A toxicogenomic data space for system-level understanding and prediction of EDC-induced toxicity.

Endocrine disrupting compounds (EDCs) are a persistent threat to humans and wildlife due to their ability to interfere with endocrine signaling pathways. Inspired by previous work to improve chemical hazard identification through the use of toxicogenomics data, we developed a genomic-oriented data space for profiling the molecular activity of EDCs in an in silico manner, and for creating predictive models that identify and prioritize EDCs. Predictive models of EDCs, derived from gene expression data from rats (in vivo and in vitro primary hepatocytes) and humans (in vitro primary hepatocytes and HepG2), achieve testing accuracy greater than 90%. Negative test sets indicate that known safer chemicals are not predicted as EDCs. The rat in vivo-based classifiers achieve accuracy greater than 75% when tested for invitro to in vivoextrapolation. This study reveals key metabolic pathways and genes affected by EDCs together with a set of predictive models that utilize these pathways to prioritize EDCs in dose/time dependent manner and to predict EDCevokedmetabolic diseases

Comparison Study of MS-HRM and Pyrosequencing Techniques for Quantification of APC and CDKN2A Gene Methylation

There is increasing interest in the development of cost-effective techniques for the quantification of DNA methylation biomarkers. We analyzed 90 samples of surgically resected colorectal cancer tissues for APC and CDKN2A promoter methylation using methylation sensitive-high resolution melting (MS-HRM) and pyrosequencing. MS-HRM is a less expensive technique compared with pyrosequencing but is usually more limited because it gives a range of methylation estimates rather than a single value. Here, we developed a method for deriving single estimates, rather than a range, of methylation using MS-HRM and compared the values obtained in this way with those obtained using the gold standard quantitative method of pyrosequencing. We derived an interpolation curve using standards of known methylated/ unmethylated ratio (0%, 12.5%, 25%, 50%, 75%, and 100% of methylation) to obtain the best estimate of the extent of methylation for each of our samples. We observed similar profiles of methylation and a high correlation coefficient between the two techniques. Overall, our new approach allows MS-HRM to be used as a quantitative assay which provides results which are comparable with those obtained by pyrosequencing

Lack of influence of the COX inhibitors metamizol and diclofenac on platelet GPIIb/IIIa and P-selectin expression in vitro

BACKGROUND: The effect of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for reduced platelet aggregation and thromboxane A(2 )synthesis has been well documented. However, the influence on platelet function is not fully explained. Aim of this study was to examine the influence of the COX-1 inhibiting NSAIDs, diclofenac and metamizol on platelet activation and leukocyte-platelet complexes, in vitro. Surface expression of GPIIb/IIIa and P-selectin on platelets, and the percentage of platelet-leukocyte complexes were investigated. METHODS: Whole blood was incubated with three different concentrations of diclofenac and metamizol for 5 and 30 minutes, followed by activation with TRAP-6 and ADP. Rates of GPIIb/IIIa and P-selectin expression, and the percentage of platelet-leukocyte complexes were analyzed by a flow-cytometric assay. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in the expression of GPIIb/IIIa and P-selectin, and in the formation of platelet-leukocyte complexes after activation with ADP and TRAP-6, regarding both the time of incubation and the concentrations of diclofenac and metamizol. CONCLUSIONS: Accordingly, the inhibitory effect of diclofenac and metamizol on platelet aggregation is not related to a reduced surface expression of P-selectin and GPIIb/IIIa on platelets

Sustained seizure freedom with adjunctive brivaracetam in patients with focal onset seizures

The maintenance of seizure control over time is a clinical priority in patients with epilepsy. The aim of this study was to assess the sustained seizure frequency reduction with adjunctive brivaracetam (BRV) in real-world practice. Patients with focal epilepsy prescribed add-on BRV were identified. Study outcomes included sustained seizure freedom and sustained seizure response, defined as a 100% and a ≥50% reduction in baseline seizure frequency that continued without interruption and without BRV withdrawal through the 12-month follow-up. Nine hundred ninety-four patients with a median age of 45 (interquartile range = 32–56) years were included. During the 1-year study period, sustained seizure freedom was achieved by 142 (14.3%) patients, of whom 72 (50.7%) were seizure-free from Day 1 of BRV treatment. Sustained seizure freedom was maintained for ≥6, ≥9, and 12 months by 14.3%, 11.9%, and 7.2% of patients from the study cohort. Sustained seizure response was reached by 383 (38.5%) patients; 236 of 383 (61.6%) achieved sustained ≥50% reduction in seizure frequency by Day 1, 94 of 383 (24.5%) by Month 4, and 53 of 383 (13.8%) by Month 7 up to Month 12. Adjunctive BRV was associated with sustained seizure frequency reduction from the first day of treatment in a subset of patients with uncontrolled focal epilepsy

Adjunctive Brivaracetam in Focal Epilepsy: Real-World Evidence from the BRIVAracetam add-on First Italian netwoRk STudy (BRIVAFIRST)

Background: In randomized controlled trials, add-on brivaracetam (BRV) reduced seizure frequency in patients with drug-resistant focal epilepsy. Studies performed in a naturalistic setting are a useful complement to characterize the drug profile. Objective: This multicentre study assessed the effectiveness and tolerability of adjunctive BRV in a large population of patients with focal epilepsy in the context of real-world clinical practice. Methods: The BRIVAFIRST (BRIVAracetam add-on First Italian netwoRk STudy) was a retrospective, multicentre study including adult patients prescribed adjunctive BRV. Patients with focal epilepsy and 12-month follow-up were considered. Main outcomes included the rates of seizure‐freedom, seizure response (≥ 50% reduction in baseline seizure frequency), and treatment discontinuation. The incidence of adverse events (AEs) was also considered. Analyses by levetiracetam (LEV) status and concomitant use of strong enzyme-inducing antiseizure medications (EiASMs) and sodium channel blockers (SCBs) were performed. Results: A total of 1029 patients with a median age of 45 years (33–56) was included. At 12 months, 169 (16.4%) patients were seizure-free and 383 (37.2%) were seizure responders. The rate of seizure freedom was 22.3% in LEV-naive patients, 7.1% in patients with prior LEV use and discontinuation due to insufficient efficacy, and 31.2% in patients with prior LEV use and discontinuation due to AEs (p < 0.001); the corresponding values for ≥ 50% seizure frequency reduction were 47.9%, 29.7%, and 42.8% (p < 0.001). There were no statistically significant differences in seizure freedom and seizure response rates by use of strong EiASMs. The rates of seizure freedom (20.0% vs. 16.6%; p = 0.341) and seizure response (39.7% vs. 26.9%; p = 0.006) were higher in patients receiving SCBs than those not receiving SCBs; 265 (25.8%) patients discontinued BRV. AEs were reported by 30.1% of patients, and were less common in patients treated with BRV and concomitant SCBs than those not treated with SCBs (28.9% vs. 39.8%; p = 0.017). Conclusion: The BRIVAFIRST provided real-world evidence on the effectiveness of BRV in patients with focal epilepsy irrespective of LEV history and concomitant ASMs, and suggested favourable therapeutic combinations

Prevention of congenital malformations and other adverse pregnancy outcomes with 4.0 mg of folic acid : community-based randomized clinical trial in Italy and the Netherlands

Background: In 2010 a Cochrane review confirmed that folic acid (FA) supplementation prevents the first- and second-time occurrence of neural tube defects (NTDs). At present some evidence from observational studies supports the hypothesis that FA supplementation can reduce the risk of all congenital malformations (CMs) or the risk of a specific and selected group of them, namely cardiac defects and oral clefts. Furthermore, the effects on the prevention of prematurity, foetal growth retardation and pre-eclampsia are unclear.Although the most common recommendation is to take 0.4 mg/day, the problem of the most appropriate dose of FA is still open.The aim of this project is to assess the effect a higher dose of peri-conceptional FA supplementation on reducing the occurrence of all CMs. Other aims include the promotion of pre-conceptional counselling, comparing rates of selected CMs, miscarriage, pre-eclampsia, preterm birth, small for gestational age, abruptio placentae.Methods/Design: This project is a joint effort by research groups in Italy and the Netherlands. Women of childbearing age, who intend to become pregnant within 12 months are eligible for the studies. Women are randomly assigned to receive 4 mg of FA (treatment in study) or 0.4 mg of FA (referent treatment) daily. Information on pregnancy outcomes are derived from women-and-physician information.We foresee to analyze the data considering all the adverse outcomes of pregnancy taken together in a global end point (e.g.: CMs, miscarriage, pre-eclampsia, preterm birth, small for gestational age). A total of about 1,000 pregnancies need to be evaluated to detect an absolute reduction of the frequency of 8%. Since the sample size needed for studying outcomes separately is large, this project also promotes an international prospective meta-analysis.Discussion: The rationale of these randomized clinical trials (RCTs) is the hypothesis that a higher intake of FA is related to a higher risk reduction of NTDs, other CMs and other adverse pregnancy outcomes. Our hope is that these trials will act as catalysers, and lead to other large RCTs studying the effects of this supplementation on CMs and other infant and maternal outcomes.Trial registration: Italian trial: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01244347.Dutch trial: Dutch Trial Register ID: NTR3161