Protocolised non-invasive compared with invasive weaning from mechanical ventilation for adults in intensive care : the Breathe RCT

Background: Invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) is a life-saving intervention. Following resolution of the condition that necessitated IMV, a spontaneous breathing trial (SBT) is used to determine patient readiness for IMV discontinuation. In patients who fail one or more SBTs, there is uncertainty as to the optimum management strategy. Objective: To evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of using non-invasive ventilation (NIV) as an intermediate step in the protocolised weaning of patients from IMV. Design: Pragmatic, open-label, parallel-group randomised controlled trial, with cost-effectiveness analysis. Setting: A total of 51 critical care units across the UK. Participants: Adult intensive care patients who had received IMV for at least 48 hours, who were categorised as ready to wean from ventilation, and who failed a SBT. Interventions: Control group (invasive weaning): patients continued to receive IMV with daily SBTs. A weaning protocol was used to wean pressure support based on the patient’s condition. Intervention group (non-invasive weaning): patients were extubated to NIV. A weaning protocol was used to wean inspiratory positive airway pressure, based on the patient’s condition. Main outcome measures: The primary outcome measure was time to liberation from ventilation. Secondary outcome measures included mortality, duration of IMV, proportion of patients receiving antibiotics for a presumed respiratory infection and health-related quality of life. Results: A total of 364 patients (invasive weaning, n = 182; non-invasive weaning, n = 182) were randomised. Groups were well matched at baseline. There was no difference between the invasive weaning and non-invasive weaning groups in median time to liberation from ventilation {invasive weaning 108 hours [interquartile range (IQR) 57–351 hours] vs. non-invasive weaning 104.3 hours [IQR 34.5–297 hours]; hazard ratio 1.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.89 to 1.39; p = 0.352}. There was also no difference in mortality between groups at any time point. Patients in the non-invasive weaning group had fewer IMV days [invasive weaning 4 days (IQR 2–11 days) vs. non-invasive weaning 1 day (IQR 0–7 days); adjusted mean difference –3.1 days, 95% CI –5.75 to –0.51 days]. In addition, fewer non-invasive weaning patients required antibiotics for a respiratory infection [odds ratio (OR) 0.60, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.00; p = 0.048]. A higher proportion of non-invasive weaning patients required reintubation than those in the invasive weaning group (OR 2.00, 95% CI 1.27 to 3.24). The within-trial economic evaluation showed that NIV was associated with a lower net cost and a higher net effect, and was dominant in health economic terms. The probability that NIV was cost-effective was estimated at 0.58 at a cost-effectiveness threshold of £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year. Conclusions: A protocolised non-invasive weaning strategy did not reduce time to liberation from ventilation. However, patients who underwent non-invasive weaning had fewer days requiring IMV and required fewer antibiotics for respiratory infections. Future work: In patients who fail a SBT, which factors predict an adverse outcome (reintubation, tracheostomy, death) if extubated and weaned using NIV? Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN15635197. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 23, No. 48. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information

Cinnamomum cassia Bark in Two Herbal Formulas Increases Life Span in Caenorhabditis elegans via Insulin Signaling and Stress Response Pathways

Background: Proving the efficacy and corresponding mode of action of herbal supplements is a difficult challenge for evidence-based herbal therapy. A major hurdle is the complexity of herbal preparations, many of which combine multiple herbs, particularly when the combination is assumed to be vitally important to the effectiveness of the herbal therapy. This issue may be addressed through the use of contemporary methodology and validated animal models. Methods and Principal Findings: In this study, two commonly used traditional herbal formulas, Shi Quan Da Bu Tang (SQDB) and Huo Luo Xiao Ling Dan (HLXL) were evaluated using a survival assay and oxidative stress biomarkers in a well-established C. elegans model of aging. HLXL is an eleven herb formula modified from a top-selling traditional herbal formula for the treatment of arthritic joint pain. SQDB consists of ten herbs often used for fatigue and energy, particularly in the aged. We demonstrate here that SQDB significantly extend life span in a C. elegans model of aging. Among all individual herbs tested, two herbs Cinnamomum cassia bark (Chinese pharmaceutical name: Cinnamomi Cortex, CIN) and Panax ginseng root (Chinese pharmaceutical name: Ginseng Radix, GS) significantly extended life span in C. elegans. CIN in both SQDB and HLXL formula extended life span via modulation of multiple longevity assurance genes, including genes involved in insulin signaling and stress response pathways. All the life-span-extending herbs (SQDB, CIN and GS) also attenuated levels of H2O2 and enhanced small heat shock protein expression. Furthermore, the life spanextending herbs significantly delayed human amyloid beta (Aβ)-induced toxicity in transgenic C. elegans expressing human Aβ. Conclusion/Significance:These results validate an invertebrate model for rapid, systematic evaluation of commonly used Chinese herbal formulations and may provide insight for designing future evidence-based herbal therapy(s). Copyright: © 2010 Yu et al.published_or_final_versio

Outcome of Hospitalization for COVID-19 in Patients with Interstitial Lung Disease. An International Multicenter Study.

Rationale: The impact of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) on patients with interstitial lung disease (ILD) has not been established.Objectives: To assess outcomes in patients with ILD hospitalized for COVID-19 versus those without ILD in a contemporaneous age-, sex-, and comorbidity-matched population.Methods: An international multicenter audit of patients with a prior diagnosis of ILD admitted to the hospital with COVID-19 between March 1 and May 1, 2020, was undertaken and compared with patients without ILD, obtained from the ISARIC4C (International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infection Consortium Coronavirus Clinical Characterisation Consortium) cohort, admitted with COVID-19 over the same period. The primary outcome was survival. Secondary analysis distinguished idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis from non-idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis ILD and used lung function to determine the greatest risks of death.Measurements and Main Results: Data from 349 patients with ILD across Europe were included, of whom 161 were admitted to the hospital with laboratory or clinical evidence of COVID-19 and eligible for propensity score matching. Overall mortality was 49% (79/161) in patients with ILD with COVID-19. After matching, patients with ILD with COVID-19 had significantly poorer survival (hazard ratio [HR], 1.60; confidence interval, 1.17-2.18; P = 0.003) than age-, sex-, and comorbidity-matched controls without ILD. Patients with an FVC of <80% had an increased risk of death versus patients with FVC ≥80% (HR, 1.72; 1.05-2.83). Furthermore, obese patients with ILD had an elevated risk of death (HR, 2.27; 1.39-3.71).Conclusions: Patients with ILD are at increased risk of death from COVID-19, particularly those with poor lung function and obesity. Stringent precautions should be taken to avoid COVID-19 in patients with ILD

Dipeptidyl peptidase-1 inhibition in patients hospitalised with COVID-19: a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trial

Background Neutrophil serine proteases are involved in the pathogenesis of COVID-19 and increased serine protease activity has been reported in severe and fatal infection. We investigated whether brensocatib, an inhibitor of dipeptidyl peptidase-1 (DPP-1; an enzyme responsible for the activation of neutrophil serine proteases), would improve outcomes in patients hospitalised with COVID-19. Methods In a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trial, across 14 hospitals in the UK, patients aged 16 years and older who were hospitalised with COVID-19 and had at least one risk factor for severe disease were randomly assigned 1:1, within 96 h of hospital admission, to once-daily brensocatib 25 mg or placebo orally for 28 days. Patients were randomly assigned via a central web-based randomisation system (TruST). Randomisation was stratified by site and age (65 years or ≥65 years), and within each stratum, blocks were of random sizes of two, four, or six patients. Participants in both groups continued to receive other therapies required to manage their condition. Participants, study staff, and investigators were masked to the study assignment. The primary outcome was the 7-point WHO ordinal scale for clinical status at day 29 after random assignment. The intention-to-treat population included all patients who were randomly assigned and met the enrolment criteria. The safety population included all participants who received at least one dose of study medication. This study was registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN30564012. Findings Between June 5, 2020, and Jan 25, 2021, 406 patients were randomly assigned to brensocatib or placebo; 192 (47·3%) to the brensocatib group and 214 (52·7%) to the placebo group. Two participants were excluded after being randomly assigned in the brensocatib group (214 patients included in the placebo group and 190 included in the brensocatib group in the intention-to-treat population). Primary outcome data was unavailable for six patients (three in the brensocatib group and three in the placebo group). Patients in the brensocatib group had worse clinical status at day 29 after being randomly assigned than those in the placebo group (adjusted odds ratio 0·72 [95% CI 0·57–0·92]). Prespecified subgroup analyses of the primary outcome supported the primary results. 185 participants reported at least one adverse event; 99 (46%) in the placebo group and 86 (45%) in the brensocatib group. The most common adverse events were gastrointestinal disorders and infections. One death in the placebo group was judged as possibly related to study drug. Interpretation Brensocatib treatment did not improve clinical status at day 29 in patients hospitalised with COVID-19

Antidepressants are a rational complementary therapy for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease

Abstract There is a high prevalence rate (30-50%) of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and depression comorbidity. Depression can be a risk factor for the development of AD or it can be developed secondary to the neurodegenerative process. There are numerous documented diagnosis and treatment challenges for the patients who suffer comorbidity between these two diseases. Meta analysis studies have provided evidence for the safety and efficacy of antidepressants in treatment of depression in AD patients. Preclinical and clinical studies show the positive role of chronic administration of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) antidepressants in hindering the progression of the AD and improving patient performance. A number of clinical studies suggest a beneficial role of combinatorial therapies that pair antidepressants with FDA approved AD drugs. Preclinical studies also demonstrate a favorable effect of natural antidepressants for AD patients. Based on the preclinical studies there are a number of plausible antidepressants effects that may modulate the progression of AD. These effects include an increase in neurogenesis, improvement in learning and memory, elevation in the levels of neurotrophic factors and pCREB and a reduction of amyloid peptide burden. Based on this preclinical and clinical evidence, antidepressants represent a rational complimentary strategy for the treatment of AD patients with depression comorbidity.</p

Modulation of Protooncongene Expression by Polychlorinated Biphenyls in 3T3-L1 Cell Line.

The effects of two substituted polychlorinated biphenyls, the 3, 4, 5, 3', 4', 5' (PCB 169) and the 2, 3, 4, 2', 4', 5', (PCB 138) were examined on the expression of c-myc, c-jun, c-ras and jun-b in 3T3-L1 cells. Northern blot analysis demonstrated that the two PCBs, which exhibit a coplanar and di-ortho substituted configuration, activated these oncogenes differently. PCB 138 markedly induced overexpression of ras, jun and myc whereas PCB 169 led to the overexpression of jun-b. HPLC analysis of the cell samples treated in medium without serum revealed a higher intracellular concentration of the 2,3,4, 2', 4', 5', Hexaclorobiphenyl (HexaCB), whereas the 3, 4, 5, 3', 4', 5', HexaCB reached the same concentration in the sonicated samples of cells with or without serum. These results indicated that there was a relationship between PCBs structure, bioavaliability and the capacity to stimulate oncogene expression.JRC.(EI)-Environment Institut

Summary.

<p>Summary.</p