Conditional rifampicin sensitivity of a rif mutant of Escherichia coli: rifampicin induced changes in transcription specificity

Arif mutantof Escherichia coli that exhibits medium and temperature-dependent sensitivity to rifampicin is described. In the absence of rifampicin, this strain grows in minimal and rich media at 30° C and 42°C. In its presence it is viable in rich medium at both temperatures, but in minimal medium only at 30°C. In minimal-rifampicin medium at the higher temperature, RNA synthesis is decreased. The addition of certain divalent salts (MgSO4, CaCl2, BaCl2) in excess, or chelators (EDTA, EGTA, o-phenanthrolein) greatly increase viability in minimal-rifampicin medium at 42°C. Excess MgSO4 (10 mM) also increases the rate of RNA synthesis in the same medium. A model is proposed wherein therif mutation is suggested to cause a structural change in RNA polymerase that allows the binding of rifampicin and other ligands at 42° C. Rifampicin-binding is suggested to alter the conformation of RNA polymerase, impairing its ability to express genes required for growth in minimal medium. Implicit in this view is the assumption that these genes are structurally different from those expressed in rich medium in respect of certain template features recognized by RNA polymerase

Intragenic suppression of the temperature-sensitivity caused by a mutation in a gene controlling transcription (fit) in Escherichia coli

Starting from a transcription-defective strain harbouring a temperature-sensitive mutation in the fit gene, a rifampicin-resistant, temperature-insensitive derivative has been isolated. Genetic analysis of this derivative demonstrated the presence of a second temperature-sensitive mutation in the same gene. The two mutations mutually suppress each other's phenotype. From cotransduction experiments, the fit gene has been mapped 0.32 min and 0.16 min clockwise from the aroD and pps loci, respectively, at 37.5 min on the linkage map. The mutants harbouring either or both of the fit mutations are defective in RNA synthesis at the non-permissive temperature. The fit gene product is suggested to function as an accessory transcription factor

Clinical studies of the DP1 antagonist laropiprant in asthma and allergic rhinitis

Background: Prostaglandin D-2 is a proinflammatory mediator believed to be important in asthma and allergic rhinitis (AR). Allelic variants in the prostaglandin D2 receptor type 1 (DP1) gene (PTGDR) have been suggested to be associated with asthma susceptibility. Objectives: We sought to investigate the efficacy of the DP1 antagonist laropiprant (alone or with montelukast) in asthma and seasonal AR and explore whether sequence variations in PTGDR are associated with asthma severity. Methods: For asthma, in a double-blind crossover study, 100 patients with persistent asthma were randomized to placebo or laropiprant, 300 mg/d for 3 weeks, followed by addition of montelukast, 10 mg/d for 2 weeks. PTGDR promoter haplotypes were categorized as high, medium, or low transcriptional efficiency. The primary efficacy end point was FEV1. For AR, in a double-blind parallel-group study, 767 patients sensitized to a regionally prevalent fall allergen with symptomatic fall rhinitis were allocated to laropiprant, 25 mg/d or 100 mg/d; cetirizine, 10mg/d; or placebo for 2 weeks. The primary end point was the Daytime Nasal Symptoms Score. Results: For asthma, no significant differences in FEV1 or asthma symptoms were noted for laropiprant versus placebo or laropiprant plus montelukast vs montelukast (differences between montelukast and placebo: P <= .001). No clear association was seen between haplotype pair (ie, diplotype) and asthma severity. For AR, although cetirizine (vs placebo) demonstrated an improvement in the Daytime Nasal Symptoms Score (P < .001), laropiprant did not. Conclusion: Laropiprant did not demonstrate efficacy in asthmatic patients or patients with AR. Variations in PTGDR did not appear related to baseline asthma severity or treatment response (NCT00533208; NCT00783601). (J Allergy Clin Immunol 2009;124:942-8.

Montelukast and fluticasone compared with salmeterol and fluticasone in protecting against asthma exacerbation in adults: one year, double blind, randomised, comparative trial

Objectives: To assess the effect of montelukast versus salmeterol added to inhaled fluticasone propionate on asthma exacerbation in patients whose symptoms are inadequately controlled with fluticasone alone.Design and setting: A 52 week, two period, double blind, multicentre trial during which patients whose symptoms remained uncontrolled by inhaled corticosteroids were randomised to add montelukast or salmeterol.Participants: Patients (15-72 years; n = 1490) had a clinical history of chronic asthma for &gt;= 1 year, a baseline forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) value 50-90% predicted, and a ? agonist improvement of &gt;= 12% in FEV1.Main outcome measures: The primary end point was the percentage of patients with at least one asthma exacerbation.Results: 20.1% of the patients in the group receiving montelukast and fluticasone had an asthma exacerbation compared with 19.1% in the group receiving salmeterol and fluticasone; the difference was 1% (95% confidence interval -3.1% to 5.0%). With a risk ratio (montelukast-fluticasone/salmeterol-fluticasone) of 1.05 (0.86 to 1.29), treatment with montelukast and fluticasone was shown to be non-inferior to treatment with salmeterol and fluticasone. Salmeterol and fluticasone significantly increased FEV1 before a ? agonist was used and morning peak expiratory flow compared with montelukast and fluticasone (P &lt;= 0.001), whereas FEV1 after a ? agonist was used and improvements in asthma specific quality of life and nocturnal awakenings were similar between the groups. Montelukast and fluticasone significantly (P = 0.011) reduced peripheral blood eosinophil counts compared with salmeterol and fluticasone. Both treatments were generally well tolerated.Conclusion: The addition of montelukast in patients whose symptoms remain uncontrolled by inhaled fluticasone could provide equivalent clinical control to salmeterol