Gestational diabetes mellitus : prelude of risks not to be misunderstood.

editorial reviewedGestational diabetes mellitus is a common complication in pregnant women. It is diagnosed between the 24th and 28th last menstrual period thanks to an oral glucose tolerance test with 75 g of glucose. Although blood glucose levels usually return to normal after childbirth, it can lead to some medium- and long-term complications, including cardiovascular, metabolic and renal complications. Early detection of various risk factors related to these complications would avoid some negative consequences for women with background of gestational diabetes.Le diabète gestationnel est une complication fréquente chez la femme enceinte. Il est diagnostiqué entre la 24ème et la 28ème semaine d’aménorrhée grâce à la réalisation d’une hyperglycémie provoquée par voie orale avec 75 g de glucose. Même si la glycémie se normalise après l’accouchement dans la plupart des cas, un antécédent de diabète gestationnel peut entraîner différentes complications à moyen et long termes, notamment sur le plan cardiovasculaire, métabolique et rénal. Un dépistage précoce des différents facteurs de risque liés à ces complications permettrait d’éviter certaines conséquences néfastes pour les femmes après un diabète gestationnel

Detection of peptide-based nanoparticles in blood plasma by ELISA

Aims: The aim of the current study was to develop a method to detect peptide-linked nanoparticles in blood plasma. Materials & Methods: A convenient enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) was developed for the detection of peptides functionalized with biotin and fluorescein groups. As a proof of principle, polymerized pentafluorophenyl methacrylate nanoparticles linked to biotin-carboxyfluorescein labeled peptides were intravenously injected in Wistar rats. Serial blood plasma samples were analyzed by ELISA and by liquid chromatography mass spectrometry (LC/MS) technology. Results: The ELISA based method for the detection of FITC labeled peptides had a detection limit of 1 ng/mL. We were able to accurately measure peptides bound to pentafluorophenyl meth-acrylate nanoparticles in blood plasma of rats, and similar results were obtained by LC/MS. Conclusions: We detected FITC-labeled peptides on pentafluorophenyl methacrylate nanoparticles after injection in vivo. This method can be extended to detect nanoparticles with different chemical compositions

Risk sharing arrangements for pharmaceuticals: potential considerations and recommendations for European payers

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>There has been an increase in 'risk sharing' schemes for pharmaceuticals between healthcare institutions and pharmaceutical companies in Europe in recent years as an additional approach to provide continued comprehensive and equitable healthcare. There is though confusion surrounding the terminology as well as concerns with existing schemes.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Aliterature review was undertaken to identify existing schemes supplemented with additional internal documents or web-based references known to the authors. This was combined with the extensive knowledge of health authority personnel from 14 different countries and locations involved with these schemes.</p> <p>Results and discussion</p> <p>A large number of 'risk sharing' schemes with pharmaceuticals are in existence incorporating both financial-based models and performance-based/outcomes-based models. In view of this, a new logical definition is proposed. This is "<it>risk sharing' schemes should be considered as agreements concluded by payers and pharmaceutical companies to diminish the impact on payers' budgets for new and existing schemes brought about by uncertainty and/or the need to work within finite budgets</it>". There are a number of concerns with existing schemes. These include potentially high administration costs, lack of transparency, conflicts of interest, and whether health authorities will end up funding an appreciable proportion of a new drug's development costs. In addition, there is a paucity of published evaluations of existing schemes with pharmaceuticals.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>We believe there are only a limited number of situations where 'risk sharing' schemes should be considered as well as factors that should be considered by payers in advance of implementation. This includes their objective, appropriateness, the availability of competent staff to fully evaluate proposed schemes as well as access to IT support. This also includes whether systematic evaluations have been built into proposed schemes.</p