Accumulation of the solvent vehicle sulphobutylether beta cyclodextrin sodium in critically ill patients treated with intravenous voriconazole under renal replacement therapy

BACKGROUND: Voriconazole was introduced for the treatment of life-threatening fungal infections. The intravenous form includes the solvent vehicle sulphobutylether beta cyclodextrin sodium which shows an impaired clearance under intermittent dialysis therapy. This investigation aimed to determine first clinical data on sulphobutylether beta cyclodextrin sodium blood levels to verify the risk for accumulation. METHODS: In four patients suffering from renal insufficiency and intermittent dialysis therapy who needed a treatment with intravenous voriconazole as a reserve antifungal at the intensive care unit of the Mainz University Hospital the trough levels of voriconazole and sulphobutylether beta cyclodextrin sodium were measured. RESULTS: A 75-year-old woman showed a maximal sulphobutylether beta cyclodextrin sodium plasma level of 145 μg/ml in the initial phase. After a few days renal function recovered and the plasma levels came down to less than 20 μg/ml. In contrast to this patient with a recovery of renal function the remaining three patients showed renal failure during the complete period of intravenous treatment with voriconazole. In these patients an accumulation of sulphobutylether beta cyclodextrin sodium plasma levels was determined with a maximum of 523 μg/ml in a 18-year-old man, 409 μg/ml in a 57-year-old man, and 581 μg/ml in a 47-year-old man. CONCLUSION: The present data indicate an accumulation of sulphobutylether beta cyclodextrin sodium in patients treated with intravenous voriconazole and dialysis therapy. Fortunately, no toxic effects were observed, although the accumulated dose values were lower but comparable with those used in previous toxicity studies with animals

Lipoprotein(a) in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and aortic stenosis: a European Atherosclerosis Society consensus statement

This 2022 European Atherosclerosis Society lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] consensus statement updates evidence for the role of Lp(a) in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and aortic valve stenosis, provides clinical guidance for testing and treating elevated Lp(a) levels, and considers its inclusion in global risk estimation. Epidemiologic and genetic studies involving hundreds of thousands of individuals strongly support a causal and continuous association between Lp(a) concentration and cardiovascular outcomes in different ethnicities; elevated Lp(a) is a risk factor even at very low levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol. High Lp(a) is associated with both microcalcification and macrocalcification of the aortic valve. Current findings do not support Lp(a) as a risk factor for venous thrombotic events and impaired fibrinolysis. Very low Lp(a) levels may associate with increased risk of diabetes mellitus meriting further study. Lp(a) has pro-inflammatory and pro-atherosclerotic properties, which may partly relate to the oxidized phospholipids carried by Lp(a). This panel recommends testing Lp(a) concentration at least once in adults; cascade testing has potential value in familial hypercholesterolaemia, or with family or personal history of (very) high Lp(a) or premature ASCVD. Without specific Lp(a)-lowering therapies, early intensive risk factor management is recommended, targeted according to global cardiovascular risk and Lp(a) level. Lipoprotein apheresis is an option for very high Lp(a) with progressive cardiovascular disease despite optimal management of risk factors. In conclusion, this statement reinforces evidence for Lp(a) as a causal risk factor for cardiovascular outcomes. Trials of specific Lp(a)-lowering treatments are critical to confirm clinical benefit for cardiovascular disease and aortic valve stenosis

Adaptation of the disector method to rare small organelles in TEM sections exemplified by counting synaptic bodies in the rat pineal gland

The disector is the only objective method for quantifying particles of variable size in a given volume. With this method, cell organelles are identified on adjacent sections, but only those present in one section are counted. When counting extremely rare structures in transmission electron microscope sections (physical disector), the usual procedure of counting on electron micrographs is limited for economic reasons (e.g. micrographs highly outnumbering the investigated structures). Hence, to apply this unbiased stereological method, a modification of the physical disector concerning 3 aspects has been developed. (1) The prerequisite of screening large corresponding tissue areas (here ∼65000 μm(2)) was fulfilled by examining tissue areas along the edges of ultrathin sections. (2) The size of the counting frame was determined by measuring the lengths of the section margins (minus a guard area) by means of a Morphomat. This value was multiplied by the width of the investigated tissue zone, corresponding to the diameter of the electron microscope viewing screen. (3) Disector counting was carried out simultaneously on both sections (bidirectional disector) to improve efficiency. In the present study tiny synaptic bodies (SBs) were quantitated by disector in a rat pineal gland, yielding ∼30 SBs/1000 μm(3). By contrast, single section profile counts of SBs amounted to 90 SBs/20000 μm(2). Since the presently described adaptation of the disector is time-consuming, it is proposed to determine a proportion factor allowing to estimate number of structures per volume based on single section profile counts. This would decrease the evaluation time by more than 50%

Highly Selective Drug-Derived Fluorescent Probes for the Cannabinoid Receptor Type 1 (CB1R)

The cannabinoid receptor type 1 (CB1R) is one of the central elements of the endocannabinoid system regulating a variety of signaling cascades. Extensive efforts on CB1R have validated its essential roles in physiology such as appetite regulation, pain perception, memory formation, and thermoregulation. Yet, there is a surprising lack of clear understanding of its cellular signaling, distribution, and expression dynamics. CB1R visualization in real-time is therefore crucial for addressing these open questions in cannabinoid research. Using various highly selective drug-like CB1R ligands with a defined pharmacological profile, we investigated their potential for constructing CB1R fluorescent probes by a reverse design-approach. A modular design concept with a diethyl glycine-based building block as centerpiece allowed the straightforward modular synthesis of novel probe candidates. Supported by computational docking studies, this systematic approach led to the identification of novel pyrrole-based CB1R fluorescent probes. The probes demonstrated CB1R selectivity in radioligand binding profiling and inverse agonist activity in a cAMP assay. Application in time-resolved fluorescence resonance target-engagement studies and CB1R live cell imaging exemplify the great versatility of the tailored pyrrole-based fluorescent probes. These validated fluorescent probes aim to deepen the understanding of mechanistic aspects of CB1R localization, trafficking, and activation essential for the function and role of this receptor in pathological conditions

Frequent questions and responses on the 2022 lipoprotein(a) consensus statement of the European Atherosclerosis Society

In 2022, the European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS) published a new consensus statement on lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)], summarizing current knowledge about its causal association with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and aortic stenosis. One of the novelties of this statement is a new risk calculator showing how Lp(a) influences lifetime risk for ASCVD and that global risk may be underestimated substantially in individuals with high or very high Lp(a) concentration. The statement also provides practical advice on how knowledge about Lp(a) concentration can be used to modulate risk factor management, given that specific and highly effective mRNA-targeted Lp(a)-lowering therapies are still in clinical development. This advice counters the attitude: "Why should I measure Lp(a) if I can't lower it?". Subsequent to publication, questions have arisen relating to how the recommendations of this statement impact everyday clinical practice and ASCVD management. This review addresses 30 of the most frequently asked questions about Lp(a) epidemiology, its contribution to cardiovascular risk, Lp(a) measurement, risk factor management and existing therapeutic options

Lipoprotein(a) in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and aortic stenosis: a European Atherosclerosis Society consensus statement

This 2022 European Atherosclerosis Society lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] consensus statement updates evidence for the role of Lp(a) in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and aortic valve stenosis, provides clinical guidance for testing and treating elevated Lp(a) levels, and considers its inclusion in global risk estimation. Epidemiologic and genetic studies involving hundreds of thousands of individuals strongly support a causal and continuous association between Lp(a) concentration and cardiovascular outcomes in different ethnicities; elevated Lp(a) is a risk factor even at very low levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol. High Lp(a) is associated with both microcalcification and macrocalcification of the aortic valve. Current findings do not support Lp(a) as a risk factor for venous thrombotic events and impaired fibrinolysis. Very low Lp(a) levels may associate with increased risk of diabetes mellitus meriting further study. Lp(a) has pro-inflammatory and pro-atherosclerotic properties, which may partly relate to the oxidized phospholipids carried by Lp(a). This panel recommends testing Lp(a) concentration at least once in adults; cascade testing has potential value in familial hypercholesterolaemia, or with family or personal history of (very) high Lp(a) or premature ASCVD. Without specific Lp(a)-lowering therapies, early intensive risk factor management is recommended, targeted according to global cardiovascular risk and Lp(a) level. Lipoprotein apheresis is an option for very high Lp(a) with progressive cardiovascular disease despite optimal management of risk factors. In conclusion, this statement reinforces evidence for Lp(a) as a causal risk factor for cardiovascular outcomes. Trials of specific Lp(a)-lowering treatments are critical to confirm clinical benefit for cardiovascular disease and aortic valve stenosis

Evolocumab and clinical outcomes in patients with cardiovascular disease

BACKGROUND Evolocumab is a monoclonal antibody that inhibits proprotein convertase subtilisin-kexin type 9 (PCSK9) and lowers low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels by approximately 60%. Whether it prevents cardiovascular events is uncertain. METHODS We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial involving 27,564 patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and LDL cholesterol levels of 70 mg per deciliter (1.8 mmol per liter) or higher who were receiving statin therapy. Patients were randomly assigned to receive evolocumab (either 140 mg every 2 weeks or 420 mg monthly) or matching placebo as subcutaneous injections. The primary efficacy end point was the composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, hospitalization for unstable angina, or coronary revascularization. The key secondary efficacy end point was the composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. The median duration of follow-up was 2.2 years. RESULTS At 48 weeks, the least-squares mean percentage reduction in LDL cholesterol levels with evolocumab, as compared with placebo, was 59%, from a median baseline value of 92 mg per deciliter (2.4 mmol per liter) to 30 mg per deciliter (0.78 mmol per liter) (P<0.001). Relative to placebo, evolocumab treatment significantly reduced the risk of the primary end point (1344 patients [9.8%] vs. 1563 patients [11.3%]; hazard ratio, 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.79 to 0.92; P<0.001) and the key secondary end point (816 [5.9%] vs. 1013 [7.4%]; hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.73 to 0.88; P<0.001). The results were consistent across key subgroups, including the subgroup of patients in the lowest quartile for baseline LDL cholesterol levels (median, 74 mg per deciliter [1.9 mmol per liter]). There was no significant difference between the study groups with regard to adverse events (including new-onset diabetes and neurocognitive events), with the exception of injection-site reactions, which were more common with evolocumab (2.1% vs. 1.6%). CONCLUSIONS In our trial, inhibition of PCSK9 with evolocumab on a background of statin therapy lowered LDL cholesterol levels to a median of 30 mg per deciliter (0.78 mmol per liter) and reduced the risk of cardiovascular events. These findings show that patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease benefit from lowering of LDL cholesterol levels below current targets