Sister Societies: Women\u27s Antislavery Organizations in Antebellum

Beth Salerno is Associate Professor of History at Saint Anselm College in Manchester, NH. She is currently working on a scholarly biography of Mary Clark, Corresponding Secretary for the Concord (NH) Female Antislavery Society. Interview with Beth A. Salerno Interviewed by ...

Free Hearts and Free Homes: Gender and American Antislavery Politics

Gender roles The ideal woman and antebellum politics In the acknowledgements section of Free Hearts and Free Homes, Michl Pierson writes that as an undergraduate student at Gettysburg College, he changed from a reader of Civil War military history into a historian interes...

Rolofylline, an adenosine A1−receptor antagonist, in acute heart failure

Background: Worsening renal function, which is associated with adverse outcomes, often develops in patients with acute heart failure. Experimental and clinical studies suggest that counterregulatory responses mediated by adenosine may be involved. We tested the hypothesis that the use of rolofylline, an adenosine A1−receptor antagonist, would improve dyspnea, reduce the risk of worsening renal function, and lead to a more favorable clinical course in patients with acute heart failure. Methods: We conducted a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial involving patients hospitalized for acute heart failure with impaired renal function. Within 24 hours after presentation, 2033 patients were randomly assigned, in a 2:1 ratio, to receive daily intravenous rolofylline (30 mg) or placebo for up to 3 days. The primary end point was treatment success, treatment failure, or no change in the patient’s clinical condition; this end point was defined according to survival, heart-failure status, and changes in renal function. Secondary end points were the post-treatment development of persistent renal impairment and the 60-day rate of death or readmission for cardiovascular or renal causes. Results: Rolofylline, as compared with placebo, did not provide a benefit with respect to the primary end point (odds ratio, 0.92; 95% confidence interval, 0.78 to 1.09; P=0.35). Persistent renal impairment developed in 15.0% of patients in the rolofylline group and in 13.7% of patients in the placebo group (P=0.44). By 60 days, death or readmission for cardiovascular or renal causes had occurred in similar proportions of patients assigned to rolofylline and placebo (30.7% and 31.9%, respectively; P=0.86). Adverse-event rates were similar overall; however, only patients in the rolofylline group had seizures, a known potential adverse effect of A1-receptor antagonists. Conclusions: Rolofylline did not have a favorable effect with respect to the primary clinical composite end point, nor did it improve renal function or 60-day outcomes. It does not show promise in the treatment of acute heart failure with renal dysfunction. (Funded by NovaCardia, a subsidiary of Merck; ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00328692 and NCT00354458.

The Influence of Nitrogen Position on Charge Carrier Mobility in Enantiopure Aza[6]helicene Crystals

The properties of an organic semiconductor are dependent on both the chemical structure of the molecule involved, and how it is arranged in the solid-state. It is challenging to extract the influence of each individual factor, as small changes in the molecular structure often dramatically change the crystal packing and hence solid-state structure. Here, we use calculations to explore the influence of the nitrogen position on the charge mobility of a chiral organic molecule when the crystal packing is kept constant. The transfer integrals for a series of enantiopure aza[6]helicene crystals sharing the same packing were analysed in order to identify the best supramolecular motifs to promote charge carrier mobility. The regioisomers considered differ only in the positioning of the nitrogen atom in the aromatic scaffold. The simulations showed that even this small change in the chemical structure has a strong effect on the charge transport in the crystal, leading to differences in charge mobility of up to one order of magnitude. Some aza[6]helicene isomers that were packed interlocked with each other showed high HOMO-HOMO integrals (up to 70 meV), whilst molecules arranged with translational symmetry generally afforded the highest LUMO-LUMO integrals (40 - 70 meV). As many of the results are not intuitively obvious, a computational approach provides additional insight into the design of new semiconducting organic materials.</p

Rolofylline, an Adenosine A(sub 1)-Receptor Antagonist, in Acute Heart Failure.

Background: Worsening renal function, which is associated with adverse outcomes, often develops in patients with acute heart failure. Experimental and clinical studies suggest that counterregulatory responses mediated by adenosine may be involved. We tested the hypothesis that the use of rolofylline, an adenosine A(sub 1)-receptor antagonist, would improve dyspnea, reduce the risk of worsening renal function, and lead to a more favorable clinical course in patients with acute heart failure. Methods: We conducted a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial involving patients hospitalized for acute heart failure with impaired renal function. Within 24 hours after presentation, 2033 patients were randomly assigned, in a 2:1 ratio, to receive daily intravenous rolofylline (30 mg) or placebo for up to 3 days. The primary end point was treatment success, treatment failure, or no change in the patient's clinical condition; this end point was defined according to survival, heart-failure status, and changes in renal function. Secondary end points were the post-treatment development of persistent renal impairment and the 60-day rate of death or readmission for cardiovascular or renal causes. Results: Rolofylline, as compared with placebo, did not provide a benefit with respect to the primary end point (odds ratio, 0.92; 95% confidence interval, 0.78 to 1.09; P=0.35). Persistent renal impairment developed in 15.0% of patients in the rolofylline group and in 13.7% of patients in the placebo group (P=0.44). By 60 days, death or readmission for cardiovascular or renal causes had occurred in similar proportions of patients assigned to rolofylline and placebo (30.7% and 31.9%, respectively; P=0.86). Adverse-event rates were similar overall; however, only patients in the rolofylline group had seizures, a known potential adverse effect of A(sub 1)-receptor antagonists. Conclusions: Rolofylline did not have a favorable effect with respect to the primary clinical composite end point, nor did it improve renal function or 60-day outcomes. It does not show promise in the treatment of acute heart failure with renal dysfunction. (Funded by NovaCardia, a subsidiary of Merck; ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00328692 and NCT00354458.) N Engl J Med 2010;363:1419-28

The safety of an adenosine A1-receptor antagonist, rolofylline, in patients with acute heart failure and renal impairment: Findings from PROTECT

Background: Adenosine exerts actions in multiple organ systems, and adenosine receptors are a therapeutic target in many development programmes. Objective: The aim of this analysis was to evaluate the safety of rolofylline, an adenosine A1-receptor antagonist, in patients with acute heart failure. Methods: The effect of rolofylline was investigated in patients hospitalized for acute heart failure with impaired renal function. Intravenous rolofylline 30 mg or placebo was infused over 4 hours daily for up to 3 days. Adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs (SAEs) were recorded from baseline through 7 and 14 days, respectively, and clinical events were adjudicated through 60 days. Results: Of 2033 patients enrolled, 2002 received study drug randomized 2 : 1 to rolofylline or placebo. Rolofylline and placebo were associated with a similar risk of pre-specified groups of AEs or SAEs, other than selected neurological events. Investigator-reported seizures occurred in 11 (0.8%) rolofylline-treated patients and zero patients receiving placebo (p = 0.02). Stroke occurred in 21 (1.6%) patients assigned to rolofylline compared with 3 (0.5%) placebo-treated patients through 60 days with a greater risk for stroke in the rolofylline group (hazard ratio 3.49; 95% CI 1.04, 11.71; p = 0.043). There was no temporal relation to rolofylline administration and no specific stroke subtype or clinical characteristics that predicted stroke in the rolofylline group. Conclusions: Rolofylline treatment was associated with an increased seizure rate, an anticipated complication of A1-receptor antagonists. An unanticipated, disproportionate increase in strokes in the rolofylline-treated patients emerged, although no clear temporal relation, aetiology, stroke subtype or interacting factor suggestive of a causal mechanism was identified. Further research into stroke as a potential complication of adenosine-modulating therapies is required. Additionally, this study underscores the value of longer follow-up durations for AEs, even for agents with short treatment periods, such as in acute heart failure