Effect of protocatechuic acid on insulin responsiveness and inflammation in visceral adipose tissue from obese individuals: possible role for PTP1B

n/

The evolution of European legislation on doping. New challenges in the age of NPS

The fight against doping in sport, formally started in 1960 with the constitution of the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and culminated in 1999 with the birth of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), commissioned to chair various activities, including the publication of the annual list of prohibited substances and methods for doping. In Europe, as early as 1967, the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe adopted a resolution to stigmatise the intake of substances foreign to the body for the sole purpose of artificially and unfairly influencing sports performance. In 2002, the Council of Europe adopted an Additional Protocol to the 1989 Strasbourg Convention against Doping to ensure mutual recognition of doping controls and to strengthen the enforcement of the Convention. In Italy, the Law of 14 December 2000 n. 376 “Discipline of the health protection of sports activities and the fight against doping”, defines doping as “the administration or intake of drugs or biologically or pharmacologically active substances and the adoption or submission to medical practices not justified by pathological conditions and suitable to modify the psychophysical or biological conditions of the organism in order to alter the athletic performance of athletes”. The same law regulates the use of drugs or biologically or pharmacologically active substances and update an annual list in agreement with WADA. The article aims to analyse the legislation from a national perspective, offering as complete a view as possible of the current situation

Ketamine: from prescription Anaesthetic to new Psycoattive substance

Descoveredin United States of America, (USA) in the 1960s, ketamine was introduced as an anaesthetic drug to specifically replace phencycline. Briefly, the sustance moved from the medicall world to recreational users since it was desoùcovered that intence psychedeloic experiences were obtain with dosageslower than those prescripted for anaesthesia

Use of cognitive enhancers: Methylphenidate and analogs

OBJECTIVE: In the last decades, several cognitive-enhancing drugs have been sold onto the drug market. Methylphenidate and analogs represent a sub-class of these new psychoactive substances (NPS). We aimed to review the use and misuse of methylphenidate and analogs, and the risk associated. Moreover, we exhaustively reviewed the scientific data on the most recent methylphenidate analogs (methylphenidate and ethylphenidate excluded). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Literature search was performed on methylphenidate and analogs, using specialized search engines accessing scientific databases. Additional reports were retrieved from international agencies, institutional websites, and drug user forums. RESULTS: Methylphenidate/Ritalin has been used for decades to treat attention deficit disorders and narcolepsy. More recently, it has been used as a cognitive enhancer and a recreational drug. Acute intoxications and fatalities involving methylphenidate were reported. Methylphenidate was scheduled as an illegal drug in many countries, but NPS circumventing the ban and mimicking the psychostimulant effects of methylphenidate started being available: ethylphenidate, 3,4-dichloromethylphenidate, 3,4-dichloroethylphenidate, 4-fluoromethylphenidate, 4-fluoroethylphenidate, methylnaphthidate, ethylnaphthidate, isopropylphenidate, propylphenidate, 4-methylmethylphenidate, and N-benzylethylphenidate have been available in the past few years. Only little data is currently available for these substances. Many intoxications involving methylphenidate analogs were reported. To date, ethylphenidate was involved in 28 fatalities, although it was reportedly directly related to the cause of death in only 7 cases; 3,4-dichloroethylphenidate was involved in 1 death. CONCLUSIONS: The rapid expansion of methylphenidate analogs onto the drug market in the past few years makes likely the occurrence of intoxications and fatalities in the next years. Careful monitoring and systematic control of methylphenidate analogs should be undertaken to reduce the uprising threat, and education efforts should be made among high-risk population

Use of cognitive enhancers: Methylphenidate and analogs

OBJECTIVE: In the last decades, several cognitive-enhancing drugs have been sold onto the drug market. Methylphenidate and analogs represent a sub-class of these new psychoactive substances (NPS). We aimed to review the use and misuse of methylphenidate and analogs, and the risk associated. Moreover, we exhaustively reviewed the scientific data on the most recent methylphenidate analogs (methylphenidate and ethylphenidate excluded). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Literature search was performed on methylphenidate and analogs, using specialized search engines accessing scientific databases. Additional reports were retrieved from international agencies, institutional websites, and drug user forums. RESULTS: Methylphenidate/Ritalin has been used for decades to treat attention deficit disorders and narcolepsy. More recently, it has been used as a cognitive enhancer and a recreational drug. Acute intoxications and fatalities involving methylphenidate were reported. Methylphenidate was scheduled as an illegal drug in many countries, but NPS circumventing the ban and mimicking the psychostimulant effects of methylphenidate started being available: ethylphenidate, 3,4-dichloromethylphenidate, 3,4-dichloroethylphenidate, 4-fluoromethylphenidate, 4-fluoroethylphenidate, methylnaphthidate, ethylnaphthidate, isopropylphenidate, propylphenidate, 4-methylmethylphenidate, and N-benzylethylphenidate have been available in the past few years. Only little data is currently available for these substances. Many intoxications involving methylphenidate analogs were reported. To date, ethylphenidate was involved in 28 fatalities, although it was reportedly directly related to the cause of death in only 7 cases; 3,4-dichloroethylphenidate was involved in 1 death. CONCLUSIONS: The rapid expansion of methylphenidate analogs onto the drug market in the past few years makes likely the occurrence of intoxications and fatalities in the next years. Careful monitoring and systematic control of methylphenidate analogs should be undertaken to reduce the uprising threat, and education efforts should be made among high-risk populations. © 2019 Verduci Editore s.r.l. All rights reserved

Comparison of valsartan 160 mg with lisinopril 20 mg, given as monotherapy or in combination with a diuretic, for the treatment of hypertension: the Blood Pressure Reduction and Tolerability of Valsartan in Comparison with Lisinopril (PREVAIL) study.

Background: The goal of antihypertensive therapy is to provide good blood pressure (BP) control without eliciting adverse effects. Objective: This study compared the risk-benefit profile of the angiotensin II receptor blocker valsartan with that of the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor lisinopril in patients with mild to severe hypertension. The primary objective was to show that the equipotent BP-lowering effect of the valsartan-based treatment is accompanied by a better tolerability profile. Methods: This 16-week, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study was conducted at 88 outpatient centers across Italy After a 2-week placebo run-in period, patients aged >18 years with mild to severe hypertension (systolic BP [SBP], 160-220 mm Hg; diastolic BP [DBP], 93-110 mm Hg) were eligible. Patients were randomized to receive once-daily, oral, self-administered treatment with valsartan 160-rag capsules or lisinopril 20-rag capsules under double-blind conditions for 4 weeks. Responders continued monotherapy, whereas nonresponders had hydrochlorothiazide 12.3 mg added for the final 12 weeks of the study The 2 primary variables used to assess the equivalence of therapeutic efficacy of the 2 regimens were sitting SBP and sitting DBE which were measured at weeks 0 (baseline), 4, 8, and 16. The rate of drug-related adverse events (AEs) was used to assess whether 1 treatment had a better tolerability profile than the other. Tolerability was assessed by collecting information about AEs by means of questioning the patient or physical examination at each visit. Results: A total of 1213 patients were enrolled (633 men, 378 women; mean [SD] age, 34.3 [10.1] years [range, 28-78 years]). The study was completed by 1100 patients (333 receiving valsartan and 347 receiving lisinopril). Fifty-one patients (8.4%) treated with valsartan and 62 (1.2%) treated with lisinopril withdrew, mainly because of AEs (9 [1.3%] and 23 patients [3.8%], respectively). The valsartan- and lisinopril-based treatments were similarly effective in reducing sitting BE with mean SBP/DBP reductions of 31.2/13.9 mm Hg and 31.4/ 13.9 mm Hg, respectively At the end of the stud> BP was controlled in 82.7% of the patients receiving valsartan and 81.6 % of those receiving lisinopril. AEs were experienced by 3.1% of the patients treated with valsartan and 10.7% of those treated with lisinopril (P = 0.001), with dry cough observed in 1.0% and 7.2% of patients, respectively (P < 0.001)

Consumption of extra-virgin olive oil rich in phenolic compounds improves metabolic control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus : a possible involvement of reduced levels of circulating visfatin

Aim: Phenolic compounds naturally contained in extra-virgin olive oil (EVOO) have demonstrated anti-inflammatory and antioxidant properties. The present study aimed at evaluating the effects of a polyphenol-rich extra-virgin olive oil (EVOO) (high-polyphenol EVOO, HP-EVOO) on the metabolic control and the production of specific pro-/anti-inflammatory adipokines in overweight patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D). Methods: Eleven overweight T2D patients not in treatment with insulin were invited to follow their habitual diet for a total of 8 weeks. During the first 4 weeks (wash-out period), they were asked to consume refined olive oil (ROO, polyphenols not detectable) and then to replace ROO with HP-EVOO (25 mL/day, 577 mg of phenolic compounds/kg) for the remaining 4 weeks. Anthropometric parameters, fasting glycaemia, glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), high-sensitive C-reactive protein, plasma lipid profile, liver function and serum levels of TNF-α, IL-6, adiponectin, visfatin and apelin were assessed at the end of each 4-week period. Results: HP-EVOO consumption significantly reduced fasting plasma glucose (P = 0.023) and HbA1c (P = 0.039) levels as well as BMI (P = 0.012) and body weight (P = 0.012). HP-EVOO ingestion determined a reduction in serum level of aspartate aminotransferase (AST, P = 0.0056) and alanine aminotransferase (ALT, P = 0.024). Serum visfatin levels strongly decreased after HP-EVOO ingestion (P = 0.0021). Conclusions: Daily consumption of polyphenol-rich EVOO might improve metabolic control and circulating inflammatory adipokines profile in overweight T2D patients.</p