Plasma levels of OLFM4 in normals and patients with gastrointestinal cancer

Olfactomedin 4 (OLFM4) is a secreted glycoprotein predominantly expressed in bone marrow and gastrointestinal tissues. Aberrant expression of OLFM4 has been shown in several cancers. However, the clinical significance hereof is currently controversial. OLFM4 has been proposed as a candidate biomarker of gastrointestinal cancers. To address this, we developed monoclonal antibodies against synthetic peptides representing various segments of OLFM4. We examined expression of OLFM4 in epithelial cells by immunohistochemistry and found that OLFM4 is highly expressed in proliferating benign epithelial cells and in some carcinoma cells. We developed an Enzyme Linked Immunosorbent Assay for OLFM4 and investigated whether plasma levels of OLFM4 reflect colorectal malignancies, but were unable to see any such association. Instead, we observed two populations of individuals with respect to OLFM4 levels in plasma, the majority with OLFM4 in plasma between 0 and 0.1 lg/ ml, mean 0.028 lg/ml while 10 % of both normals and patients with cancers had OLFM4 between 4 and 60 lg/ml, mean 15 lg/ml. The levels were constant over time. The background for this high plasma level is not known, but must be taken into account if OLFM4 is used as biomarker for GI cancers

Olfactomedin 4 defines a subset of human neutrophils

OLFM4 was identified initially as a gene highly induced in myeloid stem cells by G-CSF treatment. A bioinformatics method using a global meta-analysis of microarray data predicted that OLFM4 would be associated with specific granules in human neutrophils. Subcellular fractionation of peripheral blood neutrophils demonstrated complete colocalization of OLFM4 with the specific granule protein NGAL, and stimulation of neutrophils with PMA resulted in corelease of NGAL and OLFM4, proving that OLFM4 is a genuine constituent of neutrophil-specific granules. In accordance with this, OLFM4 mRNA peaked at the MY/MM stage of maturation. OLFM4 was, however, present in only 20–25% of peripheral blood neutrophils, as determined by immunocytochemistry and flow cytometry, whereas mRNA for OLFM4 was present in all MY/MM, indicating post-transcriptional regulation as a basis for the heterogeneous expression of OLFM4 protein

Papillon-Lefevre syndrome patient reveals species-dependent requirements for neutrophil defenses

Papillon-Lefèvre syndrome (PLS) results from mutations that inactivate cysteine protease cathepsin C (CTSC), which processes a variety of serine proteases considered essential for antimicrobial defense. Despite serine protease–deficient immune cell populations, PLS patients do not exhibit marked immunodeficiency. Here, we characterized a 24-year-old woman who had suffered from severe juvenile periodontal disease, but was otherwise healthy, and identified a homozygous missense mutation in CTSC indicative of PLS. Proteome analysis of patient neutrophil granules revealed that several proteins that normally localize to azurophil granules, including the major serine proteases, elastase, cathepsin G, and proteinase 3, were absent. Accordingly, neutrophils from this patient were incapable of producing neutrophil extracellular traps (NETs) in response to ROS and were unable to process endogenous cathelicidin hCAP-18 into the antibacterial peptide LL-37 in response to ionomycin. In immature myeloid cells from patient bone marrow, biosynthesis of CTSC and neutrophil serine proteases appeared normal along with initial processing and sorting to cellular storage. In contrast, these proteins were completely absent in mature neutrophils, indicating that CTSC mutation promotes protease degradation in more mature hematopoietic subsets, but does not affect protease production in progenitor cells. Together, these data indicate CTSC protects serine proteases from degradation in mature immune cells and suggest that neutrophil serine proteases are dispensable for human immunoprotection

Ezetimibe added to statin therapy after acute coronary syndromes

BACKGROUND: Statin therapy reduces low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels and the risk of cardiovascular events, but whether the addition of ezetimibe, a nonstatin drug that reduces intestinal cholesterol absorption, can reduce the rate of cardiovascular events further is not known. METHODS: We conducted a double-blind, randomized trial involving 18,144 patients who had been hospitalized for an acute coronary syndrome within the preceding 10 days and had LDL cholesterol levels of 50 to 100 mg per deciliter (1.3 to 2.6 mmol per liter) if they were receiving lipid-lowering therapy or 50 to 125 mg per deciliter (1.3 to 3.2 mmol per liter) if they were not receiving lipid-lowering therapy. The combination of simvastatin (40 mg) and ezetimibe (10 mg) (simvastatin-ezetimibe) was compared with simvastatin (40 mg) and placebo (simvastatin monotherapy). The primary end point was a composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, unstable angina requiring rehospitalization, coronary revascularization ( 6530 days after randomization), or nonfatal stroke. The median follow-up was 6 years. RESULTS: The median time-weighted average LDL cholesterol level during the study was 53.7 mg per deciliter (1.4 mmol per liter) in the simvastatin-ezetimibe group, as compared with 69.5 mg per deciliter (1.8 mmol per liter) in the simvastatin-monotherapy group (P<0.001). The Kaplan-Meier event rate for the primary end point at 7 years was 32.7% in the simvastatin-ezetimibe group, as compared with 34.7% in the simvastatin-monotherapy group (absolute risk difference, 2.0 percentage points; hazard ratio, 0.936; 95% confidence interval, 0.89 to 0.99; P = 0.016). Rates of pre-specified muscle, gallbladder, and hepatic adverse effects and cancer were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: When added to statin therapy, ezetimibe resulted in incremental lowering of LDL cholesterol levels and improved cardiovascular outcomes. Moreover, lowering LDL cholesterol to levels below previous targets provided additional benefit