Gender differences in cardiovascular risk factors in HIV infected patients on antiretroviral therapy: Data from the Spanish Coronator study.

Purpose: HIV-infected patients present an increased cardiovascular risk (CVR) of multifactorial origin, usually lower in women than in men. Information by gender about prevalence of modifiable risk factors is scarce. Methods: Coronator is a cross-sectional survey of a representative sample of HIV-infected patients on ART within 10 hospitals across Spain in 2011. Variables include sociodemographics, CVR factors and 10-year CV disease risk estimation (Regicor: Framingham score adapted to the Spanish population). Results: We included 860 patients (76.3% male) with no history of CVD. Median age 45.6 years; 84.1% were Spaniards; 29.9% women were IDUs. Median time since HIV diagnosis for men and women was 10 and 13 years (p=0.001), 28% had an AIDS diagnosis. Median CD4 cell count was 596 cells/mm3, 88% had undetectable viral load. Median time on ART was 91 and 108 months (p=0.017). There was a family history of early CVD in 113 men (17.9%) and 41 women (20.6%). Classical CVR factors are described in the table. Median (IQR) Regicor Score was 3% (2-5) for men and 2% (1-3) for women (p=0.000), and the proportion of subjects with mid-high risk (>5%) was 26.1% for men and 9.4% for women (p=0.000). Conclusions: In this population of HIV-infected patients, women have lower cardiovascular risk than men, partly due to higher levels of HDL cholesterol. Of note is the high frequency of smoking, abdominal obesity and sedentary lifestyle in our population. (Table Presented).

Computational and Biological Evaluation of N-octadecyl-N'-propylsulfamide, a Selective PPARα Agonist Structurally Related to N-acylethanolamines.

To further understand the pharmacological properties of N-oleoylethanolamine (OEA), a naturally occurring lipid that activates peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor alpha (PPARα), we designed sulfamoyl analogs based on its structure. Among the compounds tested, N-octadecyl-N'-propylsulfamide (CC7) was selected for functional comparison with OEA. The performed studies include the following computational and biological approaches: 1) molecular docking analyses; 2) molecular biology studies with PPARα; 3) pharmacological studies on feeding behavior and visceral analgesia. For the docking studies, we compared OEA and CC7 data with crystallization data obtained with the reference PPARα agonist GW409544. OEA and CC7 interacted with the ligand-binding domain of PPARα in a similar manner to GW409544. Both compounds produced similar transcriptional activation by in vitro assays, including the GST pull-down assay and reporter gene analysis. In addition, CC7 and OEA induced the mRNA expression of CPT1a in HpeG2 cells through PPARα and the induction was avoided with PPARα-specific siRNA. In vivo studies in rats showed that OEA and CC7 had anorectic and antiobesity activity and induced both lipopenia and decreases in hepatic fat content. However, different effects were observed when measuring visceral pain; OEA produced visceral analgesia whereas CC7 showed no effects. These results suggest that OEA activity on the PPARα receptor (e.g., lipid metabolism and feeding behavior) may be dissociated from other actions at alternative targets (e.g., pain) because other non cannabimimetic ligands that interact with PPARα, such as CC7, do not reproduce the full spectrum of the pharmacological activity of OEA. These results provide new opportunities for the development of specific PPARα-activating drugs focused on sulfamide derivatives with a long alkyl chain for the treatment of metabolic dysfunction.

Liver safety assessment: required data elements and best practices for data collection and standardization in clinical trials.

A workshop was convened to discuss best practices for the assessment of drug-induced liver injury (DILI) in clinical trials. In a breakout session, workshop attendees discussed necessary data elements and standards for the accurate measurement of DILI risk associated with new therapeutic agents in clinical trials. There was agreement that in order to achieve this goal the systematic acquisition of protocol-specified clinical measures and lab specimens from all study subjects is crucial. In addition, standard DILI terms that address the diverse clinical and pathologic signatures of DILI were considered essential. There was a strong consensus that clinical and lab analyses necessary for the evaluation of cases of acute liver injury should be consistent with the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) guidance on pre-marketing risk assessment of DILI in clinical trials issued in 2009. A recommendation that liver injury case review and management be guided by clinicians with hepatologic expertise was made. Of note, there was agreement that emerging DILI signals should prompt the systematic collection of candidate pharmacogenomic, proteomic and/or metabonomic biomarkers from all study subjects. The use of emerging standardized clinical terminology, CRFs and graphic tools for data review to enable harmonization across clinical trials was strongly encouraged. Many of the recommendations made in the breakout session are in alignment with those made in the other parallel sessions on methodology to assess clinical liver safety data, causality assessment for suspected DILI, and liver safety assessment in special populations (hepatitis B, C, and oncology trials). Nonetheless, a few outstanding issues remain for future consideration.