A comparison of an interferon-gamma release assay and tuberculin skin test in refractory inflammatory disease patients screened for latent tuberculosis prior to the initiation of a first tumor necrosis factor α inhibitor

Treatment with TNFα inhibitors increases risk of reactivating a latent tuberculosis\infection (LTBI). Therefore screening, prior to therapy with TNFα inhibitors, has been recommended, even in low-endemic areas such as well-developed Western Europe countries. We evaluated interferon-gamma release assay (IGRA), as opposed to tuberculin skin test (TST), for detection of LTBI in refractory inflammatory disease patients prior to the initiation of a first TNFα inhibitor. In addition, we evaluated the impact of impaired cellular immunity on IGRA. Patients starting on TNFα inhibition were screened for LTBI by TST and IGRA (Quantiferon-TB Gold). Data on tuberculosis exposure and Bacillus Calmette–Guérin (BCG) vaccination were obtained. Cellular immunity was assessed by CD4+ T lymphocyte cell count. Nine out of 56 patients (16.1%) tested positive for LTBI. A concordant positive result was present in three patients with a medical history of tuberculosis exposure. Six patients with discordant test results had either: (1) a negative TST and positive IGRA in combination with a medical history of tuberculosis exposure (n = 1) or (2) a positive TST and negative IGRA in combination with BCG vaccination (n = 3) or a medical history of tuberculosis exposure (n = 2). CD4+ T lymphocyte cell counts were within normal limits, and no indeterminate results of IGRA were present. IGRA appears reliable for confirming TST and excluding a false positive TST (due to prior BCG vaccination) in this Dutch serie of patients. In addition, IGRA may detect one additional case of LTBI out of 56 patients that would otherwise be missed using solely TST. Immune suppression appears not to result significantly in lower CD4+ T lymphocyte cell counts and indeterminate results of IGRA, despite systemic corticosteroid treatment in half of the patients. Confirmation in larger studies, including assessment of cost-effectiveness, is required

Combined analgesics in (headache) pain therapy: shotgun approach or precise multi-target therapeutics?

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Pain in general and headache in particular are characterized by a change in activity in brain areas involved in pain processing. The therapeutic challenge is to identify drugs with molecular targets that restore the healthy state, resulting in meaningful pain relief or even freedom from pain. Different aspects of pain perception, i.e. sensory and affective components, also explain why there is not just one single target structure for therapeutic approaches to pain. A network of brain areas ("pain matrix") are involved in pain perception and pain control. This diversification of the pain system explains why a wide range of molecularly different substances can be used in the treatment of different pain states and why in recent years more and more studies have described a superior efficacy of a precise multi-target combination therapy compared to therapy with monotherapeutics.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>In this article, we discuss the available literature on the effects of several fixed-dose combinations in the treatment of headaches and discuss the evidence in support of the role of combination therapy in the pharmacotherapy of pain, particularly of headaches. The scientific rationale behind multi-target combinations is the therapeutic benefit that could not be achieved by the individual constituents and that the single substances of the combinations act together additively or even multiplicatively and cooperate to achieve a completeness of the desired therapeutic effect.</p> <p>As an example the fixesd-dose combination of acetylsalicylic acid (ASA), paracetamol (acetaminophen) and caffeine is reviewed in detail. The major advantage of using such a fixed combination is that the active ingredients act on different but distinct molecular targets and thus are able to act on more signalling cascades involved in pain than most single analgesics without adding more side effects to the therapy.</p> <p>Summary</p> <p>Multitarget therapeutics like combined analgesics broaden the array of therapeutic options, enable the completeness of the therapeutic effect, and allow doctors (and, in self-medication with OTC medications, the patients themselves) to customize treatment to the patient's specific needs. There is substantial clinical evidence that such a multi-component therapy is more effective than mono-component therapies.</p

Epitope-specific recognition of type II collagen by rheumatoid arthritis antibodies is shared with recognition by antibodies that are arthritogenic in collagen-induced arthritis in the mouse

Objective. To analyze the fine specificity of IgG autoantibodies in sera from rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients for type II collagen (CII) epitopes that are arthritogenic in collagen-induced arthritis (CIA), a relevant murine model of RA. Methods. For enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) analysis of conformation-dependent autoantibody binding, recombinant chimeric collagens that harbor the respective CII epitopes as an insertion within the frame of a constant type X collagen triple helix were constructed. In addition, synthetic peptides mimicking the native collagen structures were applied for the first time in the ELISA assessment of Immoral CII autoimmunity. Results. The pathogenicity of IgG responses to certain CII determinants in CIA was demonstrated by arthritis development in BALB/c mice upon the combined transfer of 2 mouse monoclonal antibodies specific for precisely mapped conformational CII epitopes (amino acid residues 359-369 [C1(III)] and 551-564 [J1]), whereas antibodies to another epitope (F4) were not arthritogenic. To test whether human autoimmune responses are similarly directed to these conserved CII determinants, serum IgG was analyzed. The prevalence of sera with increased IgG binding to the C1(III) epitope was significantly higher in RA compared with sera from healthy donors or from patients with other rheumatic conditions, e.g., osteoarthritis (OA), systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), or relapsing polychondritis (RP), whereas levels of antibodies specific for the nonarthritogenic F4 epitope were associated with OA rather than RA. Conclusion. Autoimmunity to CII, although detectable in different rheumatic conditions, differs in fine specificity between distinct disease entities. In RA, in contrast to degenerative joint disease, RP, and SLE, autoantibody responses are directed to an evolutionary conserved CII structure that is also targeted by pathogenic autoimmune responses in murine models of arthritis