The Association of Systemic Microvascular Changes with Lung Function and Lung Density: A Cross-Sectional Study

10.1371/journal.pone.0050224PLoS ONE712

DNA Methylation Changes in Atypical Adenomatous Hyperplasia, Adenocarcinoma In Situ, and Lung Adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND:Aberrant DNA methylation is common in lung adenocarcinoma, but its timing in the phases of tumor development is largely unknown. Delineating when abnormal DNA methylation arises may provide insight into the natural history of lung adenocarcinoma and the role that DNA methylation alterations play in tumor formation. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS:We used MethyLight, a sensitive real-time PCR-based quantitative method, to analyze DNA methylation levels at 15 CpG islands that are frequently methylated in lung adenocarcinoma and that we had flagged as potential markers for non-invasive detection. We also used two repeat probes as indicators of global DNA hypomethylation. We examined DNA methylation in 249 tissue samples from 93 subjects, spanning the putative spectrum of peripheral lung adenocarcinoma development: histologically normal adjacent non-tumor lung, atypical adenomatous hyperplasia (AAH), adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS, formerly known as bronchioloalveolar carcinoma), and invasive lung adenocarcinoma. Comparison of DNA methylation levels between the lesion types suggests that DNA hypermethylation of distinct loci occurs at different time points during the development of lung adenocarcinoma. DNA methylation at CDKN2A ex2 and PTPRN2 is already significantly elevated in AAH, while CpG islands at 2C35, EYA4, HOXA1, HOXA11, NEUROD1, NEUROD2 and TMEFF2 are significantly hypermethylated in AIS. In contrast, hypermethylation at CDH13, CDX2, OPCML, RASSF1, SFRP1 and TWIST1 and global DNA hypomethylation appear to be present predominantly in invasive cancer. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE:The gradual increase in DNA methylation seen for numerous loci in progressively more transformed lesions supports the model in which AAH and AIS are sequential stages in the development of lung adenocarcinoma. The demarcation of DNA methylation changes characteristic for AAH, AIS and adenocarcinoma begins to lay out a possible roadmap for aberrant DNA methylation events in tumor development. In addition, it identifies which DNA methylation changes might be used as molecular markers for the detection of preinvasive lesions

Current and prospective pharmacological targets in relation to antimigraine action

Migraine is a recurrent incapacitating neurovascular disorder characterized by unilateral and throbbing headaches associated with photophobia, phonophobia, nausea, and vomiting. Current specific drugs used in the acute treatment of migraine interact with vascular receptors, a fact that has raised concerns about their cardiovascular safety. In the past, α-adrenoceptor agonists (ergotamine, dihydroergotamine, isometheptene) were used. The last two decades have witnessed the advent of 5-HT1B/1D receptor agonists (sumatriptan and second-generation triptans), which have a well-established efficacy in the acute treatment of migraine. Moreover, current prophylactic treatments of migraine include 5-HT2 receptor antagonists, Ca2+ channel blockers, and β-adrenoceptor antagonists. Despite the progress in migraine research and in view of its complex etiology, this disease still remains underdiagnosed, and available therapies are underused. In this review, we have discussed pharmacological targets in migraine, with special emphasis on compounds acting on 5-HT (5-HT1-7), adrenergic (α1, α2, and β), calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP 1 and CGRP2), adenosine (A1, A2, and A3), glutamate (NMDA, AMPA, kainate, and metabotropic), dopamine, endothelin, and female hormone (estrogen and progesterone) receptors. In addition, we have considered some other targets, including gamma-aminobutyric acid, angiotensin, bradykinin, histamine, and ionotropic receptors, in relation to antimigraine therapy. Finally, the cardiovascular safety of current and prospective antimigraine therapies is touched upon

Combination therapy with oral treprostinil for pulmonary arterial hypertension. A double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trial

Rationale: Oral treprostinil improves exercise capacity in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH), but the effect on clinical outcomes was unknown. Objectives: To evaluate the effect of oral treprostinil compared with placebo on time to first adjudicated clinical worsening event in participants with PAH who recently began approved oral monotherapy. Methods: In this event-driven, double-blind study, we randomly allocated 690 participants (1:1 ratio) with PAH to receive placebo or oral treprostinil extended-release tablets three times daily. Eligible participants were using approved oral monotherapy for over 30 days before randomization and had a 6-minute-walk distance 150 m or greater. The primary endpoint was the time to first adjudicated clinical worsening event: death; hospitalization due to worsening PAH; initiation of inhaled or parenteral prostacyclin therapy; disease progression; or unsatisfactory long-term clinical response. Measurements and Main Results: Clinical worsening occurred in 26% of the oral treprostinil group compared with 36% of placebo participants (hazard ratio, 0.74; 95% confidence interval, 0.56–0.97; P = 0.028). Key measures of disease status, including functional class, Borg dyspnea score, and N-terminal pro–brain natriuretic peptide, all favored oral treprostinil treatment at Week 24 and beyond. A noninvasive risk stratification analysis demonstrated that oral treprostinil–assigned participants had a substantially higher mortality risk at baseline but achieved a lower risk profile from Study Weeks 12–60. The most common adverse events in the oral treprostinil group were headache, diarrhea, flushing, nausea, and vomiting. Conclusions: In participants with PAH, addition of oral treprostinil to approved oral monotherapy reduced the risk of clinical worsening. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01560624)

Five insights from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019

The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2019 provides a rules-based synthesis of the available evidence on levels and trends in health outcomes, a diverse set of risk factors, and health system responses. GBD 2019 covered 204 countries and territories, as well as first administrative level disaggregations for 22 countries, from 1990 to 2019. Because GBD is highly standardised and comprehensive, spanning both fatal and non-fatal outcomes, and uses a mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive list of hierarchical disease and injury causes, the study provides a powerful basis for detailed and broad insights on global health trends and emerging challenges. GBD 2019 incorporates data from 281 586 sources and provides more than 3.5 billion estimates of health outcome and health system measures of interest for global, national, and subnational policy dialogue. All GBD estimates are publicly available and adhere to the Guidelines on Accurate and Transparent Health Estimate Reporting. From this vast amount of information, five key insights that are important for health, social, and economic development strategies have been distilled. These insights are subject to the many limitations outlined in each of the component GBD capstone papers.Peer reviewe

Global, regional, and national incidence, prevalence, and years lived with disability for 354 diseases and injuries for 195 countries and territories, 1990-2017: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017

Background: The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2017 (GBD 2017) includes a comprehensive assessment of incidence, prevalence, and years lived with disability (YLDs) for 354 causes in 195 countries and territories from 1990 to 2017. Previous GBD studies have shown how the decline of mortality rates from 1990 to 2016 has led to an increase in life expectancy, an ageing global population, and an expansion of the non-fatal burden of disease and injury. These studies have also shown how a substantial portion of the world's population experiences non-fatal health loss with considerable heterogeneity among different causes, locations, ages, and sexes. Ongoing objectives of the GBD study include increasing the level of estimation detail, improving analytical strategies, and increasing the amount of high-quality data. Methods: We estimated incidence and prevalence for 354 diseases and injuries and 3484 sequelae. We used an updated and extensive body of literature studies, survey data, surveillance data, inpatient admission records, outpatient visit records, and health insurance claims, and additionally used results from cause of death models to inform estimates using a total of 68 781 data sources. Newly available clinical data from India, Iran, Japan, Jordan, Nepal, China, Brazil, Norway, and Italy were incorporated, as well as updated claims data from the USA and new claims data from Taiwan (province of China) and Singapore. We used DisMod-MR 2.1, a Bayesian meta-regression tool, as the main method of estimation, ensuring consistency between rates of incidence, prevalence, remission, and cause of death for each condition. YLDs were estimated as the product of a prevalence estimate and a disability weight for health states of each mutually exclusive sequela, adjusted for comorbidity. We updated the Socio-demographic Index (SDI), a summary development indicator of income per capita, years of schooling, and total fertility rate. Additionally, we calculated differences between male and female YLDs to identify divergent trends across sexes. GBD 2017 complies with the Guidelines for Accurate and Transparent Health Estimates Reporting. Findings: Globally, for females, the causes with the greatest age-standardised prevalence were oral disorders, headache disorders, and haemoglobinopathies and haemolytic anaemias in both 1990 and 2017. For males, the causes with the greatest age-standardised prevalence were oral disorders, headache disorders, and tuberculosis including latent tuberculosis infection in both 1990 and 2017. In terms of YLDs, low back pain, headache disorders, and dietary iron deficiency were the leading Level 3 causes of YLD counts in 1990, whereas low back pain, headache disorders, and depressive disorders were the leading causes in 2017 for both sexes combined. All-cause age-standardised YLD rates decreased by 3·9% (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 3·1–4·6) from 1990 to 2017; however, the all-age YLD rate increased by 7·2% (6·0–8·4) while the total sum of global YLDs increased from 562 million (421–723) to 853 million (642–1100). The increases for males and females were similar, with increases in all-age YLD rates of 7·9% (6·6–9·2) for males and 6·5% (5·4–7·7) for females. We found significant differences between males and females in terms of age-standardised prevalence estimates for multiple causes. The causes with the greatest relative differences between sexes in 2017 included substance use disorders (3018 cases [95% UI 2782–3252] per 100 000 in males vs s1400 [1279–1524] per 100 000 in females), transport injuries (3322 [3082–3583] vs 2336 [2154–2535]), and self-harm and interpersonal violence (3265 [2943–3630] vs 5643 [5057–6302]). Interpretation: Global all-cause age-standardised YLD rates have improved only slightly over a period spanning nearly three decades. However, the magnitude of the non-fatal disease burden has expanded globally, with increasing numbers of people who have a wide spectrum of conditions. A subset of conditions has remained globally pervasive since 1990, whereas other conditions have displayed more dynamic trends, with different ages, sexes, and geographies across the globe experiencing varying burdens and trends of health loss. This study emphasises how global improvements in premature mortality for select conditions have led to older populations with complex and potentially expensive diseases, yet also highlights global achievements in certain domains of disease and injury