Control of photomagnetic behavior in heterobimetallic Prussian Blue analogs

A new challenge in the field of molecular magnetism is the design of optically and thermally switchable solid state magnetic materials for which various kinds of application may be feasible. Our research activities involve preparative methods, the study of the physical properties and associated mechanisms, as well as the exploration of further possibilities. Particular focus is on heterobimetallic Prussian Blue analogs, such as on RbMn[Fe(CN)6], in which the interplay between the two different adjacent metal ions is crucial for the observation of photo-induced phenomena. Our studies revealed that modification of the preparative conditions lead to differences in structural features that allowed tuning of the magnetic and electron transfer properties of RbxMn[Fe(CN)6]y.zH2O.

Antagonistic effects of two novel GIP analogs, (Hyp3)GIP and (Hyp3)GIPLys16PAL, on the biological actions of GIP and longer-term effects in diabetic ob/ob mice

This study examines the actions of the novel enzyme-resistant, NH 2-terminally modified GIP analog (Hyp3)GIP and its fatty acid-derivatized analog (Hyp3)GIPLys16PAL. Acute effects are compared with the established GIP receptor antagonist (Pro3)GIP. All three peptides exhibited DPP IV resistance, and significantly inhibited GIP stimulated cAMP formation and insulin secretion in GIP receptor-transfected fibroblasts and in clonal pancreatic BRIN-BD11 cells, respectively. Likewise, in obese diabetic ob/ob mice, intraperitoneal administration of GIP analogs significantly inhibited the acute antihyperglycemic and insulin-releasing effects of native GIP. Administration of once daily injections of (Hyp 3)GIP or (Hyp3)GIPLys16PAL for 14 days resulted in significantly lower plasma glucose levels (P < 0.05) after (Hyp 3)GIP on days 12 and 14 and enhanced glucose tolerance (P < 0.05) and insulin sensitivity (P < 0.05 to P < 0.001) in both groups by day 14. Both (Hyp3)GIP and (Hyp3)GIPLys16PAL treatment also reduced pancreatic insulin (P < 0.05 to P < 0.01) without affecting islet number. These data indicate that (Hyp3)GIP and (Hyp 3)GIPLys16PAL function as GIP receptor antagonists with potential for ameliorating obesity-related diabetes. Acylation of (Hyp 3)GIP to extend bioactivity does not appear to be of any additional benefit. Copyright © 2007 the American Physiological Society.

Usability of prostaglandin monotherapy eye droppers

AIM: To determine the force needed to extract a drop from a range of current prostaglandin monotherapy eye droppers and how this related to the comfortable and maximum pressure subjects could exert. METHODS: The comfortable and maximum pressure subjects could apply to an eye dropper constructed around a set of cantilevered pressure sensors and mounted above their eye was assessed in 102 subjects (mean 51.2±18.7 years), repeated three times. A load cell amplifier, mounted on a stepper motor controlled linear slide, was constructed and calibrated to test the force required to extract the first three drops from 13 multidose or unidose latanoprost medication eye droppers. RESULTS: The pressure that could be exerted on a dropper comfortably (25.9±17.7 Newtons, range 1.2-87.4) could be exceeded with effort (to 64.8±27.1 Newtons, range 19.9-157.8; F=19.045, p<0.001), and did not differ between repeats (F=0.609, p=0.545). Comfortable and maximum pressures exerted were correlated (r=0.618, p<0.001), neither were influenced strongly by age (r=0.138, p=0.168; r=-0.118, p=0237, respectively), but were lower in women than in men (F=12.757, p=0.001). The force required to expel a drop differed between dropper designs (F=22.528, p<0.001), ranging from 6.4 Newtons to 23.4 Newtons. The force needed to exert successive drops increased (F=36.373, p<0.001) and storing droppers in the fridge further increased the force required (F=7.987, p=0.009). CONCLUSIONS: Prostaglandin monotherapy droppers for glaucoma treatment vary in their resistance to extract a drop and with some a drop could not be comfortably achieved by half the population, which may affect compliance and efficacy.

Aspirin and aspirin analogs on esophageal cancer

Background: Esophageal cancer is the eighth most common cancer seen worldwide and is the sixth most common cause of death from cancer. The UK alone has over 8,000 new cases of esophageal cancer every year. Epidemiological studies have shown that low-dose daily intake of aspirin can decrease the incidence of esophageal cancer. However, its use as an anti-cancer drug has been restrained because of its side effects exerted through inhibition of cyclooxygenase (COX) enzymes. In our study, we have investigated the effects of a number of novel aspirin analogs on esophageal cancer cell lines. Methods: The effects of aspirin and its analogs on the viability of esophageal cancer cell lines were tested using the MTT assay. ApoSense and flow cytometric analysis were performed to examine whether aspirin analog-mediated tumor cell death is due to apoptosis or necrosis. Colorimetric assays measuring peroxidase component of cyclooxygenases were employed to screen aspirin analogs for COX inhibition. Results: Our data suggests that the anti-proliferative property of certain aspirin analogs is greater than that of aspirin itself. Benzoylsalicylates and fumaroyl diaspirin were more effective than aspirin against the oe21 squamous cell carcinoma cells and oe33 esophageal adenocarcinoma cells. Flo-1 esophageal adenocarcinoma cells showed resistance to aspirin and most of the aspirin analogs other than the benzoylsalicylates. Both diaspirin and benzoylsalicylates inhibited metabolic activity in all these esophageal cells. However, apoptosis was induced in only a small proportion. We have also shown that these aspirin analogs do not appear to inhibit COX enzymes. Conclusion: We have synthesized and characterized a number of novel aspirin analogs that are more effective against esophageal cancer cell lines than aspirin. These compounds do not exert their anti-proliferative effect through induction of apoptosis. Moreover, these analogs inability to inhibit COX enzymes suggests that they may cause fewer or no side effects compared to aspirin.