METHODS: Primary SFb isolated from knee synovium of OA obese (OA-ob:SFb), OA-pre-obese (OA-Pob:SFb), non-OA arthroscopic (scope:SFb), and non-OA arthroscopic with cartilage damage (scope-CD:SFb) were exposed to OA-conditioned media (OACM), derived from OA obese (OA-ob:CM), OA-pre-obese (OA-Pob:CM), and mechanical stretch at either 0 %, 6 % or 10 % for 24 h. Differences in the mRNA levels of genes involved in extracellular matrix production, inflammation and secretory activity were measured.
RESULTS: Despite the significant BMI differences between the OA-ob and OA-Pob groups, OA-Pob has more patients with underlying dyslipidaemia, and low-grade synovitis with higher levels of secreted proteins, CXCL8, COL4A1, CCL4, SPARC and FGF2 in OA-Pob:CM. All primary SFb exhibited anti-proliferative activity with both OA-CM. Mechanical stretch stimulated lubricin production in scope:SFb, higher TGFβ1 and COL1A1 expressions in scope-CD:SFb. OA-Pob:CM stimulated greater detrimental effects than the OA-ob:CM, with higher pro-inflammatory cytokines, IL1β, IL6, COX2 and proteases such as aggrecanases, ADAMTS4 and ADAMTS5, and lower ECM matrix, COL1A1 expressions in all SFb. OA-ob:SFb were unresponsive but expressed higher pro-inflammatory cytokines under OA-Pob:CM treatment.
CONCLUSION: Both mechanical and inflammatory stressors regulate SFb molecular functions with heterogeneity in responses that are dependent on their pathological tissue of origins. While mechanical stretch promotes a favorable effect with enhanced lubricin production in scope:SFb and TGFβ1 and COL1A1 in scope-CD:SFb, the presence of excessively high OA-associated inflammatory mediators in OA-Pob:CM, predominantly SPARC, CXCL8 and FGF2 drive all SFb regardless of pathology, towards greater pro-inflammatory activities.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13205-023-03479-1.
METHODS: Patients with schizophrenia from Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, and Taiwan were randomly assigned to 6 weeks of double-blind treatment with 40 or 80 mg/d of lurasidone or placebo. The primary efficacy measure was change from baseline to week 6 on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score. Efficacy was evaluated using a mixed-model repeated-measures (MMRM) analysis in the modified intention-to-treat (mITT) population.
RESULTS: On the basis of the analysis for the mITT population, the estimated difference score for lurasidone 40 and 80 mg/d vs placebo was -4.8 (P = 0.050) and -4.2 (P = 0.080). For the full intention-to-treat (ITT) population, the difference score for lurasidone 40 and 80 mg/d vs placebo was -5.8 (P = 0.017) and -4.2 (P = 0.043). The most frequent adverse events in the lurasidone 40 and 80 mg/d and placebo groups, respectively, were akathisia (7.3%, 10.4%, 3.3%), somnolence (6.0%, 2.6%, 0.7%), and vomiting (6.0%, 5.8%, 2.0%). The proportion of patients experiencing clinically significant weight gain (≥7%) was 5.3% for lurasidone 40 mg/d, 1.3% for 80 mg/d, and 1.4% for placebo. End point changes in metabolic parameters and prolactin were comparable for both lurasidone groups and placebo.
CONCLUSIONS: In the ITT (but not the mITT) population, treatment with lurasidone was associated with significant improvement in the PANSS total score in patients with schizophrenia. Lurasidone was generally well tolerated with minimal impact on weight and metabolic parameters.