In vivo epigenetic effects induced by engineered nanomaterials: A case study of copper oxide and laser printer-emitted engineered nanoparticles

Evidence continues to grow on potential environmental health hazards associated with engineered nanomaterials (ENMs). While the geno- and cytotoxic effects of ENMs have been investigated, their potential to target the epigenome remains largely unknown. The aim of this study is two-fold: 1) determining whether or not industry relevant ENMs can affect the epigenome in vivo and 2) validating a recently developed in vitro epigenetic screening platform for inhaled ENMs. Laser printer-emitted engineered nanoparticles (PEPs) released from nano-enabled toners during consumer use and copper oxide (CuO) were chosen since these particles induced significant epigenetic changes in a recent in vitro companion study. In this study, the epigenetic alterations in lung tissue, alveolar macrophages and peripheral blood from intratracheally instilled mice were evaluated. The methylation of global DNA and transposable elements (TEs), the expression of the DNA methylation machinery and TEs, in addition to general toxicological effects in the lung were assessed. CuO exhibited higher cell-damaging potential to the lung, while PEPs showed a greater ability to target the epigenome. Alterations in the methylation status of global DNA and TEs, and expression of TEs and DNA machinery in mouse lung were observed after exposure to CuO and PEPs. Additionally, epigenetic changes were detected in the peripheral blood after PEPs exposure. Altogether, CuO and PEPs can induce epigenetic alterations in a mouse experimental model, which in turn confirms that the recently developed in vitro epigenetic platform using macrophage and epithelial cell lines can be successfully utilized in the epigenetic screening of ENMs.     

Allergic Contact Dermatitis to Benzoyl Peroxide Resembling Impetigo

A 17‐year‐old boy presented with recurring severe dermatitis of the face of 5‐months duration that resembled impetigo. He had been treated with several courses of antibiotics without improvement. Biopsy showed changes consistent with allergic contact dermatitis and patch testing later revealed sensitization to benzoyl peroxide, which the patient had been using for the treatment of acne vulgaris.     

Comparison of guidelines and consensus articles on the management of patients with acne with oral isotretinoin

Guidelines and consensus on the management of patients with acne aim to give evidence-based, expert-group recommendations. This review compares current guidelines and consensus articles to provide a compilation of recommendations on the treatment of acne with oral isotretinoin. Ten common, relevant, clinical questions are addressed, based on published recommendations, including the indications of isotretinoin, the proposed daily dose, the cumulative isotretinoin dose and the laboratory monitoring needed. Recommendations on special considerations are also addressed, including the timing of procedures and the question of an association of depression or inflammatory bowel disease with isotretinoin. A major limitation is the use of different classification systems for acne across guidelines. The recommended daily dose ranges from 0.3 to 0.5 mg/kg in the European guidelines to up to 1 mg/kg in the US guidelines. A specific duration of treatment of at least 6 months is only recommended in the European guidelines. All guidelines report the need of strict pregnancy prevention measures. The European, French and US guidelines recommend to monitor for symptoms of depression. Important clinical questions that are inconsistently addressed in guidelines include the age indication, the recommendation for a cumulative dose, the timing of procedures, the association of isotretinoin with IBD, the recommendation for preventing acne flares and for appropriate laboratory monitoring. These topics should be clearly included in the recommendations of guidelines as they are often raised in everyday clinical practice.     

Vestibular Function Measurement Devices

Vestibular function laboratories utilize a multitude of diagnostic instruments to evaluate a dizzy patient. Caloric irrigators, oculomotor stimuli, and rotational chairs produce a stimulus whose accuracy is required for the patient response to be accurate. Careful attention to everything from cleanliness of equipment to threshold adjustments determine on a daily basis if patient data are going to be correct and useful. Instrumentation specifications that change with time such as speed and temperature must periodically be checked using calibrated instruments.     

A Phase I Trial of Trametinib in Combination with Sorafenib in Patients with Advanced Hepatocellular Cancer

Lessons Learned

• The combination of trametinib and sorafenib has an acceptable safety profile, albeit at doses lower than approved for monotherapy.
• Maximum tolerated dose is trametinib 1.5 mg daily and sorafenib 200 mg twice daily.
• The limited anticancer activity observed in this unselected patient population does not support further exploration of trametinib plus sorafenib in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.

BackgroundThe RAS/RAF/MEK/ERK signaling pathway is associated with proliferation and progression of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Preclinical data suggest that paradoxical activation of the MAPK pathway may be one of the resistance mechanisms of sorafenib; therefore, we evaluated trametinib plus sorafenib in HCC.MethodsThis was a phase I study with a 3+3 design in patients with treatment‐naïve advanced HCC. The primary objective was safety and tolerability. The secondary objective was clinical efficacy.ResultsA total of 17 patients were treated with three different doses of trametinib and sorafenib. Two patients experienced dose‐limiting toxicity, including grade 4 hypertension and grade 3 elevation of aspartate aminotransferase (AST)/alanine aminotransferase (ALT)/bilirubin over 7 days. Maximum tolerated dose was trametinib 1.5 mg daily and sorafenib 200 mg twice a day. The most common grade 3/4 treatment‐related adverse events were elevated AST (37%) and hypertension (24%). Among 11 evaluable patients, 7 (63.6%) had stable disease with no objective response. The median progression‐free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 3.7 and 7.8 months, respectively. Phosphorylated‐ERK was evaluated as a pharmacodynamic marker, and sorafenib plus trametinib inhibited phosphorylated‐ERK up to 98.1% (median: 81.2%) in peripheral blood mononuclear cells.ConclusionTrametinib and sorafenib can be safely administered up to trametinib 1.5 mg daily and sorafenib 200 mg twice a day with limited anticancer activity in advanced HCC.     

Population Genetics Identifies Challenges in Analyzing Rare Variants

Geneticists have, for years, understood the nature of genome‐wide association studies using common genomic variants. Recently, however, focus has shifted to the analysis of rare variants. This presents potential problems for researchers, as rare variants do not always behave in the same way common variants do, sometimes rendering decades of solid intuition moot. In this paper, we present examples of the differences between common and rare variants. We show why one must be significantly more careful about the origin of rare variants, and how failing to do so can lead to highly inflated type I error. We then explain how to best avoid such concerns with careful understanding and study design. Additionally, we demonstrate that a seemingly low error rate in next‐generation sequencing can dramatically impact the false‐positive rate for rare variants. This is due to the fact that rare variants are, by definition, seen infrequently, making it hard to distinguish between errors and real variants. Compounding this problem is the fact that the proportion of errors is likely to get worse, not better, with increasing sample size. One cannot simply scale their way up in order to solve this problem. Understanding these potential pitfalls is a key step in successfully identifying true associations between rare variants and diseases.