Enhanced protection of Ins-1 β cells from apoptosis under hypoxia by delivery of DNA encoding secretion signal peptide-linked exendin-4

In this study, we developed an expression system of exendin-4, a glucagon-like peptide (GLP-1) analog, using a secretion signal peptide (SP) to facilitate exendin-4 secretion. For delivery of the exendin-4 expression system, high-molecular-weight polyethylenimine (25 kDa, PEI25k), low-molecular-weight polyethylenimine (2 kDa, PEI2k), and polyamidoamine (PAMAM) dendrimers were evaluated as gene carriers to Ins-1 β cells. As a result, PEI25k showed the highest transfection efficiency. For the construction of the exendin-4 expression vector, DNA coding the SP sequence was inserted upstream of the exendin-4 cDNA, resulting in the construction of pβ-SP-Ex-4. Transfection assay showed that the secretion level of exendin-4 increased in the pβ-SP-Ex-4 transfected cells, compared with the pβ-Ex-4 transfected cells. To identify the β-cell protection effect of pβ-SP-Ex-4 delivery, the Ins-1 β cells were transfected with pβ-SP-Ex-4 or pβ-Ex-4 and incubated under normoxia or hypoxia. An MTT assay showed that the pβ-SP-Ex-4 transfected cells had higher β-cell viability than the pβ-Ex-4 transfected cells under hypoxia. In addition, the pβ-SP-Ex-4 transfected cells exhibited lower caspase-3 activity than the pβ-Ex-4 transfected cells. Therefore, PEI25k/pβ-SP-Ex-4 complex may be useful to protect isolated β cells from apoptosis during transplantation.     

Direct comparison of an automated oscillometric device with an electronic auscultatory device for epidemiologic survey to evaluate the prevalence of hypertension

Mercury-free sphygmomanometers are gradually replacing the traditional sphygmomanometers in clinical settings and epidemiological surveys for measuring blood pressure (BP) due to mercury toxicity. No direct comparative studies have evaluated BP differences and statistical errors of automated oscillometric devices (ODs) against electronic auscultatory devices (ADs) for epidemiologic surveys. Herein, we evaluated the validity of ODs for the Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (KNHANES) using the Universal Standard for BP device validation through a direct comparison with ADs as the reference standard. Four trained observers performed validation on 278 volunteers aged ≥ 19 years with a standardized BP measurement protocol. Agreement between the BP measurements recorded with an OD against those recorded with an AD was assessed by Lin’s concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) and Bland–Altman’s limits of agreement. To evaluate the agreement for BP classification, weighted kappa values were estimated. To explore the factors associated with BP measurement differences between the 2 devices, multiple linear regression analysis was performed. The average BP differences (OD-AD) were 2.6 ± 6.2 mm Hg for systolic BP (SBP) and −5.1 ± 5.6 mm Hg for diastolic BP (DBP). Lin’s CCCs were 0.927 and 0.768 for the overall SBP and DBP, respectively. The cumulative percentage of absolute errors ≤10 mm Hg was 88.1% for SBP and 81.3% for DBP. The weighted kappa value for the Joint National Committee 7 BP classification was 0.75 (95% confidence interval: 0.68–0.81). An OD overestimated the prevalence of SBP (0.3%, P = .0222) and underestimated the prevalence of DBP (1.8%, P < .0001). Multivariate analysis to identify the risk factors for BP difference revealed the arm circumference (AC) to be negatively associated with BP difference. Male sex was positively associated, while age was negatively associated with SBP difference. OD-DBP was positively associated with DBP difference and negatively associated for DBP absolute error. ODs met the accuracy requirements of the Universal Standard criteria against ADs for SBP but not for DBP. Thus, the DBP values may be underestimated by ODs in the KNHANES.     

Über die Blutkörperchensenkungsreaktion und Ihre Bedeutung für die Praxis

Ohne Zusammenfassung     

Office blood pressure threshold of 130/80 mmHg better predicts uncontrolled out‐of‐office blood pressure in apparent treatment‐resistant hypertension

The objective of this study was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of office blood pressure (BP) threshold of 140/90 and 130/80 mmHg for correctly identifying uncontrolled out‐of‐office BP in apparent treatment‐resistant hypertension (aTRH). We analyzed 468 subjects from a prospectively enrolled cohort of patients with resistant hypertension in South Korea (clinicaltrials.gov: {"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT03540992","term_id":"NCT03540992"}}NCT03540992). Resistant hypertension was defined as office BP ≥ 130/80 mmHg with three different classes of antihypertensive medications including thiazide‐type/like diuretics, or treated hypertension with four or more different classes of antihypertensive medications. We conducted different types of BP measurements including office BP, automated office BP (AOBP), home BP, and ambulatory BP. We defined uncontrolled out‐of‐office BP as daytime BP ≥ 135/85 mmHg and/or home BP ≥ 135/85 mmHg. Among subjects with office BP < 140/90 mmHg and subjects with office BP < 130/80 mmHg, 66% and 55% had uncontrolled out‐of‐office BP, respectively. The prevalence of controlled and masked uncontrolled hypertension was lower, and the prevalence of white‐coat and sustained uncontrolled hypertension was higher, with a threshold of 130/80 mmHg than of 140/90 mmHg, for both office BP and AOBP. The office BP threshold of 130/80 mmHg was better able to diagnose uncontrolled out‐of‐office BP than 140/90 mmHg, and the net reclassification improvement (NRI) was 0.255. The AOBP threshold of 130/80 mmHg also revealed better diagnostic accuracy than 140/90 mmHg, with NRI of 0.543. The office BP threshold of 130/80 mmHg showed better than 140/90 mmHg in terms of the correspondence to out‐of‐office BP in subjects with aTRH.