Uric acid is a danger signal activating NALP3 inflammasome in lung injury inflammation and fibrosis.

RATIONALE: Lung injury leads to pulmonary inflammation and fibrosis through myeloid differentiation primary response gene 88 (MyD88) and the IL-1 receptor 1 (IL-1R1) signaling pathway. The molecular mechanisms by which lung injury triggers IL-1beta production, inflammation, and fibrosis remain poorly understood. OBJECTIVES: To determine if lung injury depends on the NALP3 inflammasome and if bleomycin (BLM)-induced lung injury triggers local production of uric acid, thereby activating the NALP3 inflammasome in the lung. Methods: Inflammation upon BLM administration was evaluated in vivo in inflammasome-deficient mice. Pulmonary uric acid accumulation, inflammation, and fibrosis were analyzed in mice treated with the inhibitor of uric acid synthesis or with uricase, which degrades uric acid. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Lung injury depends on the NALP3 inflammasome, which is triggered by uric acid locally produced in the lung upon BLM-induced DNA damage and degradation. Reduction of uric acid levels using the inhibitor of uric acid synthesis allopurinol or uricase leads to a decrease in BLM-induced IL-1beta production, lung inflammation, repair, and fibrosis. Local administration of exogenous uric acid crystals recapitulates lung inflammation and repair, which depend on the NALP3 inflammasome, MyD88, and IL-1R1 pathways and Toll-like receptor (TLR)2 and TLR4 for optimal inflammation but are independent of the IL-18 receptor. CONCLUSIONS: Uric acid released from injured cells constitutes a major endogenous danger signal that activates the NALP3 inflammasome, leading to IL-1beta production. Reducing uric acid tissue levels represents a novel therapeutic approach to control IL-1beta production and chronic inflammatory lung pathology.

Can a targeted psychological intervention be effective for young people following a first manic episode? Results from an 18-month pilot study.

Aim: There is a scarce literature describing psychological interventions for a young, first-episode cohort who have experienced psychotic mania. This study aimed to assess whether a manualized psychological intervention could be effective in reducing symptomatology and relapse, and improve functional outcome in this population. Methods: The study was an open-label design, drawn from a larger pharmacotherapy trial. All participants in the pharmacotherapy trial were offered a manualized psychological intervention in addition to case management. Inclusion in the psychotherapy group was based on participant's choice, and on completion of four or more of the eight modules offered. All clinical files were audited to ensure accuracy of group allocation. Forty young people aged 15 to 25 years old who had experienced a manic episode with psychotic features were recruited into the study, with 20 people in the combined treatment as usual plus psychotherapy group (P+TAU), and an equal number of matched control participants who received treatment as usual (TAU) within the same service. All participants were prescribed antipsychotic and mood-stabilizing medication. Symptomatic, functional and relapse measures were taken both at baseline and at 18-month follow-up. Results: Manic symptoms improved significantly for both groups, with no differences between groups. Depression scores and overall symptom severity were significantly lower in the P + TAU group. No differences were evident between groups with regard to numbers or type of relapse. The P + TAU group had significantly better social and occupational functioning after 18 months. Conclusion: This study suggests that a manualized psychological intervention targeted to a first-episode population can be effective in reducing depression and overall symptom severity, and can improve functional outcome following a first episode of psychotic mania.