Novel dipeptidyl peptidase IV resistant analogues of glucagon-like peptide-1(7-36)amide have preserved biological activities in vitro conferring improved glucose-lowering action in vivo

Although the incretin hormone glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) is a potent stimulator of insulin release, its rapid degradation in vivo by the enzyme dipeptidyl peptidase IV (DPP IV) greatly limits its potential for treatment of type 2 diabetes. Here, we report two novel Ala(8)-substituted analogues of GLP-1, (Abu(8))GLP-1 and (Val(8) GLP-1 which were completely resistant to inactivation by DPP IV or human plasma. (Abu(8))GLP-1 and (Val(8))GLP-1 exhibited moderate affinities (IC50: 4.76 and 81.1 nM, respectively) for the human GLP-1 receptor compared with native GLP-1 (IC50: 0.37 nM). (Abu(8))GLP-1 and (Val(8))GLP-1 dose-dependently stimulated cAMP in insulin-secreting BRIN BD11 cells with reduced potency compared with native GLP-1 (1.5- and 3.5-fold, respectively). Consistent with other mechanisms of action, the analogues showed similar, or in the case of (Val(8))GLP-1 slightly impaired insulin releasing activity in BRIN BD11 cells. Using adult obese (ob/ob) mice, (Abu(8))GLP-1 had similar glucose-lowering potency to native GLP-1 whereas the action of (Val(8))GLP-1 was enhanced by 37%. The in vivo insulin-releasing activities were similar. These data indicate that substitution of Ala(8) in GLP-1 with Abu or Val confers resistance to DPP IV inactivation and that (Val(8))GLP-1 is a particularly potent N-terminally modified GLP-1 analogue of possible use in type 2 diabetes.

Triclabendazole-resistant Fasciola hepatica: β-tubulin and response to in vitro treatment with triclabendazole

Resistance in Fasciola hepatica to triclabendazole (Fasinex) has emerged in several countries. Benzimidazole resistance in parasitic nematodes has been linked to a single amino acid substitution (phenylalanine to tyrosine) at position 200 on the [beta]-tubulin molecule. Sequencing of [beta]-tubulin cDNAs from triclabendazole-susceptible and triclabendazole-resistant flukes revealed no amino acid differences between their respective primary amino acid sequences. In order to investigate the mechanism of triclabendazole resistance, triclabendazole-susceptible and triclabendazole-resistant flukes were incubated in vitro with triclabendazole sulphoxide (50 [mu]g/ml). Scanning and transmission electron microscopy revealed extensive damage to the tegument of triclabendazole-susceptible F. hepatica, whereas triclabendazole-resistant flukes showed only localized and relatively minor disruption of the tegument covering the spines. Immunocytochemical studies, using an anti-tubulin antibody, showed that tubulin organization was disrupted in the tegument of triclabendazole-susceptible flukes. No such disruption was evident in triclabendazole-resistant F. hepatica. The significance of these findings is discussed with regard to the mechanism of triclabendazole resistance in F. hepatica.

Eye movements and neurocognitive function in treatment resistant schizophrenia: a pilot study.

Objectives: It is increasingly important to develop predictors of treatment response and outcome in schizophrenia. Neuropsychological impairments, particularly those reflecting frontal lobe function, appear to predict poor outcome. Eye movement abnormalities probably also reflect frontal lobe deficits. We wished to see if these two aspects of schizophrenia were correlated and whether they could distinguish a treatment resistant from a treatment responsive group. Methods: Ten treatment resistant schizophrenic patients were compared with ten treatment responsive patients on three eye movement paradigms (reflexive saccades, antisaccades and smooth pursuit), clinical psychopathology (BPRS, SANS and CGI) and a neuropsychological test battery designed to detect frontal lobe dysfunction. Ten aged-matched controls also carried out the eye movement tasks. Results: Both treatment responsive (p = 0.038) and treatment resistant (p = 0.007) patients differed significantly from controls on the antisaccade task. The treatment resistant group had a higher error rate than the treatment responsive group, but the difference was not statistically significant. Similar poor neuropsychological test performance was found in both groups. Conclusions: To demonstrate the biological differences characteristic of treatment resistance, larger sample sizes and wider differences in outcome between the two groups are necessary.