Injectable Poly-l-Lactic Acid: A Novel Sculpting Agent for the Treatment of Dermal Fat Atrophy After Severe Acne

Acne vulgaris affects up to 80% of people 11 to 30 years of age, and scarring can occur for up to 95% of these patients. Scarring may be pitted or hypertrophic in nature, although in most cases it is atrophic. Atrophic acne scarring follows dermal collagen and fat loss after moderate to severe acne infection. Injectable poly-L-acid (PLLA) is a biocompatible, biodegradable, synthetic polymer device that is hypothesized to enhance dermal volume via the endogenous production of fibroblasts and, subsequently, collagen. The gradual improvements in cutaneous volume observed after treatment with injectable PLLA have been noted to last up to 2 years. The case studies presented describe the use of injectable PLLA to correct dermal fat loss in macular atrophic acne scarring of the cheeks. Two female patients underwent three treatment sessions with injectable PLLA over a 12-week period. At each treatment session, the reconstituted product was injected into the deep dermis under the depressed portion of the scar. Both patients were extremely pleased with their results at, respectively, 1- and 4-year follow-up evaluations. Patients experienced minimal swelling and redness after injection and no product-related adverse events such as papule and/or nodule formation. The author believes these data suggest that injectable PLLA is a good treatment option for the correction of macular atropic scarring with thin dermis (off-label use), particularly compared with other injectable fillers currently used for this indication that have shorter durations of effect

Comparative effectiveness of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors and human glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) analogue as add-on therapies to sulphonylurea among diabetes patients in the Asia-Pacific region: a systematic review

The prevalence of diabetes mellitus is rising globally, and it induces a substantial public health burden to the healthcare systems. Its optimal control is one of the most significant challenges faced by physicians and policy-makers. Whereas some of the established oral hypoglycaemic drug classes like biguanide, sulphonylureas, thiazolidinediones have been extensively used, the newer agents like dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors and the human glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) analogues have recently emerged as suitable options due to their similar efficacy and favorable side effect profiles. These agents are widely recognized alternatives to the traditional oral hypoglycaemic agents or insulin, especially in conditions where they are contraindicated or unacceptable to patients. Many studies which evaluated their clinical effects, either alone or as add-on agents, were conducted in Western countries. There exist few reviews on their effectiveness in the Asia-Pacific region. The purpose of this systematic review is to address the comparative effectiveness of these new classes of medications as add-on therapies to sulphonylurea drugs among diabetic patients in the Asia-Pacific countries. We conducted a thorough literature search of the MEDLINE and EMBASE from the inception of these databases to August 2013, supplemented by an additional manual search using reference lists from research studies, meta-analyses and review articles as retrieved by the electronic databases. A total of nine randomized controlled trials were identified and described in this article. It was found that DPP-4 inhibitors and GLP-1 analogues were in general effective as add-on therapies to existing sulphonylurea therapies, achieving HbA1c reductions by a magnitude of 0.59–0.90% and 0.77–1.62%, respectively. Few adverse events including hypoglycaemic attacks were reported. Therefore, these two new drug classes represent novel therapies with great potential to be major therapeutic options. Future larger-scale research should be conducted among other Asia-Pacific region to evaluate their efficacy in other ethnic groups

Vaccination against GIP for the Treatment of Obesity

BACKGROUND: According to the WHO, more than 1 billion people worldwide are overweight and at risk of developing chronic illnesses, including cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes, hypertension and stroke. Current therapies show limited efficacy and are often associated with unpleasant side-effect profiles, hence there is a medical need for new therapeutic interventions in the field of obesity. Gastric inhibitory peptide (GIP, also known as glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide) has recently been postulated to link over-nutrition with obesity. In fact GIP receptor-deficient mice (GIPR(-/-)) were shown to be completely protected from diet-induced obesity. Thus, disrupting GIP signaling represents a promising novel therapeutic strategy for the treatment of obesity. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: In order to block GIP signaling we chose an active vaccination approach using GIP peptides covalently attached to virus-like particles (VLP-GIP). Vaccination of mice with VLP-GIP induced high titers of specific antibodies and efficiently reduced body weight gain in animals fed a high fat diet. The reduction in body weight gain could be attributed to reduced accumulation of fat. Moreover, increased weight loss was observed in obese mice vaccinated with VLP-GIP. Importantly, despite the incretin action of GIP, VLP-GIP-treated mice did not show signs of glucose intolerance. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: This study shows that vaccination against GIP was safe and effective. Thus active vaccination may represent a novel, long-lasting treatment for obesity. However further preclinical safety/toxicology studies will be required before the therapeutic concept can be addressed in humans

Clinical Significance of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Colonization on Hospital Admission: One-Year Infection Risk

BACKGROUND: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) nasal colonization among inpatients is a well-established risk factor for MRSA infection during the same hospitalization, but the long-term risk of MRSA infection is uncertain. We performed a retrospective cohort study to determine the one-year risk of MRSA infection among inpatients with MRSA-positive nasal polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests confirmed by positive nasal culture (Group 1), patients with positive nasal PCR but negative nasal culture (Group 2), and patients with negative nasal PCR (Group 3). METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Subjects were adults admitted to a four-hospital system between November 1, 2006 and March 31, 2011, comprising 195,255 admissions. Patients underwent nasal swab for MRSA PCR upon admission; if positive, nasal culture for MRSA was performed; if recovered, MRSA was tested for Panton-Valentine Leukocidin (PVL). Outcomes included MRSA-positive clinical culture and skin and soft tissue infection (SSTI). Group 1 patients had a one-year risk of MRSA-positive clinical culture of 8.0% compared with 3.0% for Group 2 patients, and 0.6% for Group 3 patients (p<0.001). In a multivariable model, the hazard ratios for future MRSA-positive clinical culture were 6.52 (95% CI, 5.57 to 7.64) for Group 1 and 3.40 (95% CI, 2.70 to 4.27) for Group 2, compared with Group 3 (p<0.0001). History of MRSA and concurrent MRSA-positive clinical culture were significant risk factors for future MRSA-positive clinical culture. Group 1 patients colonized with PVL-positive MRSA had a one-year risk of MRSA-positive clinical culture of 10.1%, and a one-year risk of MRSA-positive clinical culture or SSTI diagnosis of 21.7%, compared with risks of 7.1% and 12.5%, respectively, for patients colonized with PVL-negative MRSA (p = 0.04, p = 0.005, respectively). CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: MRSA nasal colonization is a significant risk factor for future MRSA infection; more so if detected by culture than PCR. Colonization with PVL-positive MRSA is associated with greater risk than PVL-negative MRSA