75 research outputs found

    Mechanisms of the Anti-Obesity Effects of Oxytocin in Diet-Induced Obese Rats

    Get PDF
    Apart from its role during labor and lactation, oxytocin is involved in several other functions. Interestingly, oxytocin- and oxytocin receptor-deficient mice develop late-onset obesity with normal food intake, suggesting that the hormone might exert a series of beneficial metabolic effects. This was recently confirmed by data showing that central oxytocin infusion causes weight loss in diet-induced obese mice. The aim of the present study was to unravel the mechanisms underlying such beneficial effects of oxytocin. Chronic central oxytocin infusion was carried out in high fat diet-induced obese rats. Its impact on body weight, lipid metabolism and insulin sensitivity was determined. We observed a dose-dependent decrease in body weight gain, increased adipose tissue lipolysis and fatty acid ÎČ-oxidation, as well as reduced glucose intolerance and insulin resistance. The additional observation that plasma oxytocin levels increased upon central infusion suggested that the hormone might affect adipose tissue metabolism by direct action. This was demonstrated using in vitro, ex vivo, as well as in vivo experiments. With regard to its mechanism of action in adipose tissue, oxytocin increased the expression of stearoyl-coenzyme A desaturase 1, as well as the tissue content of the phospholipid precursor, N-oleoyl-phosphatidylethanolamine, the biosynthetic precursor of the oleic acid-derived PPAR-alpha activator, oleoylethanolamide. Because PPAR-alpha regulates fatty acid ÎČ-oxidation, we hypothesized that this transcription factor might mediate the oxytocin effects. This was substantiated by the observation that, in contrast to its effects in wild-type mice, oxytocin infusion failed to induce weight loss and fat oxidation in PPAR-alpha-deficient animals. Altogether, these results suggest that oxytocin administration could represent a promising therapeutic approach for the treatment of human obesity and type 2 diabetes

    Heterogeneity of pollen food allergy syndrome in seven Southern European countries: The @IT.2020 multicenter study

    Get PDF
    Background Pollen food allergy syndrome (PFAS) is a frequently underdiagnosed disease due to diverse triggers, clinical presentations, and test results. This is especially relevant in geographic areas with a broad spectrum of pollen sensitization, such as Southern Europe. Objectives To elucidate similarities and differences of PFAS in nine Southern European centers and identify associated characteristics and unique markers of PFAS. Methods As part of the @IT.2020 Multicenter Study, 815 patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR), aged 10-60 years, were recruited in seven countries. They completed questionnaires regarding SAR, comorbidities, family history, and PFAS, and underwent skin prick testing (SPT) and serum IgE testing. Results Of the 815 patients, 167 (20.5%) reported PFAS reactions. Most commonly, eliciting foods were kiwi (58, 34.7%), peach (43, 25.7%), and melon (26, 15.6%). Reported reactions were mostly local (216/319, 67.7%), occurring within 5 min of contact with elicitors (209/319, 65.5%). Associated characteristics included positive IgE to at least one panallergen (profilin, PR-10, or nsLTP) (p = 0.007), maternal PFAS (OR: 3.716, p = 0.026), and asthma (OR: 1.752, p = 0.073). Between centers, heterogeneity in prevalence (Marseille: 7.5% vs. Rome: 41.4%, p < 0.001) and of clinical characteristics was apparent. Cypress played a limited role, with only 1/22 SPT mono-sensitized patients reporting a food reaction (p < 0.073). Conclusions PFAS is a frequent comorbidity in Southern European SAR patients. Significant heterogeneity of clinical characteristics in PFAS patients among the centers was observed and may be related to the different pollen sensitization patterns in each geographic area. IgE to panallergen(s), maternal PFAS, and asthma could be PFAS-associated characteristics

    “Whole” vs. “fragmented” approach to EAACI pollen season definitions: A multicenter study in six Southern European cities

    Get PDF
    Background: The adequate definition of pollen seasons is essential to facilitate a correct diagnosis, treatment choice, and outcome assessment in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis. A position paper by the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) proposed season definitions for Northern and Middle Europe. Objective: To test the pollen season definitions proposed by EAACI in six Mediterranean cities for seven pollen taxa. Methods: As part of the @IT.2020 multi-center study, pollen counts for Poaceae, Oleaceae, Fagales, Cupressaceae, Urticaceae (Parietaria spp.), and Compositae (Ambrosia spp., Artemisia spp.) were collected from January 1 to December 31, 2018. Based on these data, pollen seasons were identified according to EAACI criteria. A unified monitoring period for patients in AIT trials was created and assessed for feasibility. Results: The analysis revealed a great heterogeneity between the different locations in terms of pattern and length of the examined pollen seasons. Further, we found a fragmentation of pollen seasons in several segments (max. 8) separated by periods of low pollen counts (intercurrent periods). Potential monitoring periods included often many recording days with low pollen exposure (max. 341 days). Conclusion: The Mediterranean climate leads to challenging pollen exposure times. Monitoring periods for AIT trials based on existing definitions may include many intermittent days with low pollen concentrations. Therefore, it is necessary to find an adapted pollen season definition as individual solution for each pollen and geographical area

    Overview of the current use of levosimendan in France: a prospective observational cohort study

    Get PDF
    Abstract Background Following the results of randomized controlled trials on levosimendan, French health authorities requested an update of the current use and side-effects of this medication on a national scale. Method The France-LEVO registry was a prospective observational cohort study reflecting the indications, dosing regimens, and side-effects of levosimendan, as well as patient outcomes over a year. Results The patients included ( n = 602) represented 29.6% of the national yearly use of levosimendan in France. They were treated for cardiogenic shock ( n = 250, 41.5%), decompensated heart failure ( n = 127, 21.1%), cardiac surgery-related low cardiac output prophylaxis and/or treatment ( n = 86, 14.3%), and weaning from veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation ( n = 82, 13.6%). They received 0.18 ± 0.07 ”g/kg/min levosimendan over 26 ± 8 h. An initial bolus was administered in 45 patients (7.5%), 103 (17.1%) received repeated infusions, and 461 (76.6%) received inotropes and or vasoactive agents concomitantly. Hypotension was reported in 218 patients (36.2%), atrial fibrillation in 85 (14.1%), and serious adverse events in 17 (2.8%). 136 patients (22.6%) died in hospital, and 26 (4.3%) during the 90-day follow-up. Conclusions We observed that levosimendan was used in accordance with recent recommendations by French physicians. Hypotension and atrial fibrillation remained the most frequent side-effects, while serious adverse event potentially attributable to levosimendan were infrequent. The results suggest that this medication was safe and potentially associated with some benefit in the population studied

    Large expert-curated database for benchmarking document similarity detection in biomedical literature search

    Get PDF
    Document recommendation systems for locating relevant literature have mostly relied on methods developed a decade ago. This is largely due to the lack of a large offline gold-standard benchmark of relevant documents that cover a variety of research fields such that newly developed literature search techniques can be compared, improved and translated into practice. To overcome this bottleneck, we have established the RElevant LIterature SearcH consortium consisting of more than 1500 scientists from 84 countries, who have collectively annotated the relevance of over 180 000 PubMed-listed articles with regard to their respective seed (input) article/s. The majority of annotations were contributed by highly experienced, original authors of the seed articles. The collected data cover 76% of all unique PubMed Medical Subject Headings descriptors. No systematic biases were observed across different experience levels, research fields or time spent on annotations. More importantly, annotations of the same document pairs contributed by different scientists were highly concordant. We further show that the three representative baseline methods used to generate recommended articles for evaluation (Okapi Best Matching 25, Term Frequency-Inverse Document Frequency and PubMed Related Articles) had similar overall performances. Additionally, we found that these methods each tend to produce distinct collections of recommended articles, suggesting that a hybrid method may be required to completely capture all relevant articles. The established database server located at https://relishdb.ict.griffith.edu.au is freely available for the downloading of annotation data and the blind testing of new methods. We expect that this benchmark will be useful for stimulating the development of new powerful techniques for title and title/abstract-based search engines for relevant articles in biomedical research.Peer reviewe

    Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

    Get PDF
    IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570
    • 

    corecore