Disruption of the Key Ca2+ Binding Site in the Selectivity Filter of Neuronal Voltage-Gated Calcium Channels Inhibits Channel Trafficking

Voltage-gated calcium channels are exquisitely Ca2+ selective, conferred primarily by four conserved pore-loop glutamate residues contributing to the selectivity filter. There has been little previous work directly measuring whether the trafficking of calcium channels requires their ability to bind Ca2+ in the selectivity filter or to conduct Ca2+. Here, we examine trafficking of neuronal CaV2.1 and 2.2 channels with mutations in their selectivity filter and find reduced trafficking to the cell surface in cell lines. Furthermore, in hippocampal neurons, there is reduced trafficking to the somatic plasma membrane, into neurites, and to presynaptic terminals. However, the CaV2.2 selectivity filter mutants are still influenced by auxiliary α2δ subunits and, albeit to a reduced extent, by β subunits, indicating the channels are not grossly misfolded. Our results indicate that Ca2+ binding in the pore of CaV2 channels may promote their correct trafficking, in combination with auxiliary subunits. Furthermore, physiological studies utilizing selectivity filter mutant CaV channels should be interpreted with caution

Proteolytic maturation of α 2 δ represents a checkpoint for activation and neuronal trafficking of latent calcium channels

The auxiliary α2δ subunits of voltage-gated calcium channels are extracellular membrane-associated proteins, which are post-translationally cleaved into disulfide-linked polypeptides α2 and δ. We now show, using α2δ constructs containing artificial cleavage sites, that this processing is an essential step permitting voltage-dependent activation of plasma membrane N-type (CaV2.2) calcium channels. Indeed, uncleaved α2δ inhibits native calcium currents in mammalian neurons. By inducing acute cell-surface proteolytic cleavage of α2δ, voltage-dependent activation of channels is promoted, independent from the trafficking role of α2δ. Uncleaved α2δ does not support trafficking of CaV2.2 channel complexes into neuronal processes, and inhibits Ca2+ entry into synaptic boutons, and we can reverse this by controlled intracellular proteolytic cleavage. We propose a model whereby uncleaved α2δ subunits maintain immature calcium channels in an inhibited state. Proteolytic processing of α2δ then permits voltage-dependent activation of the channels, acting as a checkpoint allowing trafficking only of mature calcium channel complexes into neuronal processes

Multivariable risk prediction can greatly enhance the statistical power of clinical trial subgroup analysis

BACKGROUND: When subgroup analyses of a positive clinical trial are unrevealing, such findings are commonly used to argue that the treatment's benefits apply to the entire study population; however, such analyses are often limited by poor statistical power. Multivariable risk-stratified analysis has been proposed as an important advance in investigating heterogeneity in treatment benefits, yet no one has conducted a systematic statistical examination of circumstances influencing the relative merits of this approach vs. conventional subgroup analysis. METHODS: Using simulated clinical trials in which the probability of outcomes in individual patients was stochastically determined by the presence of risk factors and the effects of treatment, we examined the relative merits of a conventional vs. a "risk-stratified" subgroup analysis under a variety of circumstances in which there is a small amount of uniformly distributed treatment-related harm. The statistical power to detect treatment-effect heterogeneity was calculated for risk-stratified and conventional subgroup analysis while varying: 1) the number, prevalence and odds ratios of individual risk factors for risk in the absence of treatment, 2) the predictiveness of the multivariable risk model (including the accuracy of its weights), 3) the degree of treatment-related harm, and 5) the average untreated risk of the study population. RESULTS: Conventional subgroup analysis (in which single patient attributes are evaluated "one-at-a-time") had at best moderate statistical power (30% to 45%) to detect variation in a treatment's net relative risk reduction resulting from treatment-related harm, even under optimal circumstances (overall statistical power of the study was good and treatment-effect heterogeneity was evaluated across a major risk factor [OR = 3]). In some instances a multi-variable risk-stratified approach also had low to moderate statistical power (especially when the multivariable risk prediction tool had low discrimination). However, a multivariable risk-stratified approach can have excellent statistical power to detect heterogeneity in net treatment benefit under a wide variety of circumstances, instances under which conventional subgroup analysis has poor statistical power. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that under many likely scenarios, a multivariable risk-stratified approach will have substantially greater statistical power than conventional subgroup analysis for detecting heterogeneity in treatment benefits and safety related to previously unidentified treatment-related harm. Subgroup analyses must always be well-justified and interpreted with care, and conventional subgroup analyses can be useful under some circumstances; however, clinical trial reporting should include a multivariable risk-stratified analysis when an adequate externally-developed risk prediction tool is available

Proteolytic maturation of alpha(2)delta represents a checkpoint for activation and neuronal trafficking of latent calcium channels

The auxiliary a2d subunits of voltage-gated calcium channels are extracellular membrane-associated proteins, which are post-translationally cleaved into disulfide-linked polypeptides a2 and d. We now show, using a2d constructs containing artificial cleavage sites, that this processing is an essential step permitting voltage-dependent activation of plasma membrane N-type (CaV2.2) calcium channels. Indeed, uncleaved a2d inhibits native calcium currents in mammalian neurons. By inducing acute cell-surface proteolytic cleavage of a2d, voltage-dependent activation of channels is promoted, independent from the trafficking role of a2d. Uncleaved a2d does not support trafficking of CaV2.2 channel complexes into neuronal processes, and inhibits Ca2+ entry into synaptic boutons, and we can reverse this by controlled intracellular proteolytic cleavage. We propose a model whereby uncleaved a2d subunits maintain immature calcium channels in an inhibited state. Proteolytic processing of a2d then permits voltage-dependent activation of the channels, acting as a checkpoint allowing trafficking only of mature calcium channel complexes into neuronal processes

Withdrawal rates as a consequence of disclosure of risk associated with manipulation of the cervical spine

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The risk associated with cervical manipulation is controversial. Research in this area is widely variable but as yet the risk is not easily quantifiable. This presents a problem when informing the patient of risks when seeking consent and information may be withheld due to the fear of patient withdrawal from care. As yet, there is a lack of research into the frequency of risk disclosure and consequent withdrawal from manipulative treatment as a result. This study seeks to investigate the reality of this and to obtain insight into the attitudes of chiropractors towards informed consent and disclosure.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Questionnaires were posted to 200 UK chiropractors randomly selected from the register of the General Chiropractic Council.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>A response rate of 46% (n = 92) was achieved. Thirty-three per cent (n = 30) respondents were female and the mean number of years in practice was 10. Eighty-eight per cent considered explanation of the risks associated with any recommended treatment important when obtaining informed consent. However, only 45% indicated they always discuss this with patients in need of cervical manipulation. When asked whether they believed discussing the possibility of a serious adverse reaction to cervical manipulation could increase patient anxiety to the extent there was a strong possibility the patient would refuse treatment, 46% said they believed this could happen. Nonetheless, 80% said they believed they had a moral/ethical obligation to disclose risk associated with cervical manipulation despite these concerns. The estimated number of withdrawals throughout respondents' time in practice was estimated at 1 patient withdrawal for every 2 years in practice.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The withdrawal rate from cervical manipulation as a direct consequence of the disclosure of associated serious risks appears unfounded. However, notwithstanding legal obligations, reluctance to disclose risk due to fear of increasing patient anxiety still remains, despite acknowledgement of moral and ethical responsibility.</p

Use of Aspirin postdiagnosis improves survival for colon cancer patients

Background: The preventive role of non-steroid anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and aspirin, in particular, on colorectal cancer is well established. More recently, it has been suggested that aspirin may also have a therapeutic role. Aim of the present observational population-based study was to assess the therapeutic effect on overall survival of aspirin/NSAIDs as adjuvant treatment used after the diagnosis of colorectal cancer patients. Methods: Data concerning prescriptions were obtained from PHARMO record linkage systems and all patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer (1998-2007) were selected from the Eindhoven Cancer Registry (population-based cancer registry). Aspirin/NSAID use was classified as none, prediagnosis and postdiagnosis and only postdiagnosis. Patients were defined as non-user of aspirin/NSAIDs from the date of diagnosis of the colorectal cancer to the date of first use of aspirin or NSAIDs and user from first use to the end of follow-up. Poisson regression was performed with user status as time-varying exposure.Results:In total, 1176 (26%) patients were non-users, 2086 (47%) were prediagnosis and postdiagnosis users and 1219 (27%) were only postdiagnosis users (total n=4481). Compared with non-users, a survival gain was observed for aspirin users; the adjusted rate ratio (RR) was 0.77 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.63-0.95; P=0.015). Stratified for colon and rectal, the survival gain was only present in colon cancer (adjusted RR 0.65 (95%CI 0.50-0.84; P=0.001)). For frequent users survival gain was larger (adjusted RR 0.61 (95%CI 0.46-0.81; P=0.001). In rectal cancer, aspirin use was not associated with survival (adjusted RR 1.10 (95%CI 0.79-1.54; P=0.6). The NSAIDs use was associated with decreased survival (adjusted RR 1.93 (95%CI 1.70-2.20; P<0.001). Conclusion: Aspirin use initiated or continued after diagnosis of colon cancer is associated with a lower risk of overall mortality. These findings strongly support initiation of a placebo-controlled trial that investigates the role of aspirin as adjuvant treatment in colon cancer patients

Efficacy of manipulation for non-specific neck pain of recent onset: design of a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Manipulation is a common treatment for non-specific neck pain. Neck manipulation, unlike gentler forms of manual therapy such as mobilisation, is associated with a small risk of serious neurovascular injury and can result in stroke or death. It is thought however, that neck manipulation provides better results than mobilisation where clinically indicated. There is long standing and vigorous debate both within and between the professions that use neck manipulation as well as the wider scientific community as to whether neck manipulation potentially does more harm than good. The primary aim of this study is to determine whether neck manipulation provides more rapid resolution of an episode of neck pain than mobilisation. METHODS/DESIGN: 182 participants with acute and sub-acute neck pain will be recruited from physiotherapy, chiropractic and osteopathy practices in Sydney, Australia. Participants will be randomly allocated to treatment with either manipulation or mobilisation. Randomisation will occur after the treating practitioner decides that manipulation is an appropriate treatment for the individual participant. Both groups will receive at least 4 treatments over 2 weeks. The primary outcome is number of days taken to recover from the episode of neck pain. Cox regression will be used to compare survival curves for time to recovery for the manipulation and mobilisation treatment groups. DISCUSSION: This paper presents the rationale and design of a randomised controlled trial to compare the effectiveness of neck manipulation and neck mobilisation for acute and subacute neck pain