AIM OF THE STUDY: The molecular mechanisms of the anti-inflammatory properties of M. accedens are not yet understood. Therefore, we examined those mechanisms using a methanol extract of M. accedens (Ma-ME) and determined the target molecule in macrophages.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We evaluated the anti-inflammatory effects of Ma-ME in lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-stimulated RAW264.7 cells and in an HCl/EtOH-triggered gastritis model in mice. To investigate the anti-inflammatory activity, we performed a nitric oxide (NO) production assay and ELISA assay for prostaglandin E2 (PGE2). RT-PCR, luciferase gene reporter assays, western blotting analyses, and a cellular thermal shift assay (CETSA) were conducted to identify the mechanism and target molecule of Ma-ME. The phytochemical composition of Ma-ME was analyzed by HPLC and LC-MS/MS.
RESULTS: Ma-ME suppressed the production of NO and PGE2 and the mRNA expression of proinflammatory genes (iNOS, IL-1β, and COX-2) in LPS-stimulated RAW264.7 cells without cytotoxicity. Ma-ME inhibited NF-κB activation by suppressing signaling molecules such as IκBα, Akt, Src, and Syk. Moreover, the CETSA assay revealed that Ma-ME binds to Syk, the most upstream molecule in the NF-κB signal pathway. Oral administration of Ma-ME not only alleviated inflammatory lesions, but also reduced the gene expression of IL-1β and p-Syk in mice with HCl/EtOH-induced gastritis. HPLC and LC-MS/MS analyses confirmed that Ma-ME contains various anti-inflammatory flavonoids, including quercetin, daidzein, and nevadensin.
CONCLUSIONS: Ma-ME exhibited anti-inflammatory activities in vitro and in vivo by targeting Syk in the NF-κB signaling pathway. Therefore, we propose that Ma-ME could be used to treat inflammatory diseases such as gastritis.
METHODS: Electroclinical phenotyping and genotyping of patients with a DNM1 variant were conducted for patients undergoing next-generation sequencing at our centre, followed by a systematic review.
RESULTS: Six patients with heterozygous DNM1 variants were identified in our cohort. Three had a typical DEE phenotype characterised by epileptic spasms, tonic seizures and severe-to-profound intellectual disability with pathogenic variants located in the GTPase or middle domain. The other three patients had atypical phenotypes of milder cognitive impairment and focal epilepsy. Genotypically, two patients with atypical phenotypes had variants located in the GTPase domain, while the third patient had a novel variant (p.M648R) in the linker region between pleckstrin homology and GTPase effector domains. The third patient with an atypical phenotype showed normal development until he developed febrile status epilepticus. Our systematic review on 55 reported cases revealed that those with GTPase or middle domain variants had more severe intellectual disability (p<0.001) and lower functional levels of ambulation (p=0.001) or speech and language (p<0.001) than the rest.
CONCLUSION: DNM1-related phenotypes encompass a wide spectrum of epilepsy and neurodevelopmental disorders, with specific variants underlying different phenotypes.
METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional retrospective study of 171 stroke centers from 49 countries. We recorded COVID-19 admission volumes, CVT hospitalization, and CVT in-hospital mortality from January 1, 2019, to May 31, 2021. CVT diagnoses were identified by International Classification of Disease-10 (ICD-10) codes or stroke databases. We additionally sought to compare the same metrics in the first 5 months of 2021 compared to the corresponding months in 2019 and 2020 (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04934020).
RESULTS: There were 2,313 CVT admissions across the 1-year pre-pandemic (2019) and pandemic year (2020); no differences in CVT volume or CVT mortality were observed. During the first 5 months of 2021, there was an increase in CVT volumes compared to 2019 (27.5%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 24.2 to 32.0; P<0.0001) and 2020 (41.4%; 95% CI, 37.0 to 46.0; P<0.0001). A COVID-19 diagnosis was present in 7.6% (132/1,738) of CVT hospitalizations. CVT was present in 0.04% (103/292,080) of COVID-19 hospitalizations. During the first pandemic year, CVT mortality was higher in patients who were COVID positive compared to COVID negative patients (8/53 [15.0%] vs. 41/910 [4.5%], P=0.004). There was an increase in CVT mortality during the first 5 months of pandemic years 2020 and 2021 compared to the first 5 months of the pre-pandemic year 2019 (2019 vs. 2020: 2.26% vs. 4.74%, P=0.05; 2019 vs. 2021: 2.26% vs. 4.99%, P=0.03). In the first 5 months of 2021, there were 26 cases of vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT), resulting in six deaths.
CONCLUSIONS: During the 1st year of the COVID-19 pandemic, CVT hospitalization volume and CVT in-hospital mortality did not change compared to the prior year. COVID-19 diagnosis was associated with higher CVT in-hospital mortality. During the first 5 months of 2021, there was an increase in CVT hospitalization volume and increase in CVT-related mortality, partially attributable to VITT.
METHODS: Eligible Asian patients (enrolled at Asian sites) who were at least 18 years of age (≥20 years in Japan) and had untreated EGFR-mutated advanced NSCLC were randomized 1:1 to receive osimertinib (80 mg, orally once daily) or an SoC EGFR TKI (gefitinib, 250 mg, or erlotinib, 150 mg, orally once daily). The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). The key secondary end points were overall survival, objective response rate, central nervous system efficacy, and safety.
RESULTS: The median PFS was 16.5 versus 11.0 months for the osimertinib and SoC EGFR TKI groups, respectively (hazard ratio = 0.54, 95% confidence interval: 0.41-0.72, p < 0.0001). The overall survival data were immature (24% maturity). The objective response rates were 80% for osimertinib and 75% for an SoC EGFR TKI. The median central nervous system PFS was not calculable for the osimertinib group and was 13.8 months for the SoC EGFR TKI group (hazard ratio = 0.55, 95% confidence interval: 0.25-1.17, p = 0.118). Fewer adverse events of grade 3 or higher (40% versus 48%) and fewer adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation (15% versus 21%) were reported with osimertinib versus with an SoC EGFR TKI, respectively.
CONCLUSION: In this Asian population, first-line osimertinib demonstrated a clinically meaningful improvement in PFS over an SoC EGFR TKI, with a safety profile consistent with that for the overall FLAURA study population.
METHODS: The phase 3 LASER301 study evaluated lazertinib efficacy and safety in treatment-naive patients with EGFR-mutated (exon 19 deletion or L858R) locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC. Patients were randomized one-to-one and received either lazertinib or gefitinib. The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. Secondary end points included overall survival, objective response rate, duration of response, and safety.
RESULTS: Between February 13, 2020, and July 29, 2022, among 258 patients of Asian descent, the median progression-free survival was significantly longer with lazertinib than gefitinib (20.6 versus 9.7 mo; hazard ratio: 0.46; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.34-0.63, p < 0.001), and the benefit was consistent across predefined subgroups (exon 19 deletion, L858R, baseline central nervous system metastases). Objective response rate and disease control rates were similar between treatment groups. The median duration of response was 19.4 months (95% CI: 16.6-24.9) versus 9.6 months (95% CI: 6.9-12.4) in the lazertinib versus gefitinib group. Adverse event rates in Asian patients were comparable with the overall LASER301 population. Adverse events leading to discontinuation in the lazertinib and gefitinib groups were 13% and 12%, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: In LASER301, efficacy and safety results in Asian patients were consistent with the overall population. Lazertinib exhibited better efficacy than gefitinib in Asian patients with a tolerable safety profile.
METHODS: The administered activity of 177 Lu-DOTATATE was 7.99 ± 0.36 GBq. SPECT/CT images were acquired 0.5, 4, 24, and 48 h after injection in Sunway Medical Centre. For the multiple VSV method, VSV kernels of 177 Lu in media with various densities were generated by Geant4 Application for Emission Tomography (GATE) simulation first. The second step involved the convolution of the time-integrated activity map with each kernel to produce medium-specific dose maps. Third, each medium-specific dose map was masked using binary medium masks, which were generated from CT-based density maps. Finally, all masked dose maps were summed to generate the final dose map. VSV methods with four different VSV sets (1, 4, 10, and 20 VSVs) were compared. Voxel-wise density correction for the single VSV method was also performed. The absorbed doses in the kidneys, bone marrow, and tumors were analyzed, and the relative errors between the VSV and Monte Carlo simulation approaches were estimated. Organ-based dosimetry using Organ Level INternal Dose Assessment/EXponential Modeling (OLINDA/EXM) was also compared.
RESULTS: The accuracy of the multiple VSV approach increased with the number of dose kernels. The average dose estimation errors of a single VSV with density correction and 20 VSVs were less than 6% in most cases, although organ-based dosimetry using OLINDA/EXM yielded an error of up to 123%. The advantages of the single VSV method with density correction and the 20 VSVs over organ-based dosimetry were most evident in bone marrow and bone-metastatic tumors with heterogeneous medium properties.
CONCLUSION: The single VSV method with density correction and multiple VSV method with 20 dose kernels enabled fast and accurate radiation dose estimation. Accordingly, voxel-based dosimetry methods can be useful for managing administration activity and for investigating tumor dose responses to further increase the therapeutic efficacy of 177 Lu-DOTATATE.
METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional, observational, retrospective study across 6 continents, 70 countries, and 457 stroke centers. Diagnoses were identified by their ICD-10 codes or classifications in stroke databases.
RESULTS: There were 91,373 stroke admissions in the 4 months immediately before compared to 80,894 admissions during the pandemic months, representing an 11.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] -11.7 to -11.3, p < 0.0001) decline. There were 13,334 IVT therapies in the 4 months preceding compared to 11,570 procedures during the pandemic, representing a 13.2% (95% CI -13.8 to -12.7, p < 0.0001) drop. Interfacility IVT transfers decreased from 1,337 to 1,178, or an 11.9% decrease (95% CI -13.7 to -10.3, p = 0.001). Recovery of stroke hospitalization volume (9.5%, 95% CI 9.2-9.8, p < 0.0001) was noted over the 2 later (May, June) vs the 2 earlier (March, April) pandemic months. There was a 1.48% stroke rate across 119,967 COVID-19 hospitalizations. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection was noted in 3.3% (1,722/52,026) of all stroke admissions.
CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic was associated with a global decline in the volume of stroke hospitalizations, IVT, and interfacility IVT transfers. Primary stroke centers and centers with higher COVID-19 inpatient volumes experienced steeper declines. Recovery of stroke hospitalization was noted in the later pandemic months.