Practices and ethical concerns regarding preimplantation diagnosis. Who regulates preimplantation genetic diagnosis in Brazil?

Preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) was originally developed to diagnose embryo-related genetic abnormalities for couples who present a high risk of a specific inherited disorder. Because this technology involves embryo selection, the medical, bioethical, and legal implications of the technique have been debated, particularly when it is used to select features that are not related to serious diseases. Although several initiatives have attempted to achieve regulatory harmonization, the diversity of healthcare services available and the presence of cultural differences have hampered attempts to achieve this goal. Thus, in different countries, the provision of PGD and regulatory frameworks reflect the perceptions of scientific groups, legislators, and society regarding this technology. In Brazil, several texts have been analyzed by the National Congress to regulate the use of assisted reproduction technologies. Legislative debates, however, are not conclusive, and limited information has been published on how PGD is specifically regulated. The country requires the development of new regulatory standards to ensure adequate access to this technology and to guarantee its safe practice. This study examined official documents published on PGD regulation in Brazil and demonstrated how little direct oversight of PGD currently exists. It provides relevant information to encourage reflection on a particular regulation model in a Brazilian context, and should serve as part of the basis to enable further reform of the clinical practice of PGD in the country.     

Discordant Electrocardiogram Left Ventricular Wall Thickness and Strain Findings in Influenza Myocarditis

A 42‐year‐old man presented with a viral prodrome and tested positive for influenza A. He rapidly deteriorated developing cardiogenic shock, rhabdomyolysis, and acute kidney injury. Patient improved 1 week later with supportive measures including vasopressors, inotropes, and an intraaortic balloon pump. We report this case as it highlights the discordance between echocardiographic ventricular wall thickening as a result of myocardial edema, and electrocardiographic findings at presentation, with a reversal in findings at time of resolution. Additionally, there was some suggestion of a regional pattern to the reduced longitudinal strain.     

Population pharmacokinetics of tanezumab in phase 3 clinical trials for osteoarthritis pain

AimsThe aims were to 1) develop the pharmacokinetics model to describe and predict observed tanezumab concentrations over time, 2) test possible covariate parameter relationships that could influence clearance and distribution and 3) assess the impact of fixed dosing vs. a dosing regimen adjusted by body weight.MethodsIndividual concentration–time data were determined from 1608 patients in four phase 3 studies conducted to assess efficacy and safety of intravenous tanezumab. Patients received two or three intravenous doses (2.5, 5 or 10 mg) every 8 weeks. Blood samples for assessment of tanezumab PK were collected at baseline, 1 h post‐dose and at weeks 4, 8, 16 and 24 (or early termination) in all studies. Blood samples were collected at week 32 in two studies. Plasma samples were analyzed using a sensitive, specific, validated enzyme‐linked immunosorbent assay.ResultsA two compartment model with parallel linear and non‐linear elimination processes adequately described the data. Population estimates for clearance (CL), central volume (V ₁), peripheral volume (V ₂), inter‐compartmental clearance, maximum elimination capacity (VM) and concentration at half‐maximum elimination capacity were 0.135 l day^–1, 2.71 l, 1.98 l, 0.371 l day^–1, 8.03 μg day^–1 and 27.7 ng ml^–1, respectively. Inter‐individual variability (IIV) was included on CL, V ₁, V ₂ and VM. A mixture model accounted for the distribution of residual error. While gender, dose and creatinine clearance were significant covariates, only body weight as a covariate of CL, V ₁ and V ₂ significantly reduced IIV.ConclusionsThe small increase in variability associated with fixed dosing is consistent with other monoclonal antibodies and does not change risk : benefit.