N-Acetylcysteine inhibits platelet-monocyte conjugation in patients with type 2 diabetes with depleted intraplatelet glutathione: a randomised controlled trial

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: The aim of this study was to determine whether oral dosing with N-acetylcysteine (NAC) increases intraplatelet levels of the antioxidant, glutathione (GSH), and reduces platelet–monocyte conjugation in blood from patients with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: In this placebo-controlled randomised crossover study, the effect of oral NAC dosing on platelet–monocyte conjugation and intraplatelet GSH was investigated in patients with type 2 diabetes (eligibility criteria: men or post-menopausal women with well-controlled diabetes (HbA(1c) < 10%), not on aspirin or statins). Patients (n = 14; age range 43–79 years, HbA(1c) = 6.9 ± 0.9% [52.3 ± 10.3 mmol/mol]) visited the Highland Clinical Research Facility, Inverness, UK on day 0 and day 7 for each arm of the study. Blood was sampled before and 2 h after oral administration of placebo or NAC (1,200 mg) on day 0 and day 7. Patients received placebo or NAC capsules for once-daily dosing on the intervening days. The order of administration of NAC and placebo was allocated by a central office and all patients and research staff involved in the study were blinded to the allocation until after the study was complete and the data fully analysed. The primary outcome for the study was platelet–monocyte conjugation. RESULTS: Oral NAC reduced platelet–monocyte conjugation (from 53.1 ± 4.5% to 42.5 ± 3.9%) at 2 h after administration and the effect was maintained after 7 days of dosing. Intraplatelet GSH was raised in individuals with depleted GSH and there was a negative correlation between baseline intraplatelet GSH and platelet–monocyte conjugation. There were no adverse events. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: The NAC-induced normalisation of intraplatelet GSH, coupled with a reduction in platelet–monocyte conjugation, suggests that NAC might help to reduce atherothrombotic risk in type 2 diabetes. FUNDING: Chief Scientist Office (CZB/4/622), Scottish Funding Council, Highlands & Islands Enterprise and European Regional Development Fund. TRIAL REGISTRATION: isrctn.org ISRCTN89304265 ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00125-012-2685-z) contains peer-reviewed but unedited supplementary material, which is available to authorised users

Mechanisms of Endothelial Dysfunction in Resistance Arteries from Patients with End-Stage Renal Disease

The study focuses on the mechanisms of endothelial dysfunction in the uremic milieu. Subcutaneous resistance arteries from 35 end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients and 28 matched controls were studied ex-vivo. Basal and receptor-dependent effects of endothelium-derived factors, expression of endothelial NO synthase (eNOS), prerequisites for myoendothelial gap junctions (MEGJ), and associations between endothelium-dependent responses and plasma levels of endothelial dysfunction markers were assessed. The contribution of endothelium-derived hyperpolarizing factor (EDHF) to endothelium-dependent relaxation was impaired in uremic arteries after stimulation with bradykinin, but not acetylcholine, reflecting the agonist-specific differences. Diminished vasodilator influences of the endothelium on basal tone and enhanced plasma levels of asymmetrical dimethyl L-arginine (ADMA) suggest impairment in NO-mediated regulation of uremic arteries. eNOS expression and contribution of MEGJs to EDHF type responses were unaltered. Plasma levels of ADMA were negatively associated with endothelium-dependent responses in uremic arteries. Preserved responses of smooth muscle to pinacidil and NO-donor indicate alterations within the endothelium and tolerance of vasodilator mechanisms to the uremic retention products at the level of smooth muscle. We conclude that both EDHF and NO pathways that control resistance artery tone are impaired in the uremic milieu. For the first time, we validate the alterations in EDHF type responses linked to kinin receptors in ESRD patients. The association between plasma ADMA concentrations and endothelial function in uremic resistance vasculature may have diagnostic and future therapeutic implications

Comparative Persistence of the TNF Antagonists in Rheumatoid Arthritis – A Population-Based Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE:To compare persistence with tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF) antagonists among rheumatoid arthritis patients in British Columbia. Treatment persistence has been suggested as a proxy for real-world therapeutic benefit and harm of treatments for chronic non-curable diseases, including rheumatoid arthritis. We hypothesized that the different pharmacological characteristics of infliximab, adalimumab and etanercept cause statistically and clinically significant differences in persistence. METHODS:We conducted a population-based cohort study using administrative health data from the Canadian province of British Columbia. The study cohort included rheumatoid arthritis patients who initiated the first course of a TNF antagonist between 2001 and 2008. Persistence was measured as the time between first dispensing to discontinuation. Drug discontinuation was defined as a drug-free interval of 180 days or switching to another TNF antagonist, anakinra, rituximab or abatacept. Persistence was estimated and compared using survival analysis. RESULTS:The study cohort included 2,923 patients, 63% treated with etanercept. Median persistence in years (95% confidence interval) with infliximab was 3.7 (2.9-4.9), with adalimumab 3.3 (2.6-4.1) and with etanercept 3.8 (3.3-4.3). Similar risk of discontinuation was observed for the three drugs: the hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) was 0.98 (0.85-1.13) comparing infliximab with etanercept, 0.95 (0.78-1.15) comparing infliximab with adalimumab and 1.04 (0.88-1.22) comparing adalimumab with etanercept. CONCLUSIONS:Similar persistence was observed with infliximab, adalimumab and etanercept in rheumatoid arthritis patients during the first 9 years of use. If treatment persistence is a good proxy for the therapeutic benefit and harm of these drugs, then this finding suggests that the three drugs share an overall similar benefit-harm profile in rheumatoid arthritis patients