A peptide inhibitor of C-jun N-terminal kinase modulates hepatic damage and the inflammatory response after hemorrhagic shock and resuscitation

Hemorrhage and resuscitation (H/R) leads to phosphorylation of mitogen-activated stress kinases, an event that is associated with organ damage. Recently, a specific, cell-penetrating, protease-resistant inhibitory peptide of the mitogen-activated protein kinase c-JUN N-terminal kinase (JNK) was developed (D-JNKI-1). Here, using this peptide, we tested if inhibition of JNK protects against organ damage after H/R. Male Sprague-Dawley rats were treated with D-JNKI-1 (11 mg/kg, i.p.) or vehicle. Thirty minutes later, rats were hemorrhaged for 1 h to a MAP of 30 to 35 mmHg and then resuscitated with 60% of the shed blood and twice the shed blood volume as Ringer lactate. Tissues were harvested 2 h later. ANOVA with Tukey post hoc analysis or Kruskal-Wallis ANOVA on ranks, P < 0.05, was considered significant. c-JUN N-terminal kinase inhibition decreased serum alanine aminotransferase activity as a marker of liver injury by 70%, serum creatine kinase activity by 67%, and serum lactate dehydrogenase activity by 60% as compared with vehicle treatment. The histological tissue damage observed was blunted after D-JNKI-1 pretreatment both for necrotic and apoptotic cell death. Hepatic leukocyte infiltration and serum IL-6 levels were largely diminished after D-JNKI-1 pretreatment. The extent of oxidative stress as evaluated by immunohistochemical detection of 4-hydroxynonenal was largely abrogated after JNK inhibition. After JNK inhibition, activation of cJUN after H/R was also reduced. Hemorrhage and resuscitation induces a systemic inflammatory response and leads to end-organ damage. These changes are mediated, at least in part, by JNK. Therefore, JNK inhibition deserves further evaluation as a potential treatment option in patients after resuscitated blood loss.

Therapy modifications in response to poorly controlled hypertension, dyslipidemia, and diabetes mellitus.

BACKGROUND: Poorly controlled cardiovascular risk factors are common. Evaluating whether physicians respond appropriately to poor risk factor control in patients may better reflect quality of care than measuring proportions of patients whose conditions are controlled. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate therapy modifications in response to poor control of hypertension, dyslipidemia, or diabetes in a large clinical population. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study within an 18-month period in 2002 to 2003. SETTING: Kaiser Permanente of Northern California. PATIENTS: 253,238 adult members with poor control of 1 or more of these conditions. MEASUREMENTS: The authors assessed the proportion of patients with poor control who experienced a change in pharmacotherapy within 6 months, and they defined "appropriate care" as a therapy modification or return to control without therapy modification within 6 months. RESULTS: A total of 64% of patients experienced modifications in therapy for poorly controlled systolic blood pressure, 71% for poorly controlled diastolic blood pressure, 56% for poorly controlled low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level, and 66% for poorly controlled hemoglobin A1c level. Most frequent modifications were increases in number of drug classes (from 70% to 84%) and increased dosage (from 15% to 40%). An additional 7% to 11% of those with poorly controlled blood pressure, but only 3% to 4% of those with elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level or hemoglobin A1c level, returned to control without therapy modification. Patients with more than 1 of the 3 conditions, higher baseline values, and target organ damage were more likely to receive "appropriate care." LIMITATIONS: Patient preferences and suboptimal adherence to therapy were not measured and may explain some failures to act. CONCLUSIONS: As an additional measure of the quality of care, measuring therapy modifications in response to poor control in a large population is feasible. Many patients with poorly controlled hypertension, dyslipidemia, or diabetes had their therapy modified and, thus, seemed to receive clinically "appropriate care" with this new quality measure.