Bovine lactoferrin and lactoferrin-derived peptides inhibit the growth of Vibrio cholerae and other Vibrio species

Vibrio is a genus of Gram-negative bacteria, some of which can cause serious infectious diseases. Vibrio infections are associated with the consumption of contaminated food and classified in Vibrio cholera infections and non-cholera Vibrio infections. In the present study, we investigate whether bovine lactoferrin (bLF) and several synthetic peptides corresponding to bLF sequences, are able to inhibit the growth or have bactericidal effect against V. cholerae and other Vibrio species. The antibacterial activity of LF and LF-peptides was assessed by kinetics of growth or determination of colony forming unit in bacteria treated with the peptides and antibiotics. To get insight in the mode of action, the interaction between bLF and bLF-peptides (coupled to FITC) and V. cholera was evaluated. The damage of effector-induced bacterial membrane permeability was measured by inclusion of the fluorescent dye propidium iodide using flow cytometry, whereas the bacterial ultrastructural damage in bacteria treated was observed by transmission electron microscopy. The results showed that bLF and LFchimera inhibited the growth of the V. cholerae strains; LFchimera permeabilized the bacteria which membranes were seriously damaged. Assays with a multidrug-resistant strain of Vibrio species indicated that combination of sub-lethal doses of LFchimera with ampicillin or tetracycline strongly reduced the concentration of the antibiotics to reach 95% growth inhibition. Furthermore, LFchimera were effective to inhibit the V. cholerae counts and damage due to this bacterium in a model mice. These data suggest that LFchimera and bLF are potential candidates to combat the V. cholerae and other multidrug resistant Vibrio species

Biosimilars approvals by thirteen regulatory authorities: A cross-national comparison

Biosimilars are biological medicines highly similar to a previously licensed reference product and their licensing is expected to improve access to biological therapies. This study aims to present an overview of biosimilars approval by thirteen regulatory authorities (RA). The study is a cross-national comparison of regulatory decisions involving biosimilars in Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Chile, Canada, Colombia, Europe, Hungary, Guatemala, Italy, Mexico, Peru and United States. We examined publicly available documents containing information regarding the approval of biosimilars and investigated the publication of public assessment reports for registration applications, guidelines for biosimilars licensing, and products approved. Data extraction was conducted by a network of researchers and regulatory experts. All the RA had issued guidance documents establishing the requirements for the licensing of biosimilars. However, only three RA had published public assessment reports for registration applications. In total, the investigated jurisdictions had from 19 to 78 biosimilars approved, most of them licensed from 2018 to 2020. In spite of the advance in the number of products in recent years, some challenges still persist. Limited access to information regarding the assessment of biosimilars by RA can affect confidence, which may ultimately impact adoption of these products in practice.Fil: Machado, Fernanda Lacerda da Silva. Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro; BrasilFil: Cañás, Martín. Universidad Nacional Arturo Jauretche; ArgentinaFil: Doubova, Svetlana V.. Mexican Institute Of Social Security; MéxicoFil: Urtasun, Martín Alejandro. Universidad Nacional Arturo Jauretche; ArgentinaFil: Marin, Gustavo Horacio. Universidad Nacional de La Plata; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Osorio de Castro, Claudia Garcia Serpa. Instituto Oswaldo Cruz; BrasilFil: Albuquerque, Flavia Caixeta. Sorocaba University; BrasilFil: Ribeiro, Tatiane Bonfim. Universidade de Sao Paulo; BrasilFil: Pont, Lisa. University of Technology Sydney; AustraliaFil: Crisóstomo Landeros, José. Instituto de Salud Pública de Chile; ChileFil: Roldán Saelzer, Juan. Instituto de Salud Pública de Chile; ChileFil: Sepúlveda Viveros, Dino. Universidad del Desarrollo; Chile. Universidad Autónoma de Chile; ChileFil: Acosta, Angela. Universidad Icesi; ColombiaFil: Machado Beltrán, Manuel A.. Universidad Nacional de Colombia; ColombiaFil: Gordillo Alas, Lily Iracema. Ministry of Public Health and Social Assistance; GuatemalaFil: Orellana Tablas, Lourdes Abigail. Ministry of Public Health and Social Assistance; GuatemalaFil: Benko, Ria. University of Szeged; HungríaFil: Convertino, Irma. University of Pisa; ItaliaFil: Bonaso, Marco. University of Pisa; ItaliaFil: Tuccori, Marco. University of Pisa; ItaliaFil: Kirchmayer, Ursula. Lazio Regional Health Service; ItaliaFil: Contreras Sánchez, Saúl E.. Mexican Institute of Social Security; MéxicoFil: Rodríguez Tanta, L. Yesenia. Universidad Cientifica del Sur;Fil: Gutierrez Aures, Ysabel. Ministry of Health of Peru; PerúFil: Lin, Boya. University of Florida; Estados UnidosFil: Alipour Haris, Golnoosh. University of Florida; Estados UnidosFil: Eworuke, Efe. Real World Solutions; Estados UnidosFil: Lopes, Luciane Cruz. Sorocaba University; Brasi