Drugs and lifestyle for the treatment and prevention of coronary artery disease: comparative analysis of the scientific basis

In this article, we compare two strategies for atherosclerosis treatment: drugs and healthy lifestyle. Statins are the principal drugs used for the treatment of atherosclerosis. Several secondary prevention studies have demonstrated that statins can significantly reduce cardiovascular events including coronary death, the need for surgical revascularization, stroke, total mortality, as well as fatal and non-fatal myocardial infarction. These results were observed in both men and women, the elderly, smokers and non-smokers, diabetics and hypertensives. Primary prevention studies yielded similar results, although total mortality was not affected. Statins also induce atheroma regression and do not cause cancer. However, many unresolved issues remain, such as partial risk reduction, costs, several potential side effects, and long-term use by young patients. Statins act mainly as lipid-lowering drugs but pleiotropic actions are also present. Healthy lifestyle, on the other hand, is effective and inexpensive and has no harmful effects. Five items are associated with lower cardiac risk: non-smoking, BMI ≤25, regular exercise (30 min/day), healthy diet (fruits, vegetables, low-saturated fat, and 5-30 g alcohol/day). Nevertheless, there are difficulties in implementing these measures both at the individual and population levels. Changes in behavior require multidisciplinary care, including medical, nutritional, and psychological counseling. Participation of the entire society is required for such implementation, i.e., universities, schools, media, government, and medical societies. Although these efforts represent a major challenge, such a task must be faced in order to halt the atherosclerosis epidemic that threatens the world.

Comparative proteomics analysis of chronic atrophic gastritis: changes of protein expression in chronic atrophic gastritis without Helicobacter pylori infection

Chronic atrophic gastritis (CAG) is a very common gastritis and one of the major precursor lesions of gastric cancer, one of the most common cancers worldwide. The molecular mechanism underlying CAG is unclear, but its elucidation is essential for the prevention and early detection of gastric cancer and appropriate intervention. A combination of two-dimensional gel electrophoresis and mass spectrometry was used in the present study to analyze the differentially expressed proteins. Samples from 21 patients (9 females and 12 males; mean age: 61.8 years) were used. We identified 18 differentially expressed proteins in CAG compared with matched normal mucosa. Eight proteins were up-regulated and 10 down-regulated in CAG when compared with the same amounts of proteins in individually matched normal gastric mucosa. Two novel proteins, proteasome activator subunit 1 (PSME1), which was down-regulated in CAG, and ribosomal protein S12 (RPS12), which was up-regulated in CAG, were further investigated. Their expression was validated by Western blot and RT-PCR in 15 CAG samples matched with normal mucosa. The expression level of RPS12 was significantly higher in CAG than in matched normal gastric mucosa (P < 0.05). In contrast, the expression level of PSME1 in CAG was significantly lower than in matched normal gastric mucosa (P < 0.05). This study clearly demonstrated that there are some changes in protein expression between CAG and normal mucosa. In these changes, down-regulation of PSME1 and up-regulation of RPS12 could be involved in the development of CAG. Thus, the differentially expressed proteins might play important roles in CAG as functional molecules.

Comparative pathogenicity of Coxsackievirus A16 circulating and noncirculating strains in vitro and in a neonatal mouse model

An enterovirus 71 (EV71) vaccine for the prevention of hand, foot, and mouth disease (HMFD) is available, but it is not known whether the EV71 vaccine cross-protects against Coxsackievirus (CV) infection. Furthermore, although an inactivated circulating CVA16 Changchun 024 (CC024) strain vaccine candidate is effective in newborn mice, the CC024 strain causes severe lesions in muscle and lung tissues. Therefore, an effective CV vaccine with improved pathogenic safety is needed. The aim of this study was to evaluate the in vivo safety and in vitro replication capability of a noncirculating CVA16 SHZH05 strain. The replication capacity of circulating CVA16 strains CC024, CC045, CC090 and CC163 and the noncirculating SHZH05 strain was evaluated by cytopathic effect in different cell lines. The replication capacity and pathogenicity of the CC024 and SHZH05 strains were also evaluated in a neonatal mouse model. Histopathological and viral load analyses demonstrated that the SHZH05 strain had an in vitro replication capacity comparable to the four CC strains. The CC024, but not the SHZH05 strain, became distributed in a variety of tissues and caused severe lesions and mortality in neonatal mice. The differences in replication capacity and in vivo pathogenicity of the CC024 and SHZH05 strains may result from differences in the nucleotide and amino acid sequences of viral functional polyproteins P1, P2 and P3. Our findings suggest that the noncirculating SHZH05 strain may be a safer CV vaccine candidate than the CC024 strain.

Comparative efficacy and safety of the left versus right radial approach for percutaneous coronary procedures: a meta-analysis including 6870 patients

The radial approach is widely used in the treatment of patients with coronary artery disease. We conducted a meta-analysis of published results on the efficacy and safety of the left and right radial approaches in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary procedures. A systematic search of reference databases was conducted, and data from 14 randomized controlled trials involving 6870 participants were analyzed. The left radial approach was associated with significant reductions in fluoroscopy time [standardized mean difference (SMD)=-0.14, 95% confidence interval (CI)=-0.19 to -0.09; P<0.00001] and contrast volume (SMD=-0.07, 95%CI=-0.12 to -0.02; P=0.009). There were no significant differences in rate of procedural failure of the left and the right radial approaches [risk ratios (RR)=0.98; 95%CI=0.77-1.25; P=0.88] or procedural time (SMD=-0.05, 95%CI=0.17-0.06; P=0.38). Tortuosity of the subclavian artery (RR=0.27, 95%CI=0.14-0.50; P<0.0001) was reported more frequently with the right radial approach. A greater number of catheters were used with the left than with the right radial approach (SMD=0.25, 95%CI=0.04-0.46; P=0.02). We conclude that the left radial approach is as safe as the right radial approach, and that the left radial approach should be recommended for use in percutaneous coronary procedures, especially in percutaneous coronary angiograms.