Pilot Safety Evaluation of Varenicline for the Treatment of Methamphetamine Dependence.

Despite the worldwide extent of methamphetamine dependence, no medication has been shown to effectively treat afflicted individuals. One relatively unexplored approach is modulation of cholinergic system function. Animal research suggests that enhancement of central cholinergic activity, possibly at nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (nAChRs), can reduce methamphetamine-related behaviors. Further, preliminary findings indicate that rivastigmine, a cholinesterase inhibitor, may reduce craving for methamphetamine after administration of the drug in human subjects. We therefore performed a double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover pilot study of the safety and tolerability of varenicline in eight methamphetamine-dependent research subjects. Varenicline is used clinically to aid smoking cessation, and acts as a partial agonist at α4β2 nAChRs with full agonist properties at α7 nAChRs. Oral varenicline dose was titrated over 1 week to reach 1 mg bid, and then was co-administered with 30 mg methamphetamine, delivered in ten intravenous infusions of 3 mg each. Varenicline was found to be safe in combination with IV methamphetamine, producing no cardiac rhythm disturbances or alterations in vital sign parameters. No adverse neuropsychiatric sequelae were detected either during varenicline titration or following administration of methamphetamine. The results suggest that varenicline warrants further investigation as a potential treatment for methamphetamine dependence

Hypothesis: primary antiangiogenic method proposed to treat early stage breast cancer

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Women with Down syndrome very rarely develop breast cancer even though they now live to an age when it normally occurs. This may be related to the fact that Down syndrome persons have an additional copy of chromosome 21 where the gene that codes for the antiangiogenic protein Endostatin is located. Can this information lead to a primary antiangiogenic therapy for early stage breast cancer that indefinitely prolongs remission? A key question that arises is when is the initial angiogenic switch thrown in micrometastases? We have conjectured that avascular micrometastases are dormant and relatively stable if undisturbed but that for some patients angiogenesis is precipitated by surgery. We also proposed that angiogenesis of micrometastases very rarely occurs before surgical removal of the primary tumor. If that is so, it seems possible that we could suggest a primary antiangiogenic therapy but the problem then arises that starting a therapy before surgery would interfere with wound healing.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The therapy must be initiated at least one day prior to surgical removal of the primary tumor and kept at a Down syndrome level perhaps indefinitely. That means the drug must have virtually no toxicity and not interfere meaningfully with wound healing. This specifically excludes drugs that significantly inhibit the VEGF pathway since that is important for wound healing and because these agents have some toxicity. Endostatin is apparently non-toxic and does not significantly interfere with wound healing since Down syndrome patients have no abnormal wound healing problems.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>We propose a therapy for early stage breast cancer consisting of Endostatin at or above Down syndrome levels starting at least one day before surgery and continuing at that level. This should prevent micrometastatic angiogenesis resulting from surgery or at any time later. Adjuvant chemotherapy or hormone therapy should not be necessary. This can be continued indefinitely since there is no acquired resistance that develops, as happens in most cancer therapies.</p

The clinical potential of antiangiogenic fragments of extracellular matrix proteins

Neovasculature development is a crucial step in the natural history of a cancer. While much emphasis has been placed on proangiogenic growth factors such as VEGF, it is clear that endogenous angiogenesis inhibitors also have critical roles in the regulation of this process. Recent research has identified several cryptic fragments of extracellular matrix/vascular basement membrane proteins that have potent antiangiogenic properties in vivo. It has become apparent that many of these fragments signal via interactions with endothelial integrins, although multiple downstream effector pathways have been implicated and endostatin, the first non-collagenous domain of collagen XVIII, influences an intricate signalling network. The activity of these molecules in animal models suggests that they may have significant clinical activity; however, results of phase I/II trials with endostatin were disappointing. Many possible reasons can be found for the failure of these studies. Weaknesses in trial design, endostatin administration regimen and patient selection are identifiable, and importantly the lack of a clearly defined antiangiogenic mechanism for endostatin hindered assessment of biologically effective dose. Additionally, in vivo immunological and proteolytic function-neutralising mechanisms may have negated endostatin's actions. Lessons learned from these studies will aid the future clinical development of other antiangiogenic extracellular matrix protein fragments