Toxic marine microalgae and shellfish poisoning in the British isles: history, review of epidemiology, and future implications

The relationship between toxic marine microalgae species and climate change has become a high profile and well discussed topic in recent years, with research focusing on the possible future impacts of changing hydrological conditions on Harmful Algal Bloom (HAB) species around the world. However, there is very little literature concerning the epidemiology of these species on marine organisms and human health. Here, we examine the current state of toxic microalgae species around the UK, in two ways: first we describe the key toxic syndromes and gather together the disparate reported data on their epidemiology from UK records and monitoring procedures. Secondly, using NHS hospital admissions and GP records from Wales, we attempt to quantify the incidence of shellfish poisoning from an independent source. We show that within the UK, outbreaks of shellfish poisoning are rare but occurring on a yearly basis in different regions and affecting a diverse range of molluscan shellfish and other marine organisms. We also show that the abundance of a species does not necessarily correlate to the rate of toxic events. Based on routine hospital records, the numbers of shellfish poisonings in the UK are very low, but the identification of the toxin involved, or even a confirmation of a poisoning event is extremely difficult to diagnose. An effective shellfish monitoring system, which shuts down aquaculture sites when toxins exceed regularity limits, has clearly prevented serious impact to human health, and remains the only viable means of monitoring the potential threat to human health. However, the closure of these sites has an adverse economic impact, and the monitoring system does not include all toxic plankton. The possible geographic spreading of toxic microalgae species is therefore a concern, as warmer waters in the Atlantic could suit several species with southern biogeographical affinities enabling them to occupy the coastal regions of the UK, but which are not yet monitored or considered to be detrimental

Effects of Once-Weekly Exenatide on Cardiovascular Outcomes in Type 2 Diabetes.

Abstract BACKGROUND: The cardiovascular effects of adding once-weekly treatment with exenatide to usual care in patients with type 2 diabetes are unknown. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with type 2 diabetes, with or without previous cardiovascular disease, to receive subcutaneous injections of extended-release exenatide at a dose of 2 mg or matching placebo once weekly. The primary composite outcome was the first occurrence of death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke. The coprimary hypotheses were that exenatide, administered once weekly, would be noninferior to placebo with respect to safety and superior to placebo with respect to efficacy. RESULTS: In all, 14,752 patients (of whom 10,782 [73.1%] had previous cardiovascular disease) were followed for a median of 3.2 years (interquartile range, 2.2 to 4.4). A primary composite outcome event occurred in 839 of 7356 patients (11.4%; 3.7 events per 100 person-years) in the exenatide group and in 905 of 7396 patients (12.2%; 4.0 events per 100 person-years) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83 to 1.00), with the intention-to-treat analysis indicating that exenatide, administered once weekly, was noninferior to placebo with respect to safety (P<0.001 for noninferiority) but was not superior to placebo with respect to efficacy (P=0.06 for superiority). The rates of death from cardiovascular causes, fatal or nonfatal myocardial infarction, fatal or nonfatal stroke, hospitalization for heart failure, and hospitalization for acute coronary syndrome, and the incidence of acute pancreatitis, pancreatic cancer, medullary thyroid carcinoma, and serious adverse events did not differ significantly between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with type 2 diabetes with or without previous cardiovascular disease, the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events did not differ significantly between patients who received exenatide and those who received placebo. (Funded by Amylin Pharmaceuticals; EXSCEL ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01144338 .)