A double-blind, randomized parallel-group, efficacy and safety study of intramuscular S-adenosyl-L-methionine 1,4-butanedisulphonate (SAMe) versus imipramine in patients with major depressive disorder.

S-adenosyl-L-methionine (SAMe) is a natural substance which constitutes the most important methyl donor in transmethylation reactions in the central nervous system. Several clinical trials have shown that SAMe possesses an antidepressant activity. This multicentre study was carried out to confirm both efficacy and safety of SAMe in the treatment of major depression. SAMe was given intramuscularly (i.m.) at a dose of 400 mg/d, double-blind, vs. 150 mg/d oral Imipramine (IMI) in patients with a diagnosis of major depressive episode, with a baseline score on the 21-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD) of >or=18. A total of 146 patients received SAMe whereas 147 received IMI for a period of 4 wk. The two main efficacy measures were endpoint HAMD score and percentage of responders to Clinical Global Impression (CGI) at week 4. Secondary efficacy measures were the final Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) scores and the response rate intended as a fall in HAMD scores of at least 50% with respect to baseline. The analysis of safety and tolerability was conducted in all treated patients. SAMe and IMI did not differ significantly on any efficacy measure, either main or secondary. Adverse events were significantly less in patients treated with SAMe compared to those treated with IMI. These data show 400 mg/d i.m. SAMe to be comparable to 150 mg/d oral IMI in terms of antidepressive efficacy, but significantly better tolerated. These findings suggest interesting perspectives for the use of SAMe in depression

Performance Assessment in Fingerprinting and Multi Component Quantitative NMR Analyses

An interlaboratory comparison (ILC) was organized with the aim to set up quality control indicators suitable for multicomponent quantitative analysis by nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy. A total of 36 NMR data sets (corresponding to 1260 NMR spectra) were produced by 30 participants using 34 NMR spectrometers. The calibration line method was chosen for the quantification of a five-component model mixture. Results show that quantitative NMR is a robust quantification tool and that 26 out of 36 data sets resulted in statistically equivalent calibration lines for all considered NMR signals. The performance of each laboratory was assessed by means of a new performance index (named Qp-score) which is related to the difference between the experimental and the consensus values of the slope of the calibration lines. Laboratories endowed with a Qp-score falling within the suitable acceptability range are qualified to produce NMR spectra that can be considered statistically equivalent in terms of relative intensities of the signals. In addition, the specific response of nuclei to the experimental excitation/relaxation conditions was addressed by means of the parameter named NR. NR is related to the difference between the theoretical and the consensus slopes of the calibration lines and is specific for each signal produced by a well-defined set of acquisition parameters

A community-built calibration system: The case study of quantification of metabolites in grape juice by qNMR spectroscopy

Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) is an analytical technique extensively used in almost every chemical laboratory for structural identification. This technique provides statistically equivalent signals in spite of using spectrometer with different hardware features and is successfully used for the traceability and quantification of analytes in food samples. Nevertheless, to date only a few internationally agreed guidelines have been reported on the use of NMR for quantitative analysis. The main goal of the present study is to provide a methodological pipeline to assess the reproducibility of NMR data produced for a given matrix by spectrometers from different manufacturers, with different magnetic field strengths, age and hardware configurations. The results have been analyzed through a sequence of chemometric tests to generate a community-built calibration system which was used to verify the performance of the spectrometers and the reproducibility of the predicted sample concentrations