Measuring quality of life in mental health: Are we asking the right questions?

Measuring quality-adjusted-life years using generic preference-based quality of life measures is common practice when evaluating health interventions. However, there are concerns that measures in common use, such as the EQ-5D and SF-6D, focus overly on physical health and therefore may not be appropriate for measuring quality of life for people with mental health problems. The aim of this research was to identify the domains of quality of life that are important to people with mental health problems in order to assess the content validity of these generic measures. Qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted with 19 people, recruited from UK mental health services, with a broad range of mental health problems at varying levels of severity. This complemented a previous systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative studies on the same topic. Seven domains important to quality of life for people with mental health problems were identified: well-being and ill-being; relationships and a sense of belonging; activity; self-perception; autonomy, hope and hopelessness; and physical health. These were consistent with the systematic review, with the addition of physical health as a domain, and revealed a differing emphasis on the positive and negative aspects of quality of life according to the severity of the mental health problems. We conclude that the content of existing generic preference-based measures of health do not cover this domain space well. Additionally, because people may experience substantial improvements in their quality of life without registering on the positive end of a quality of life scale, it is important that the full spectrum of negative through to positive aspects of each domain are included in any quality of life measure

Cardioprotective effects of lixisenatide in rat myocardial ischemia-reperfusion injury studies

BACKGROUND: Lixisenatide is a glucagon-like peptide-1 analog which stimulates insulin secretion and inhibits glucagon secretion and gastric emptying. We investigated cardioprotective effects of lixisenatide in rodent models reflecting the clinical situation. METHODS: The acute cardiac effects of lixisenatide were investigated in isolated rat hearts subjected to brief ischemia and reperfusion. Effects of chronic treatment with lixisenatide on cardiac function were assessed in a modified rat heart failure model after only transient coronary occlusion followed by long-term reperfusion. Freshly isolated cardiomyocytes were used to investigate cell-type specific mechanisms of lixisenatide action. RESULTS: In the acute setting of ischemia-reperfusion, lixisenatide reduced the infarct-size/area at risk by 36% ratio without changes on coronary flow, left-ventricular pressure and heart rate. Treatment with lixisenatide for 10 weeks, starting after cardiac ischemia and reperfusion, improved left ventricular end-diastolic pressure and relaxation time and prevented lung congestion in comparison to placebo. No anti-fibrotic effect was observed. Gene expression analysis revealed a change in remodeling genes comparable to the ACE inhibitor ramipril. In isolated cardiomyocytes lixisenatide reduced apoptosis and increased fractional shortening. Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor (GLP1R) mRNA expression could not be detected in rat heart samples or isolated cardiomyocytes. Surprisingly, cardiomyocytes isolated from GLP-1 receptor knockout mice still responded to lixisenatide. CONCLUSIONS: In rodent models, lixisenatide reduced in an acute setting infarct-size and improved cardiac function when administered long-term after ischemia-reperfusion injury. GLP-1 receptor independent mechanisms contribute to the described cardioprotective effect of lixisenatide. Based in part on these preclinical findings patients with cardiac dysfunction are currently being recruited for a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter study with lixisenatide. TRIAL REGISTRATION: (ELIXA, ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01147250

Antimicrobial peptides as novel anti-tuberculosis therapeutics

"Available online 24 May 2016"Tuberculosis (TB), a disease caused by the human pathogen Mycobacterium tuberculosis, has recently joined HIV/AIDS as the world's deadliest infectious disease, affecting around 9.6 million people worldwide in 2014. Of those, about 1.2 million died from the disease. Resistance acquisition to existing antibiotics, with the subsequent emergence of Multi-Drug Resistant mycobacteria strains, together with an increasing economic burden, has urged the development of new anti-TB drugs. In this scope, antimicrobial peptides (AMPs), which are small, cationic and amphipathic peptides that make part of the innate immune system, now arise as promising candidates for TB treatment. In this review, we analyze the potential of AMPs for this application. We address the mechanisms of action, advantages and disadvantages over conventional antibiotics and how problems associated with its use may be overcome to boost their therapeutic potential. Additionally, we address the challenges of translational development from benchside to bedside, evaluate the current development pipeline and analyze the expected global impact from a socio-economic standpoint. The quest for more efficient and more compliant anti-TB drugs, associated with the great therapeutic potential of emerging AMPs and the rising peptide market, provide an optimal environment for the emergence of AMPs as promising therapies. Still, their pharmacological properties need to be enhanced and manufacturing-associated issues need to be addressed.Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT) - UID/ BIO/04469/2013 unit ; COMPETE 2020 (POCI-01-0145-FEDER- 006684) ; SFRH/BPD/64958/2010Project RECI/BBB-EBI/0179/2012 (FCOMP-01-0124-FEDER-027462

IgE allergy diagnostics and other relevant tests in allergy, a World Allergy Organization position paper

Correction: Volume14 Issue7 Article Number100557 DOI10.1016/j.waojou.2021.100557Currently, testing for immunoglobulin E (IgE) sensitization is the cornerstone of diagnostic evaluation in suspected allergic conditions. This review provides a thorough and updated critical appraisal of the most frequently used diagnostic tests, both in vivo and in vitro. It discusses skin tests, challenges, and serological and cellular in vitro tests, and provides an overview of indications, advantages and disadvantages of each in conditions such as respiratory, food, venom, drug, and occupational allergy. Skin prick testing remains the first line approach in most instances; the added value of serum specific IgE to whole allergen extracts or components, as well as the role of basophil activation tests, is evaluated. Unproven, non-validated, diagnostic tests are also discussed. Throughout the review, the reader must bear in mind the relevance of differentiating between sensitization and allergy; the latter entails not only allergic sensitization, but also clinically relevant symptoms triggered by the culprit allergen.Peer reviewe