Childbirth and consequent atopic disease: emerging evidence on epigenetic effects based on the hygiene and EPIIC hypotheses

Background: In most high and middle income countries across the world, at least 1:4 women give birth by cesarean section. Rates of labour induction and augmentation are rising steeply; and in some countries up to 50 % of laboring women and newborns are given antibiotics. Governments and international agencies are increasingly concerned about the clinical, economic and psychosocial effects of these interventions. Discussion: There is emerging evidence that certain intrapartum and early neonatal interventions might affect the neonatal immune response in the longer term, and perhaps trans-generationally. Two theories lead the debate in this area. Those aligned with the hygiene (or ‘Old Friends’) hypothesis have examined the effect of gut microbiome colonization secondary to mode of birth and intrapartum/neonatal pharmacological interventions on immune response and epigenetic phenomena. Those working with the EPIIC (Epigenetic Impact of Childbirth) hypothesis are concerned with the effects of eustress and dys-stress on the epigenome, secondary to mode of birth and labour interventions. Summary: This paper examines the current and emerging findings relating to childbirth and atopic/autoimmune disease from the perspective of both theories, and proposes an alliance of research effort. This is likely to accelerate the discovery of important findings arising from both approaches, and to maximize the timely understanding of the longer-term consequences of childbirth practices

Antiinflammatory Therapy with Canakinumab for Atherosclerotic Disease

Background: Experimental and clinical data suggest that reducing inflammation without affecting lipid levels may reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease. Yet, the inflammatory hypothesis of atherothrombosis has remained unproved. Methods: We conducted a randomized, double-blind trial of canakinumab, a therapeutic monoclonal antibody targeting interleukin-1β, involving 10,061 patients with previous myocardial infarction and a high-sensitivity C-reactive protein level of 2 mg or more per liter. The trial compared three doses of canakinumab (50 mg, 150 mg, and 300 mg, administered subcutaneously every 3 months) with placebo. The primary efficacy end point was nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or cardiovascular death. RESULTS: At 48 months, the median reduction from baseline in the high-sensitivity C-reactive protein level was 26 percentage points greater in the group that received the 50-mg dose of canakinumab, 37 percentage points greater in the 150-mg group, and 41 percentage points greater in the 300-mg group than in the placebo group. Canakinumab did not reduce lipid levels from baseline. At a median follow-up of 3.7 years, the incidence rate for the primary end point was 4.50 events per 100 person-years in the placebo group, 4.11 events per 100 person-years in the 50-mg group, 3.86 events per 100 person-years in the 150-mg group, and 3.90 events per 100 person-years in the 300-mg group. The hazard ratios as compared with placebo were as follows: in the 50-mg group, 0.93 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.80 to 1.07; P = 0.30); in the 150-mg group, 0.85 (95% CI, 0.74 to 0.98; P = 0.021); and in the 300-mg group, 0.86 (95% CI, 0.75 to 0.99; P = 0.031). The 150-mg dose, but not the other doses, met the prespecified multiplicity-adjusted threshold for statistical significance for the primary end point and the secondary end point that additionally included hospitalization for unstable angina that led to urgent revascularization (hazard ratio vs. placebo, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.73 to 0.95; P = 0.005). Canakinumab was associated with a higher incidence of fatal infection than was placebo. There was no significant difference in all-cause mortality (hazard ratio for all canakinumab doses vs. placebo, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.06; P = 0.31). Conclusions: Antiinflammatory therapy targeting the interleukin-1β innate immunity pathway with canakinumab at a dose of 150 mg every 3 months led to a significantly lower rate of recurrent cardiovascular events than placebo, independent of lipid-level lowering. (Funded by Novartis; CANTOS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01327846.

Clinical Behaviour Analysis

At its core, Clinical Behaviour Analysis (CBA) is the application of empirically established behavioural learning principles to the clinical domain, providing a framework for the systematic analysis of a person’s historical and current contexts, in terms of the personal learning that has occurred through interaction with those contexts, and using this information to understand the function and maintenance of an individual’s clinically-relevant behaviour. Unlike other established approaches to formulation and therapy, CBA is often misunderstood by individuals who are unfamiliar, or only partially familiar, with the central tenets of the approach. Common charges levied against CBA include: the apparent dismissal of thoughts, feelings and emotions as unobservable and therefore unimportant to the clinician or analyst; the use of aversive techniques and punishment to change behaviour; and the reduction of the complexity of individual experience into simplistic behavioural units. While these criticisms may be valid for some forms of mechanistic behaviourism or misinformed individual therapists, they do not apply to the radical behaviourism of B F Skinner – the behavioural philosophy that underpins our approach. Within this chapter, we formulate the case of ‘Molly’, using the principles of CBA to understand her presentation, current difficulties, and potential areas for intervention