Glucuronidation by UGT1A1 Is the Dominant Pathway of the Metabolic Disposition of Belinostat in Liver Cancer Patients

10.1371/journal.pone.0054522PLoS ONE81

Comparative effectiveness of antihypertensive medication for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease: systematic review and multiple treatments meta-analysis

Background: We conducted a systematic review of evidence from randomized controlled trials to answer the following research question: What are the relative effects of different classes of antihypertensive drugs in reducing the incidence of cardiovascular disease outcomes for healthy people at risk of cardiovascular disease? Methods: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED (up to February 2011) and CENTRAL (up to May 2009), and reference lists in recent systematic reviews. Titles and abstracts were assessed for relevance and those potentially fulfilling our inclusion criteria were then assessed in full text. Two reviewers made independent assessments at each step. We selected the following main outcomes: total mortality, myocardial infarction and stroke. We also report on angina, heart failure and incidence of diabetes. We conducted a multiple treatments meta-analysis using random-effects models. We assessed the quality of the evidence using the GRADE-instrument. Results: We included 25 trials. Overall, the results were mixed, with few significant dif-ferences, and with no drugclass standing out as superior across multiple outcomes. The only significant finding for total mortality based on moderate to high quality evidence was that beta-blockers (atenolol) were inferior to angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) (relative risk (RR) 1.14; 95% credibility interval (CrI) 1.02 to 1.28). Angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE)- inhibitors came out inferior to calcium-channel blockers (CCB) regarding stroke-risk (RR 1.19; 1.03 to 1.38), but superior regarding risk of heart failure (RR 0.82; 0.69 to 0.94), both based on moderate quality evidence. Diuretics reduced the risk of myocardial infarction compared to beta-blockers (RR 0.82; 0.68 to 0.98), and lowered the risk of heart failure compared to CCB (RR 0.73; 0.62 to 0.84), beta-blockers (RR 0.73; 0.54 to 0.96), and alpha-blockers (RR 0.51; 0.40 to 0.64). The risk of diabetes increased with diuretics compared to ACE-inhibitors (RR 1.43; 1.12 to 1.83) and CCB (RR 1.27; 1.05 to 1.57). Conclusion: Based on the available evidence, there seems to be little or no difference between commonly used blood pressure lowering medications for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease. Beta-blockers (atenolol) and alpha-blockers may not be first-choice drugs as they were the only drug-classes that were not significantly superior to any other, for any outcomes

Lidocaine relaxation in isolated rat aortic rings is enhanced by endothelial removal: possible role of Kv, KATP channels and A2a receptor crosstalk

BACKGROUND: Lidocaine is an approved local anesthetic and Class 1B antiarrhythmic with a number of ancillary properties. Our aim was to investigate lidocaine’s vasoreactivity properties in intact versus denuded rat thoracic aortic rings, and the effect of inhibitors of nitric oxide (NO), prostenoids, voltage-dependent K(v) and K(ATP) channels, membrane Na(+)/K(+) pump, and A(2a) and A(2b) receptors. METHODS: Aortic rings were harvested from adult male Sprague Dawley rats and equilibrated in an organ bath containing oxygenated, modified Krebs-Henseleit solution, pH 7.4, 37 °C. The rings were pre-contracted sub-maximally with 0.3 μM norepinephrine (NE), and the effect of increasing lidocaine concentrations was examined. Rings were tested for viability after each experiment with maximally dilating 100 μM papaverine. The drugs 4-aminopyridine (4-AP), glibenclamide, 5-hydroxydecanoate, ouabain, 8-(3-chlorostyryl) caffeine and PSB-0788 were examined. RESULTS: All drugs tested had no significant effect on basal tension. Lidocaine relaxation in intact rings was biphasic between 1 and 10 μM (Phase 1) and 10 and 1000 μM (Phase 2). Mechanical removal of the endothelium resulted in further relaxation, and at lower concentrations ring sensitivity (% relaxation per μM lidocaine) significantly increased 3.5 times compared to intact rings. The relaxing factor(s) responsible for enhancing ring relaxation did not appear to be NO- or prostacyclin-dependent, as L-NAME and indomethacin had little or no effect on intact ring relaxation. In denuded rings, lidocaine relaxation was completely abolished by K(v) channel inhibition and significantly reduced by antagonists of the MitoK(ATP) channel, and to a lesser extent the SarcK(ATP) channel. Curiously, A(2a) subtype receptor antagonism significantly inhibited lidocaine relaxation above 100 μM, but not the A(2b) receptor. CONCLUSIONS: We show that lidocaine relaxation in rat thoracic aorta was biphasic and significantly enhanced by endothelial removal, which did not appear to be NO or prostacyclin dependent. The unknown factor(s) responsible for enhanced relaxation was significantly reduced by K(v) inhibition, 5-HD inhibition, and A(2a) subtype inhibition indicating a potential role for crosstalk in lidocaine’s vasoreactivity