High serum immunoglobulin g and m levels predict freedom from adverse cardiovascular events in hypertension: a nested case-control substudy of the Anglo-Scandinavian cardiac outcomes trial

Aims: We aimed to determine whether the levels of total serum IgM and IgG, together with specific antibodies against malondialdehyde-conjugated low-density lipoprotein (MDA-LDL), can improve cardiovascular risk discrimination. Methods and Results: The Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial (ASCOT) randomized 9098 patients in the UK and Ireland into the Blood Pressure-Lowering Arm. 485 patients that had cardiovascular (CV) events over 5.5 years were age and sex matched with 1367 controls. Higher baseline total serum IgG, and to a lesser extent IgM, were associated with decreased risk of CV events (IgG odds ratio (OR) per one standard deviation (SD) 0.80 [95% confidence interval, CI 0.72,0.89], p < 0.0001; IgM 0.83[0.75,0.93], p = 0.001), and particularly events due to coronary heart disease (CHD) (IgG OR 0.66 (0.57,0.76); p < 0.0001, IgM OR 0.81 (0.71,0.93); p = 0.002). The association persisted after adjustment for a basic model with variables in the Framingham Risk Score (FRS) as well as following inclusion of C-reactive protein (CRP) and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NtProBNP). IgG and IgM antibodies against MDA-LDL were also associated with CV events but their significance was lost following adjustment for total serum IgG and IgM respectively. The area under the receiver operator curve for CV events was improved from the basic risk model when adding in total serum IgG, and there was improvement in continuous and categorical net reclassification (17.6% and 7.5% respectively) as well as in the integrated discrimination index. Conclusion: High total serum IgG levels are an independent predictor of freedom from adverse cardiovascular events, particularly those attributed to CHD, in patients with hypertension

Regression of left ventricular mass in hypertensive patients treated with perindopril/indapamide as a first-line combination: The REASON echocardiography study

Background: Increase in left ventricular mass (LVM) may be linked to morbidity and mortality in hypertensive patients. Arterial stiffness, systolic blood pressure (BP), and pulse pressure (PP) seem to be the main determinants of LVM. The perindopril/indapamide combination normalizes systolic BP, PP, and arterial function to a greater extent than atenolol. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of perindopril (2 mg)/indapamide (0.625 mg) first-line combination with atenolol (50 mg) on LVM reduction in hypertensive patients. Methods: Two hundred fourteen patients with essential hypertension participating in the PREterax in Regression of Arterial Stiffness in a ContrOlled Double-BliNd (REASON), randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study, underwent M-mode two-dimensional-guided echocardiography. Results: Perindopril/indapamide and atenolol were both effective at brachial BP reduction during the 12-month period. The systolic BP reduction was significantly greater with perindopril/indapamide than with atenolol (−21.2 v −15.3 mm Hg), whereas the reduction in diastolic BP was similar between treatment groups (−12.1 v −11.3 mm Hg). Reduction in LVM was higher with perindopril/indapamide than with atenolol. The between-group difference was significant for LVM (−13.6 v −4.3 g, P = .027), LVM/body surface area (LVMI1, P = .032), and LVM/body height2.7 (LVMI2, P = .013). The 124 patients with LV hypertrophy at baseline showed greatest LVM regression (LVM: −22.5 v −8.9 g, P = .009; LVMI1, P = .031; LVMI2, P = .028). The reduction in LVM adjusted for brachial systolic BP and heart rate was still significantly greater with perindopril/indapamide than with atenolol. Conclusions: Treatment, based on a first-line perindopril/indapamide combination in hypertensive patients, was more effective than atenolol on regression of echocardiographic indices of LVM and LV hypertroph

Tehnologije dodavanja materijala u metalurgiji – Studija slučaja produkcije ventila iz sivog lijeva

Additive Fabrication technologies are well known from the last two decades. In that time Additive Fabrication technologies have evolved from strictly prototype part production into an option that can also be used to produce end-user parts. With development of Additive Fabrication machines capable of producing metal parts, a complete substitution of conventional metal casting technologies is possible. However, direct Additive Fabrication of metal parts is still not time/cost effective when producing large volume parts, and nowadays there is still lack of materials that can be used on those machines. This paper presents a method how a conventional sand casting process can be assisted by Additive Fabrication technologies. A sand mould pattern is produced by Selective Laser Sintering. Additive Fabrication is also used in direct manufacturing of cores.Tehnologije sa dodavanjem materijala dobro su poznate od posljednja dva desetljeća. U to vrijeme tehnologije dodavanja su se razvije od tehnologija koje se upotrebljavaju strogo za brzo proizvodnju prototipnih dijelova, do tehnologija, sa kojima se može direktnu proizvodnju konačne produkte. Sa razvojem tehnologija za direktnu izradu metalnih dijelove, moguća je potpuna zamjena konvencionalnih tehnologija lijevanja metala. Međutim, direktna izrada dijelova još uvijek nije dovoljno ‘’cost efficient’’ kada su u pitanju komadi velikog volumna i danas još uvijek je samo nekoliko materijala , koji su testirani na strojevima za direktnu proizvodnju metalnih komada. Ovaj rad predstavlja metodu kako se mogu tehnologije dodavanja koristiti kao pomoć kod konvencionalnih lijevarskih procesa. Pješčani kalup izrađen je po postupku selektivnog laserskog sinteriranja pijeska, a postupci direktne proizvodnje su korišteni kod proizvodnje jezgra ventila

Comparison of single and combination diuretics on glucose tolerance (PATHWAY-3):protocol for a randomised double-blind trial in patients with essential hypertension

INTRODUCTION: Thiazide diuretics are associated with increased risk of diabetes mellitus. This risk may arise from K(+)-depletion. We hypothesised that a K(+)-sparing diuretic will improve glucose tolerance, and that combination of low-dose thiazide with K(+)-sparing diuretic will improve both blood pressure reduction and glucose tolerance, compared to a high-dose thiazide.METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a parallel-group, randomised, double-blind, multicentre trial, comparing hydrochlorothiazide 25-50 mg, amiloride 10-20 mg and combination of both diuretics at half these doses. A single-blind placebo run-in of 1 month is followed by 24 weeks of blinded active treatment. There is forced dose-doubling after 3 months. The Primary end point is the blood glucose 2 h after oral ingestion of a 75 g glucose drink (OGTT), following overnight fasting. The primary outcome is the difference between 2 h glucose at weeks 0, 12 and 24. Secondary outcomes include the changes in home systolic blood pressure (BP) and glycated haemoglobin and prediction of response by baseline plasma renin. Eligibility criteria are: age 18-79, systolic BP on permitted background treatment ≥140 mm Hg and home BP ≥130 mm Hg and one component of the metabolic syndrome additional to hypertension. Principal exclusions are diabetes, estimated-glomerular filtration rate &lt;45 mL/min, abnormal plasma K(+), clinic SBP &gt;200 mm Hg or DBP &gt;120 mm Hg (box 2). The sample size calculation indicates that 486 patients will give 80% power at α=0.01 to detect a difference in means of 1 mmol/L (SD=2.2) between 2 h glucose on hydrochlorothiazide and comparators.ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: PATHWAY-3 was approved by Cambridge South Ethics Committee, number 09/H035/19. The trial results will be published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal.TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: Eudract number 2009-010068-41 and clinical trials registration number: NCT02351973.</p

Prevention And Treatment of Hypertension With Algorithm-based therapy (PATHWAY) number 2: protocol for a randomised crossover trial to determine optimal treatment for drug-resistant hypertension.

This is the final published version. It first appeared at http://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/8/e008951.full.INTRODUCTION: Resistant hypertension is inadequately controlled blood pressure (BP) despite treatment with at least three BP-lowering drugs. A popular hypothesis is that resistant hypertension is due to excessive Na(+)-retention, and that 'further diuretic therapy' will be superior to alternative add-on drugs. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Placebo-controlled, random crossover study of fourth-line treatment when added to standard (A+C+D) triple drug therapy: ACE inhibitor or Angiotensin receptor blocker (A) +Calcium channel blocker (C)+Diuretic (D). Patients (aged 18-79 years) with clinical systolic BP ≥ 140 mm Hg (135 mm Hg in diabetics) and Home BP Monitoring (HBPM) systolic BP average ≥ 130 mm Hg on treatment for at least 3 months with maximum tolerated doses of A+C+D are randomised to four consecutive randomly allocated 12-week treatment cycles with an α-blocker, β-blocker, spironolactone and placebo. The hierarchical coprimary end point is the difference in HBPM average systolic BP between (in order) spironolactone and placebo, spironolactone and the average of the other two active drugs, spironolactone and each of the other two drugs. A key secondary outcome is to determine whether plasma renin predicts the BP response to the different drugs. A sample size of 346 (allowing 15% dropouts) will confer 90% power to detect a 3 mm Hg HBPM average systolic BP difference between any two drugs. The study can also detect a 6 mm Hg difference in HBPM average systolic BP between each patient's best and second-best drug predicted by tertile of plasma renin. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was initiated in May 2009 and results are expected in 2015. These will provide RCT evidence to support future guideline recommendations for optimal drug treatment of resistant hypertension. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02369081, EUDract number: 2008-007149-30.The study is funded by a special project grant from the British Heart Foundation (number SP/08/002). Further funding is provided by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Comprehensive Local Research Networks. BW is supported by the NIHR UCL/UCL Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre

Monotherapy versus dual therapy for the initial treatment of hypertension (PATHWAY-1): a randomised double-blind controlled trial.

This is the final version of the article. It first appeared from BMJ via http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-007645INTRODUCTION: Previous studies have suggested that more intensive initial therapy for hypertension results in better long-term blood pressure (BP) control. We test this hypothesis comparing initial monotherapy with dual therapy in the management of essential hypertension. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The study is a prospective, multicentre, double-blind, active-controlled trial in patients with essential hypertension. Around 50% of patients studied will be newly diagnosed and the others will be known hypertensives who previously received only monotherapy. The trial is divided into three phases as follows: Phase 1 (Week 0-Week 16): Randomised, parallel-group, masked assignation to either combination or monotherapy. Phase 2 (Week 17-Week 32): Open-label combination therapy. Phase 3 (Week 33-Week 52): Open-label combination therapy plus open-label add-on (if BP is above 140/90 mm Hg). Hierarchical primary end points are: a comparison of home BP (home systolic blood pressure (HSBP)) averaged over the duration of phase 1 and 2 in the combination versus monotherapy arms. If combination is superior in this analysis, then the averaged mean HSBP between initial monotherapy and initial combination therapy at the end of phase 2 will be compared. Secondary end points include: BP control at 1 year; the role of age, baseline renin, sodium status, plasma volume, haemodynamic compensation and peripheral resistance on BP control; validation of the National Institute for Clinical Excellence/British Hypertension Society joint guideline algorithm; safety and tolerability of combination therapy; and the impact of combination versus monotherapy on left ventricular mass and aortic pulse wave velocity. A sample size of 536 (268 in each group) will have 90% power to detect a difference in means of 4 mm Hg. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: PATHWAY 1 was approved by UK ethics (REC Reference 09/H0308/132). Trial results will be published and all participating subjects will be informed of the results. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: UKCRN 4499 and EudraCT number 2008-007749-29 registered 27/08/2009.Funding statement The study is funded by a special project grant from the British Heart Foundation (number SP/08/002). Further funding is provided by Comprehensive Local Research Networks. The losartan and losartan-HCTZ were a generous gift from Dr Paul Robinson, Merck Sharpe Dohme, UK. Acknowledgements BW, PS, MC and MJB are NIHR Senior Investigators

The Role of Dynamin and Its Binding Partners in Coated Pit Invagination and Scission

Plasma membrane clathrin-coated vesicles form after the directed assembly of clathrin and the adaptor complex, AP2, from the cytosol onto the membrane. In addition to these structural components, several other proteins have been implicated in clathrin-coated vesicle formation. These include the large molecular weight GTPase, dynamin, and several Src homology 3 (SH3) domain–containing proteins which bind to dynamin via interactions with its COOH-terminal proline/arginine-rich domain (PRD). To understand the mechanism of coated vesicle formation, it is essential to determine the hierarchy by which individual components are targeted to and act in coated pit assembly, invagination, and scission