Ethosuximide modifies network excitability in the rat entorhinal cortex via an increase in GABA release

Ethosuximide is the drug of choice for treating generalized absence seizures, but its mechanism of action is still a matter of debate. It has long been thought to act by disrupting a thalamic focus via blockade of T-type channels and, thus, generation of spike-wave activity in thalamocortical pathways. However, there is now good evidence that generalized absence seizures may be initiated at a cortical focus and that ethosuximide may target this focus. In the present study we have looked at the effect ethosuximide on glutamate and GABA release at synapses in the rat entorhinal cortex in vitro, using two experimental approaches. Whole-cell patch-clamp studies revealed an increase in spontaneous GABA release by ethosuximide concurrent with no change in glutamate release. This was reflected in studies that estimated global background inhibition and excitation from intracellularly recorded membrane potential fluctuations, where there was a substantial rise in the ratio of network inhibition to excitation, and a concurrent decrease in excitability of neurones embedded in this network. These studies suggest that, in addition to well-characterised effects on ion channels, ethosuximide may directly elevate synaptic inhibition in the cortex and that this could contribute to its anti-absence effects. This article is part of a Special Issue entitled 'Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder'

Immuno-Therapy with Anti-CTLA4 Antibodies in Tolerized and Non-Tolerized Mouse Tumor Models

Monoclonal antibodies specific for cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 (anti-CTLA4) are a novel form of cancer immunotherapy. While preclinical studies in mouse tumor models have shown anti-tumor efficacy of anti-CTLA4 injection or expression, anti-CTLA4 treatment in patients with advanced cancers had disappointing therapeutic benefit. These discrepancies have to be addressed in more adequate pre-clinical models. We employed two tumor models. The first model is based on C57Bl/6 mice and syngeneic TC-1 tumors expressing HPV16 E6/E7. In this model, the HPV antigens are neo-antigens, against which no central tolerance exists. The second model involves mice transgenic for the proto-oncogen neu and syngeneic mouse mammary carcinoma (MMC) cells. In this model tolerance to Neu involves both central and peripheral mechanisms. Anti-CTLA4 delivery as a protein or expression from gene-modified tumor cells were therapeutically efficacious in the non-tolerized TC-1 tumor model, but had no effect in the MMC-model. We also used the two tumor models to test an immuno-gene therapy approach for anti-CTLA4. Recently, we used an approach based on hematopoietic stem cells (HSC) to deliver the relaxin gene to tumors and showed that this approach facilitates pre-existing anti-tumor T-cells to control tumor growth in the MMC tumor model. However, unexpectedly, when used for anti-CTLA4 gene delivery in this study, the HSC-based approach was therapeutically detrimental in both the TC-1 and MMC models. Anti-CTLA4 expression in these models resulted in an increase in the number of intratumoral CD1d+ NKT cells and in the expression of TGF-β1. At the same time, levels of pro-inflammatory cytokines and chemokines, which potentially can support anti-tumor T-cell responses, were lower in tumors of mice that received anti-CTLA4-HSC therapy. The differences in outcomes between the tolerized and non-tolerized models also provide a potential explanation for the low efficacy of CTLA4 blockage approaches in cancer immunotherapy trials

Effectiveness of behavioural graded activity compared with physiotherapy treatment in chronic neck pain: design of a randomised clinical trial [ISRCTN88733332]

BACKGROUND: Chronic neck pain is a common complaint in the Netherlands with a point prevalence of 14.3%. Patients with chronic neck pain are often referred to a physiotherapist and, although many treatments are available, it remains unclear which type of treatment is to be preferred. The objective of this article is to present the design of a randomised clinical trial, Ephysion, which examines the clinical and cost effectiveness of behavioural graded activity compared with a physiotherapy treatment for patients with chronic non-specific neck pain. METHODS: Eligible patients with non-specific neck pain persisting longer than 3 months will be randomly allocated to either the behavioural graded activity programme or to the physiotherapy treatment. The graded activity programme is based on an operant approach, which uses a time-contingent method to increase the patient's activity level. This treatment is compared with physiotherapy treatment using a pain-contingent method. Primary treatment outcome is the patient's global perceived effect concerning recovery from the complaint. Global perceived effect on daily functioning is also explored as primary outcome to establish the impact of treatment on daily activity. Direct and indirect costs will also be assessed. Secondary outcomes include the patient's main complaints, pain intensity, medical consumption, functional status, quality of life, and psychological variables. Recruitment of patients will take place up to the end of the year 2004 and follow-up measurement will continue until end 2005

Relative effectiveness and adverse effects of cervical manipulation, mobilisation and the activator instrument in patients with sub-acute non-specific neck pain: results from a stopped randomised trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Neck pain of a mechanical nature is a common complaint seen by practitioners of manual medicine, who use a multitude of methods to treat the condition. It is not known, however, if any of these methods are superior in treatment effectiveness. This trial was stopped due to poor recruitment. The purposes of this report are (1) to describe the trial protocol, (2) to report on the data obtained from subjects who completed the study, (3) to discuss the problems we encountered in conducting this study.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A pragmatic randomised clinical trial was undertaken. Patients who met eligibility criteria were randomised into three groups. One group was treated using specific segmental high velocity low amplitude manipulation (diversified), another by specific segmental mobilisation, and a third group by the Activator instrument. All three groups were also treated for any myofascial distortions and given appropriate exercises and advice. Participants were treated six times over a three-week period or until they reported being pain free. The primary outcome measure for the study was Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC); secondary outcome measures included the Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36v₂), the neck Bournemouth Questionnaire, and the numerical rating scale for pain intensity. Participants also kept a diary of any pain medication taken and noted any perceived adverse effects of treatment. Outcomes were measured at four points: end of treatment, and 3, 6, and 12 months thereafter.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Between January 2007 and March 2008, 123 patients were assessed for eligibility, of these 47 were considered eligible, of which 16 were allocated to manipulation, 16 to the Activator instrument and 15 to the mobilisation group. Comparison between the groups on the PGIC adjusted for baseline covariants did not show a significant difference for any of the endpoints. Within group analyses for change from baseline to the 12-month follow up for secondary outcomes were significant for all groups on the Bournemouth Questionnaire and for pain, while the mobilisation group had a significant improvement on the PCS and MCS subscales of the SF-36_v2. Finally, there were no moderate, severe, or long-lasting adverse effects reported by any participant in any group.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Although the small sample size must be taken into consideration, it appears that all three methods of treating mechanical neck pain had a long-term benefit for subacute neck pain, without moderate or serious adverse events associated with any of the treatment methods. There were difficulties in recruiting subjects to this trial. This pragmatic trial should be repeated with a larger sample size.</p

Hyperoxemia and excess oxygen use in early acute respiratory distress syndrome : Insights from the LUNG SAFE study

Publisher Copyright: © 2020 The Author(s). Copyright: Copyright 2020 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.Background: Concerns exist regarding the prevalence and impact of unnecessary oxygen use in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). We examined this issue in patients with ARDS enrolled in the Large observational study to UNderstand the Global impact of Severe Acute respiratory FailurE (LUNG SAFE) study. Methods: In this secondary analysis of the LUNG SAFE study, we wished to determine the prevalence and the outcomes associated with hyperoxemia on day 1, sustained hyperoxemia, and excessive oxygen use in patients with early ARDS. Patients who fulfilled criteria of ARDS on day 1 and day 2 of acute hypoxemic respiratory failure were categorized based on the presence of hyperoxemia (PaO2 > 100 mmHg) on day 1, sustained (i.e., present on day 1 and day 2) hyperoxemia, or excessive oxygen use (FIO2 ≥ 0.60 during hyperoxemia). Results: Of 2005 patients that met the inclusion criteria, 131 (6.5%) were hypoxemic (PaO2 < 55 mmHg), 607 (30%) had hyperoxemia on day 1, and 250 (12%) had sustained hyperoxemia. Excess FIO2 use occurred in 400 (66%) out of 607 patients with hyperoxemia. Excess FIO2 use decreased from day 1 to day 2 of ARDS, with most hyperoxemic patients on day 2 receiving relatively low FIO2. Multivariate analyses found no independent relationship between day 1 hyperoxemia, sustained hyperoxemia, or excess FIO2 use and adverse clinical outcomes. Mortality was 42% in patients with excess FIO2 use, compared to 39% in a propensity-matched sample of normoxemic (PaO2 55-100 mmHg) patients (P = 0.47). Conclusions: Hyperoxemia and excess oxygen use are both prevalent in early ARDS but are most often non-sustained. No relationship was found between hyperoxemia or excessive oxygen use and patient outcome in this cohort. Trial registration: LUNG-SAFE is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02010073publishersversionPeer reviewe