A probable dual mode of action for both L- and D-lactate neuroprotection in cerebral ischemia.

Lactate has been shown to offer neuroprotection in several pathologic conditions. This beneficial effect has been attributed to its use as an alternative energy substrate. However, recent description of the expression of the HCA1 receptor for lactate in the central nervous system calls for reassessment of the mechanism by which lactate exerts its neuroprotective effects. Here, we show that HCA1 receptor expression is enhanced 24 hours after reperfusion in an middle cerebral artery occlusion stroke model, in the ischemic cortex. Interestingly, intravenous injection of L-lactate at reperfusion led to further enhancement of HCA1 receptor expression in the cortex and striatum. Using an in vitro oxygen-glucose deprivation model, we show that the HCA1 receptor agonist 3,5-dihydroxybenzoic acid reduces cell death. We also observed that D-lactate, a reputedly non-metabolizable substrate but partial HCA1 receptor agonist, also provided neuroprotection in both in vitro and in vivo ischemia models. Quite unexpectedly, we show D-lactate to be partly extracted and oxidized by the rodent brain. Finally, pyruvate offered neuroprotection in vitro whereas acetate was ineffective. Our data suggest that L- and D-lactate offer neuroprotection in ischemia most likely by acting as both an HCA1 receptor agonist for non-astrocytic (most likely neuronal) cells as well as an energy substrate.

Effect of Cumulating Exposure to Abacavir on the Risk of Cardiovascular Disease Events in Patients From the Swiss HIV Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with HIV exposed to the antiretroviral drug abacavir may have an increased risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). There is concern that this association arises because of a channeling bias. Even if exposure is a risk, it is not clear how that risk changes as exposure cumulates. METHODS: We assess the effect of exposure to abacavir on the risk of CVD events in the Swiss HIV Cohort Study. We use a new marginal structural Cox model to estimate the effect of abacavir as a flexible function of past exposures while accounting for risk factors that potentially lie on a causal pathway between exposure to abacavir and CVD. RESULTS: A total of 11,856 patients were followed for a median of 6.6 years; 365 patients had a CVD event (4.6 events per 1000 patient-years). In a conventional Cox model, recent--but not cumulative--exposure to abacavir increased the risk of a CVD event. In the new marginal structural Cox model, continued exposure to abacavir during the past 4 years increased the risk of a CVD event (hazard ratio = 2.06; 95% confidence interval: 1.43 to 2.98). The estimated function for the effect of past exposures suggests that exposure during the past 6-36 months caused the greatest increase in risk. CONCLUSIONS: Abacavir increases the risk of a CVD event: the effect of exposure is not immediate, rather the risk increases as exposure cumulates over the past few years. This gradual increase in risk is not consistent with a rapidly acting mechanism, such as acute inflammation.

Presence of Leishmania RNA Virus 1 in Leishmania guyanensis Increases the Risk of First-Line Treatment Failure and Symptomatic Relapse.

Treatment failure and symptomatic relapse are major concerns in American tegumentary leishmaniasis (TL). Such complications are seen frequently in Leishmania guyanensis infections, in which patients respond variously to first-line antileishmanials and are more prone to develop chronic cutaneous leishmaniasis. The factors underlying this pathology, however, are unknown. Recently, we reported that a double-stranded RNA virus, Leishmania RNA virus 1 (LRV1), nested within L. guyanensis parasites is able to exacerbate experimental murine leishmaniasis by inducing a hyperinflammatory response. This report investigates the prevalence of LRV1 in human L. guyanensis infection and its effect on treatment efficacy, as well as its correlation to symptomatic relapses after the completion of first-line treatment. In our cohort of 75 patients with a diagnosis of primary localized American TL, the prevalence of LRV1-positive L. guyanensis infection was elevated to 58%. All patients infected with LRV1-negative L. guyanensis were cured after 1 dose (22 of 31 [71%]) or 2 doses (31 of 31 [100%]) of pentamidine. In contrast, 12 of 44 LRV1-positive patients (27%) presented with persistent infection and symptomatic relapse that required extended therapy and the use of second-line drugs. Finally, LRV1 presence was associated with a significant increase in levels of intra-lesional inflammatory markers. In conclusion, LRV1 status in L. guyanensis infection is significantly predictive (P = .0009) of first-line treatment failure and symptomatic relapse and has the potential to guide therapeutic choices in American TL.

Worldwide trends in diabetes since 1980: a pooled analysis of 751 population-based studies with 4.4 million participants.

One of the global targets for non-communicable diseases is to halt, by 2025, the rise in the age-standardised adult prevalence of diabetes at its 2010 levels. We aimed to estimate worldwide trends in diabetes, how likely it is for countries to achieve the global target, and how changes in prevalence, together with population growth and ageing, are affecting the number of adults with diabetes. We pooled data from population-based studies that had collected data on diabetes through measurement of its biomarkers. We used a Bayesian hierarchical model to estimate trends in diabetes prevalence-defined as fasting plasma glucose of 7.0 mmol/L or higher, or history of diagnosis with diabetes, or use of insulin or oral hypoglycaemic drugs-in 200 countries and territories in 21 regions, by sex and from 1980 to 2014. We also calculated the posterior probability of meeting the global diabetes target if post-2000 trends continue. We used data from 751 studies including 4,372,000 adults from 146 of the 200 countries we make estimates for. Global age-standardised diabetes prevalence increased from 4.3% (95% credible interval 2.4-7.0) in 1980 to 9.0% (7.2-11.1) in 2014 in men, and from 5.0% (2.9-7.9) to 7.9% (6.4-9.7) in women. The number of adults with diabetes in the world increased from 108 million in 1980 to 422 million in 2014 (28.5% due to the rise in prevalence, 39.7% due to population growth and ageing, and 31.8% due to interaction of these two factors). Age-standardised adult diabetes prevalence in 2014 was lowest in northwestern Europe, and highest in Polynesia and Micronesia, at nearly 25%, followed by Melanesia and the Middle East and north Africa. Between 1980 and 2014 there was little change in age-standardised diabetes prevalence in adult women in continental western Europe, although crude prevalence rose because of ageing of the population. By contrast, age-standardised adult prevalence rose by 15 percentage points in men and women in Polynesia and Micronesia. In 2014, American Samoa had the highest national prevalence of diabetes (>30% in both sexes), with age-standardised adult prevalence also higher than 25% in some other islands in Polynesia and Micronesia. If post-2000 trends continue, the probability of meeting the global target of halting the rise in the prevalence of diabetes by 2025 at the 2010 level worldwide is lower than 1% for men and is 1% for women. Only nine countries for men and 29 countries for women, mostly in western Europe, have a 50% or higher probability of meeting the global target. Since 1980, age-standardised diabetes prevalence in adults has increased, or at best remained unchanged, in every country. Together with population growth and ageing, this rise has led to a near quadrupling of the number of adults with diabetes worldwide. The burden of diabetes, both in terms of prevalence and number of adults affected, has increased faster in low-income and middle-income countries than in high-income countries. Wellcome Trust.

Mycoplasma hominis mediastinitis after acute aortic dissection repair.

We report a case of ascending aortic graft infection by an atypical bacteria, Mycoplasma hominis, with mediastinitis, a dreaded complication after cardiac surgery. A 55-year-old patient underwent ascending aorta replacement for acute type A dissection. He developed sternal instability and purulent discharge, requiring sternal wire removal and debridement. Cultures were initially sterile, but showed M. hominis infection after a significant delay and in specific culture media. The patient was treated with doxycycline and moxifloxacine. Cultures became negative and the sternum was closed on the 28th postoperative day after the first debridement. Recovery was favorable, with no signs of infection. Antibiotics were continued for one year. The patient is still asymptomatic 16 months after antibiotic interruption. Atypical organisms should be considered in the differential diagnosis of acute mediastinitis of unknown etiology after routine microbiological investigations.

Task force IV: Clinical use of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. Participants of the 1999 Consensus Conference on Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring

OBJECTIVE: To reach a consensus on the clinical use of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM). METHODS: A task force on the clinical use of ABPM wrote this overview in preparation for the Seventh International Consensus Conference (23-25 September 1999, Leuven, Belgium). This article was amended to account for opinions aired at the conference and to reflect the common ground reached in the discussions. POINTS OF CONSENSUS: The Riva Rocci/Korotkoff technique, although it is prone to error, is easy and cheap to perform and remains worldwide the standard procedure for measuring blood pressure. ABPM should be performed only with properly validated devices as an accessory to conventional measurement of blood pressure. Ambulatory recording of blood pressure requires considerable investment in equipment and training and its use for screening purposes cannot be recommended. ABPM is most useful for identifying patients with white-coat hypertension (WCH), also known as isolated clinic hypertension, which is arbitrarily defined as a clinic blood pressure of more than 140 mmHg systolic or 90 mmHg diastolic in a patient with daytime ambulatory blood pressure below 135 mmHg systolic and 85 mmHg diastolic. Some experts consider a daytime blood pressure below 130 mmHg systolic and 80 mmHg diastolic optimal. Whether WCH predisposes subjects to sustained hypertension remains debated. However, outcome is better correlated to the ambulatory blood pressure than it is to the conventional blood pressure. Antihypertensive drugs lower the clinic blood pressure in patients with WCH but not the ambulatory blood pressure, and also do not improve prognosis. Nevertheless, WCH should not be left unattended. If no previous cardiovascular complications are present, treatment could be limited to follow-up and hygienic measures, which should also account for risk factors other than hypertension. ABPM is superior to conventional measurement of blood pressure not only for selecting patients for antihypertensive drug treatment but also for assessing the effects both of non-pharmacological and of pharmacological therapy. The ambulatory blood pressure should be reduced by treatment to below the thresholds applied for diagnosing sustained hypertension. ABPM makes the diagnosis and treatment of nocturnal hypertension possible and is especially indicated for patients with borderline hypertension, the elderly, pregnant women, patients with treatment-resistant hypertension and patients with symptoms suggestive of hypotension. In centres with sufficient financial resources, ABPM could become part of the routine assessment of patients with clinic hypertension. For patients with WCH, it should be repeated at annual or 6-monthly intervals. Variation of blood pressure throughout the day can be monitored only by ABPM, but several advantages of the latter technique can also be obtained by self-measurement of blood pressure, a less expensive method that is probably better suited to primary practice and use in developing countries. CONCLUSIONS: ABPM or equivalent methods for tracing the white-coat effect should become part of the routine diagnostic and therapeutic procedures applied to treated and untreated patients with elevated clinic blood pressures. Results of long-term outcome trials should better establish the advantage of further integrating ABPM as an accessory to conventional sphygmomanometry into the routine care of hypertensive patients and should provide more definite information on the long-term cost-effectiveness. Because such trials are not likely to be funded by the pharmaceutical industry, governments and health insurance companies should take responsibility in this regard.

A look through the new therapeutic window: irbesartan

Although an impressive array of efficacious antihypertensive agents are available to treat hypertension, the optimal use of these agents is limited by dose-related side-effect profiles. This is particularly the case for widely used first-line antihypertensive agents such as diuretics, beta-blockers, calcium antagonists, and alpha1-blockers; this represents a major therapeutic dilemma in treating hypertension. With the development of the angiotensin II receptor antagonists (AIIRAs), this dilemma might have been solved. Irbesartan is a long-acting AIIRA that provides dose-related efficacy with placebo-like tolerability at all clinical doses. The results of placebo and active-control trials of irbesartan have demonstrated that the agent is as effective as the leading members of major antihypertensive classes with respect to blood pressure control, while having superior tolerability. Pooled data from nine multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled trials with irbesartan have documented no adverse events caused by dose-response. This feature could widen the traditionally narrow therapeutic window in the treatment of hypertension and point to the use of AIIRAs such as irbesartan as first-line therapy in the management of hypertension.

Therapeutic strategies to improve control of hypertension.

Blood pressure is poorly controlled in most European countries and the control rate is even lower in high-risk patients such as patients with chronic kidney disease, diabetic patients or previous coronary heart disease. Several factors have been associated with poor control, some of which involve the characteristic of the patients themselves, such as socioeconomic factors, or unsuitable life-styles, other factors related to hypertension or to associated comorbidity, but there are also factors directly associated with antihypertensive therapy, mainly involving adherence problems, therapeutic inertia and therapeutic strategies unsuited to difficult-to-control hypertensive patients.It is common knowledge that only 30% of hypertensive patients can be controlled using monotherapy; all the rest require a combination of two or more antihypertensive drugs, and this can be a barrier to good adherence and log-term persistence in patients who also often need to use other drugs, such as antidiabetic agents, statins or antiplatelet agents. The fixed combinations of three antihypertensive agents currently available can facilitate long-term control of these patients in clinical practice. If well tolerated, a long-term therapeutic regimen that includes a diuretic, an ACE inhibitor or an angiotensin receptor blocker, and a calcium channel blocker is the recommended optimal triple therapy.

Self-measurement of blood pressure in clinical trials and therapeutic applications

Self-measurement of blood pressure (SMBP) is increasingly used to assess blood pressure outside the medical setting. A prerequisite for the wide use of SMBP is the availability of validated devices providing reliable readings when they are handled by patients. This is the case today with a number of fully automated oscillometric apparatuses. A major advantage of SMBP is the great number of readings, which is linked with high reproducibility. Given these advantages, one of the major indications for SMBP is the need for evaluation of antihypertensive treatment, either for individual patients in everyday practice or in clinical trials intended to characterize the effects of blood-pressure-lowering medications. In fact, SMBP is particularly helpful for evaluating resistant hypertension and detecting white-coat effect in patients exhibiting high office blood pressure under antihypertensive therapy. SMBP might also motivate the patient and improve his or her adherence to long-term treatment. Moreover, SMBP can be used as a sensitive technique for evaluating the effect of antihypertensive drugs in clinical trials; it increases the power of comparative trials, allowing one to study fewer patients or to detect smaller differences in blood pressure than would be possible with the office measurement. Therefore, SMBP can be regarded as a valuable technique for the follow-up of treated patients as well as for the assessment of antihypertensive drugs in clinical trials.

Application in the STRATHE trial of a score system to compare the efficacy and the tolerability of different therapeutic strategies in the management of hypertension

A score system integrating the evolution of efficacy and tolerability over time was applied to a subpopulation of the STRATHE trial, a trial performed according to a parallel group design, with a double-blind, random allocation to either a fixed-dose combination strategy (perindopril/indapamide 2 mg/0.625 mg, with the possibility to increase the dose to 3 mg/0.935 mg, and 4 mg/1.250 mg if needed, n = 118), a sequential monotherapy approach (atenolol 50 mg, followed by losartan 50 mg and amlodipine 5 mg if needed, n = 108), or a stepped-care strategy (valsartan 40 mg, followed by valsartan 80 mg and valsartan 80 mg+ hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg if needed, n = 103). The aim was to lower blood pressure below 140/90 mmHg within a 9-month period. The treatment could be adjusted after 3 and 6 months. Only patients in whom the study protocol was strictly applied were included in this analysis. At completion of the trial the total score averaged 13.1 +/- 70.5 (mean +/- SD) using the fixed-dose combination strategy, compared with -7.2 +/- 81.0 using the sequential monotherapy approach and -17.5 +/- 76.4 using the stepped-care strategy. In conclusion, the use of a score system allows the comparison of antihypertensive therapeutic strategies, taking into account at the same time efficacy and tolerability. In the STRATHE trial the best results were observed with the fixed-dose combination containing low doses of an angiotensin enzyme converting inhibitor (perindopril) and a diuretic (indapamide).

Comparaison de stratégies thérapeutiques dans la prise en charge de l'hypertension artérielle [Comparison of therapeutic strategies in the management of hypertension]

Guidelines for the treatment of hypertension recommend reducing blood pressure to below 140/90 mmHg. However, there is little to guide the clinician on which pharmacological strategy to pursue: monotherapy with stepped-care, sequential monotherapy, or the initial use of combination therapy. The STRATHE study was designed to clarify this issue by comparing the three strategies. A low-dose combination of perindopril/indapamide was significantly superior to either stepped-care or sequential monotherapy in terms of reducing systolic blood pressure and in the percentage of patients achieving normalisation without adverse effects. Pulse pressure showed a trend to greater reductions with the low-dose combination. Although there must be caution about extrapolating these results to other combinations, which may not have the same pharmacological properties, the STRATHE study has shown that initiating antihypertensive therapy with a low-dose combination has advantages over the two other classical therapeutic strategies.

Ambulatory blood pressure measurement and antihypertensive therapy.

The traditional basis for assessing the effect of antihypertensive therapy is the blood pressure reading taken by a physician. However, several recent trials have been designed to evaluate the blood pressure lowering effect of various therapeutic agents during the patients' normal daytime activities, using a portable, semi-automatic blood pressure recorder. The results have shown that in a given patient, blood pressure measured at the physician's office often differs greatly from that prevailing during the rest of the day. This is true both in treated and untreated hypertensive patients. The difference between office and ambulatory recorded pressures cannot be predicted from blood pressure levels measured by the physician. Therefore, a prospective study was carried out in patients with diastolic blood pressures that were uncontrolled at the physician's office despite antihypertensive therapy. The purpose was to evaluate the response of recorded ambulatory blood pressure to treatment adjustments aimed at reducing office blood pressure below a pre-set target level. Only patients with high ambulatory blood pressures at the outset appeared to benefit from further changes in therapy. Thus, ambulatory blood pressure monitoring can be used to identify those patients who remain hypertensive only when facing the physician, despite antihypertensive therapy. Ambulatory monitoring could thus help to evaluate the efficacy of antihypertensive therapy and allow individual treatment.

Treatment of essential hypertension with calcium channel blockers: what is the place of lercanidipine?

In all actual clinical guidelines, dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers (CCBs) belong to the recommended first line antihypertensive drugs to treat essential hypertension. Several recent large clinical trials have confirmed their efficacy not only in lowering blood pressure but also in reducing cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in hypertensive patients with a normal or high cardiovascular risk profile. In clinical trials such as ALLHAT, VALUE or ASCOT, an amlodipine-based therapy was at least as effective, when not slightly superior, in lowering blood pressure and sometimes more effective in preventing target organ damages than blood pressure lowering strategies based on the use of diuretics, beta-blockers and blockers of the renin-angiotensin system. One of the main clinical side effects of the first and second generation CCBs including amlodipine is the development of peripheral edema. The incidence of leg edema can be markedly reduced by combining the CCB with a blocker of the renin-angiotensin system. This strategy has now led to the development of several fixed-dose combinations of amlodipine and angiotensin II receptor antagonists. Another alternative to lower the incidence of edema is to use CCBs of the third generation such as lercanidipine. Indeed, although no major clinical trials have been conducted with this compound, clinical studies have shown that lercanidipine and amlodipine have a comparable antihypertensive efficacy but with significantly less peripheral edema in patients receiving lercanidipine. In some countries, lercanidipine is now available in a single-pill association with an ACE inhibitor thereby further improving its efficacy and tolerability profile.