Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for October, 2012

Larry H. Bernstein, MD, Reporter

This is another very interesting contribution.  I submit without change.

Neuroscientists find the molecular “when”, “where” of memory formation
Fri, 10/19/2012 – 11:30am

Neuroscientists from New York University and the University of California, Irvine have isolated the “when” and “where” of molecular activity that occurs in the formation of short-, intermediate-, and long-term memories. Their findings, which appear the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, offer new insights into the molecular architecture of memory formation and, with it, a better roadmap for developing therapeutic interventions for related afflictions.

“Our findings provide a deeper understanding of how memories are created,” explains the research team leader Thomas Carew, a professor in NYU’s Center for Neural Science and dean of NYU’s Faculty of Arts and Science. “Memory formation is not simply a matter of turning molecules on and off; rather, it results from a complex temporal and spatial relationship of molecular interaction and movement.”

Neuroscientists have previously uncovered different aspects of molecular signaling relevant to the formation of memories. But less understood is the spatial relationship between molecules and when they are active during this process.

To address this question, the researchers studied the neurons inAplysia californica, the California sea slug. Aplysia is a model organism that is quite powerful for this type of research because its neurons are 10 to 50 times larger than those of higher organisms, such as vertebrates, and it possesses a relatively small network of neurons—characteristics that readily allow for the examination of molecular signaling during memory formation. Moreover, its coding mechanism for memories is highly conserved in evolution, and thus is similar to that of mammals, making it an appropriate model for understanding how this process works in humans.

The scientists focused their study on two molecules, MAPK and PKA, which earlier research has shown to be involved in many forms of memory and synaptic plasticity—that is, changes in the brain that occur after neuronal interaction. But less understood was how and where these molecules interacted.

English: Figure 1: A possible mechanism of cAM...

English: Figure 1: A possible mechanism of cAMP/PKA inhibition of ERK activation (MAPK pathway). cAMP activation of PKA activates Rap1 via Src. Rap1 then phosphorylates Ras and inhibits signaling to Raf-1. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

To explore this, the researchers subjected the sea slugs to sensitization training, which induces increased behavioral reflex responsiveness following mild tail shock, or in this study, mild activation of the nerve form the tail. They then examined the subsequent molecular activity of both MAPK and PKA. Both molecules have been shown to be involved in the formation of memory for sensitization, but the nature of their interaction is less clear.

What they found was MAPK and PKA coordinate their activity both spatially and temporally in the formation of memories. Specifically, in the formation of intermediate-term (for example, hours) and long-term (for example, days) memories, both MAPK and PKA activity occur, with MAPK spurring PKA action. By contrast, for short-term memories (for example, less than 30 min), only PKA is active, with no involvement of MAPK.

Source: New York University

 

 

 

Read Full Post »

Clinical Trials Results for Endothelin System: Pathophysiological role in Chronic Heart Failure, Acute Coronary Syndromes and MI – Marker of Disease Severity or Genetic Determination?

Curator: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

 

UPDATED on 8/17/2018

Ambrisentan (U.S. trade name Letairis; E.U. trade name Volibris; India trade name Pulmonext by MSN labs) is a drug indicated for use in the treatment of pulmonary hypertension.

The peptide endothelin constricts muscles in blood vessels, increasing blood pressure. Ambrisentan, which relaxes those muscles, is an endothelin receptor antagonist, and is selective for the type A endothelin receptor (ETA).[1] Ambrisentan significantly improved exercise capacity (6-minute walk distance) compared with placebo in two double-blind, multicenter trials (ARIES-1 and ARIES-2).[2]

Ambrisentan was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicines Agency, and designated an orphan drug, for the treatment of pulmonary hypertension.[3][4][5][6][7]

Ambrisentan is an endothelin receptor antagonist used in the therapy of pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). Ambrisentan has been associated with a low rate of serum enzyme elevations during therapy, but has yet to be implicated in cases of clinically apparent acute liver injury.

Ambrisentan was first approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on Jun 15, 2007, then approved by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) on Apr 21, 2008 and approved by Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency of Japan (PMDA) on Jul 23, 2010. In 2000, Abbott, originator of ambrisentan, granted Myogen (acquired by Gilead in 2006) a license to the compound for the treatment of PAH. In 2006, GlaxoSmithKline obtained worldwide rights to market the compound for PAH worldwide, with the exception of the U.S. It is marketed as Letairis® by Gilead in US.

Ambrisentan is an endothelin receptor antagonist, and is selective for the type A endothelin receptor (ETA). It is indicated for the treatment of pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) (WHO Group 1) to improve exercise ability and delay clinical worsening. Studies establishing effectiveness included predominantly patients with WHO Functional Class II-III symptoms and etiologies of idiopathic or heritable PAH (64%) or PAH associated with connective tissue diseases (32%).

Letairis® is available as film-coated tablet for oral use, containing 5 or 10 mg of free Ambrisentan. The recommended starting dose is 5 mg once daily with or without food, and increase the dose to 10 mg once daily if 5 mg is tolerated.

SOURCE

Introduction to Endothelin

Endothelin (ET) derived from vascular endothelial cells (ECs), which consists of a 21 amino acid peptide, has a strong and persistent vasoconstrictive action (1). ET has three family peptides (ET-1, ET-2, and ET-3). As the distribution and properties of these peptides are different, each peptide is believed to play specific physiological roles. ET has two types of receptor: the ETA receptor with a high affinity for ET-1 and ET-2 is mainly located on muscle cells, whereas the ETB receptor with an affinity for all three peptides lies on endothelial, epithelial, endocrine, and nerve cells. Of the three ET isoforms,

ET-1 plays a much more important role in the regulation of vascular tone than the others and has a powerful effect on the cardiovascular system. Thus, the role of ET-1 and its receptors as the etiology or precipitating factors in various cardiovascular diseases (CVD) has been investigated (2, 3). In addition, numerous studies have reported effective treatment targeted at ET-1 in pulmonary hypertension, salt-sensitive hypertension, diabetes, and acute and chronic kidney diseases using ETconverting enzyme (ECE) inhibitors and ET-receptor antagonists (2, 4). Several animal models genetically lacking ET-1 and ET receptors have also been used as a tool for determining the physiological and pathophysiological roles of ET-1 and ET receptors in CVD (5 – 10).

Fig. 1.

Schematic illustration of ET-1 production and ET receptor–mediated actions on vascular endothelial cells and smooth muscle cells. G: G protein, ROS: reactive oxygen species, CaM: calmodulin, AA: arachidonic acid, PGI2: prostaglandin I2, AC: adenylate cyclase, sGC: soluble guanylate cyclase.

Figure Source: Journal of Pharmacological Sciences, 119, 302 – 313 (2012)

Introduction to the ET system

Endothelial Cells (ECs) are known as the main physiological source of vascular ET-1. Vascular smooth muscle cells (VSMCs), macrophages, leukocytes, cardiomyocytes, and fibroblasts are also capable of ET-1 production (11 – 13).

Several studies have indicated that various physical and chemical factors such as thrombin, angiotensin II, cytokines, hypoxia, and shear stress stimulate ET-1 gene expression in ECs by DNA binding of transcription factors including activator protein-1, GATA-2, Smad, nuclear factor-kappa B (NF-κB), and hypoxia inducible factor-1 (14 – 18). On the other hand, ET-1 is synthesized as an inactive 203-amino-acid precursor, preproET-1, which is proteolytically cleaved to yield a second inactive 39 (or 38)-amino-acid segment called ‘big’ ET-1.

The last part of the proteolytic process is mainly carried out by ECE (ECE-1 and ECE-2) and leads to the production of the bioactive form of 21-amino-acid peptide ET-1. As ET-1 release from ECs is constitutive, ET-1 biosynthesis and release appear to be mainly controlled via regulation of gene transcription and/or ECE activity.

On the other hand, although another ETB-receptor subtype (ETB2) located on VSMCs exerts vasoconstriction, it has become clear that ETB2 receptor–induced vasoconstriction is negligible under normal conditions but becomes more important in some kinds of diseases such as atherosclerosis and essential hypertension (24 – 26).

Has the considerable promise of ET-1 manipulation as a therapeutic option been realized? Its release, perhaps from a dysfunctional endothelium, could have a major role in the pathogenesis of a variety of cardiovascular diseases (reviewed by Haynes and Webb, 1992 andRubanyi and Polokoff, 1994). The discovery of endothelin-1 (ET-1) almost 20 years ago (Yanagisawa et al., 1988) was rapidly followed by prospects that pharmacological manipulation of the ET-1 system might provide powerful new treatments for many clinically significant cardiovascular conditions.
Fig. 2.
Proposed explanation for the interaction between the ET-1 system and norepinephrine (NE) release from cardiac sympathetic nerve endings in protracted myocardial ischemia. ATP is depleted and axoplasmic pH is reduced under ischemic conditions.This diminishes vesicular storage of NE, leading to a large increase in free axoplasmic NE. Compensatory activation of the neuronal Na+/H+ exchanger (NHE) by axoplasmic acidification causes influx of Na+ in exchange for H+. The resulting Na+ accumulation triggers a massive release of free axoplasmic NE via a reversal of the NE transporter (NET). Released NE acts on postsynaptic adrenoceptors on myocytes. Stimulation of the ETA receptor existing in sympathetic nerve endings by endogenously generated or exogenously applied ET-1 enhances neuronal NHE activity and results in increases in NE release. In contrast, exogenously applied big ET-1 is converted to ET-1 by ECE-1 expressed on the cell surface, and this ET-1 preferentially binds to the ETB receptor located on NOS-containing cells. As a result, increments in NO production cause inhibition of NE release. NCX: Na+/Ca2+ exchanger, VMAT: vesicular monoamine transporter.
Over 200 references in this paper trace the trail of experiments and clinical trials conducted by induction of therapeutic potential compounds that target the ET system. The role of ET-1 in cardiovascular disease and development of pharmacological tools that manipulate its activity, include agents that
The rapid identification of such compounds led remarkably quickly to the development of orally active antagonists (Clozel et al., 1994) and their administration to patients (Kiowski et al., 1995). Additional insight into ET physiology has been gained from studies with
most dramatically revealing the crucial role of ET-1 in development (Kurihara et al., 1994) and regulation of salt excretion (Ahn et al., 2004Bagnall et al., 2006Ge et al., 2006).

The recent licensing of

  • bosentan
  • sitaxsentan and
  • ambrisentan

for treatment of PAH is the most obvious demonstration of the clinical benefit derived from therapeutic manipulation of the ET-1 system in cardiovascular disease. This development of one of the first effective treatments for a condition with poor prognosis has obvious clinical significance and is likely to be extended to include PAH associated with connective tissue disorders.

Thus, ET antagonists are already realizing their potential in treatment of cardiovascular diseases, while early clinical data suggest these compounds may prove beneficial in other conditions, such as resistant hypertension, chronic kidney disease and SAH. In contrast, a potential role in conditions associated with vascular remodelling (restenosis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and transplant graft rejection) remains speculative and requires further investigation. It should also be noted that the clinical experience with ET antagonists in patients with cardiovascular disease remains relatively limited and the design of new trials could be improved using knowledge gained from previous studies, particularly with regard to drug dose and selectivity. These successes must obviously be balanced against the failure of ET antagonists to realize their potential in the treatment of heart failure, and the fact that teratogenic effects have restricted their possible use to treatment of conditions where childbearing potential is unlikely to be an issue.

Several reasons have been proposed to account for the disappointing outcomes in clinical trials as compared to investigations using animal models of disease, including

  • inadequate models or a bias in publication towards positive outcomes;
  • incorrect dose/timing of administration;
  • the need to show additional benefit over existing treatments; and
  • ET activation being a consequence rather than a cause of the condition.

Whatever the reason, this experience urges caution in extrapolating data obtained in vitro and in animals to humans. It is hoped that additional information will emerge from unpublished clinical trials that will shed light on previous failures (Kelland and Webb, 2006), and that the combination of powerful pharmacological and molecular approaches will help us to better understand the role of ETA and ETB receptors in health and disease so as to fully realize the clinical potential created by the identification of the powerful vasoconstrictor peptide, ET-1.

Further studies have addressed the role of ET receptor antagonism in erectile dysfunction and aneurysmal SAH, with mixed results. A double-blind pilot study of 53 patients with mild-to-moderate erectile dysfunction demonstrated no benefit of the ETA-selective antagonist BMS-193884 (100mg by mouth) over placebo (Kim et al., 2002).

The ETA-selective antagonist clazosentan was specifically designed for intravenous use in conditions characterized by cerebral vasoconstriction. Its potential in treating severe aneurysmal SAH has recently been addressed in a phase IIa pilot study for the Clazosentan to Overcome Neurological iSChaemia and Infarction OccUrring after Sub-arachnoid haemorrhage (CONSCIOUS-1) trial (Vajkoczy et al., 2005). This ‘pre-CONSCIOUS-1′ study documented a reduction in the frequency and severity of cerebral vasospasm following SAH.

There is considerable evidence that the potent vasoconstrictor endothelin-1 (ET-1) contributes to the pathogenesis of a variety of cardiovascular diseases. As such, pharmacological manipulation of the ET system might represent a promising therapeutic goal. Many clinical trials have assessed the potential of ET receptor antagonists in cardiovascular disease, the most positive of which have resulted in the licensing of the mixed ET receptor antagonist bosentan, and the selective ETA receptor antagonists, sitaxsentan and ambrisentan, for the treatment of pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH).
In contrast, despite encouraging data from in vitro and animal studies, outcomes in human heart failure have been disappointing, perhaps illustrating the risk of extrapolating preclinical work to man. Many further potential applications of these compounds, including
  • resistant hypertension,
  • chronic kidney disease,
  • connective tissue disease and
  • sub-arachnoid haemorrhage
are currently being investigated in the clinic. Furthermore, experience from previous studies should enable improved trial design and scope remains for development of improved compounds and alternative therapeutic strategies.

Read Full Post »

English: diagram based on Squire and Zola (199...

English: diagram based on Squire and Zola (1996) about decalarative and non-declarative memory (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Larry H Bernstein, MD, FCAP, Reporter

An interesting paper recently published.

I only show abstract and part of introduction.

Available online http://www.interesjournals.org/JMMS

Copyright © 2012 International Research Journals
Review

Martin Ezeani, Maxwell Omabe, J.C. Onyeanusi, I.N. Nnatuanya, Elom S.O.
*1Department of Neurosciences, University of Sussex UK
*2Molecular Pathology Division, Department of Medical Laboratory Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, Ebonyi State
University.
*3Department of Medical Biochemistry, Faculty of Basic Medical Sciences, Ebonyi State University.

ABSTRACT
Molecular studies of both declarative and non-declarative memory in Aplysia californica, lymaea stagnalis and hippocampal slices implicate experience-dependent changes of synaptic structure and strength as the fundamental basis of memory storage and maintenance. The essential outcome of these changes in synaptic structure and strength is our ability to remember what we are thought.
Remembrance is of critical importance. In disease conditions like Alzheimer’s there is lack of the ability to recreate the past. From this perspective, memory literally is the glue that binds our mental life, the scaffolding that holds our personal history and that makes it possible to change throughout life. What causes memory persistence after labile phase of memory is not yet fully known.

Elegant discoveries have explained why labile memory phase could persist over time into long term memory phase. Synaptic connections are not fixed but become modified by learning. These modifications in synaptic structure and strength persist and become the fundamental component of memory storage
after learning. Learning-induced changes in behavioural performance are the result of a fundamental physiological phenomenon.

The fundamental physiological phenomenon is neuronal plasticity. In the
process of neuronal plasticity, we review only the emerging aspect of the roles of prion like-protein, neuronal astrocyte and protein kinase Mzeta (PKMζ) in memory maintenance.
Keywords: Memory Maintenance, NMDARs and AMPARs, CPEB, Neuronal Lacate and Protein Kinase Mzeta.

INTRODUCTION
Memory defines the ability to retain, store and recall events. Memory maintenance is the process of keeping optimally these events. For instance, the beautiful nature of Sussex genomic center and its Medical School are
examples of explicit or declarative memory. Memories such as these are stored very well in the brain for recall of details later in life. Apart from these explicit or
declarative memories another type of memory is implicit or non-declarative memory. In this latter type of memory, motor skills and other type of tasks are done through performance with no conscious recall of past experience.
For instance riding a bicycle and driving a car.

Studies suggest that experience-dependent changes of synaptic strength, growth, structure and fundamental mechanism are ways of which these memories are encoded, processed and stored within the brain (Hawkins et al.,
2006; Bailey et al., 2004; and Beckinschtein et al., 2010). In these processes of initial memory formation and consolidation, memory basically exists in forms. These forms may include; short term memory (STM), intermediate memory (IM) and Long term memory (LTM) (Beckinschtein et al., 2010). There is also early and late LTM. Memories are maintained because, if all these memories are formed by similar molecular process, then what accounts for these types of basic memory?

Read Full Post »

NEW ENGLAND COMPUNDING CENTER: A FAMILY BUSINESS

Reporter: Alan F. Kaul, R.Ph., Pharm.D.,MS,MBA,FCCP

The New England Compounding Center (NECC), the pharmacy linked to the deadly outbreak of meningitis along with Ameridose LLC, Alaunus LLC, and Medical Sales Management are four of 17 Massachusetts companies launched by the Conigiiaro and Cadden families.

The failure to clearly differentiate the operational and legal capabilities between the two companies: an inadequately  regulated compounding pharmacy licensed to compound prescriptions for individual patients and an FDA licensed and inspected manufacturing facility has certainly contributed to the current unacceptable situation and outcome for the public. Compounding pharmacies  have a place in the drug distribution chain.  According to the International Academy of Compounding Pharmacies. there are about 2,700 sterile compounding pharmacies most of which started business subsequent to the year 2000.  The Pharmacy Compounding Accreditation Board (PCAB) is an organization that inspects and certifies that its members meet or exceed USP Chapter 797 standards. There are about 167 compounding pharmacies that meet this accreditation standard. The PCAB can help to validate practice standards and accredit compounding pharmacies. State and possibly Federal regulatory compliance and inspection should also be a part of the solution. As always, the question of paying for the additional oversight must be addressed. Perhaps, users fees paid by compounding pharmacies may be part of the solution.

Barry Cadden and Lisa Conigliaro were classmates and 1990 graduates of the University of Rhode Island College of Pharmacy.  Mr. Cadden’s father was a local pharmacist and Ms. Conigliaro came from an entrepreneurial family.   Within a few years they married. Lisa’s older brother Greg was a civil engineer who began building his fortune in the recycling business. In 1996, Barry Cadden and Greg Conigliaro founded NECC specializing in compounding products not readily available for patients such as specially flavored versions of syrups and liquids for children.  Due to shortages of drugs in the marketplace of common drugs like morphine, compounding pharmacies started to grow and became a viable option to meet patients’ medication needs..

Greg Conigliaro’s older brother Douglas was an anesthesiologist and pain management physician practicing in Florida who returned to join the family businesses and lead Medical Sales Management, Inc., the marketing company for New England Compounding Center and later Ameridose LLC, an FDA approved pharmaceutical manufacturer.  Ameridose manufactured prefilled syringes and intravenous piggyback containers for individual patients. Because they were a licensed manufacturer unlike NECC, they could manufacture and ship medications in bulk without obtaining individual patient prescriptions. Around 2009, Greg Conigliaro and Barry Cadden started anther company Alaunus Pharmaceuticals to distribute generic drugs.

Medical Sales Management promoted both NECC and Ameridose at trade shows, in hospitals, and to physicians. A former sales person for the organization indicated that he saw little difference between how products were sold for the two companies.

Too rapid growth of both companies and pressure to meet orders may have contributed to the current issues. NECC grew to 50 employees and Ameridose from 50 to 400 over the past 3-4 yours. Some employees spoke little English increasing the likelihood of critical errors. Both companies have been previously cited by the FDA for violations.  OSHA has also confirmed a whistle-blower suit against Ameridose.

http://www.iacprx.org/displaycommon.cfm?an=1&subarticlenbr=10

http://www.pcab.org/about

http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2012/10/17/merging-families-fueled-drug-businesses-center-meningitis-scare/hGKaZuhoGGjJm1YRqa4x4K/story.html

Merging of families fueled businesses linked to meningitis outbreak

By  Todd Wallackand  Patricia Wen   |   G L O B E S T AF F               O C T O B E R  1 8 ,  2 0 1 2

AP

A sign in front of the Waverly Business Center lists the New England Compounding Center and other business owned by the Cadden and Conigliaro families. The compounding center is linked to the fatal meningitis outbreak.

KINGSTON, R.I. — The Massachusetts specialty pharmacy at the center of the deadly national outbreak of meningitis might not have existed but for a relationship that started about three decades ago on the bucolic campus of the University of Rhode Island. Barry Cadden and Lisa Conigliaro were classmates in the school’s College of Pharmacy, two of 92 students who graduated in the class of 1990. Cadden was following a family tradition: His father was a local pharmacist and an alumnus of this state university. Conigliaro came from a family with a strong entrepreneurial bent. They would fall in love and, within a few years of graduating, marry.

It would be more than a wedding of two licensed pharmacists. A special alliance would evolve between Cadden and his wife’s older brother, Gregory Conigliaro, a go­getter with an eye for niche businesses. Together, they started New England Compounding Center in Framingham, as well as Ameridose, and turned them into some of the fastest­growing drug­compounding businesses in the country. With Cadden’s scientific know­how and Gregory Conigliaro’s enterprising spirit, their fortunes grew. They launched a half­dozen related corporations and brought in relatives, including Lisa, as employees and corporate officers. Together with their wives, each built handsome homes in Massachusetts, bought vacation homes, and gave generously to their favorite charities or political causes.The creative energy of the two families seemed unstoppable, until last month, when public health authorities linked an outbreak of fungal meningitis around the country to one of their injectable steroids. Now New England Compounding is blamed for potentially exposing thousands of patients to contaminated products. So far, 19 people have died, and more than 200 people have become ill.

Cadden, 45, and Conigliaro, 46, and their extended families have declined comment since the outbreak began and have remained mainly out of public view. Many of their colleagues and friends also are not speaking. A spokesman for their businesses also declined comment Wednesday. But public records and interviews with former employees and neighbors reveal how they created the formidable family enterprise that is now threatening to crumble.

Early on, Conigliaro, a civil engineer who served in the Massachusetts Air National Guard, displayed talent for high­risk business ventures. His first company, though, had nothing to do with pharmaceuticals: He made his initial fortune with trash. Just a few years after graduating from Tufts University in 1987, he founded a recycling business in an old industrial building on Waverly Street in Framingham after realizing that recycling could soon become a booming business. Conigliaro started in 1990 with just a used U­Haul and credit cards, with which he racked up $42,000 in charges. But the company, Conigliaro Industries, quickly started making money by finding new uses for trash nobody wanted.  It converted detergent bottles into recycling bins, molded Styrofoam lunch trays into flower pots, and turned plastic computer casings into pothole filler. By 1994, Conigliaro was successful enough to be spotlighted in The Boston Globe as an up­and­ coming entrepreneur. Conigliaro brought many family members into his recycling business, including his mother and his father, an inventor who codeveloped a machine that shreds leaves. The business also includes an aunt.

He soon branched into real estate as well, starting GDC Holdings Inc. and GDC Properties Management LLC, which owns the large Framingham complex where the recycling business was launched.  It was not long before he turned his sights to the pharmaceutical business, an area his sister Lisa and brother­in­law, Cadden, knew something about.

Since getting married at St. Mary’s Catholic Church in Holliston, Mass., the couple had been busy raising three children in a renovated antique barn house in Cumberland,  R.I., and working as pharmacists, neighbors recalled. They saw them as hard­working and devoted parents. Lisa began showing some entrepreneurial spirit of her own, filing for a patent for a product called Comfy Cuff, a cushioned sleeve for a nursing mother to wear to provide extra comfort for her baby’s head.

In 1998, Conigliaro and Cadden founded New England Compounding in the same Framingham building Conigliaro already used for his recycling factory and real estate businesses. Like the other ventures, New England Compounding was a family affair. Gregory’s sister­in­law Carla Conigliaro, a nurse, was initially listed as the company’s president. Cadden’s wife was also on the board, listed as Lisa Cadden Conigliaro.  A former employee of New England Compounding, Carrie­Lee Touhey, recalled Gregory Conigliaro as the consummate businessman who provided the financial expertise, while Cadden was the sunny pharmacist who always had “a smile on his face.” Conigliaro normally wore a shirt and tie, while Cadden wore blue hospital scrubs, she said.  New England Compounding was not your typical neighborhood pharmacy. Instead, it ­ focused on compounding, mixing the ingredients of medications in new ways for individual patients. For instance, a compounding pharmacist might create a liquid version of a pill for children or substitute an ingredient for patients with an allergy.

Richard Sawyer, who sold his Rhode Island summer home to the Caddens a few years ago, recalled Barry Cadden talking about being a pharmacist and initially specializing in cancer drugs, then broadening into other areas.  In fact, nationwide, the market for compounding drugs started growing because of shortages of some common drugs, such as morphine and certain antibiotic injections; increasing use of medications for pets; and greater diagnoses of childhood allergies. “Compounders become the only option,” said David A. Ball, president of Ball Consulting Group in Newton.

Cadden and Conigliaro soon brought in a new family member to help market their drugs and services. Conigliaro’s older brother Douglas, a doctor who specialized in anesthesiology and pain management, had been disciplined by the Florida medical board in 2002 after allegedly puncturing a woman’s spinal cord during surgery while inserting a catheter for pain medication. The woman was paralyzed, allegedly because of the procedure. Douglas Conigliaro was ordered to pay a $10,000 fine, but did not admit guilt.  The doctor led a new company in the Framingham building, now called Medical Sales Management Inc., to provide advertising and marketing services. As the sales arm for New England Compounding, Medical Sales promoted the compounding business at trade shows across the country, and its sales force aggressively worked the phones, cold­calling new customers and reaching out to existing ones. It also helped manage the company’s computer operations.

The compounding business apparently proved so successful that the families decided to expand their empire.  In 2006, Conigliaro and Cadden launched Ameridose, which was initially located in the same Framingham complex. Former workers said they found a new opportunity, selling a much­needed service to hospitals: prefilling syringes and breaking down vats of liquid medications into smaller intravenous bags for individual treatments.  The new company either prepared the medications or bought them elsewhere. And unlike New England Compounding, Ameridose had a manufacturing license from the US Food and Drug Administration, allowing it to ship medications in bulk without obtaining individual prescriptions.

Historically, hospitals did much of that work themselves. But new federal regulations required hospitals to go through more elaborate steps to handle sterile preparations, making it more costly and complicated. Moreover, health care providers have been under growing pressure to reduce costs by outsourcing work wherever they can, creating a huge opportunity for the new firm.  “There is a definite need,” said Ernest Gates, president of Gates Healthcare Associates, a Middleton­based consulting company. “These standards are very difficult [for hospitals] to meet, because they lack the physical space and resources.”

Two years after it started, Ameridose added a second location, leasing a 76,000­ square­foot building in Westborough. It later leased two neighboring buildings on the same block, its growth driven in part by its sales force at Medical Sales Management, who flew around the country visiting hospitals and doctors.  Ameridose officially changed its main address from Framingham to its new base in Westborough last year.  Between 2008 and this year, Ameridose went from 50 workers to close to 400, according to federal contracting recordsNew England Compounding also grew rapidly, with its head count more than doubling to about 50 employees over the last three years.  Meanwhile, Cadden and Gregory Conigliaro started yet another company, Alaunus Pharmaceutical in Framingham, to distribute generic drugs three years ago.

Both Cadden and Gregory Conigliaro seemed to thrive financially. In 2010, Conigliaro bought a sprawling $3.5 million home in Southborough with six bedrooms, nine bathrooms, and more than 11,000 square feet. He also bought a vacation home in Barnstable in 2008. Meanwhile, the Caddens built a $1.8 million home in Wrentham in 2005.

About three years ago, they also purchased and renovated a beach home in North Kingston, R.I., a place with stunning views of Wickford Cove that was featured in Rhode Island Monthly magazine in August.

Conigliaro, the more high­profile of the pair, became politically active.  Last month, he and his wife hosted a fund­raiser for US Senator Scott Brown at their home in Southborough. Instead of political donations, Cadden’s giving focused on education, including his alma matter in Rhode Island and his children’s parochial school, which he gave at least $5,000, according to the schools’ websites.

Some of the firms’ former workers say they saw a downside to the rapid growth. Ameridose warned prospective hires that it needed “high­energy” workers who could regularly work weekends or evenings.  “The environment is very fast pace,” the company said in recent help wanted ads. Several former workers said the company suffered from high turnover and pressure to meet orders. Two former co­workers said some employees spoke little English, increasing the possibility of critical errors. A pharmacist who worked at Ameridose said she quit in 2009 after the company decided to try using quality control workers, rather than highly trained pharmacists, to make sure the right drugs were present before filling intravenous bags.  “The problem is the rush,” said the pharmacist. “You can only go so fast.”

Ronnie Leger, who worked in packaging at Ameridose, said he was also concerned about the hectic pace and safety. For instance, when sterile syringes and drugs fell to the ground, he said workers sometimes picked them up, quickly wiped them off, and shipped them anyway.  Leger said he was fired last year after he complained about the safety practices, including workers being exposed to noxious odors one day. He said he filed complaints with the FDA and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. A spokesman with OSHA confirmed it has an active whistleblower investigation into Ameridose, but would not provide details.

The companies occasionally asked people in sales to help pack shipments when they got backed up with orders, according to a former Medical Sales Management sales representative.

The Globe interviewed a half­dozen former employees of the companies, many of whom asked not to be named because of legal agreements with the firms or fear it would harm their careers. One said the companies cared about safety.  Regulators also found problems. An FDA inspection of Ameridose in 2008 found ­ numerous issues, including that the company did not fully test all the lots of its drugs and shipped some lots before receiving the results of sterility tests. Ameridose recalled a painkiller shortly afterward because it was overly potent. And a group  purchasing company, Novation LLC of Irving, Texas, told customers it planned to sever its ties with Ameridose at the end of this month because of concerns about the company’s quality controls.  Novation agreed to extend the contract after Ameridose sued Novation for slander and other issues.

Meanwhile, New England Compounding had issues of its own. A patient in upstate New York died of meningitis after receiving a tainted anti­inflammatory shot made by the company in 2002, according to a 2004 lawsuit filed in Monroe County in upstate New York that was later settled.  And state and federal regulators launched an investigation after receiving complaints about the firm, leading to a consent order from the state and an FDA warning letter in  2006 detailing a number of issues, including concerns about potential microbial contamination from splitting and repackaging the injectable colorectal cancer drug Avastin.

Finally, the safety concerns exploded into the headlines this month after a growing number of people were diagnosed with fungal meningitis traced to a possibly contaminated steroid shot typically used to treat back pain. Federal safety inspectors are examining the possibility that other drugs from the company may also have been  New England Compounding agreed to suspend its operations two weeks ago. Cadden has also temporarily agreed to stop practicing pharmacy in Massachusetts, though his ­ license remains in good standing in neighboring Rhode Island. In addition, Ameridose and Alaunus agreed to temporarily suspend their operations for two weeks while federal and state inspectors review the operations.

Still, the Caddens and Conigliaros have not given up on restarting Ameridose soon. The company’s public relations firm has gone to great pains to insist that Ameridose and New England Compounding are separate companies with distinct management teams and facilities, even though they were both owned by the Conigliaros and Caddens.

But former employees say the companies were intertwined, even holding combined Christmas parties. The companies had adjoining booths at the National Pharmacy Purchasing Association conference in August in Las Vegas and used the same sister company, Medical Sales Management, for sales and marketing. They use the same public relations team. New England Compounding’s privacy policy on its website ­ appeared to be almost an exact replica of Ameridose’s. It was even titled “Ameridose privacy policy.’’

Until recently, both companies had space in the same complex on Waverly Road in Framingham. And even today, they have adjoining mailboxes at the property. Cadden, the president and main pharmacist at New England Compounding, was also listed as comanager of Ameridose in the company’s annual report with the secretary of state in Feburary.  “I don’t think there was literally any difference,” said the former Medical Sales Management worker who handled sales for Ameridose, while a colleague at the next desk took orders for New England Compounding.  Now federal and state investigators are probing the ties between the two firms.

The problems appear to be taking a toll on the families, and those who know them ­insist the crisis must devastate them emotionally and financially.  One neighbor said the Caddens have since retreated from an offer to buy a new waterfront vacation home in Rhode Island, valued at about $1.3 million and only a few

Liz Kowalczyk of the Globe  staff contributed to this report. Patricia Wen can be reached  at  wen@globe.com.ToddWallack can be reached  at twallack@globe.com.

© 2012 THE NEW YORK TIMES COMPANY

Key Words: New England Compounding Center, fungal meningitis, barry Csdden, Lisa Cadden, Greg Conigliaro, Douglas Conigliaro, Alaunus, Ameridose

Read Full Post »

Reporter: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

VIEW VIDEO

Former FDA Chief on Modernizing Drug and Device Approvals

Introduction

John C. Reed, MD, PhD: Hello, and welcome to Medscape One-on-One. I’m Dr. John Reed, Professor and CEO of Sanford-Burnham Medical Research Institute. Joining me today at the Celebration of Science Conference at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) is Andrew C. von Eschenbach, President of Samaritan Health Initiatives, former Commissioner of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and former Director of the National Cancer Institute (NCI). Welcome.

Andrew C. von Eschenbach, MD: Great to be with you.

The Collaboration of Government, Industry, and Academia

Dr. Reed: At this conference, you spoke about the interaction of government, industry, and academic centers. The relationship among these 3 entities is often challenging, but also crucial to the advancement of science. Can you give us a couple of examples how these partnerships are working well, and also some ideas of how we can improve collaboration among these groups?

Dr. von Eschenbach: I think we both appreciate that caring for patients, solving their problems, and curing their diseases is a team sport. We all have a part and a role to play in this. Government, academia, industry — we need to come together to figure out how to create these comprehensive systematic solutions to problems.

It starts with discovery. Academic centers and researchers like you are really revealing the mysteries of the underlying mechanisms of these diseases, and are making it possible for industry to start creating and developing solutions and interventions that can target those mechanisms and alter the outcome of those diseases — whether it’s eliminating suffering and death due to cancer or solving the problem of Alzheimer disease.

Government has to play a critical role in catalyzing and fostering that collaboration. A great example of where I saw this occurred was when I was at the NCI. When I looked at the government’s investment following the National Cancer Act in 1971, which enabled the NCI to create cancer centers, I could see 65 cancer centers all over this country. But what I also saw was that around these centers, there were these clusters of state-of-the-art care. There were these clusters of emerging biotechnology and the pharmaceutical industry coming together and creating an ecosystem that would be able to go from discovery and development to delivery.

Another great example is the state of Georgia, which did not have a cancer center at that time. But the state took money from the tobacco settlement, put it into a private endowment, and went about the business of creating the Winship Cancer Institute at Emory University in Atlanta. That attracted a united effort, including government funding from our cancer nanotechnology initiative. It brought in other academic institutions, such as Georgia Tech, and even private philanthropy from such institutions as Home Depot, for example.

We can make this work. We can bring the parts and pieces together as a team to use the brilliance of the science that you, Dr. Reed, have been doing, and others here at NIH and in academic institutions all around the world have been doing, and recognize that science is the means. The end is that we solve people’s problems, and we do it together.

Translating Life-Science Advancements Into Disease Cures and Prevention

Dr. Reed: That’s a great example of the catalytic role that government funding can play in economic development as well as advancing healthcare. You gave the example of Georgia. We’ve seen the same thing happen in the state of Florida, where tobacco settlement monies were used to create a seed investment. That spawned additional development of hospitals, and a government investment that turned a couple hundred jobs into tens of thousands of jobs for the state.

Let me change subjects. You were previously involved in laboratory and clinical research. Can you talk about how advancements in the field of life sciences are paving the way for possible cures and preventions for such diseases as prostate cancer? You used to be an urologist, and prostate cancer is a disease you worked on a lot. There are also neurodegenerative diseases, such as Alzheimer’s disease, which we’re all worried about. What are you excited about in these areas?

Dr. von Eschenbach: If I get a chance to talk to students and they ask what they should do in life, I tell them this is the most exciting time to go into medicine. And we are in the midst of the most profound transformation to ever occur in history in medicine going all the way back to Hippocrates. Throughout the history of medicine, physicians such as myself have been practicing a model based on our observations of the manifestations of disease.

I feel a lump in a woman’s breast. I see a shadow on a chest x-ray. I’m seeing the manifestations of an underlying disease, but it tells me nothing about what to do about it. All of our therapies and all of the things that we do about those observations have been empiric. Today we’re going from observing manifestations to actually understanding the mechanisms of the disease. We’re beginning to recognize the genes, the molecules, and the cellular processes that are responsible for and driving those disease processes. Once we have that knowledge of an underlying mechanism, it intuitively leads us to what the right solution is, to intervene in that mechanism and alter the outcome of that process.

Cancer, for example, is a disease process. It begins with our susceptibility, and that process ends with unfortunate suffering and death. But there are all these steps in between, and you have contributed personally to understanding some of those fundamental mechanisms.

Now physicians can be strategic. We can intervene in that process in a strategic way. Call it “personalized medicine” if you will. Get the right intervention for the right reason to the right patient at the right time, and you can prevent that process from happening. You can detect disease very early. You can eliminate it, or you can modulate and change its behavior and its outcome. You can alter the slope of the curve and allow patients to live the rest of their life never threatened by it.

This is the new frontier for medicine and for physicians. We will enter into this frontier with tools that we never had before. We can visualize biology with new imaging. We now have new therapies that are becoming available to us that will alter and change disease in radical ways. No longer is it just for cancer, surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation. The future for physicians is the most exciting, and yet it is a future that we have to grasp.

Dr. Reed: As a former director of the NCI, do you see a day where cancer patients will be treated not on the basis of whether their cancer arose in the lung or the colon, or the prostate, but on the basis of the underlying genetics of the cancer? By matching the mutations to the medicine — is that how you think it will look in the future?

Dr. von Eschenbach: Absolutely. We’ve been immersed in categorizing diseases on the basis of what we could observe, what we could see. We call something “breast cancer” because we feel a lump in a woman’s breast, or we call something “lung cancer” because it’s in the lung.

But now, as we’re looking at these underlying mechanisms, guess what? We’re finding out that some subsets of lung cancer look exactly like another kind of cancer. And therefore, from that point of view, they have the same treatment. You can use a drug for chronic myelogenous leukemia and it works exceedingly well in gastrointestinal stroma, tumors of the stomach, as well. Even more important, we understand a mechanism for cancer based on angiogenesis in the abnormal growth of blood vessels. We develop a drug for that to retard or slow down the cancer, and it turns out it’s one of the most effective drugs for macular degeneration of the eye.

For physicians and for those of us who are practicing medicine, we’re going to see disease through a different prism. When we see it through that different prism, we’re going to be able to see new ways of conquering many diseases. Cancer is just the lead here. But we’re going to be seeing the same kinds of dramatic changes and breakthroughs in neurocognitive diseases, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease along the way.

We’re also seeing it disseminate very rapidly. It’s no longer centers and then community practice. We’re seeing the opportunity now with new technologies even outside of medicine. We now have information technologies that will help us see a full continuum for every patient. It will mean absolutely state-of-the-art care by every physician, regardless of where you’re located.

Speeding Drug and Device Approvals

Dr. Reed: For these exciting new therapies to come to reality, they have to be approved by the FDA. You are a former commission of the FDA. Some clinicians are frustrated with the time it takes to get new medical devices and drugs approved by the FDA. You’ve been more sympathetic to the agency and the lack of resources it has to help it through a mighty tough job.

What do you think we should be doing — either the American people or the federal government — to better support the FDA and its efforts to get much needed treatments to patients more quickly?

Dr. von Eschenbach: The importance of the FDA can’t be overemphasized. It’s absolutely critical to this entire process of progress that I’ve been talking about. Let’s go back to our model of discovery, development, and delivery enterprise in medicine. It’s no longer linear — from the bench to the bedside. It’s actually circular.

What we’re seeing in terms of physicians delivering care is that there are tools that are now available to help us better understand the human biology of disease. When we treat disease or intervene in a human being, through functional imaging or whatever, it is actually a discovery platform making this process circular.

The success of the process of discovery, development, and delivery is going to be based on speed. How quickly can we do that? How quickly can we keep cycling that revolution of knowledge and intervention? At the hub of that wheel is the FDA. It can be the brake, or it can be the accelerator. It clearly is critical to how rapidly we’re going to be able to move from your brilliant discovery in the laboratory to the point where we’ve actually made a difference in a patient’s life.

Regulation has to be modernized. It’s a matter of making sure that the agency has the capacity and the capability. Funding resources are critically important. But what’s more important is we need a new way of doing business. We can no longer use a regulatory process and framework that served us well in the 20th century, but is woefully inadequate for this new reality in the 21st century.

For physicians, especially physicians out in the community, a simple piece of that equation is that we will play a critically important role in the perspective of clinical trials. The way we approve drugs now in phase 1, phase 2, and phase 3 of clinical trials is not commensurate with the mechanistic view of disease. So we’re going to change the FDA. And in doing so, we’re going to fulfill the promise for people.

Dr. Reed: We’re excited to hear that. At the Celebration of Science Conference, we heard a representative from the FDA, Janet Woodcock, talking about that very issue of having more adaptable clinical trial designs. That is an opportunity for us to increase the speed of learning and turnover with real-time feedback from imaging and biomarkers, which allows us to see whether the medicine is working.

Dr. von Eschenbach: The FDA has to practice regulation in the way that physicians practice medicine. Every patient, first of all, wants personalized medicine. They all want to know what’s right and what’s best for me. Doctor, what should I do? We now have the tools to become much more precise about that.

But every patient, also in a way, becomes their own experiment. We apply a therapy, and a rational physician makes a very sophisticated educated guess but never knows whether it’s actually going to work in that one patient. We monitor, and when we observe outcomes, we change. We alter the treatment until we get to that desired outcome.

Why don’t we approve drugs that way? Why don’t we use adaptive trial designs so that we learn as we go, and do that routinely rather than using this stepwise fashion that we’ve been locked into? We have to be open to change.

Promising New Methods of Treating Disease

Dr. Reed: You were once a practicing urologist, and you went on to become director of the NCI. In recent years, you’ve been active in a number of organizations dedicated to researching and developing new methods of treating a variety of diseases. Tell us one of the things that you’re most looking forward to.

Dr. von Eschenbach: Cancer had the opportunity to be at the forefront and the vanguard of this radical transformation. In 1970, cancer was a disease that was devastating us with regard to the human toll of suffering and death, and the economic consequences. At that time, the science of cancer was just beginning to become apparent in a way that we could begin to understand the cancer cell and the living normal cell at its very fundamental genetic and molecular level. That created this enormous cascade of progress.

What we’re seeing now is that the lessons learned and the progress made in cancer can now be disseminated to all the other diseases. For example, Alzheimer disease and neurocognitive and neurologic disorders are probably today where cancer was in 1970. Those diseases have a huge, devastating impact on human life and will bankrupt us in terms of the overall cost of healthcare and the cost of caring for patients affected by these diseases. But science is now emerging to help us better understand these diseases.

It’s a privilege to have lived the life of a cancer physician and researcher, and now I can transpose that experience to ask how we can do that for all diseases. That’s my passion today; it’s not just about cancer. It’s no longer cancer-centric, but it is cancer-led. Everyone will profit from the tremendous progress that researchers are making in the science that we will translate into cures for people.

Dr. Reed: Dr. von Eschenbach, thank you for joining us today. For Medscape One-on-One, I’m John Reed.

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/771952?src=ptalk

Read Full Post »

Curator and Reporter: Aviral Vatsa PhD, MBBS

Based on: A review by Wink et al., 2011

This is the first part of a two part post

Nitric oxide (NO), reactive nitrogen species (RNS) and reactive oxygen species (ROS) perform dual roles as immunotoxins and immunomodulators. An incoming immune signal initiates NO and ROS production both for tackling the pathogens and modulating the downstream immune response via complex signaling pathways. The complexity of these interactions is a reflection of involvement of redox chemistry in biological setting (fig. 1)

Fig 1. Image credit: (Wink et al., 2011)

Previous studies have highlighted the role of NO in immunity. It was shown that macrophages released a substance that had antitumor and antipathogen activity and required arginine for its production (Hibbs et al., 1987, 1988). Hibbs and coworkers further strengthened the connection between immunity and NO by demonstrating that IL2 mediated immune activation increased NO levels in patients and promoted tumor eradication in mice (Hibbs et al., 1992; Yim et al., 1995).

In 1980s a number of authors showed the direct evidence that macrophages made nitrite, nitrates and nitrosamines. It was also shown that NO generated by macrophages could kill leukemia cells (Stuehr and Nathan, 1989). Collectively these studies along with others demonstrated the important role NO plays in immunity and lay the path for further research in understanding the role of redox molecules in immunity.

NO is produced by different forms of nitric oxide synthase (NOS) enzymes such as eNOS (endothelial), iNOS (inducible) and nNOS (neuronal). The constitutive forms of eNOS generally produce NO in short bursts and in calcium dependent manner. The inducible form produces NO for longer durations and is calcium independent. In immunity, iNOS plays a vital role. NO production by iNOS can occur over a wide range of concentrations from as little as nM to as much as µM. This wide range of NO concentrations provide iNOS with a unique flexibility to be functionally effective in various conditions and micro-environements and thus provide different temporal and concentration profiles of NO, that can be highly efficient in dealing with immune challenges.

Redox reactions in immune responses

NO/RNS and ROS are two categories of molecules that bring about immune regulation and ‘killing’ of pathogens. These molecules can perform independently or in combination with each other. NO reacts directly with transition metals in heme or cobalamine, with non-heme iron, or with reactive radicals (Wink and Mitchell, 1998). The last reactivity also imparts it a powerful antioxidant capability. NO can thus act directly as a powerful antioxidant and prevent injury initiated by ROS (Wink et al., 1999). On the other hand, NO does not react directly with thiols or other nucleophiles but requires activation with superoxide to generate RNS. The RNS species then cause nitrosative and oxidative stress (Wink and Mitchell, 1998).

The variety of functions achieved by NO can be understood if one looks at certain chemical concepts. NO and NO2 are lipophilic and thus can migrate through cells, thus widening potential target profiles. ONOO-, a RNS, reacts rapidly with CO2 that shortens its half life to <10 ms. The anionic form and short half life limits its mobility across membranes. When NO levels are higher than superoxide levels, the CO2-OONOintermediate is converted to NO2 and N2O3 and changes the redox profile from an oxidative to a nitrosative microenvironment. The interaction of NO and ROS determines the bioavailability of NO and proximity of RNS generation to superoxide source, thus defining a reaction profile. The ROS also consumes NO to generate NO2 and N2O3 as well as nitrite in certain locations. The combination of these reactions in different micro-environments provides a vast repertoire of reaction profiles for NO/RNS and ROS entities.

The Phagosome ‘cauldron’

The phagosome provides an ‘isolated’ environment for the cell to carry out foreign body ‘destruction’. ROS, NO and RNS interact to bring about redox reactions. The concentration of NO in a phagosome can depend on the kind of NOS in the vicinity and its activity and other localised cellular factors. NO and is metabolites such as nitrites and nitrates along with ROS combine forces to kill pathogens in the acidic environment of the phagosome as depicted in the figure 2 below.

Fig 2. The NO chemistry of the phagosome. (image credit: (Wink et al., 2011)

This diagram depicts the different nitrogen oxide and ROS chemistry that can occur within the phagosome to fight pathogens. The presence of NOX2 in the phagosomes serves two purposes: one is to focus the nitrite accumulation through scavenging mechanisms, and the second provides peroxide as a source of ROS or FA generation. The nitrite (NO2−) formed in the acidic environment provides nitrosative stress with NO/NO2/N2O3. The combined acidic nature and the ability to form multiple RNS and ROS within the acidic environment of the phagosome provide the immune response with multiple chemical options with which it can combat bacteria.

Bacteria

There are various ways in which NO combines forces with other molecules to bring about bacterial killing. Here are few examples

E.coli: It appears to be resistant to individual action of NO/RNS and H2O2 /ROS. However, when combined together, H2O2 plus NO mediate a dramatic, three-log increase in cytotoxicity, as opposed to 50% killing by NO alone or H2O2 alone. This indicates that these bacteria are highly susceptible to their synergistic action.

Staphylococcus: The combined presence of NO and peroxide in staphylococcal infections imparts protective effect. However, when these bacteria are first exposed to peroxide and then to NO there is increased toxicity. Hence a sequential exposure to superoxide/ROS and then NO is a potent tool in eradicating staphylococcal bacteria.

Mycobacterium tuberculosis: These bacterium are sensitive to NO and RNS, but in this case, NO2 is the toxic species. A phagosome microenvironment consisting of ROS combined with acidic nitrite generates NO2/N2O3/NO, which is essential for pathogen eradication by the alveolar macrophage. Overall, NO has a dual function; it participates directly in killing an organism, and/or it disarms a pathway used by that organism to elude other immune responses.

Parasites

Many human parasites have demonstrated the initiation of the immune response via the induction of iNOS, that then leads to expulsion of the parasite. The parasites include Plasmodia(malaria), Leishmania(leishmaniasis), and Toxoplasma(toxoplasmosis). Severe cases of malaria have been related with increased production of NO. High levels of NO production are however protective in these cases as NO was shown to kill the parasites (Rockett et al., 1991; Gyan et al., 1994). Leishmania is an intracellualr parasite that resides in the mamalian macrophages. NO upregulation via iNOS induction is the primary pathway involved in containing its infestation. A critical aspect of NO metabolism is that NOHA inhibits AG activity, thereby limiting the growth of parasites and bacteria including Leishmania, Trypanosoma, Schistosoma, HelicobacterMycobacterium, and Salmonella, and is distinct from the effects of RNS. Toxoplasma gondii is also an intracellular parasite that elicits NO mediated response. INOS knockout mice have shown more severe inflammatory lesions in the CNS that their wild type counterparts, in response to toxoplasma exposure. This indicates the CNS preventative role of iNOS in toxoplasmosis (Silva et al., 2009).

Virus

Viral replication can be checked by increased production of NO by induction of iNOS (HIV-1, coxsackievirus, influenza A and B, rhino virus, CMV, vaccinia virus, ectromelia virus, human herpesvirus-1, and human parainfluenza virus type 3) (Xu et al., 2006). NO can reduce viral load, reduce latency and reduce viral replication. One of the main mechanisms as to how NO participates in viral eradication involves the nitrosation of critical cysteines within key proteins required for viral infection, transcription, and maturation stages. For example, viral proteases or even the host caspases that contain cysteines in their active site are involved in the maturation of the virus. The nitrosative stress environment produced by iNOS may serve to protect against some viruses by inhibiting viral infectivity, replication, and maturation.

To be continued in part 2 …

Bibliography

Gyan, B., Troye-Blomberg, M., Perlmann, P., Björkman, A., 1994. Human monocytes cultured with and without interferon-gamma inhibit Plasmodium falciparum parasite growth in vitro via secretion of reactive nitrogen intermediates. Parasite Immunol. 16, 371–3

Hibbs, J.B., Jr, Taintor, R.R., Vavrin, Z., 1987. Macrophage cytotoxicity: role for L-arginine deiminase and imino nitrogen oxidation to nitrite. Science 235, 473–476.

Hibbs, J.B., Jr, Taintor, R.R., Vavrin, Z., Rachlin, E.M., 1988. Nitric oxide: a cytotoxic activated macrophage effector molecule. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 157, 87–94.

Hibbs, J.B., Jr, Westenfelder, C., Taintor, R., Vavrin, Z., Kablitz, C., Baranowski, R.L., Ward, J.H., Menlove, R.L., McMurry, M.P., Kushner, J.P., 1992. Evidence for cytokine-inducible nitric oxide synthesis from L-arginine in patients receiving interleu

Rockett, K.A., Awburn, M.M., Cowden, W.B., Clark, I.A., 1991. Killing of Plasmodium falciparum in vitro by nitric oxide derivatives. Infect Immun 59, 3280–3283.

Stuehr, D.J., Nathan, C.F., 1989. Nitric oxide. A macrophage product responsible for cytostasis and respiratory inhibition in tumor target cells. J. Exp. Med. 169, 1543–1555.

Wink, D.A., Hines, H.B., Cheng, R.Y.S., Switzer, C.H., Flores-Santana, W., Vitek, M.P., Ridnour, L.A., Colton, C.A., 2011. Nitric oxide and redox mechanisms in the immune response. J Leukoc Biol 89, 873–891.

Wink, D.A., Mitchell, J.B., 1998. Chemical biology of nitric oxide: Insights into regulatory, cytotoxic, and cytoprotective mechanisms of nitric oxide. Free Radic. Biol. Med. 25, 434–456.

Wink, D.A., Vodovotz, Y., Grisham, M.B., DeGraff, W., Cook, J.C., Pacelli, R., Krishna, M., Mitchell, J.B., 1999. Antioxidant effects of nitric oxide. Meth. Enzymol. 301, 413–424.

Xu, W., Zheng, S., Dweik, R.A., Erzurum, S.C., 2006. Role of epithelial nitric oxide in airway viral infection. Free Radic. Biol. Med. 41, 19–28.

Yim, C.Y., McGregor, J.R., Kwon, O.D., Bastian, N.R., Rees, M., Mori, M., Hibbs, J.B., Jr, Samlowski, W.E., 1995. Nitric oxide synthesis contributes to IL-2-induced antitumor responses against intraperitoneal Meth A tumor. J. Immunol. 155, 4382–4390.

Further reading on NO:

Nitric Oxide in bone metabolism July 16, 2012

Author: Aviral Vatsa PhD, MBBS

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2012/07/16/nitric-oxide-in-bone-metabolism/?goback=%2Egde_4346921_member_134751669

Nitric Oxide production in Systemic sclerosis July 25, 2012

Curator: Aviral Vatsa, PhD, MBBS

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2012/07/25/nitric-oxide-production-in-systemic-sclerosis/?goback=%2Egde_4346921_member_138370383

Nitric Oxide Signalling Pathways August 22, 2012 by

Curator/ Author: Aviral Vatsa, PhD, MBBS

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2012/08/22/nitric-oxide-signalling-pathways/?goback=%2Egde_4346921_member_151245569

Nitric Oxide: a short historic perspective August 5, 2012

Author/Curator: Aviral Vatsa PhD, MBBS

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2012/08/05/nitric-oxide-a-short-historic-perspective-7/

Nitric Oxide: Chemistry and function August 10, 2012

Curator/Author: Aviral Vatsa PhD, MBBS

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2012/08/10/nitric-oxide-chemistry-and-function/?goback=%2Egde_4346921_member_145137865

Nitric Oxide and Platelet Aggregation August 16, 2012 by

Author: Dr. Venkat S. Karra, Ph.D.

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2012/08/16/no-and-platelet-aggregation/?goback=%2Egde_4346921_member_147475405

The rationale and use of inhaled NO in Pulmonary Artery Hypertension and Right Sided Heart Failure August 20, 2012

Author: Larry Bernstein, MD

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2012/08/20/the-rationale-and-use-of-inhaled-no-in-pulmonary-artery-hypertension-and-right-sided-heart-failure/

Nitric Oxide: The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 1998 Robert F. Furchgott, Louis J. Ignarro, Ferid Murad August 16, 2012

Reporter: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2012/08/16/nitric-oxide-the-nobel-prize-in-physiology-or-medicine-1998-robert-f-furchgott-louis-j-ignarro-ferid-murad/

Coronary Artery Disease – Medical Devices Solutions: From First-In-Man Stent Implantation, via Medical Ethical Dilemmas to Drug Eluting Stents August 13, 2012

Author: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2012/08/13/coronary-artery-disease-medical-devices-solutions-from-first-in-man-stent-implantation-via-medical-ethical-dilemmas-to-drug-eluting-stents/

Nano-particles as Synthetic Platelets to Stop Internal Bleeding Resulting from Trauma

August 22, 2012

Reported by: Dr. V. S. Karra, Ph.D.

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2012/08/22/nano-particles-as-synthetic-platelets-to-stop-internal-bleeding-resulting-from-trauma/

Cardiovascular Disease (CVD) and the Role of agent alternatives in endothelial Nitric Oxide Synthase (eNOS) Activation and Nitric Oxide Production July 19, 2012

Curator and Research Study Originator: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2012/07/19/cardiovascular-disease-cvd-and-the-role-of-agent-alternatives-in-endothelial-nitric-oxide-synthase-enos-activation-and-nitric-oxide-production/

Macrovascular Disease – Therapeutic Potential of cEPCs: Reduction Methods for CV Risk

July 2, 2012

An Investigation of the Potential of circulating Endothelial Progenitor Cells (cEPCs) as a Therapeutic Target for Pharmacological Therapy Design for Cardiovascular Risk Reduction: A New Multimarker Biomarker Discovery

Curator: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2012/07/02/macrovascular-disease-therapeutic-potential-of-cepcs-reduction-methods-for-cv-risk/

Bone remodelling in a nutshell June 22, 2012

Author: Aviral Vatsa, Ph.D., MBBS

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2012/06/22/bone-remodelling-in-a-nutshell/

Targeted delivery of therapeutics to bone and connective tissues: current status and challenges- Part, September  

Author: Aviral Vatsa, PhD, September 23, 2012

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2012/09/23/targeted-delivery-of-therapeutics-to-bone-and-connective-tissues-current-status-and-challenges-part-i/

Calcium dependent NOS induction by sex hormones: Estrogen

Curator: S. Saha, PhD, October 3, 2012

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2012/10/03/calcium-dependent-nos-induction-by-sex-hormones/

Nitric Oxide and Platelet Aggregation,

Author V. Karra, PhD, August 16, 2012

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2012/08/16/no-and-platelet-aggregation/

Bystolic’s generic Nebivolol – positive effect on circulating Endothelial Progenitor Cells endogenous augmentation

Curator: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, July 16, 2012

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/?s=Nebivolol

Endothelin Receptors in Cardiovascular Diseases: The Role of eNOS Stimulation

Author: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, 10/4/2012

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2012/10/04/endothelin-receptors-in-cardiovascular-diseases-the-role-of-enos-stimulation/

Inhibition of ET-1, ETA and ETA-ETB, Induction of NO production, stimulation of eNOS and Treatment Regime with PPAR-gamma agonists (TZD): cEPCs Endogenous Augmentation for Cardiovascular Risk Reduction – A Bibliography

Curator: Aviva Lev-Ari, 10/4/2012.

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2012/10/04/inhibition-of-et-1-eta-and-eta-etb-induction-of-no-production-and-stimulation-of-enos-and-treatment-regime-with-ppar-gamma-agonists-tzd-cepcs-endogenous-augmentation-for-cardiovascular-risk-reduc/

Nitric Oxide Nutritional remedies for hypertension and atherosclerosis. It’s 12 am: do you know where your electrons are?

Author and Reporter: Meg Baker, 10/7/2012.

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2012/10/07/no-nutritional-remedies-for-hypertension-and-atherosclerosis-its-12-am-do-you-know-where-your-electrons-are/

 

Read Full Post »

 

Reporter: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

Public release date: 18-Oct-2012
Contact: Lauren Woods
law2014@med.cornell.edu
212-821-0560
New York- Presbyterian Hospital/Weill Cornell Medical Center/Weill Cornell Medical College

 

New study shows reprogrammed amniotic fluid cells could treat vascular diseases

Weill Cornell Researchers discover a new effective approach for converting amniotic fluid-derived cells into endothelial cells to repair damaged blood vessels in heart disease, stroke, diabetes and trauma

NEW YORK (Oct. 18, 2012) — A research team at Weill Cornell Medical College has discovered a way to utilize diagnostic prenatal amniocentesis cells, reprogramming them into abundant and stable endothelial cells capable of regenerating damaged blood vessels and repairing injured organs.

Their study, published online today in Cell, paints a picture of a future therapy where amniotic fluid collected from thousands of amniocentesis procedures yearly, during mid-pregnancy to examine fetal chromosomes, would be collected with the permission of women undergoing the test. These cells, which are not embryonic, would then be treated with a trio of genes that reprogram them quickly into billions of endothelial cells — the cells that line the entire circulatory system. The new endothelial cells could be frozen and banked the same way blood is, and patients in need of blood vessel repair would be able to receive the cells through a simple injection.

If proven in future studies, this novel therapy could dramatically improve treatment for disorders linked to a damaged vascular system, including heart disease, stroke, lung diseases such as emphysema, diabetes, and trauma, says the study’s senior investigator, Dr. Shahin Rafii, the Arthur B. Belfer Professor in Genetic Medicine at Weill Cornell Medical College and co-director of its Ansary Stem Cell Institute.

“Currently, there is no curative treatment available for patients with vascular diseases, and the common denominator to all these disorders is dysfunction of blood vessels, specifically endothelial cells that are the building blocks of the vessels,” says Dr. Rafii, who is also a Howard Hughes Medical Institute investigator.

But these cells do much more than just provide the plumbing to move blood. Dr. Rafii has recently led a series of transformative studies that show endothelial cells in blood vessels produce growth factors that actively participate in organ maintenance, repair and regeneration. So while damaged vessels cannot repair the organs they nurture with blood, he says an infusion of new endothelial cells could.

“Replacement of the dysfunctional endothelial cells with transplantation of normal, properly engineered cultured endothelial cells could potentially provide for a novel therapy for many patients,” says study co-author Dr. Sina Rabbany, adjunct associate professor of bioengineering in genetic medicine at Weill Cornell. “In order to engineer tissues with clinically relevant dimensions, endothelial cells can be assembled into porous three-dimensional scaffolds that, once introduced into a patient’s injured organ, could form true blood vessels.”

Dr. Rafii says that this study will potentially create a new field of translational vascular medicine. He estimates that as few as four years are needed for the preclinical work to seek FDA approval to start human clinical trials to advance the potential of reprogrammed endothelial cells for treatment of vascular disorders.

As part of their study, the research team proved, in mice, that endothelial cells reprogrammed from human amniotic cells could engraft into an injured liver to form stable, normal and functional blood vessels. “We have shown that these engrafted endothelial cells have the capacity to produce unique growth factors to promote regeneration of the liver cells,” says the study’s lead investigator, Dr. Michael Ginsberg, a senior postdoctoral associate in Dr. Rafii’s laboratory.

“The novelty of this technique is that, from 100,000 amniotic cells — a small amount — we grew more than six billion new authentic endothelial cells within a matter of weeks,” Dr. Ginsberg says. “And when we injected these cells into mice, a substantial amount of them engrafted into regenerating vessels. It was remarkable to see that these cells went right to work building new blood vessels in the liver as well as producing the right growth factors that could potentially regenerate and repair injured organs.”

The Goldilocks of Cellular Reprogramming

To date, there have been many failed attempts to clinically produce endothelial cells that can be used to treat patients. Isolation of endothelial cells from adult organs so they can be grown in the laboratory is not efficient, according to Dr. Daylon James, study co-author and an assistant professor of stem cell biology in reproductive medicine at Weill Cornell Medical College. Attempts to produce the cells from the body’s master pluripotent stem cells have also not worked out. Experiments have shown that prototypical pluripotent stem cells, such as embryonic stem cells, which have the potential to become any cell in the body, produce endothelial cells but often grow poorly, and if not fully differentiated could potentially cause cancer. “Coaxing adult cells to revert to a stem-like state so they can then be pushed to form endothelial cells is, at this point, not clinically feasible, and ongoing studies in my lab are focused on achieving this goal,” says Dr.

James, who is also assistant professor of stem cell biology in obstetrics and gynecology and genetic medicine at Weill Cornell. Therefore, Dr. Rafii’s team searched for a new source of cells that they could turn into a vast supply of stable endothelial cells. They probed human amniotic fluid-derived cells, which some studies had suggested have the potential to become differentiated cell types, if stimulated in the right way — which no one had yet identified.

In their first experiments with these cells three years ago, Dr. Ginsberg used cells taken from an amniocentesis given at 16 weeks of gestation. Researchers found that amniotic cells are the “Goldilocks” of cellular programming. “They are not as plastic and unstable as endothelial cells derived from embryonic cells or as stubborn as those produced from reprogramming differentiated adult cells,” Dr. Ginsberg says. Instead, he says amniotic cells provide conditions that are just right — the so-called “Goldilocks Principle” — for producing endothelial cells.

But in order to make that discovery, the researchers had to know how to reprogram the amniotic cells. To this end, they looked for the genes that embryonic stem cells use to differentiate into endothelial cells. Dr. Rafii’s group identified three genes that are expressed during vascular development, all of which are members of the E-twenty six (ETS) family of transcription factors known to regulate cellular differentiation, especially blood vessel formation.

Next, they used gene transfer technology to insert the three genes into mature amniotic cells, and then shut one of them off after a brief and critical period of activity by using a special molecular inhibitor. Remarkably, 20 percent of the amniotic cells could efficiently be reprogrammed into endothelial cells. “This is quite an achievement since current strategies to reprogram adult cells result less than one percent of the time in successful reprogramming into endothelial cells,” says Dr. Rafii.

“These transcription factors do not cause cancer, and the endothelial cells reprogrammed from human amniotic cells are not tumorigenic and could in the future be infused into patients with a large margin of safety,” Dr. Ginsberg says.

The findings suggest that other transcription factors could be used to reprogram the amniotic cells into many other tissue-specific cells, such as those that make up muscles, the brain, pancreatic islet cells and other parts of the body.

“While our work focused primarily on the reprogramming of amniotic cells into endothelial cells, we surmise that through the use of other transcription factors and growth conditions, our group and others will be able to reprogram mouse and human amniotic cells virtually into every organ cell type, such as hepatocytes in the liver, cardiomyocytes in heart muscle, neurons in the brain and even chondrocytes in cartilage, just to name a few,” Dr. Ginsberg says.

“Obviously, the implications of these findings would be enormous in the field of translational regenerative medicine,” emphasizes study co-author Dr. Zev Rosenwaks, the Revlon Distinguished Professor of Reproductive Medicine in Obstetrics and Gynecology at Weill Cornell Medical College and director and physician-in-chief of the Ronald O. Perelman and Claudia Cohen Center for Reproductive Medicine at NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital/Weill Cornell Medical Center. “The greatest obstacle to overcome in the pursuit to regenerate specific tissues and organs is the requirement for substantial levels of cells — in the billions — that are stable, safe and durable. Our approach will bring us closer to this milestone.”

“Most importantly, these endothelial cells could be reprogrammed from amniotic cells from genetically diverse individuals,” says co-author Dr. Venkat R. Pulijaal, director of the Cytogenetic Laboratory, associate professor of clinical pathology and laboratory medicine at Weill Cornell. What endothelial cells a patient receives would depend on their human leukocyte antigen (HLA) type, which is a set of self-recognition molecules that enable doctors to match a patient with potential donors of blood or tissue.

“Selecting the proper immunologically matched endothelial cells for each patient would be akin to blood typing. There are only so many varieties, which are well represented across the amniotic fluid cells that could be obtained, frozen and banked from wide variety of ethnic groups around the world,” Dr. Rafii says.

A patent has been filed on the discovery.

 

Other study co-authors from Weill Cornell Medical College include: Dr. Bi-Sen Ding, Dr. Daniel Nolan, Dr. Fuqiang Geng, Dr. Jason M. Butler, Dr. William Schachterle, Dr. Susan Mathew, Dr. Stephen T. Chasen, Dr. Jenny Xiang, Dr. Koji Shido and Dr. Olivier Elemento.

Dr. Rafii’s research is funded by the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, the Ansary Stem Cell Institute at Weill Cornell Medical College, the Empire State Stem Cell Board and New York State Department of Health grants, and the Qatar National Priorities Research Foundation.

Weill Cornell Medical College

Weill Cornell Medical College, Cornell University’s medical school located in New York City, is committed to excellence in research, teaching, patient care and the advancement of the art and science of medicine, locally, nationally and globally. Physicians and scientists of Weill Cornell Medical College are engaged in cutting-edge research from bench to bedside, aimed at unlocking mysteries of the human body in health and sickness and toward developing new treatments and prevention strategies. In its commitment to global health and education, Weill Cornell has a strong presence in places such as Qatar, Tanzania, Haiti, Brazil, Austria and Turkey. Through the historic Weill Cornell Medical College in Qatar, the Medical College is the first in the U.S. to offer its M.D. degree overseas. Weill Cornell is the birthplace of many medical advances — including the development of the Pap test for cervical cancer, the synthesis of penicillin, the first successful embryo-biopsy pregnancy and birth in the U.S., the first clinical trial of gene therapy for Parkinson’s disease, and most recently, the world’s first successful use of deep brain stimulation to treat a minimally conscious brain-injured patient. Weill Cornell Medical College is affiliated with NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital, where its faculty provides comprehensive patient care at NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital/Weill Cornell Medical Center. The Medical College is also affiliated with the Methodist Hospital in Houston. For more information, visit weill.cornell.edu.

Source:

 

Read Full Post »

Reporter: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

Reform, Regulation, and Pharmaceuticals — The Kefauver–Harris Amendments at 50

Jeremy A. Greene, M.D., Ph.D., and Scott H. Podolsky, M.D.

N Engl J Med 2012; 367:1481-1483 October 18, 2012DOI: 10.1056/NEJMp1210007

 

Fifty years ago this month, President John F. Kennedy signed into law the Kefauver–Harris Amendments to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (see photoPresident John F. Kennedy Signing the 1962 Kefauver–Harris Amendments.). With the stroke of a pen, a threadbare Food and Drug Administration (FDA) was given the authority to require proof of efficacy (rather than just safety) before approving a new drug — a move that laid the groundwork for the phased system of clinical trials that has since served as the infrastructure for the production of knowledge about therapeutics in this country. We often remember the Kefauver–Harris Amendments for the thalidomide scandal that drove their passage in 1962. But there is much we have collectively forgotten about Senator Estes Kefauver (D-TN) and his hearings on administered prices in the drug industry. Many parts of the bill left on Congress’s cutting-room floor in 1962 — and left out of our memories since — have not disappeared but continue to confront those who would ensure access to innovative, safe, efficacious, and affordable therapeutics.

By the time Kefauver began his investigation into the pharmaceutical industry in the late 1950s, the escalating expense of lifesaving prescription drugs was illustrating that the free-market approach to medical innovation had costs as well as benefits. From the development of insulin in the 1920s, through the “wonder drug” revolutions of sulfa drugs, steroids, antibiotics, tranquilizers, antipsychotics, and cardiovascular drugs in the ensuing decades, the American pharmaceutical industry had come to play a dominant role in the public understanding of medical science, the economics of patient care, and the rising politics of consumerism. For Kefauver, the “captivity” of the prescription-drug consumer in the face of price gouging and dubious claims of efficacy under-scored the need for the state to ensure that innovative industries worked to the benefit of the average American.

After 17 months of hearings, in which pharmaceutical executives were openly berated for profiteering and doctors were portrayed as dupes of pharmaceutical companies’ marketing departments, Kefauver presented his bill, S.1552. Perhaps its least controversial components were its calls for ensuring that the FDA review claims of efficacy before drug approval, monitor pharmaceutical advertising, and ensure that all drugs had readable generic names. More radically, Kefauver proposed completely overhauling the relationship between patents and therapeutic innovation. First, he proposed a compulsory licensing provision so that all important new drugs would generate competitive markets after 3 years. Second, and more controversial still, Kefauver wanted to eliminate “me-too drugs” and “molecular modifications” by insisting that a new drug be granted a patent only if it produced a therapeutic effect “significantly greater than that of the drug before modification.”1 Proving that a drug worked, according to Kefauver, was not enough: he wanted proof that a drug worked better than its predecessors. In contemporary terms, he wanted to know its comparative effectiveness.

Kefauver’s bill met strong resistance as it made its way through the Subcommittee on Antitrust and Monopoly.2 The American Medical Association firmly opposed the regulation of efficacy by a government agency, arguing that “the only possible final determination as to the efficacy and ultimate use of a drug is the extensive clinical use of that drug by large numbers of the medical profession over a long period of time.”3 The editors of the Journal, on the other hand, supported the efficacy provision and the expansion of generic drug names but opposed the patent provisions (considering them an “arbitrary discrimination” against the pharmaceutical industry) and the comparative effectiveness provisions (considering “proof of superiority” necessary only if superiority was actually being “claimed by the manufacturer”).4 The pharmaceutical industry amplified such concerns about comparative effectiveness, arguing that any a priori determination of which medicines were “me-too” and which were true innovations would be arbitrary. Efficacy was hard enough to prove, they suggested; proving comparative efficacy would be “completely impracticable.”3

Kefauver initially stuck to his guns on issues of compulsory licensing and patents, but his persistence ultimately cost him control of his own bill. In June of 1962, officials from the Kennedy administration and the pharmaceutical industry presented the subcommittee with an alternate bill — with no regulatory language about patents included. Kefauver cried foul, the Kennedy administration eased off its support, and S.1552 seemed to all observers to be a dead letter. It was only by chance timing that the summer of 1962 also produced a highly visible tragedy (thalidomide), a hero (Frances Kelsey), and enough ensuing public outcry to persuade Kefauver and Kennedy to embrace the gutted bill.

The amendments granted the FDA the power to demand proof of efficacy — in the form of “adequate and well-controlled investigations” — before approving a new drug for the U.S. market. They also led to a retrospective review of all drugs approved between 1938 and 1962 (the Drug Efficacy Study Implementation program), which by the early 1970s had categorized approximately 600 medicines as “ineffective” and forced their removal from the market. These market-making and unmaking powers were also tied to a new structure of knowledge generation: the orderly sequence of phase 1, phase 2, and phase 3 trials now seen as a natural part of any pharmaceutical life cycle.

However, a well-circulated grievance pointed to one unanticipated consequence of the amendments: the new burden of proof appeared to make the process of drug development both more expensive and much longer, leading to increasing drug prices and a “drug lag” in which innovative compounds reached markets in Europe long before they reached the U.S. market. Industry agitation surrounding the “drug lag” finally led to modification of the drug patenting system in the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984 — through further extension of drug patents. Indirectly, then, Kefauver’s amendments ultimately affected both pharmaceutical pricing and patenting — in a manner diametrically opposed to the one he intended.

Another unintended consequence of the amendments was that the new structures of proof changed not only the behavior of the pharmaceutical industry but also the conceptual categories used by biomedical researchers around the world.5 Pharmaceutical research came to be overwhelmingly organized around the placebo-controlled, randomized, controlled trial. Although this system has greatly helped researchers gauge the efficacy of an individual drug, it has also rendered data on comparative efficacy much more difficult — and much more expensive — to find or produce.

Renewed attention to comparative effectiveness research in the 21st century illustrates the consequences of sidelining Kefauver’s initial demand for comparative data for evaluating the promotion of novel therapeutics. By 2000, pharmaceutical expenditures had become one of the fastest-growing parts of the budget of many U.S. states and third-party insurers. But the kind of knowledge required for entry into the U.S. drug market offers consumers and payers little information relevant to choosing between subtly different “me-too” drugs within the same therapeutic class — whose therapeutic effect may or may not be the same. Only in the past decade, through the action of the Reforming States Group, the Drug Effectiveness Review Project, and most recently funding of comparative effectiveness research through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the Affordable Care Act, and now the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute, have we begun to catch up on the vital project of comparing therapeutics so that American consumers and their physicians can make meaningful treatment decisions — the project that motivated Kefauver’s original investigations a half century ago.

Disclosure forms provided by the authors are available with the full text of this article at NEJM.org.

SOURCE INFORMATION

From the Departments of Medicine and the History of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore (J.A.G.); and the Department of Global Health and Social Medicine, Harvard Medical School, and the Center for the History of Medicine, Francis Countway Library of Medicine — both in Boston (S.H.P.).

REFERENCES

  1. 1

    Congressional Record. Washington, DC: United States Senate, 1961;107:5639.

  2. 2

    Tobbell D. Pills, power, and policy: the struggle for drug reform in Cold War America and its consequences. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2012.

  3. 3

    Drug Industry Antitrust Act. 87th Congress, Session 1, 1961.

  4. 4

    Ethical drugs — reflections on the inquiry. N Engl J Med 1961;265:1015-1016
    Full Text | Web of Science

  5. 5

    Carpenter D. Reputation and power: organizational image and pharmaceutical regulation at the FDA. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2010.

 

Read Full Post »

Reporter and Curator: Dr. Sudipta Saha, Ph.D.

With the completion of the mapping of the human genome, we now have access to all the DNA sequence information responsible for human biology. Together with microarray technology, we are ushering in a new era in reproductive medicine—the era of Reproductive Genomics.

Whole genome microarray analysis of the testis and ovary suggests that a substantial part of the genome is expressed in reproductive tissues and many of them are likely to be important for normal reproduction. Yet adequate expression and functional information is only available for less than 10% of them. Hence, one of the important questions in reproductive studies now is ‘how do we associate function with the genes expressed in reproductive tissues?’ The establishment of mutations in animal models such as the mouse represents one powerful approach to address this question.

Animal models have played critical roles in improving our understanding of mechanisms and pathogenesis of diseases. Mouse knockout models have often provided highly needed functional validation of genes implicated in human diseases. The rapid advance of human genetics in areas such as

  • single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) and
  • haplotyping technology

now allows the identification of disease-associated single nucleotide variation at a much faster pace. Functional examination of those candidate genes is needed to determine if those genes or variants are indeed involved in reproductive disease. Generating mutations in murine homologs of candidate genes represents a direct way to determine their roles, and mouse models will further allow the dissection of genetic pathways underlying the disease condition and provide models to test possible drug treatments. Thus, how to generate mouse models efficiently becomes a priority issue in the Genomics era of Reproductive Medicine.

It is known that generating a mouse knockout is no small endeavor, even for a mouse research lab, often requiring specialized expertise and experience in

  • molecular biology,
  • embryonic stem (ES) biology and
  • mouse husbandry.

Therefore, it could be intimidating for people who have little experience in mouse research. Fortunately, there are some technological developments in the mouse community that make the task of generating mouse mutations less intimidating to people unfamiliar with mouse genetics. One of these developments is the effort led by the International Gene Trap Consortium (IGTC) to generate a library of mouse mutant ES cells covering most of the genes in the mouse genome. This method saves researchers the tedious and sometimes challenging tasks of making knockout vectors and screening ES cell colonies and directly provides researchers an ES cell clone carrying the mutation of the gene of interest.

Because gene trapping involves the use of different mechanisms in generating mutations from the traditional knockout method, and its efficacy in targeting reproductive genes which often are expressed in later development or adult has not been fully established, it is necessary to examine the benefits and limitations of this technology, especially in the perspective of reproductive medicine so that reproductive researchers and physicians who are interested in mouse models could become familiar with this technology.

With this in mind, we provide an overview of the gene trapping mutagenesis method and its possible application to Reproductive Medicine. We evaluate gene trapping as a method in terms of its efficiency in comparison with traditional knockout methods and use an in-house software program to screen the IGTC database for existing cell lines with possible mutations in genes expressed in various reproductive tissues. Among over seven thousand genes highly expressed in human ovaries, almost half of them have existing gene trap lines.

Additionally, from 900 human seminal fluid proteins, 43% of them have gene trap hits in their mouse homologs. Our analysis suggests gene trapping is an effective mutagenesis method for identifying the genetic basis of reproductive diseases and many mutations for important reproductive genes are already present in the database. Given the rapid growth of the number of gene trap lines, the continuing evolution of gene trap vectors, and its easy accessibility to scientific communities, gene trapping could provide a fast and efficient way of generating mouse mutation(s) for any one particular gene of interest or multiple genes involved in a pathway at the same time. Consequently, we recommend gene trapping to be considered in the planning of mouse modeling of human reproductive disease and the IGTC be the first stop for people interested in searching for and generating mouse mutations of genes of interest.

Gene trapping is a high-throughput approach of generating mutations in murine ES cells through vectors that simultaneously disrupt and report the expression of the endogenous gene at the point of insertion. First-generation vectors trapped genes that were actively transcribed in undifferentiated ES cells. Depending on the areas in which they integrate, these vectors can be roughly divided into two classes:

  • promoter trap vectors and
  • gene trap vectors.

Promoter trap vectors contain promoterless reporter regions, usually bgeo (a fusion of neomycin phosphotransferase and b-galactosidase), and thus have to be integrated into an exon of a transcriptionally active locus in order for the cell to be selected for neomycin resistance or by LacZ staining. Gene trap vectors demonstrate more utility by their added ability to integrate into an intron. These vectors contain a splice acceptor (SA) site positioned at the 50-end of the reporter gene, allowing the vector to be spliced to the endogenous gene to form a fusion transcript. Later improvements include an internal ribosomal re-entry site (IRES) between the SA site and the reporter gene sequence; as a result, the reporter gene can be translated even when it is not fused to the trapped gene. Second-generation vectors have sought to trap genes that are transcriptionally silent in ES cells. Although these vectors still contain a promoterless reporter gene with a 50 SA sequence, the antibiotic resistance gene is under the control of a constitutive promoter. Consequently, antibiotic selection is independent from the expression of the trapped gene, whereas the expression of the reporter gene is still regulated by the endogenous promoter.

A disadvantage of these vectors is that all integration events give rise to resistant ES cells regardless of whether or not the vector has integrated into a gene locus. To increase trapping efficiency, a new class of polyA gene trap vectors was developed where the polyadenylation signal of the neo gene was replaced by a splice donor sequence, thereby requiring the vector to trap an endogenous polyA signal for expression of neo. These vectors were recently shown to have a bias toward insertion near the 30-end of a gene due to nonsense-mediated mRNA decay of the fusion transcript. An improved polyA trap vector, UPATrap, was developed to overcome this bias using an IRES sequence placed downstream of a marker containing a termination codon. Gene trap vectors are usually introduced by retroviral infection or electroporation of plasmid DNA, with each approach having its own advantages and disadvantages.

While relatively difficult to manipulate, retroviral gene traps display a preference toward insertion at the 50-end of genes, which is advantageous for generating null alleles. Moreover, the multiplicity of infection with retroviruses can be tightly controlled to a single trap event or simultaneous disruption in many genes. However, there may be a possible bias integration toward certain ‘hotspots’ of the genome.

In contrast, plasmid-based gene trap vectors integrate more randomly into the genome. This can, however, potentially result in a functional partial protein and a hypomorphic phenotype. Additionally, plasmid vectors usually result in multiple integrations in 20–50% of cell lines. The most common approach for identifying the gene trap integration site is to use 50 or 30 rapid amplification of cDNA ends (RACE) to amplify the fusion transcript. The sequence provides a DNA tag for the identification of the disrupted gene and can be used for genotypic screens. Mutagenesis screens can also be performed on the basis of gene function or expression, and data from an expression sequence combined with sequence tag information can elucidate novel expression patterns of known genes or to suggest gene function.

Gene trapping has proven to be an efficacious technique in mutagenesis compared with other methods such as

  • spontaneous mutations,
  • fortuitous transgene integration and
  • N-ethyl-N-nitrosurea (ENU) mutagenesis

We have been able to use our SpiderGene program to identify genes in reproductive tissues that are present in the IGTC database and moreover to narrow down those with restricted expression in the testis and ovary. Gene trapping possesses an enormous potential for researchers in the reproductive field seeking to create mouse models for a gene mutation. The improving versatility of gene trap vectors has enabled groups to trap an increasing number of genes in various organisms, including Arabidopsis, Zebra fish and Drosophila.

The gene trap effort has perhaps been the most extensive in the murine genome, with over 57000 cell lines representing more than 40% of the known genome. These large-scale screens will likely achieve the trapping of the entire mouse genome in the coming years, but the power of gene trapping will only be fully demonstrated by its usefulness in investigator-driven focused functional analyses.

In our laboratory, future work will focus on generating knockout mice in order to investigate gene function and to identify gene products that might have therapeutic value in reproduction. As screening efforts continue, gene trapping will continue to be a valuable tool in mouse genomics and will undoubtedly yield new discoveries in Reproductive Physiology and Pathology.

Source References:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=Gene%20trap%20mutagenesis%3A%20a%20functional%20genomics%20approach%20towards%20reproductive%20research

 

Read Full Post »

Reporter: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

Screen Shot 2021-07-19 at 7.01.57 PM
Word Cloud By Danielle Smolyar
GASTRIC CANCER

Methylation Subtypes and Large-Scale Epigenetic Alterations in Gastric Cancer

  1. Hermioni Zouridis1,*,,
  2. Niantao Deng1,2,*,
  3. Tatiana Ivanova1,
  4. Yansong Zhu1,
  5. Bernice Wong3,
  6. Dan Huang4,
  7. Yong Hui Wu1,5,
  8. Yingting Wu6,7,
  9. Iain Beehuat Tan2,8,
  10. Natalia Liem9,
  11. Veena Gopalakrishnan1,
  12. Qin Luo1,
  13. Jeanie Wu5,
  14. Minghui Lee5,
  15. Wei Peng Yong9,10,
  16. Liang Kee Goh1,
  17. Bin Tean Teh1,3,4,
  18. Steve Rozen6,11 and
  19. Patrick Tan1,5,9,12,

+Author Affiliations


  1. 1Cancer and Stem Cell Biology Program, Duke-NUS Graduate Medical School, 8 College Road, Singapore 169857, Singapore.

  2. 2NUS Graduate School for Integrative Sciences and Engineering, National University of Singapore, 5 Lower Kent Ridge Road, Singapore 119074, Singapore.

  3. 3National Cancer Centre Singapore–Van Andel Research Institute Translational Research Laboratory, Department of Medical Sciences, National Cancer Centre, 11 Hospital Drive, Singapore 169610, Singapore.

  4. 4Laboratory of Cancer Genetics, Van Andel Research Institute, Grand Rapids, MI 49503, USA.

  5. 5Cellular and Molecular Research, National Cancer Centre, Singapore 169610, Singapore.

  6. 6Neuroscience and Behavioural Disorders, Duke-NUS Graduate Medical School, Singapore 169857, Singapore.

  7. 7Singapore-MIT Alliance, National University of Singapore, Singapore 119074, Singapore.

  8. 8Division of Medical Oncology, National Cancer Centre, Singapore 169610, Singapore.

  9. 9Cancer Science Institute of Singapore, National University of Singapore, Singapore 119074, Singapore.

  10. 10National Cancer Institute Singapore, National University Hospital, Singapore 119228, Singapore.

  11. 11Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC 27710, USA.

  12. 12Genome Institute of Singapore, 60 Biopolis Street, Genome 02-01, Singapore 138672, Singapore.

+Author Notes

  • * These authors contributed equally to this work.

  • † Present address: LabConnect, LLC, 2910 First Avenue South, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134, USA.

  1. ‡To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: gmstanp@duke-nus.edu.sg

ABSTRACT

Epigenetic alterations are fundamental hallmarks of cancer genomes. We surveyed the landscape of DNA methylation alterations in gastric cancer by analyzing genome-wide CG dinucleotide (CpG) methylation profiles of 240 gastric cancers (203 tumors and 37 cell lines) and 94 matched normal gastric tissues. Cancer-specific epigenetic alterations were observed in 44% of CpGs, comprising both tumor hyper- and hypomethylation. Twenty-five percent of the methylation alterations were significantly associated with changes in tumor gene expression. Whereas most methylation-expression correlations were negative, several positively correlated methylation-expression interactions were also observed, associated with CpG sites exhibiting atypical transcription start site distances and gene body localization. Methylation clustering of the tumors revealed a CpG island methylator phenotype (CIMP) subgroup associated with widespread hypermethylation, young patient age, and adverse patient outcome in a disease stage–independent manner. CIMP cell lines displayed sensitivity to 5-aza-2′-deoxycytidine, a clinically approved demethylating drug. We also identified long-range regions of epigenetic silencing (LRESs) in CIMP tumors. Combined analysis of the methylation, gene expression, and drug treatment data suggests that certain LRESs may silence specific genes within the region, rather than all genes. Finally, we discovered regions of long-range tumor hypomethylation, associated with increased chromosomal instability. Our results provide insights into the epigenetic impact of environmental and biological agents on gastric epithelial cells, which may contribute to cancer.

Sci Transl Med 17 October 2012: 
Vol. 4, Issue 156, p. 156ra140 
Sci. Transl. Med. DOI: 10.1126/scitranslmed.3004504
 

Methylation-based Stomach Cancer Subtypes

October 17, 2012

NEW YORK (GenomeWeb News) – A new study in Science Translational Medicine is highlighting the epigenetic subtypes that exist within stomach cancer.

“Our results strongly demonstrate that gastric cancer is not one disease but a conglomerate of multiple diseases, each with a different underlying biology and hallmark features,” senior author Patrick Tan, a cancer researcher with the Duke-National University of Singapore Graduate Medical School, said in a statement.

“If gastric cancer is the result of multiple interacting factors, including both environmental factors and host genetic factors, we need better ways to diagnosis and treat it,” added Tan, who is also affiliated with Singapore’s National Cancer Centre and the Genome Institute of Singapore.

Tan and colleagues based in Singapore and the US did array-based DNA methylation analyses on more than 200 gastric tumors and dozens of gastric cancer lines. Their subsequent analyses of these methylation profiles indicated that stomach cancers have many stretches of sequence with higher or lower levels of methylation compared with nearly 100 matched normal stomach samples.

Within the tumor and cell lines, the analysis revealed subsets of gastric cancer with distinct methylation profiles that appear to be prognostically important.

In particular, a group of tumors known as CIMP (CpG island methylator phenotype) tumors, which show excess methylation at some cytosine and guanine-rich regions of the genome, tended to turn up in younger gastric cancer patients and those with poor outcomes.

On the other hand, results of the study also hint that the pronounced methylation shifts in these CIMP gastric cancers could also render them more vulnerable to demethylating compounds.

“Gastric cancer is a heterogenous disease with individual patients often displaying markedly different responses to the same treatment,” Tan said. “Improving gastric cancer clinical outcomes will require molecular approaches capable of subdividing patients into biologically similar subgroups, and designing subtype-specific therapies for each group.”

Previous genomic studies have started to unravel the range of somatic mutations and other genetic alterations that can contribute to gastric adenocarcinoma, the researchers noted. Less is known about the epigenetic features of the often deadly disease, which is especially common in some Asian populations, though some studies have identified specific genes with unusual epigenetic profiles in gastric cancer.

In an effort to more fully understand the epigenetic features of stomach cancer, Tan and his colleagues used Illumina Infinium arrays to profile cytosine methylation patterns in tumor samples from 203 individuals with gastric cancer, along with matched normal stomach tissue samples for 94 of the patients.

Using a similar strategy, the group also measured genome-wide methylation patterns in 37 stomach cancer cell lines.

When they compared methylation profiles across the samples, the researchers saw that some 44 percent of the CpG sites tested had higher- or lower-than-usual cytosine methylation levels that were specific to the stomach cancer. Around a quarter of these seemed to coincide with either jumps or — more frequently — dips in gene expression in the tumors, they reported.

A subset of the tumors had especially high levels of CpG island methylation, the team found. Follow-up analyses indicated that these tumors — which comprise an apparent CIMP sub-group of the stomach cancer — were more commonly found in young patients and/or those with poor survival outcomes.

Over-represented amongst the genes in highly methylated regions of CIMP tumors were genes implicated in stem cell-related processes, researchers noted, as were sites recognized by the histone regulating Polycomb repressive complex.

“Taken collectively,” they wrote, “these results suggest that CIMP tumors may represent a clinically and biologically distinct sub-group of gastric cancers.”

Moreover, in one of its follow-up experiments the team found that it was possible to curb the proliferation of seven gastric cancer-derived cell lines in the CIMP sub-group using a demethylating drug called 5-aza-2′-deoxycytidine, or 5-Aza-dC — an effect they did not see in 10 non-CIMP cell lines treated with the drug.

Based on findings from their methylation and gene expression profiling in gastric cancer so far, the study authors argued that an improved appreciation of the methylome-based sub-types present in the disease might aid future efforts to improve stomach cancer diagnosis and treatment options.

“[A]dditional work will focus on developing simple diagnostic tests to detect gastric cancer at earlier stages, plus drugs and drug targets that might exhibit high potency against different molecular subtypes of disease,” Tan said in a statement.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »