Coordinated Monitoring of the Eccentric O-star Binary Iota Orionis: The X-ray Analysis

We analyse two ASCA observations of the highly eccentric O9III + B1III binary Iota Orionis obtained at periastron and apastron. Based on the assumption of a strong colliding winds shock between the stellar components, we expected to see significant variation in the X-ray emission between these phases. The observations proved otherwise: the X-ray luminosities and spectral distributions were remarkably similar. The only noteworthy feature was the hint of a proximity effect during periastron passage, supported also in the optical. We discuss the accuracy of our results, and also analyse archival ROSAT observations. We investigate why we do not see a clear colliding winds signature. A simple model shows that the wind attenuation to the expected position of the shock apex is negligible throughout the orbit, which poses the puzzling question of why the expected 1/D variation (ie. a factor of 7.5) in the intrinsic luminosity is not seen in the data. Two scenarios are proposed: either the colliding winds emission is unexpectedly weak such that intrinsic shocks in the winds dominate the emission, or, alternatively, that the emission observed is colliding winds emission but in a more complex form than we would naively expect. Complex hydrodynamical models are then analyzed. Despite strongly phase-variable emission from the models, both were consistent with the observations. We find that if the mass-loss rates of the stars are low then intrinsic wind shocks could dominate the emission. However, when we assume higher mass-loss rates of the stars, we find that the observed emission could also be consistent with a purely colliding winds origin. To distinguish between the different models X-ray observations with improved phase coverage will be necessary.Comment: 18 pages, 14 figures, uses mn.st

Effects of the high-density lipoprotein mimetic agent CER-001 on coronary atherosclerosis in patients with acute coronary syndromes: a randomized trial†

Aim High-density lipoproteins (HDLs) have several potentially protective vascular effects. Most clinical studies of therapies targeting HDL have failed to show benefits vs. placebo. Objective To investigate the effects of an HDL-mimetic agent on atherosclerosis by intravascular ultrasonography (IVUS) and quantitative coronary angiography (QCA). Design and setting A prospective, double-blinded, randomized trial was conducted at 51 centres in the USA, the Netherlands, Canada, and France. Intravascular ultrasonography and QCA were performed to assess coronary atherosclerosis at baseline and 3 (2-5) weeks after the last study infusion. Patients Five hundred and seven patients were randomized; 417 and 461 had paired IVUS and QCA measurements, respectively. Intervention Patients were randomized to receive 6 weekly infusions of placebo, 3 mg/kg, 6 mg/kg, or 12 mg/kg CER-001. Main outcome measures The primary efficacy parameter was the nominal change in the total atheroma volume. Nominal changes in per cent atheroma volume on IVUS and coronary scores on QCA were also pre-specified endpoints. Results The nominal change in the total atheroma volume (adjusted means) was −2.71, −3.13, −1.50, and −3.05 mm3 with placebo, CER-001 3 mg/kg, 6 mg/kg, and 12 mg/kg, respectively (primary analysis of 12 mg/kg vs. placebo: P = 0.81). There was also no difference among groups for the nominal change in per cent atheroma volume (0.02, −0.02, 0.01, and 0.19%; nominal P = 0.53 for 12 mg/kg vs. placebo). Change in the coronary artery score was −0.022, −0.036, −0.022, and −0.015 mm (nominal P = 0.25, 0.99, 0.55), and change in the cumulative coronary stenosis score was −0.51, 2.65, 0.71, and −0.77% (compared with placebo, nominal P = 0.85 for 12 mg/kg and nominal P = 0.01 for 3 mg/kg). The number of patients with major cardiovascular events was 10 (8.3%), 16 (13.3%), 17 (13.7%), and 12 (9.8%) in the four groups. Conclusion CER-001 infusions did not reduce coronary atherosclerosis on IVUS and QCA when compared with placebo. Whether CER-001 administered in other regimens or to other populations could favourably affect atherosclerosis must await further study. Name of the trial registry: Clinicaltrials.gov; Registry's URL: http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01201837?term=cer-001&rank=2; Trial registration number: NCT0120183

Fiber Type-Specific Nitric Oxide Protects Oxidative Myofibers against Cachectic Stimuli

Oxidative skeletal muscles are more resistant than glycolytic muscles to cachexia caused by chronic heart failure and other chronic diseases. The molecular mechanism for the protection associated with oxidative phenotype remains elusive. We hypothesized that differences in reactive oxygen species (ROS) and nitric oxide (NO) determine the fiber type susceptibility. Here, we show that intraperitoneal injection of endotoxin (lipopolysaccharide, LPS) in mice resulted in higher level of ROS and greater expression of muscle-specific E3 ubiqitin ligases, muscle atrophy F-box (MAFbx)/atrogin-1 and muscle RING finger-1 (MuRF1), in glycolytic white vastus lateralis muscle than in oxidative soleus muscle. By contrast, NO production, inducible NO synthase (iNos) and antioxidant gene expression were greatly enhanced in oxidative, but not in glycolytic muscles, suggesting that NO mediates protection against muscle wasting. NO donors enhanced iNos and antioxidant gene expression and blocked cytokine/endotoxin-induced MAFbx/atrogin-1 expression in cultured myoblasts and in skeletal muscle in vivo. Our studies reveal a novel protective mechanism in oxidative myofibers mediated by enhanced iNos and antioxidant gene expression and suggest a significant value of enhanced NO signaling as a new therapeutic strategy for cachexia

Effects of the high-density lipoprotein mimetic agent CER-001 on coronary atherosclerosis in patients with acute coronary syndromes: a randomized trial†

Aim High-density lipoproteins (HDLs) have several potentially protective vascular effects. Most clinical studies of therapies targeting HDL have failed to show benefits vs. placebo. Objective: To investigate the effects of an HDL-mimetic agent on atherosclerosis by intravascular ultrasonography (IVUS) and quantitative coronary angiography (QCA). Design and setting A prospective, double-blinded, randomized trial was conducted at 51 centres in the USA, the Netherlands, Canada, and France. Intravascular ultrasonography and QCA were performed to assess coronary atherosclerosis at baseline and 3 (2–5) weeks after the last study infusion. Patients Five hundred and seven patients were randomized; 417 and 461 had paired IVUS and QCA measurements, respectively. Intervention Patients were randomized to receive 6 weekly infusions of placebo, 3 mg/kg, 6 mg/kg, or 12 mg/kg CER-001. Main outcome measures The primary efficacy parameter was the nominal change in the total atheroma volume. Nominal changes in per cent atheroma volume on IVUS and coronary scores on QCA were also pre-specified endpoints. Results: The nominal change in the total atheroma volume (adjusted means) was −2.71, −3.13, −1.50, and −3.05 mm3 with placebo, CER-001 3 mg/kg, 6 mg/kg, and 12 mg/kg, respectively (primary analysis of 12 mg/kg vs. placebo: P = 0.81). There was also no difference among groups for the nominal change in per cent atheroma volume (0.02, −0.02, 0.01, and 0.19%; nominal P = 0.53 for 12 mg/kg vs. placebo). Change in the coronary artery score was −0.022, −0.036, −0.022, and −0.015 mm (nominal P = 0.25, 0.99, 0.55), and change in the cumulative coronary stenosis score was −0.51, 2.65, 0.71, and −0.77% (compared with placebo, nominal P = 0.85 for 12 mg/kg and nominal P = 0.01 for 3 mg/kg). The number of patients with major cardiovascular events was 10 (8.3%), 16 (13.3%), 17 (13.7%), and 12 (9.8%) in the four groups. Conclusion: CER-001 infusions did not reduce coronary atherosclerosis on IVUS and QCA when compared with placebo. Whether CER-001 administered in other regimens or to other populations could favourably affect atherosclerosis must await further study. Name of the trial registry: Clinicaltrials.gov; Registry's URL: http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01201837?term=cer-001&rank=2; Trial registration number: NCT01201837