Direct angiotensin AT2 receptor stimulation using a novel AT2 receptor agonist, compound 21, evokes neuroprotection in conscious hypertensive rats

Background: In this study, the neuroprotective effect of a novel nonpeptide AT2R agonist, C21, was examined in a conscious model of stroke to verify a class effect of AT2R agonists as neuroprotective agents. Methods and Results: Spontaneously hypertensive rats (SHR) were pre-treated for 5 days prior to stroke with C21 alone or in combination with the AT2R antagonist PD123319. In a separate series of experiments C21 was administered in a series of 4 doses commencing 6 hours after stroke. A focal reperfusion model of ischemia was induced in conscious SHR by administering endothelin-1 to the middle cerebral artery (MCA). Motor coordination was assessed at 1 and 3 days after stroke and post mortem analyses of infarct volumes, microglia activation and neuronal survival were performed at 72 hours post MCA occlusion. When given prior to stroke, C21 dose dependently decreased infarct volume, which is consistent with the behavioural findings illustrating an improvement in motor deficit. During the pre-treatment protocol C21 was shown to enhance microglia activation, which are likely to be evoking protection by releasing brain derived neurotrophic factor. When drug administration was delayed until 6 hours after stroke, C21 still reduced brain injury. Conclusion: These results indicate that centrally administered C21 confers neuroprotection against stroke damage. This benefit is likely to involve various mechanisms, including microglial activation of endogenous repair and enhanced cerebroperfusion. Thus, we have confirmed the neuroprotective effect of AT2R stimulation using a nonpeptide compound which highlights the clinical potential of the AT2R agonists for future development

Proteasome inhibition reduces plasma cell and antibody secretion, but not angiotensin II-induced hypertension

IntroductionDepletion of mature B cells affords protection against experimental hypertension. However, whether B cell-mediated hypertension is dependent on differentiation into antibody-secreting cells (ASCs) remains unclear. Using the proteasome inhibitor, bortezomib, the present study tested the effect of ASC reduction on angiotensin II-induced hypertension.MethodsMale C57BL6/J mice were infused with angiotensin II (0.7 mg/kg/day; s.c.) for 28 days via osmotic minipump to induce hypertension. Normotensive control mice received saline infusion. Bortezomib (750 μg/kg) or vehicle (0.1% DMSO) was administered (i.v.) 3 days prior to minipump implantation, and twice weekly thereafter. Systolic blood pressure was measured weekly using tail-cuff plethysmography. Spleen and bone marrow B1 (CD19+B220−), B2 (B220+CD19+) and ASCs (CD138hiSca-1+Blimp-1+) were enumerated by flow cytometry. Serum immunoglobulins were quantified using a bead-based immunoassay.ResultsBortezomib treatment reduced splenic ASCs by ∼68% and ∼64% compared to vehicle treatment in normotensive (2.00 ± 0.30 vs. 0.64 ± 0.15 × 105 cells; n = 10–11) and hypertensive mice (0.52 ± 0.11 vs. 0.14 ± 0.02 × 105 cells; n = 9–11), respectively. Bone marrow ASCs were also reduced by bortezomib in both normotensive (4.75 ± 1.53 vs. 1.71 ± 0.41 × 103 cells; n = 9–11) and hypertensive mice (4.12 ± 0.82 vs. 0.89 ± 0.18 × 103 cells; n = 9–11). Consistent with ASC reductions, bortezomib reduced serum IgM and IgG2a in all mice. Despite these reductions in ASCs and antibody levels, bortezomib did not affect angiotensin II-induced hypertension over 28 days (vehicle: 182 ± 4 mmHg vs. bortezomib: 177 ± 7 mmHg; n = 9–11).ConclusionReductions in ASCs and circulating IgG2a and IgM did not ameliorate experimental hypertension, suggesting other immunoglobulin isotypes or B cell effector functions may promote angiotensin II-induced hypertension

Effects of antiplatelet therapy on stroke risk by brain imaging features of intracerebral haemorrhage and cerebral small vessel diseases: subgroup analyses of the RESTART randomised, open-label trial

Background Findings from the RESTART trial suggest that starting antiplatelet therapy might reduce the risk of recurrent symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage compared with avoiding antiplatelet therapy. Brain imaging features of intracerebral haemorrhage and cerebral small vessel diseases (such as cerebral microbleeds) are associated with greater risks of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage. We did subgroup analyses of the RESTART trial to explore whether these brain imaging features modify the effects of antiplatelet therapy

Effects of antiplatelet therapy after stroke due to intracerebral haemorrhage (RESTART): a randomised, open-label trial

Background: Antiplatelet therapy reduces the risk of major vascular events for people with occlusive vascular disease, although it might increase the risk of intracranial haemorrhage. Patients surviving the commonest subtype of intracranial haemorrhage, intracerebral haemorrhage, are at risk of both haemorrhagic and occlusive vascular events, but whether antiplatelet therapy can be used safely is unclear. We aimed to estimate the relative and absolute effects of antiplatelet therapy on recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage and whether this risk might exceed any reduction of occlusive vascular events. Methods: The REstart or STop Antithrombotics Randomised Trial (RESTART) was a prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded endpoint, parallel-group trial at 122 hospitals in the UK. We recruited adults (≥18 years) who were taking antithrombotic (antiplatelet or anticoagulant) therapy for the prevention of occlusive vascular disease when they developed intracerebral haemorrhage, discontinued antithrombotic therapy, and survived for 24 h. Computerised randomisation incorporating minimisation allocated participants (1:1) to start or avoid antiplatelet therapy. We followed participants for the primary outcome (recurrent symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage) for up to 5 years. We analysed data from all randomised participants using Cox proportional hazards regression, adjusted for minimisation covariates. This trial is registered with ISRCTN (number ISRCTN71907627). Findings: Between May 22, 2013, and May 31, 2018, 537 participants were recruited a median of 76 days (IQR 29–146) after intracerebral haemorrhage onset: 268 were assigned to start and 269 (one withdrew) to avoid antiplatelet therapy. Participants were followed for a median of 2·0 years (IQR [1·0– 3·0]; completeness 99·3%). 12 (4%) of 268 participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy had recurrence of intracerebral haemorrhage compared with 23 (9%) of 268 participants allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (adjusted hazard ratio 0·51 [95% CI 0·25–1·03]; p=0·060). 18 (7%) participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy experienced major haemorrhagic events compared with 25 (9%) participants allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (0·71 [0·39–1·30]; p=0·27), and 39 [15%] participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy had major occlusive vascular events compared with 38 [14%] allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (1·02 [0·65–1·60]; p=0·92). Interpretation: These results exclude all but a very modest increase in the risk of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage with antiplatelet therapy for patients on antithrombotic therapy for the prevention of occlusive vascular disease when they developed intracerebral haemorrhage. The risk of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage is probably too small to exceed the established benefits of antiplatelet therapy for secondary prevention

Effects of antiplatelet therapy after stroke due to intracerebral haemorrhage (RESTART): a randomised, open-label trial

Background: Antiplatelet therapy reduces the risk of major vascular events for people with occlusive vascular disease, although it might increase the risk of intracranial haemorrhage. Patients surviving the commonest subtype of intracranial haemorrhage, intracerebral haemorrhage, are at risk of both haemorrhagic and occlusive vascular events, but whether antiplatelet therapy can be used safely is unclear. We aimed to estimate the relative and absolute effects of antiplatelet therapy on recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage and whether this risk might exceed any reduction of occlusive vascular events. Methods: The REstart or STop Antithrombotics Randomised Trial (RESTART) was a prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded endpoint, parallel-group trial at 122 hospitals in the UK. We recruited adults (≥18 years) who were taking antithrombotic (antiplatelet or anticoagulant) therapy for the prevention of occlusive vascular disease when they developed intracerebral haemorrhage, discontinued antithrombotic therapy, and survived for 24 h. Computerised randomisation incorporating minimisation allocated participants (1:1) to start or avoid antiplatelet therapy. We followed participants for the primary outcome (recurrent symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage) for up to 5 years. We analysed data from all randomised participants using Cox proportional hazards regression, adjusted for minimisation covariates. This trial is registered with ISRCTN (number ISRCTN71907627). Findings: Between May 22, 2013, and May 31, 2018, 537 participants were recruited a median of 76 days (IQR 29–146) after intracerebral haemorrhage onset: 268 were assigned to start and 269 (one withdrew) to avoid antiplatelet therapy. Participants were followed for a median of 2·0 years (IQR [1·0– 3·0]; completeness 99·3%). 12 (4%) of 268 participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy had recurrence of intracerebral haemorrhage compared with 23 (9%) of 268 participants allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (adjusted hazard ratio 0·51 [95% CI 0·25–1·03]; p=0·060). 18 (7%) participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy experienced major haemorrhagic events compared with 25 (9%) participants allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (0·71 [0·39–1·30]; p=0·27), and 39 [15%] participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy had major occlusive vascular events compared with 38 [14%] allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (1·02 [0·65–1·60]; p=0·92). Interpretation: These results exclude all but a very modest increase in the risk of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage with antiplatelet therapy for patients on antithrombotic therapy for the prevention of occlusive vascular disease when they developed intracerebral haemorrhage. The risk of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage is probably too small to exceed the established benefits of antiplatelet therapy for secondary prevention

Effects of antiplatelet therapy after stroke due to intracerebral haemorrhage (RESTART): a randomised, open-label trial

BACKGROUND: Antiplatelet therapy reduces the risk of major vascular events for people with occlusive vascular disease, although it might increase the risk of intracranial haemorrhage. Patients surviving the commonest subtype of intracranial haemorrhage, intracerebral haemorrhage, are at risk of both haemorrhagic and occlusive vascular events, but whether antiplatelet therapy can be used safely is unclear. We aimed to estimate the relative and absolute effects of antiplatelet therapy on recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage and whether this risk might exceed any reduction of occlusive vascular events. METHODS: The REstart or STop Antithrombotics Randomised Trial (RESTART) was a prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded endpoint, parallel-group trial at 122 hospitals in the UK. We recruited adults (≥18 years) who were taking antithrombotic (antiplatelet or anticoagulant) therapy for the prevention of occlusive vascular disease when they developed intracerebral haemorrhage, discontinued antithrombotic therapy, and survived for 24 h. Computerised randomisation incorporating minimisation allocated participants (1:1) to start or avoid antiplatelet therapy. We followed participants for the primary outcome (recurrent symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage) for up to 5 years. We analysed data from all randomised participants using Cox proportional hazards regression, adjusted for minimisation covariates. This trial is registered with ISRCTN (number ISRCTN71907627). FINDINGS: Between May 22, 2013, and May 31, 2018, 537 participants were recruited a median of 76 days (IQR 29-146) after intracerebral haemorrhage onset: 268 were assigned to start and 269 (one withdrew) to avoid antiplatelet therapy. Participants were followed for a median of 2·0 years (IQR [1·0- 3·0]; completeness 99·3%). 12 (4%) of 268 participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy had recurrence of intracerebral haemorrhage compared with 23 (9%) of 268 participants allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (adjusted hazard ratio 0·51 [95% CI 0·25-1·03]; p=0·060). 18 (7%) participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy experienced major haemorrhagic events compared with 25 (9%) participants allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (0·71 [0·39-1·30]; p=0·27), and 39 [15%] participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy had major occlusive vascular events compared with 38 [14%] allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (1·02 [0·65-1·60]; p=0·92). INTERPRETATION: These results exclude all but a very modest increase in the risk of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage with antiplatelet therapy for patients on antithrombotic therapy for the prevention of occlusive vascular disease when they developed intracerebral haemorrhage. The risk of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage is probably too small to exceed the established benefits of antiplatelet therapy for secondary prevention. FUNDING: British Heart Foundation

Novel approaches for treating hypertension [version 1; referees: 2 approved]

Hypertension, or high blood pressure, is a prevalent yet modifiable risk factor for cardiovascular disease. While there are many effective treatments available to combat hypertension, patients often require at least two to three medications to control blood pressure, although there are patients who are resistant to such therapies. This short review will briefly update on recent clinical advances and potential emerging therapies and is intended for a cross-disciplinary readership

NADPH oxidases as regulators of tumor angiogenesis: current and emerging concepts

Significance Reactive oxygen species (ROS) such as superoxide, hydrogen peroxide, and peroxynitrite are generated ubiquitously by all mammalian cells and have been understood for many decades as inflicting cell damage and as causing cancer by oxidation and nitration of macromolecules, including DNA, RNA, proteins, and lipids. Recent Advances A current concept suggests that ROS can also promote cell signaling pathways triggered by growth factors and transcription factors that ultimately regulate cell proliferation, differentiation, and apoptosis, all of which are important hallmarks of tumor cell proliferation and angiogenesis. Moreover, an emerging concept indicates that ROS regulate the functions of immune cells that infiltrate the tumor environment and stimulate angiogenesis, such as macrophages and specific regulatory T cells. Critical Issues In this article, we highlight that the NADPH oxidase family of ROS-generating enzymes are the key sources of ROS and, thus, play an important role in redox signaling within tumor, endothelial, and immune cells thereby promoting tumor angiogenesis. Future Directions Knowledge of these intricate ROS signaling pathways and identification of the culprit NADPH oxidases is likely to reveal novel therapeutic opportunities to prevent angiogenesis that occurs during cancer and which is responsible for the revascularization after current antiangiogenic treatment

Immune mechanisms of hypertension

Hypertension affects 30% of adults and is the leading risk factor for heart attack and stroke. Traditionally, hypertension has been regarded as a disorder of two systems that are involved in the regulation of salt–water balance and cardiovascular function: the renin–angiotensin–aldosterone system (RAAS) and the sympathetic nervous system (SNS). However, current treatments that aim to limit the influence of the RAAS or SNS on blood pressure fail in ~40% of cases, which suggests that other mechanisms must be involved. This Review summarizes the clinical and experimental evidence supporting a contribution of immune mechanisms to the development of hypertension. In this context, we highlight the immune cell subsets that are postulated to either promote or protect against hypertension through modulation of cardiac output and/or peripheral vascular resistance. We conclude with an appraisal of knowledge gaps still to be addressed before immunomodulatory therapies might be applied to at least a subset of patients with hypertension