依维莫司联合全反式维甲酸逆转急性早幼粒细胞白血病细胞耐药的研究

目的探讨依维莫司联合全反式维甲酸(简称维甲酸)逆转急性早幼粒细胞白血病(APL)细胞株NB4-R1耐药的作用。方法应用CD11b染色流式细胞术及硝基四唑氮蓝(NBT)还原实验检测两药联合应用对细胞分化的影响, 流式细胞术检测细胞周期情况, Annexin V/PI双染色检测细胞凋亡情况, 蛋白质印迹法检测自噬相关蛋白微管结合蛋白轻链3(LC3)、Beclin 1及早幼粒白血病-维甲酸受体融合蛋白(PML-RARα)、磷酸化核糖体S6激酶(P-P70S6K)、磷酸化4E结合蛋白1(P-4E-BP1) 等表达水平。结果与维甲酸组比较, 联用组能诱导耐药细胞株NB4-R1细胞的分化, 并将细胞增殖阻止在G ₁期而对细胞凋亡无明显影响。100 nmol/L依维莫司组、1μmol/L维甲酸组、联用组、对照组NB4-R1细胞培养48 h后分化百分率分别为(2.29±0.57)%、(17.06±2.65)%、(54.47±4.91)%、(2.54±0.53)%; 处于G ₁期的细胞百分率分别为(35.20±11.97)%、(33.54±6.25)%、(53.70±8.73)%、(27.40±6.01)%; 四组细胞凋亡细胞百分率分别为(2.30±0.14)%、(2.25±0.21)%、(2.40±0.28)%、(1.95±0.07)%。与维甲酸组比较, 联用组mTOR信号通路下游的P70S6K、4E-BP1分子磷酸化水平下降, LC3-II和Beclin 1的表达上调, 且能部分降解融合蛋白PML-RARα。 结论依维莫司联合维甲酸能诱导NB4-R1细胞分化, 且能阻滞细胞周期而不致细胞凋亡, 其机制可能与依维莫司联合维甲酸抑制mTOR信号通路激活自噬作用从而降解PML-RARα蛋白有关。     

两例 SMILE 术中特殊情况更改 SBK 手术的疗效观察

目的：通过对同一患者双眼不同手术方式的自身对比，了解飞秒扫描后改SBK手术的疗效差异，为不同患者屈光手术方式的选择提供临床指导依据。方法回顾分析2例右眼行飞秒激光小切口透镜取出术（ SMILE），左眼SMILE术中负压环脱失和激光扫描不良透镜分离困难而改行机械刀制瓣准分子激光手术（ SBK）的患者，比较术后视力、等效球镜（ SE）、对比敏感度（ CSF）、波前像差（ HAOS）以及泪膜破裂时间（ BUT）、泪液分泌功能试验（ Schimer I）和SPEED、OSDI干眼症状问卷调查分析差异。结果（1）术后个月，均能达到最佳矫正视力（BSCVA），等效球镜均在±0．75 D以内，双眼比较无显著性差异。（2）CSF的比较，左右眼无显著性差异，略低于正常水平。（3）术后3个月，BUT和Schimer检查中，双眼无显著性差异。（4）HAOS比较中，总像差RMS和高阶像差这两项， SMILE眼低于SBK眼；球差（S）的比较，SMILE眼高于SBK眼。（5）SPEED和OSDI问卷评分双眼无显著差异。结论 SMILE失败眼改SBK后视觉质量与SMILE眼无显著差异，其视觉质量、疗效不受影响。     

The U.S.-FORTA (Fit fOR The Aged) List: Consensus Validation of a Clinical Tool to Improve Drug Therapy in Older Adults

Background/ObjectivesPolypharmacy and multimorbidity is a threat to older people; hence, listing approaches should support physicians to optimize medication. The FORTA (Fit fOR The Aged) classification of drug appropriateness for older people provides positive or negative labels: A (A-bsolutely), B (B-eneficial), C (C-areful), and D (D-on't). Based on these categories, FORTA-labeled drug lists were developed in 7 European countries or regions; the same approach was used to develop a U.S.-FORTA List reflecting the country-specific availability and usage of drugs.Design/SettingA 2-step Delphi-type approach was employed to add, remove, or relabel drugs from the listing proposal and to add or remove new indications. The proposal utilized the European (EURO)-FORTA list as template.ParticipantsEight US-based geriatricians/pharmacists served as raters. Measurements: Raters gave recommendations and comments on the list items.ResultsThe first U.S.-FORTA List contains 273 items aligned to 27 main indication groups; 30 drugs and drug groups were added, and 23 removed as being unavailable in the United States. The highest percentage of changes in FORTA labels as compared to the EURO-FORTA List occurred for sleep disorders associated with dementia (40%). In 8 indications, the labels for 11 items were different from the proposal. Thus, for the majority of the items (n = 232, 95.5%), the proposals were accepted by the US raters. Only 16 (6.6%) of the proposed items (n = 243) had to be re-evaluated in the second round as a result of inconsistent rating in the first round.Conclusions and ImplicationsThe U.S.-FORTA List addresses the appropriateness of drugs for older people in the United States reflecting country-specific availability, usage, and expert rating. As shown for the FORTA list in Europe, this listing approach is among the few that are clinically validated and improve well-being and geriatric outcomes. The U.S.-FORTA List now largely enhances the global availability of this approach.     

Evaluation of mutagenic,recombinogenic and carcinogenic potential of (+)-usnic acid in somatic cells of Drosophila melanogaster

The main of this study was to evaluate the mutagenic and carcinogenic potential of (+) – usnic acid (UA), using Somatic Mutation and Recombination Test (SMART) and the test for detecting epithelial tumor clones (wts) in Drosophila melanogaster. Larvae from 72 ± 4 h from Drosophila were fed with UA (5.0, 10.0 or 20.0 mM); urethane (10.0 mM) (positive control); and solvent (Milli-Q water, 1% Tween-80 and 3% ethanol) (negative control). ST cross produced increase in total mutant spots in the individuals treated with 5.0, 10.0 or 20.0 mM of UA. HB cross produced spot frequencies in the concentration of 5.0 mM that were higher than the frequency for the same concentration in the ST cross. In the highest concentrations the result was negative, which means that the difference observed can be attributed, in part, to the high levels of P450, suggesting that increasing the metabolic capacity maximized the toxic effect of these doses. In the evaluation of carcinogenesis using the wts test, the results obtained for the same concentrations of UA show a positive result for the presence of tumors when compared to the negative control. We conclude that UA has recombinogenic, mutagenic and carcinogenic effects on somatic cells in D. melanogaster.     

Clinical pharmacokinetics and pharmacogenetics of tamoxifen and endoxifen

Introduction: Tamoxifen dominates the anti-estrogenic therapy in the early and metastatic breast cancer setting. Tamoxifen has a complex metabolism, being mainly metabolized by CYP2D6 into its 30–100 times more potent metabolite, endoxifen. Recently, a phase I study in which endoxifen as an orally z-endoxifen hydrochloride has been successfully evaluated.

Areas covered: the principal pharmacogenetic and non-genetic differences in the pharmacology of tamoxifen and endoxifen are evaluated. To this end, references from PubMed, Embase or Web of Science, among others, were reviewed As non-genetic factors, important differences and similarities such age, or adherence to tamoxifen therapy are comprehensively illustrated. Additionally, since CYP2D6 genotypes are considered the main limitation of tamoxifen, many studies have investigated the association between the worsened clinical outcomes in patients with non-functional CYP2D6 genotypes. In this review, an overview of the research on this field is presented. Also, a summary describing the literature about individualizing tamoxifen therapy with endoxifen concentrations and its limitations is listed.

Expert opinion: z-endoxifen hydrochloride is only investigated in the metastatic setting, still more research is required before its place in therapeutics is known. Similarly, monitoring tamoxifen efficacy based on endoxifen concentrations might not be overall recommended due to the limited evidence available.     

UPLC-MS/MS测定73例患者血中头孢哌酮与舒巴坦的浓度

目的：建立液相色谱-串联质谱法（UPLC-MS/MS）同时测定人血浆中头孢哌酮与舒巴坦的浓度，分析头孢哌酮/舒巴坦血药浓度监测结果，为临床合理用药提供参考。方法：以氯唑沙宗为内标，采用Waters BEHC₁₈柱（2.1 mm×100 mm，1.7 μm）进行分离，通过串联质谱仪，负离子检测模式下，以多反应监测（MRM）方式进行定量测定。对某院2018年以不同给药方案进行治疗的73例住院患者测定的头孢哌酮/舒巴坦血药浓度结果进行分析。结果：头孢哌酮与舒巴坦在测定条件下1~200 mg·L^-1范围内线性关系良好，两者日内精密度RSD均<10%，基质效应分别为（72.77±0.99）%与（75.72±0.11）%，提取回收率均>90%。73例患者共监测血药浓度96次，其中不同给药方案2 g，q8 h（43例次）；2 g，q12 h（26例次）；2 g，q6 h（27例次），各组头孢哌酮血药浓度的中位数分别为34.12 mg·L^-1（4.12~177.79 mg·L^-1）、31.23 mg·L^-1（1.89~251.8 mg·L^-1）、59.96 mg·L^-1（1.77~140.58 mg·L^-1），舒巴坦血药浓度的中位数分别为6.3 mg·L^-1（0.61~136.01 mg·L^-1）、28.83 mg·L^-1（0.5~133.69 mg·L^-1）、11.17 mg·L^-1（0.73~143.53 mg·L^-1）。Mann-Whitney U检验显示，头孢哌酮血药浓度结果无统计学差异（P>0.05），舒巴坦有统计学差异（P<0.05）。结论：本检测方法操作简便、快速、重复性好，可满足临床头孢哌酮与舒巴坦浓度的检测；头孢哌酮/舒巴坦在不同给药方案下血药浓度结果与个体差异相关，有必要开展血药浓度监测并依据结果适时调整用药方案，提高治疗效果减少耐药率的发生。