Analysis on internal mechanism of zedoary turmeric in treatment of liver cancer based on pharmacodynamic substances and pharmacodynamic groups

Zedoary tumeric (Curcumae Rhizoma, Ezhu in Chinese) has a long history of application and has great potential in the treatment of liver cancer. The anti liver cancer effect of zedoary tumeric depends on the combined action of multiple pharmacodynamic substances. In order to clarify the specific mechanism of zedoary tumeric against liver cancer, this paper first analyzes the mechanism of its single pharmacodynamic substance against liver cancer, and then verifies the joint anti liver cancer mechanism of its "pharmacodynamic group". By searching the research on the anti hepatoma effect of active components of zedoary tumeric in recent years, we found that pharmacodynamic substances, including curcumol, zedoarondiol, curcumenol, curzerenone, curdione, curcumin, germacrone, β-elemene, can act on multi-target and multi-channel to play an anti hepatoma role. For example, curcumin can regulate miR, GLO1, CD133, VEGF, YAP, LIN28B, GPR81, HCAR-1, P53 and PI3K/Akt/mTOR, HSP70/TLR4 and NF-κB. Wnt/TGF/EMT, Nrf2/Keap1, JAK/STAT and other pathways play an anti hepatoma role. Network pharmacological analysis showed that the core targets of the "pharmacodynamic group" for anti-life cancer are AKT1, EGFR, MAPK8, etc, and the core pathways are neuroactive live receiver interaction, nitrogen metabolism, HIF-1 signaling pathway, etc. At the same time, by comparing and analyzing the relationship between the specific mechanisms of pharmacodynamic substance and "pharmacodynamic group", it is found that they have great reference significance in target, pathway, biological function, determination of core pharmacodynamic components, formation of core target protein interaction, in-depth research of single pharmacodynamic substance, increasing curative effect and so on. By analyzing the internal mechanism of zedoary tumeric pharmacodynamic substance and "pharmacodynamic group" in the treatment of liver cancer, this paper intends to provide some ideas and references for the deeper pharmacological research of zedoary tumeric and the relationship between pharmacodynamic substance and "pharmacodynamic group".     

乙肝肝硬化肝胆湿热及肝肾阴虚证物质基础研究＊

目的 运用代谢组学技术分析乙肝肝硬化患者肝肾阴虚及肝胆湿热两种典型证候（同病异证）的血清差异代谢产物及其代谢通路，探寻虚、实两种典型证候的内在物质基础，以期从代谢水平上为中医证候分类提供客观依据。方法 对符合纳入标准的111例不同证候的乙肝肝硬化患者（肝胆湿热证40例，肝肾阴虚证41例，隐证(无证可辨）者30例）中医症状及体征进行描述性分析，发现两种不同证型的临床信息分布规律及证候特征；采用气相色谱-飞行时间质谱联用（GC-TOF/MS）技术对乙肝肝硬化患者，以及与之相匹配的60例健康人的血清样本进行检测，经非监督的主成分分析（Principal Components Analysis，PCA）、有监督的偏最小二乘判别分析（Partial Least Square Discriminant Analysis，PLS-DA）及监督的正交偏最小二乘法（Orthogonal Partial Least SquareDiscriminant Analysis，OPLS-DA）分析，找出与乙肝肝硬化疾病本身及其两种典型证候相关的差异性物质；运用MetaboAnalyst 3.0数据库，寻找并解析肝胆湿热及肝肾阴虚虚实两种证候间差异性物质的相关代谢通路。结果 （1）肝胆湿热证中出现频率较高（50%以上）的症状为小便色黄，口干，口苦，口臭或有异味等。肝肾阴虚证中出现频率较高的症状为口干、腰酸、乏力、腿软等。两证共见症/征为口干、尿黄、易怒、舌红。（2）各组间丙氨酸氨基转移酶（Alanine Aminotransferase,ALT）数值无统计学差异（P > 0.05）；与健康组比较，隐证组中白蛋白（Albumin，ALB），肝胆湿热证中总胆红素（Total Bilirubin，TBil）、直接胆红素（Direct Bilirubin，DBil）、谷草转氨酶（Aspartate Transaminase，AST）、碱性磷酸酶（Alkaline Phosphatase，ALP）、谷氨酰转肽酶（Gamma-Glutamyl Transpeptidase，GGT）、总胆汁酸（Total Biliary Acid，TBA）及ALB，肝肾阴虚证TBil、ALP、GGT、TBA、ALB值差异均有统计学意义（P < 0.05）；与隐证比较，肝胆湿热证TBil、DBil、AST、ALP、TBA、ALB，肝肾阴虚证TBA、ALB差异有统计学意义（P < 0.05）；肝胆湿热证与肝肾阴虚证相比，TBil、DBil差异有统计学意义（P < 0.05）。（3）代谢组学检测及代谢通路分析，发现各组之间代谢谱均有良好的区分，并获得各组间的差异性物质。发现肝胆湿热及肝肾阴虚两典型证的共同物质10个，去除疾病（隐证）的信息，则得到两证共同物质6个，涉及的代谢通路为甘氨酸、丝氨酸及苏氨酸代谢和苯丙氨酸代谢；同时，分别获得两证各自特异性的代谢物质各8个，分别涉及亚油酸代谢和甘氨酸、苏氨酸及丝氨酸代谢。结论 运用代谢组学技术，发现肝胆湿热及肝肾阴虚不同证之间既存在病的共同物质（同病），也存在证的差异物质（异证），从而在代谢层面上为中医证候分类的科学性提供科学依据。     

色谱柱参数对盐酸四环素有关物质HPLC分析的影响研究

摘要：目的 分析色谱柱参数对盐酸四环素有关物质HPLC分析的影响，筛选影响关键杂质分离度以及理论塔板数的主要 柱参数。方法 针对《中国药典》2020版中盐酸四环素有关物质检查的色谱条件，使用多个品牌不同型号的色谱柱进行色谱分 析，使用SPSS软件进行模型回归，得到柱参数与目标因子分离度及理论塔板数的回归方程，并用实测值进行验证。结果 色谱 柱参数C是影响杂质4-差向四环素和土霉素分离度(R12)的重要参数，利用柱参数C可快速预测不同色谱柱的相似度，进而筛选 适宜四环素分析的色谱柱；探讨了金霉素理论塔板数(R5N)与柱参数之间的关系，其中参数B2对R5N影响较大。结论 建立柱参 数与色谱分析目标因子之间的联系，为盐酸四环素有关物质测定选择合适的色谱柱提供便利与指导。     

Substance Use Disorder Treatment via Telemedicine During Coronavirus Disease 2019

Telemedicine has been effective at bridging the gap among patients, providers, and health systems. Authors from a large academic medical center in Baltimore, MD, anecdotally found that digital tools were beneficial in supporting substance use disorder recovery during a global pandemic. Audiovisual tools like Zoom (Zoom Video Communications, Inc, San Jose, CA) and Doximity (Doximity, Inc, San Francisco, CA), as well as increased frequency of communication with patients, have been most helpful to supporting recovery. The barriers noted were related to patient privacy and increased tendency of patients to avoid treatment, similar barriers as when treatment is provided in the clinic. The intent of this narrative is to discuss provider perspectives of benefits and barriers to telemedicine for substance use disorder treatment during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.     

Beyond Brief Intervention: Pharmacologic Management of Alcohol Use Disorder

Over 50 years ago, alcohol use disorder (AUD) was recognized as a treatable medical disorder negatively affecting millions of adults, yet pharmacologic management is underused. Most patients seeking AUD treatment are referred to an outpatient program or a peer support group. Relapse is common because frequently medications to treat AUD are recommended yet not prescribed for routine use concurrently with support programs. Therefore, comprehensive treatment of AUD must include pharmacologic management to prevent a relapse to alcohol use. The purpose of this article is to present evidence-based information for nurse practitioners’ pharmacologic management of AUD.     

“I used to be an addict. I’m still an addict. I’m always going to be a recovering addict”: Understanding the challenges of individuals seeking recovery

Background and Objective: Although preventable, substance addiction has become one of the most prominent public health problems facing the nation. As a result, treatment programs and centers have focused resources and efforts on aiding individuals on their path to long-term recovery. However, the constant threat, reinforced by high incidence, of relapse presents a major obstacle to long-term recovery. Relapse prevention programs are designed to target social and psychological factors contributing to lapses in sobriety. Yet, the exact factors that can impact long-term recovery and prevent or lower the instances of relapse are not always clear. The current study explores the major contributors to relapse as experienced in a male residential treatment center.

Methods: The data were gathered through 31 in-depth interviews in a residential halfway house treatment facility for substance use recovery.

Results: The results of the study underscored social support and interpersonal relationships as major factors impacting long-term recovery. More specifically, lack of efficacy in managing interpersonal relationships and building new support networks were identified as essential barriers to long-term recovery.

Conclusions: The management of interpersonal relationships seems to be a key to long-term recovery, which emphasizes the need for strategies that underscore the development of positive relationships that will strengthen resistance to relapse and long-term recovery.