Human keratinocytes are vanilloid resistant

BACKGROUND: Use of capsaicin or resiniferatoxin (RTX) as analgesics is an attractive therapeutic option. RTX opens the cation channel inflammatory pain/vanilloid receptor type 1 (TRPV1) permanently and selectively removes nociceptive neurons by Ca(2+)-cytotoxicity. Paradoxically, not only nociceptors, but non-neuronal cells, including keratinocytes express full length TRPV1 mRNA, while patient dogs and experimental animals that underwent topical treatment or anatomically targeted molecular surgery have shown neither obvious behavioral, nor pathological side effects. METHODS: To address this paradox, we assessed the vanilloid sensitivity of the HaCaT human keratinocyte cell line and primary keratinocytes from skin biopsies. RESULTS: Although both cell types express TRPV1 mRNA, neither responded to vanilloids with Ca(2+)-cytotoxicity. Only ectopic overproduction of TRPV1 rendered HaCaT cells sensitive to low doses (1-50 nM) of vanilloids. The TRPV1-mediated and non-receptor specific Ca(2+)-cytotoxicity ([RTX]>15 microM) could clearly be distinguished, thus keratinocytes were indeed resistant to vanilloid-induced, TRPV1-mediated Ca(2+)-entry. Having a wider therapeutic window than capsaicin, RTX was effective in subnanomolar range, but even micromolar concentrations could not kill human keratinocytes. Keratinocytes showed orders of magnitudes lower TRPV1 mRNA level than sensory ganglions, the bona fide therapeutic targets in human pain management. In addition to TRPV1, TRPV1b, a dominant negative splice variant was also noted in keratinocytes. CONCLUSION: TRPV1B expression, together with low TRPV1 expression, may explain the vanilloid paradox: even genuinely TRPV1 mRNA positive cells can be spared with therapeutic (up to micromolar) doses of RTX. This additional safety information might be useful for planning future human clinical trials

BHPR research: qualitative1. Complex reasoning determines patients' perception of outcome following foot surgery in rheumatoid arhtritis

Background: Foot surgery is common in patients with RA but research into surgical outcomes is limited and conceptually flawed as current outcome measures lack face validity: to date no one has asked patients what is important to them. This study aimed to determine which factors are important to patients when evaluating the success of foot surgery in RA Methods: Semi structured interviews of RA patients who had undergone foot surgery were conducted and transcribed verbatim. Thematic analysis of interviews was conducted to explore issues that were important to patients. Results: 11 RA patients (9 ♂, mean age 59, dis dur = 22yrs, mean of 3 yrs post op) with mixed experiences of foot surgery were interviewed. Patients interpreted outcome in respect to a multitude of factors, frequently positive change in one aspect contrasted with negative opinions about another. Overall, four major themes emerged. Function: Functional ability & participation in valued activities were very important to patients. Walking ability was a key concern but patients interpreted levels of activity in light of other aspects of their disease, reflecting on change in functional ability more than overall level. Positive feelings of improved mobility were often moderated by negative self perception ("I mean, I still walk like a waddling duck”). Appearance: Appearance was important to almost all patients but perhaps the most complex theme of all. Physical appearance, foot shape, and footwear were closely interlinked, yet patients saw these as distinct separate concepts. Patients need to legitimize these feelings was clear and they frequently entered into a defensive repertoire ("it's not cosmetic surgery; it's something that's more important than that, you know?”). Clinician opinion: Surgeons' post operative evaluation of the procedure was very influential. The impact of this appraisal continued to affect patients' lasting impression irrespective of how the outcome compared to their initial goals ("when he'd done it ... he said that hasn't worked as good as he'd wanted to ... but the pain has gone”). Pain: Whilst pain was important to almost all patients, it appeared to be less important than the other themes. Pain was predominately raised when it influenced other themes, such as function; many still felt the need to legitimize their foot pain in order for health professionals to take it seriously ("in the end I went to my GP because it had happened a few times and I went to an orthopaedic surgeon who was quite dismissive of it, it was like what are you complaining about”). Conclusions: Patients interpret the outcome of foot surgery using a multitude of interrelated factors, particularly functional ability, appearance and surgeons' appraisal of the procedure. While pain was often noted, this appeared less important than other factors in the overall outcome of the surgery. Future research into foot surgery should incorporate the complexity of how patients determine their outcome Disclosure statement: All authors have declared no conflicts of interes