The selective phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitor roflumilast and phosphodiesterase 3/4 inhibitor pumafentrine reduce clinical score and TNF expression in experimental colitis in mice.

The specific inhibition of phosphodiesterase (PDE)4 and dual inhibition of PDE3 and PDE4 has been shown to decrease inflammation by suppression of pro-inflammatory cytokine synthesis. We examined the effect of roflumilast, a selective PDE4 inhibitor marketed for severe COPD, and the investigational compound pumafentrine, a dual PDE3/PDE4 inhibitor, in the preventive dextran sodium sulfate (DSS)-induced colitis model. The clinical score, colon length, histologic score and colon cytokine production from mice with DSS-induced colitis (3.5% DSS in drinking water for 11 days) receiving either roflumilast (1 or 5 mg/kg body weight/d p.o.) or pumafentrine (1.5 or 5 mg/kg/d p.o.) were determined and compared to vehicle treated control mice. In the pumafentrine-treated animals, splenocytes were analyzed for interferon-γ (IFNγ) production and CD69 expression. Roflumilast treatment resulted in dose-dependent improvements of clinical score (weight loss, stool consistency and bleeding), colon length, and local tumor necrosis factor-α (TNFα) production in the colonic tissue. These findings, however, were not associated with an improvement of the histologic score. Administration of pumafentrine at 5 mg/kg/d alleviated the clinical score, the colon length shortening, and local TNFα production. In vitro stimulated splenocytes after in vivo treatment with pumafentrine showed a significantly lower state of activation and production of IFNγ compared to no treatment in vivo. These series of experiments document the ameliorating effect of roflumilast and pumafentrine on the clinical score and TNF expression of experimental colitis in mice

Why do physicians prescribe dialysis? A prospective questionnaire study

Funding Information: This study was supported by an unrestricted grant 14CECPDEU1001 from Baxter Healthcare International. Baxter Novum is the result of a grant from Baxter Healthcare Corporation to Division of Renal Medicine and Baxter Novum, Department of Clinical Science, Intervention and Technology, Karolinska Institutet, to support research activities at Karolinska Institutet to promote the understanding and treatment of renal disease. Bengt Lindholm is employed by Baxter Healthcare Corporation. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials. Publisher Copyright: © 2017 Heaf et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Copyright: Copyright 2018 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.Introduction.The incidence of unplanned dialysis initiation (DI) with consequent increased comorbidity, mortality and reduced modality choice remains high, but the optimal timing of dialysis initiation (DI) remains controversial, and there is a lack of studies of specific reasons for DI. We investigated why and when physicians prescribe dialysis and hypothesized that physician motivation for DI is an independent factor which may have clinical consequences. Methods In the Peridialysis study, an ongoing multicenter prospective study assessing the causes and timing of DI and consequences of unplanned dialysis, physicians in 11 hospitals were asked to describe their primary, secondary and further reasons for prescribing DI. The stated reasons for DI were analyzed in relation to clinical and biochemical data at DI, and characteristics of physicians. Results In 446 patients (median age 67 years; 38% females; diabetes 25.6%), DI was prescribed by 84 doctors who stated 23 different primary reasons for DI. The primary indication was clinical in 63% and biochemical in 37%; 23% started for life-threatening conditions. Reduced renal function accounted for only 19% of primary reasons for DI but was a primary or contributing reason in 69%. The eGFR at DI was 7.2 ±3.4 ml/min/1.73 m2, but varied according to comorbidity and cause of DI. Patients with cachexia, anorexia and pulmonary stasis (34% with heart failure) had the highest eGFR (8.2–9.8 ml/min/1.73 m2), and those with edema, “low GFR”, and acidosis, the lowest (4.6–6.1 ml/min/1.73 m2). Patients with multiple comorbidity including diabetes started at a high eGFR (8.7 ml/min/1.73 m2). Physician experience played a role in dialysis prescription. Non-specialists were more likely to prescribe dialysis for life-threatening conditions, while older and more experienced physicians were more likely to start dialysis for clinical reasons, and at a lower eGFR. Female doctors started dialysis at a higher eGFR than males (8.0 vs. 7.1 ml/min/1.73 m2). Conclusions DI was prescribed mainly based on clinical reasons in accordance with current recommendations while low renal function accounted for only 19% of primary reasons for DI. There are considerable differences in physicians´ stated motivations for DI, related to their age, clinical experience and interpretation of biochemical variables. These differences may be an independent factor in the clinical treatment of patients, with consequences for the risk of unplanned DI.publishersversionPeer reviewe

Pharmacological characterisation of anti-inflammatory compounds in acute and chronic mouse models of cigarette smoke-induced inflammation

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Candidate compounds being developed to treat chronic obstructive pulmonary disease are typically assessed using either acute or chronic mouse smoking models; however, in both systems compounds have almost always been administered prophylactically. Our aim was to determine whether the prophylactic effects of reference anti-inflammatory compounds in acute mouse smoking models reflected their therapeutic effects in (more clinically relevant) chronic systems.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>To do this, we started by examining the type of inflammatory cell infiltrate which occurred after acute (3 days) or chronic (12 weeks) cigarette smoke exposure (CSE) using female, C57BL/6 mice (n = 7-10). To compare the effects of anti-inflammatory compounds in these models, mice were exposed to either 3 days of CSE concomitant with compound dosing or 14 weeks of CSE with dosing beginning after week 12. Budesonide (1 mg kg^-1; i.n., q.d.), roflumilast (3 mg kg^-1; p.o., q.d.) and fluvastatin (2 mg kg^-1; p.o., b.i.d.) were dosed 1 h before (and 5 h after for fluvastatin) CSE. These dose levels were selected because they have previously been shown to be efficacious in mouse models of lung inflammation. Bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) leukocyte number was the primary endpoint in both models as this is also a primary endpoint in early clinical studies.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>To start, we confirmed that the inflammatory phenotypes were different after acute (3 days) versus chronic (12 weeks) CSE. The inflammation in the acute systems was predominantly neutrophilic, while in the more chronic CSE systems BALF neutrophils (PMNs), macrophage and lymphocyte numbers were all increased (p < 0.05). In the acute model, both roflumilast and fluvastatin reduced BALF PMNs (p < 0.01) after 3 days of CSE, while budesonide had no effect on BALF PMNs. In the chronic model, therapeutically administered fluvastatin reduced the numbers of PMNs and macrophages in the BALF (p ≤ 0.05), while budesonide had no effect on PMN or macrophage numbers, but did reduce BALF lymphocytes (p < 0.01). Roflumilast's inhibitory effects on inflammatory cell infiltrate were not statistically significant.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>These results demonstrate that the acute, prophylactic systems can be used to identify compounds with therapeutic potential, but may not predict a compound's efficacy in chronic smoke exposure models.</p

The RISAP-study: a complex intervention in risk communication and shared decision-making in general practice

General practitioners (GPs) and patients find it difficult to talk about risk of future disease, especially when patients have asymptomatic conditions, and treatment options are unlikely to cause immediate perceptible improvements in well-being. Further studies in risk communication training are needed. Aim:1) to systematically develop, describe and evaluate a complex intervention comprising a training programme for GPs in risk communication and shared decision-making, 2) to evaluate the effect of the training programme on real-life consultations between GPs and patients with high cholesterol levels, and 3) to evaluate patients' reactions during and after the consultations. Methods/Design The effect of the complex intervention, based around a training programme, will be evaluated in a cluster-randomised controlled trial with an intervention group and an active control group with 40 GPs and 280 patients in each group. The GPs will receive a questionnaire at baseline and after 6 months about attitudes towards risk communication and cholesterol-reducing medication. After each consultation with a participating high cholesterol-patient, the GPs will complete a questionnaire about decision satisfaction (Provider Decision Process Assessment Instrument). The patients will receive a questionnaire at baseline and after 3 and 6 months. It includes questions about adherence to chosen treatment (Morisky Compliance Scale), self-rated health (SF-12), enablement (Patient Enablement Instrument), and risk communication and decision-making effectiveness (COMRADE Scale). Prescriptions, contacts to the health services, and cholesterol level will be drawn from the registers. In each group, 12 consultations will be observed and tape-recorded. The patients from these 24 consultations will be interviewed immediately after the consultation and re-interviewed after 6 months. Eight purposefully selected GPs from the intervention group will be interviewed in a focus group 6 months after participation in the training programme. The process and context of the RISAP-study will be investigated in detail using an action research approach, in order to analyse adaptation of the intervention model to the specific context. Discussion This study aims at providing GPs and patients with a firm basis for active deliberation about preventive treatment options, with a view to optimising adherence to chosen treatment. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Protocol Registration System NCT0118705