Impact of hypoglycemia on patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and their quality of life, work productivity, and medication adherence.

BackgroundThe purpose of this study was to determine the characteristics of adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) that correlate with greater risk of hypoglycemia and determine the impact of hypoglycemia on health-related quality of life, work productivity, and medication adherence from a patient perspective.MethodsData from a large web-based survey were retrospectively analyzed. Adults with a diagnosis of T2DM taking antihyperglycemic agents were included in the analysis. Participants with knowledge of their hypoglycemic history were divided into three groups: those experiencing recent hypoglycemia (previous 3 months), those experiencing nonrecent hypoglycemia, and those never experiencing hypoglycemia.ResultsOf the participants with T2DM taking antihyperglycemic agents who were knowledgeable of their hypoglycemia history, 55.7% had ever experienced hypoglycemia. Of those, 52.7% had recent hypoglycemia. Compared with those who never experienced hypoglycemia, those who experienced hypoglycemia tended to: be younger; be more aware of their glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels; have higher HbA1c levels; have a higher body mass index; have higher Charlson Comorbidity Index scores; be on insulin, sulfonylureas, and/or glucagon-like peptide-1 agonists; and be less adherent to their antihyperglycemic agents. Hypoglycemia interfered with social activities, caused more missed work (absenteeism), more impairment while at work (presenteeism), and decreased overall work productivity compared with patients who had never experienced hypoglycemia. Overall health-related quality of life, as determined by the Short Form-36 health questionnaire, was negatively impacted by hypoglycemia. Both Physical and Mental Summary scores were significantly lower for the recent hypoglycemia and nonrecent hypoglycemia groups compared with the never hypoglycemia group.ConclusionHypoglycemia can negatively impact many aspects of life. Greater awareness of those who are at risk for developing hypoglycemia can lead to the development of measures (eg, patient and physician education) to prevent future hypoglycemia episodes

Overexpression of Partner of Numb Induces Asymmetric Distribution of the PI4P 5-Kinase Skittles in Mitotic Sensory Organ Precursor Cells in Drosophila

Unequal segregation of cell fate determinants at mitosis is a conserved mechanism whereby cell fate diversity can be generated during development. In Drosophila, each sensory organ precursor cell (SOP) divides asymmetrically to produce an anterior pIIb and a posterior pIIa cell. The Par6-aPKC complex localizes at the posterior pole of dividing SOPs and directs the actin-dependent localization of the cell fate determinants Numb, Partner of Numb (Pon) and Neuralized at the opposite pole. The plasma membrane lipid phosphatidylinositol (4,5)-bisphosphate (PIP2) regulates the plasma membrane localization and activity of various proteins, including several actin regulators, thereby modulating actin-based processes. Here, we have examined the distribution of PIP2 and of the PIP2-producing kinase Skittles (Sktl) in mitotic SOPs. Our analysis indicates that both Sktl and PIP2 reporters are uniformly distributed in mitotic SOPs. In the course of this study, we have observed that overexpression of full-length Pon or its localization domain (LD) fused to the Red Fluorescent Protein (RFP::PonLD) results in asymmetric distribution of Sktl and PIP2 reporters in dividing SOPs. Our observation that Pon overexpression alters polar protein distribution is relevant because RFP::PonLD is often used as a polarity marker in dividing progenitors

Effects of antiplatelet therapy after stroke due to intracerebral haemorrhage (RESTART): a randomised, open-label trial

Background: Antiplatelet therapy reduces the risk of major vascular events for people with occlusive vascular disease, although it might increase the risk of intracranial haemorrhage. Patients surviving the commonest subtype of intracranial haemorrhage, intracerebral haemorrhage, are at risk of both haemorrhagic and occlusive vascular events, but whether antiplatelet therapy can be used safely is unclear. We aimed to estimate the relative and absolute effects of antiplatelet therapy on recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage and whether this risk might exceed any reduction of occlusive vascular events. Methods: The REstart or STop Antithrombotics Randomised Trial (RESTART) was a prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded endpoint, parallel-group trial at 122 hospitals in the UK. We recruited adults (≥18 years) who were taking antithrombotic (antiplatelet or anticoagulant) therapy for the prevention of occlusive vascular disease when they developed intracerebral haemorrhage, discontinued antithrombotic therapy, and survived for 24 h. Computerised randomisation incorporating minimisation allocated participants (1:1) to start or avoid antiplatelet therapy. We followed participants for the primary outcome (recurrent symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage) for up to 5 years. We analysed data from all randomised participants using Cox proportional hazards regression, adjusted for minimisation covariates. This trial is registered with ISRCTN (number ISRCTN71907627). Findings: Between May 22, 2013, and May 31, 2018, 537 participants were recruited a median of 76 days (IQR 29–146) after intracerebral haemorrhage onset: 268 were assigned to start and 269 (one withdrew) to avoid antiplatelet therapy. Participants were followed for a median of 2·0 years (IQR [1·0– 3·0]; completeness 99·3%). 12 (4%) of 268 participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy had recurrence of intracerebral haemorrhage compared with 23 (9%) of 268 participants allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (adjusted hazard ratio 0·51 [95% CI 0·25–1·03]; p=0·060). 18 (7%) participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy experienced major haemorrhagic events compared with 25 (9%) participants allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (0·71 [0·39–1·30]; p=0·27), and 39 [15%] participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy had major occlusive vascular events compared with 38 [14%] allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (1·02 [0·65–1·60]; p=0·92). Interpretation: These results exclude all but a very modest increase in the risk of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage with antiplatelet therapy for patients on antithrombotic therapy for the prevention of occlusive vascular disease when they developed intracerebral haemorrhage. The risk of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage is probably too small to exceed the established benefits of antiplatelet therapy for secondary prevention

Effects of antiplatelet therapy after stroke due to intracerebral haemorrhage (RESTART): a randomised, open-label trial

Background: Antiplatelet therapy reduces the risk of major vascular events for people with occlusive vascular disease, although it might increase the risk of intracranial haemorrhage. Patients surviving the commonest subtype of intracranial haemorrhage, intracerebral haemorrhage, are at risk of both haemorrhagic and occlusive vascular events, but whether antiplatelet therapy can be used safely is unclear. We aimed to estimate the relative and absolute effects of antiplatelet therapy on recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage and whether this risk might exceed any reduction of occlusive vascular events. Methods: The REstart or STop Antithrombotics Randomised Trial (RESTART) was a prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded endpoint, parallel-group trial at 122 hospitals in the UK. We recruited adults (≥18 years) who were taking antithrombotic (antiplatelet or anticoagulant) therapy for the prevention of occlusive vascular disease when they developed intracerebral haemorrhage, discontinued antithrombotic therapy, and survived for 24 h. Computerised randomisation incorporating minimisation allocated participants (1:1) to start or avoid antiplatelet therapy. We followed participants for the primary outcome (recurrent symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage) for up to 5 years. We analysed data from all randomised participants using Cox proportional hazards regression, adjusted for minimisation covariates. This trial is registered with ISRCTN (number ISRCTN71907627). Findings: Between May 22, 2013, and May 31, 2018, 537 participants were recruited a median of 76 days (IQR 29–146) after intracerebral haemorrhage onset: 268 were assigned to start and 269 (one withdrew) to avoid antiplatelet therapy. Participants were followed for a median of 2·0 years (IQR [1·0– 3·0]; completeness 99·3%). 12 (4%) of 268 participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy had recurrence of intracerebral haemorrhage compared with 23 (9%) of 268 participants allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (adjusted hazard ratio 0·51 [95% CI 0·25–1·03]; p=0·060). 18 (7%) participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy experienced major haemorrhagic events compared with 25 (9%) participants allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (0·71 [0·39–1·30]; p=0·27), and 39 [15%] participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy had major occlusive vascular events compared with 38 [14%] allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (1·02 [0·65–1·60]; p=0·92). Interpretation: These results exclude all but a very modest increase in the risk of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage with antiplatelet therapy for patients on antithrombotic therapy for the prevention of occlusive vascular disease when they developed intracerebral haemorrhage. The risk of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage is probably too small to exceed the established benefits of antiplatelet therapy for secondary prevention

Effects of antiplatelet therapy after stroke due to intracerebral haemorrhage (RESTART): a randomised, open-label trial

BACKGROUND: Antiplatelet therapy reduces the risk of major vascular events for people with occlusive vascular disease, although it might increase the risk of intracranial haemorrhage. Patients surviving the commonest subtype of intracranial haemorrhage, intracerebral haemorrhage, are at risk of both haemorrhagic and occlusive vascular events, but whether antiplatelet therapy can be used safely is unclear. We aimed to estimate the relative and absolute effects of antiplatelet therapy on recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage and whether this risk might exceed any reduction of occlusive vascular events. METHODS: The REstart or STop Antithrombotics Randomised Trial (RESTART) was a prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded endpoint, parallel-group trial at 122 hospitals in the UK. We recruited adults (≥18 years) who were taking antithrombotic (antiplatelet or anticoagulant) therapy for the prevention of occlusive vascular disease when they developed intracerebral haemorrhage, discontinued antithrombotic therapy, and survived for 24 h. Computerised randomisation incorporating minimisation allocated participants (1:1) to start or avoid antiplatelet therapy. We followed participants for the primary outcome (recurrent symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage) for up to 5 years. We analysed data from all randomised participants using Cox proportional hazards regression, adjusted for minimisation covariates. This trial is registered with ISRCTN (number ISRCTN71907627). FINDINGS: Between May 22, 2013, and May 31, 2018, 537 participants were recruited a median of 76 days (IQR 29-146) after intracerebral haemorrhage onset: 268 were assigned to start and 269 (one withdrew) to avoid antiplatelet therapy. Participants were followed for a median of 2·0 years (IQR [1·0- 3·0]; completeness 99·3%). 12 (4%) of 268 participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy had recurrence of intracerebral haemorrhage compared with 23 (9%) of 268 participants allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (adjusted hazard ratio 0·51 [95% CI 0·25-1·03]; p=0·060). 18 (7%) participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy experienced major haemorrhagic events compared with 25 (9%) participants allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (0·71 [0·39-1·30]; p=0·27), and 39 [15%] participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy had major occlusive vascular events compared with 38 [14%] allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (1·02 [0·65-1·60]; p=0·92). INTERPRETATION: These results exclude all but a very modest increase in the risk of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage with antiplatelet therapy for patients on antithrombotic therapy for the prevention of occlusive vascular disease when they developed intracerebral haemorrhage. The risk of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage is probably too small to exceed the established benefits of antiplatelet therapy for secondary prevention. FUNDING: British Heart Foundation

An Anti-β-Amyloid Vaccine for Treating Cognitive Deficits in a Mouse Model of Down Syndrome

<div><p>In Down syndrome (DS) or trisomy of chromosome 21, the β-amyloid (Aβ) peptide product of the amyloid precursor protein (APP) is present in excess. Evidence points to increased <i>APP</i> gene dose and Aβ as playing a critical role in cognitive difficulties experienced by people with DS. Particularly, Aβ is linked to the late-life emergence of dementia as associated with neuropathological markers of Alzheimer’s disease (AD). At present, no treatment targets Aβ–related pathogenesis in people with DS. Herein we used a vaccine containing the Aβ 1–15 peptide embedded into liposomes together with the adjuvant monophosphoryl lipid A (MPLA). Ts65Dn mice, a model of DS, were immunized with the anti-Aβ vaccine at 5 months of age and were examined for cognitive measures at 8 months of age. The status of basal forebrain cholinergic neurons and brain levels of APP and its proteolytic products were measured. Immunization of Ts65Dn mice resulted in robust anti-Aβ IgG titers, demonstrating the ability of the vaccine to break self-tolerance. The vaccine-induced antibodies reacted with Aβ without detectable binding to either APP or its C-terminal fragments. Vaccination of Ts65Dn mice resulted in a modest, but non-significant reduction in brain Aβ levels relative to vehicle-treated Ts65Dn mice, resulting in similar levels of Aβ as diploid (2N) mice. Importantly, vaccinated Ts65Dn mice showed resolution of memory deficits in the novel object recognition and contextual fear conditioning tests, as well as reduction of cholinergic neuron atrophy. No treatment adverse effects were observed; vaccine did not result in inflammation, cellular infiltration, or hemorrhage. These data are the first to show that an anti-Aβ immunotherapeutic approach may act to target Aβ-related pathology in a mouse model of DS.</p></div

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)

In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field