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".     

Phase I Dose-Escalation Study of SCB01A,a Microtubule Inhibitor with Vascular Disrupting Activity,in Patients with Advanced Solid Tumors

Lessons Learned

• SCB01A is a novel microtubule inhibitor with vascular disrupting activity.
• This first‐in‐human study demonstrated SCB01A safety, pharmacokinetics, and preliminary antitumor activity.
• SCB01A is safe and well tolerated in patients with advanced solid malignancies with manageable neurotoxicity.

BackgroundSCB01A, a novel microtubule inhibitor, has vascular disrupting activity.MethodsIn this phase I dose‐escalation and extension study, patients with advanced solid tumors were administered intravenous SCB01A infusions for 3 hours once every 21 days. Rapid titration and a 3 + 3 design escalated the dose from 2 mg/m² to the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) based on dose‐limiting toxicity (DLT). SCB01A‐induced cellular neurotoxicity was evaluated in dorsal root ganglion cells. The primary endpoint was MTD. Safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), and tumor response were secondary endpoints.ResultsTreatment‐related adverse events included anemia, nausea, vomiting, fatigue, fever, and peripheral sensorimotor neuropathy. DLTs included grade 4 elevated creatine phosphokinase (CPK) in the 4 mg/m² cohort; grade 3 gastric hemorrhage in the 6.5 mg/m² cohort; grade 2 thromboembolic event in the 24 mg/m² cohort; and grade 3 peripheral sensorimotor neuropathy, grade 3 elevated aspartate aminotransferase, and grade 3 hypertension in the 32 mg/m² cohort. The MTD was 24 mg/m², and average half‐life was ~2.5 hours. The area under the curve‐dose response relationship was linear. Nineteen subjects were stable after two cycles. The longest treatment lasted 24 cycles. SCB01A‐induced neurotoxicity was reversible in vitro.ConclusionThe MTD of SCB01A was 24 mg/m² every 21 days; it is safe and tolerable in patients with solid tumors.     

Comparison between tension band and cerclage with X-Plate and lag screws in treatment of comminuted patellar fractures

BackgroundComminuted patellar fractures are not rare, and the ideal treatment method remains controversial. The present study was conducted to evaluate effects and compare complications of two different methods used to treat comminuted patellar fractures.MethodsFrom March 2010 to August 2016, 102 cases of 34-C2 or 34-C3 comminuted patellar fractures were treated at our hospital, wherein patients received two different treatments: titanium cable tension band with cerclage method (group A) and intrafragmentary screws with X-shaped plating technique (group B). At follow-ups, articular step-off, range of motion (ROM), Lysholm scores, time of union, and complications were recorded and analyzed. Radiographic and clinical data as well as rate of complications were statistically analyzed.ResultsIn total, 87 patients were included in the final analysis (n = 47 in group A and n = 40 in group B). No significant differences were noted in terms of cost of implant, age, gender, rate of 34-C3 fractures, rate of layered inferior pole fractures, postoperative articular step-off and union time. At 2-year follow-up, average Lysholm scores, ROM and rate of complications were (89.0 ± 4.5), (122°±12°) and (27.7%) in group A and (90.2 ± 3.9), (124°±11°) and (17.5%) in group B, respectively, with no significant differences (p > 0.05). The mean time of surgery in group B was shorter than that in group A with significant difference (p < 0.05).ConclusionsTreatment using the intrafragmentary screws and plate method for amenable comminuted patellar fractures achieved similar complication rate and favorable functional outcomes at the 2-year follow-up, which was comparable to the titanium cable tension band with cerclage method. Thus, the intrafragmentary screws and plate method is effective, safe and convenient for 34-C2/C3 comminuted patellar fractures, especially appropriate for patients with layered fragments.     

Differential diagnosis of diarrhoea in patients with neuroendocrine tumours:A systematic review

BACKGROUND Approximately 20% of patients with neuroendocrine tumours(NETs) develop carcinoid syndrome(CS),characterised by flushing and diarrhoea.Somatostatin analogues or telotristat can be used to control symptoms of CS through inhibition of serotonin secretion.Although CS is often the cause of diarrhoea among patients with gastroenteropancreatic NETs(GEP-NETs),other causes to consider include pancreatic enzyme insufficiency(PEI),bile acid malabsorption and small intestinal bacterial overgrowth.If other causes of diarrhoea unrelated to serotonin secretion are mistaken for CS diarrhoea,these treatments may be ineffective against the diarrhoea,risking detrimental effects to patient quality of life.AIM To identify and synthesise qualitative and quantitative evidence relating to the differential diagnosis of diarrhoea in patients with GEP-NETs.METHODS Electronic databases(MEDLINE,Embase and the Cochrane Library) were searched from inception to September 12,2018 using terms for NETs and diarrhoea.Congresses,systematic literature review bibliographies and included articles were also hand-searched.Any study designs and publication types were eligible for inclusion if relevant data on a cause(s) of diarrhoea in patients with GEP-NETs were reported.Studies were screened by two independent reviewers at abstract and full-text stages.Framework synthesis was adapted to synthesise quantitative and qualitative data.The definition of qualitative data was expanded to include all textual data in any section of relevant publications.RESULTS Forty-seven publications(44 studies) were included,comprising a variety of publication types,including observational studies,reviews,guidelines,case reports,interventional studies,and opinion pieces.Most reported on PEI on/after treatment with somatostatin analogs;9.5%-84% of patients with GEP-NETs had experienced steatorrhoea or confirmed PEI.Where reported,14.3%–50.7% of patients received pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy.Other causes of diarrhoea reported in patients with GEP-NETs included bile acid malabsorption(80%),small intestinal bacterial overgrowth(23.6%-62%),colitis(20%) and infection(7.1%).Diagnostic approaches included faecal elastase,breath tests,tauroselcholic(selenium-75) acid(Se HCAT) scan and stool culture,although evidence on the effectiveness or diagnostic accuracy of these approaches was limited.Assessment of patient history or diarrhoea characteristics was also reported as initial approaches for investigation.From the identified evidence,if diarrhoea is assumed to be CS diarrhoea,consequences include uncontrolled diarrhoea,malnutrition,and perceived ineffectiveness of CS treatment.Approaches for facilitating differential diagnosis of diarrhoea include improving patient and clinician awareness of non-CS causes and involvement of a multidisciplinary clinical team,including gastroenterologists.CONCLUSION Diarrhoea in GEP-NETs can be multifactorial with misdiagnosis leading to delayed patient recovery and inefficient resource use.This systematic literature review highlights gaps for further research on prevalence of non-CS diarrhoea and suitability of diagnostic approaches,to determine an effective algorithm for differential diagnosis of GEP-NET diarrhoea.