8 research outputs found

    Effects of Valproic Acid on Cerebral Nutrient Carriers' Expression in the Rat

    Get PDF
    Objective: The antiepileptic drug valproate has been shown to affect the expression of carriers for essential compounds and drugs in extracerebral tissues. The aim of the current study was to evaluate in vivo the effect of valproate treatment on the cerebral expression of carriers and selected genes of the blood-brain barrier (BBB) in the rat.Methods: Male Wistar rats were treated daily for 7 days by intraperitoneal injections of valproate (75, 150, or 300 mg/kg/day) or the vehicle. mRNA was isolated from the cerebral cortex and the hippocampus. Transcript levels of 37 genes were measured using a customized gene expression assay. Quantitative histone acetylation was evaluated by western blotting. Glucose6-phosphate (G6P) tissue levels were used as a surrogate of cerebral glucose concentrations.Results: Valproate treatment was associated with significant reduction (up to 22%; P < 0.05) in cortical and hippocampal claudin 5-normalized Slc2a1 (Glut1) mRNA expression. G6P levels were not significantly altered, but were correlated with Slc2a1 transcript levels (r = 0.499; P < 0.02). None of the other 36 screened genes were significantly affected by valproate. Cortical histone hyperacetylation indicated cerebral activity of valproate on a major pathway regulating gene expression (P < 0.02).Significance: The effect of valproate on nutrient carriers appears to be tissue-specific and even brain area-specific. If validated in humans, the changes in Glut1 expression might have clinical implications in positron emission tomography (PET) imaging. Further studies are required for elucidating the relevance of these findings to the clinic

    COVID-19 in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease: The Israeli Experience

    No full text
    Background: Crohn’s disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) are chronic, immune-mediated inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) affecting millions of people worldwide. IBD therapies, designed for continuous immune suppression, often render patients more susceptible to infections. The effect of the immune suppression on the risk of coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) is not fully determined yet. Objective: To describe COVID-19 characteristics and outcomes and to evaluate the association between IBD phenotypes, infection outcomes and immunomodulatory therapies. Methods: In this multi-center study, we prospectively followed IBD patients with proven COVID-19. De-identified data from medical charts were collected including age, gender, IBD type, IBD clinical activity, IBD treatments, comorbidities, symptoms and outcomes of COVID-19. A multivariable regression model was used to examine the effect of immunosuppressant drugs on the risk of infection by COVID-19 and the outcomes. Results: Of 144 IBD patients, 104 (72%) were CD and 40 (28%) were UC. Mean age was 32.2 ± 12.6 years. No mortalities were reported. In total, 94 patients (65.3%) received biologic therapy. Of them, 51 (54%) at escalated doses, 10 (11%) in combination with immunomodulators and 9 (10%) with concomitant corticosteroids. Disease location, behavior and activity did not correlate with the severity of COVID-19. Biologics as monotherapy or with immunomodulators or corticosteroids were not associated with more severe infection. On the contrary, patients receiving biologics had significantly milder infection course (p = 0.001) and were less likely to be hospitalized (p = 0.001). Treatment was postponed in 34.7% of patients until recovery from COVID-19, without consequent exacerbation. Conclusion: We did not witness aggravated COVID-19 outcomes in patients with IBD. Patients treated with biologics had a favorable outcome

    Endoscopic Postoperative Recurrence In Crohn's Disease After Curative Ileocecal Resection With Early Prophylaxis By Anti-Tnf, Vedolizumab Or Ustekinumab: A Real-World Multicenter European Study

    No full text
    Background: Endoscopic-post-operative-recurrence [ePOR] in Crohn's disease [CD] after ileocecal resection [ICR] is a major concern. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of early prophylaxis with biologics and to compare anti-tumour necrosis factor [anti-TNF] therapy to vedolizumab [VDZ] and ustekinumab [UST] in a real-world setting.Methods: A retrospective multicentre study of CD-adults after curative ICR on early prophylaxis was undertaken. ePOR was defined as a Rutgeerts score [RS] >= i2 or colonic-segmental-SES-CD >= 6. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate risk factors, and inverse probability treatment weighting [IPTW] was applied to compare the effectiveness between agents.Results: The study included 297 patients (53.9% males, age at diagnosis 24 years [19-32], age at ICR 34 years 126-431, 18.5% smokers, 276% biologic-naive, 65.7% anti-TNF experienced, 28.6% two or more biologics and 17.2% previous surgery). Overall, 224, 39 and 34 patients received anti-TNF, VDZ or UST, respectively. Patients treated with VDZ and UST were more biologic experienced with higher rates of previous surgery. ePOR rates within 1 year were 41.8%. ePOR rates by treatment groups were: anti-TNF 40.2%, VDZ 33% and UST 61.8%. Risk factors for ePOR at 1 year were: past-infliximab (adjusted odds ratio [adj.OR] = 1.73 [95% confidence interval, CI: 1.01-2.97]), past-adalimumab [adj.OR = 2.32 [95% CI: 1.35-4.01] and surgical aspects. After IPTW, the risk of ePOR within 1 year of VDZ vs anti-TNF or UST vs anti-TNF was comparable (OR = 0.55 [95% CI: 0.25-1.19], OR = 1.86 [95% CI: 0.79-4.381), respectively.Conclusion. Prevention of ePOR within 1 year after surgery was successful in -60% of patients. Patients treated with VDZ or UST consisted of a more refractory group. After controlling for confounders, no differences in ePOR risk were seen between anti-TNF prophylaxis and other groups
    corecore