Intracranial compliance in type 2 diabetes mellitus and its relationship with the cardiovascular autonomic nervous control

The intracranial compliance in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients and the association with cardiovascular autonomic control have not been fully elucidated. The aim of this study was to assess intracranial compliance using the noninvasive intracranial pressure (niICP) and the monitoring of waveform peaks (P1, P2, and P3) and the relationship with cardiovascular autonomic control in T2DM patients. Thirty-two men aged 40-60 years without cardiovascular autonomic neuropathy (CAN) were studied: T2DMG (n=16) and control group CG (n=16). The niICP was evaluated by a noninvasive extracranial sensor placed on the scalp. Cardiovascular autonomic control was evaluated by indices of the baroreflex sensitivity (BRS), from temporal series of R-R intervals of electrocardiogram and systolic arterial pressure, during supine and orthostatic positions. The participants remained in the supine position for 15 min and then 15 min more in orthostatism. T2DMG presented a decrease of the P2/P1 ratio during the orthostatic position (P<0.001). There was a negative moderate correlation between the P2 peak with cardiovascular coupling (K2HP-SAPLF) in supine (r=-0.612, P=0.011) and orthostatic (r=-0.568, P=0.020) positions in T2DMG. We concluded that T2DM patients without CAN and cardiovascular complications presented intracranial compliance similar to healthy subjects. Despite preserved intracranial adjustments, T2DM patients had a response of greater magnitude in orthostatism. In addition, the decoupling between the heart period and blood pressure signal oscillations in low frequency appeared to be related to the worsening of intracranial compliance due to the increased P2 peak.

WITHDRAWN: Low level laser therapy (Classes III) for treating osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND: Osteoarthritis (OA) affects a large portion of the population. Low Level Laser Therapy (LLLT) is a light source that generates extremely pure light, of a single wavelength. The effect is not thermal, but rather related to photochemical reactions in the cells. LLLT was introduced as an alternative non-invasive treatment for OA about 30 years ago, but its effectiveness has to be examined more closely, especially in the treatment of OA. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of class III LLLT for osteoarthritis when irradiation is directed at the osteoarthritic joint capsule. SEARCH STRATEGY: Searches were conducted in the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Musculoskeletal registry, the Rehabilitation and Related Therapies field registry and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register up to May, 2005. SELECTION CRITERIA: Following an a prior protocol, only controlled clinical trials of LLLT for the treatment of patients with a clinical diagnosis of OA were eligible. Abstracts lacking data were excluded unless further data could be obtained from the authors. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently selected trials and extracted data using predetermined forms. A fixed effects model was used throughout for continuous variables, except where heterogeneity existed; in which case, a random effects model was used. Results were analyzed as weighted mean differences (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI), whereas the difference between the treatment and control groups was weighted by the inverse of the variance. Standardized mean differences (SMD) were calculated by dividing the difference between treatment and control by the baseline variance, and were used in the analysis of pain because different scales were used to measure it. Dichotomous outcomes were analyzed with relative risk (RR). MAIN RESULTS: Eight trials were included with 233 patients randomized to laser and 172 patients to placebo laser. Treatment duration ranged from two to six weeks. Pain was assessed in seven trials. When the results were pooled from different pain scales used in these seven trials, a statistically significant difference in favor of laser treatment was found with a SMD of -0.28 (95% CI: -0.48 to -0.09). One of these studies also measured pain during movement and found a statistically significant difference in favor of laser treatment with a WMD of -1.16 (95% CI: -2.02 to -0.30). Two studies found significant results for increased knee range of motion. Two others studies found a statistically significant difference in favor of laser treatment for patient-assessed global disease activity with laser compared to placebo (RR 1.70, 95%CI: 1.1. to 2.63). One trial evaluated the effectiveness of laser treatment in temporomandibular joint OA and found a statistically significant difference (WMD 38.69, 95% CI: 29.25 to 48.13) using the change in VAS score to measure pain. One study found a statistically significant difference in favor of laser treatment at the end of treatment and at 4 and 8 weeks post-treatment for morning stiffness. Other outcome measures of joint tenderness and strength did not yield significant differences. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Five trials included in this review showed a statistically significant difference favoring laser treatment when compared to placebo for at least one outcome measure. Three trials did not report beneficial effects. The varying results of these trials may be due to the method of laser application and/or other features of LLLT application. Clinicians and researchers should consistently report the characteristics of LLLT devices and application techniques used. New trials on LLLT should make use of standardized, validated outcomes. There is clearly a need to investigate the effects of different dosages on LLLT effectiveness for OA in future randomized, controlled clinical trials. Also, more studies should be done to investigate the anti-inflammatory action of laser as well as the appropriate parameters needed to achieve an anti-inflammatory effect.

Competition enzyme-linked immunosorbant assay (ELISA) can be a sensitive method for the specific detection of small quantities of allergen in a complex mixture.

RATIONALE: The competition ELISA assay is used to determine the potency of US standardized allergen extracts. We have been concerned that the competition ELISA is not sensitive to changes in individual allergen levels. This study was designed to determine the sensitivity of the competition ELISA to detect the specific loss of Bla g 1 and Bla g 2 in cockroach extracts. METHODS: German cockroach extract E3Cg was made from defatted German cockroaches. New Zealand White rabbits were immunized with rBla g 1 or rBla g 2. Optimal dilutions of anti-Bla g 1 and anti-Bla g 2 sera were established by ELISA. E3Cg was selectively depleted of Bla g 1 or Bla g 2 by immunoabsorption with anti-Bla g 1 or anti-Bla g 2 attached to Protein G agarose beads. Competition ELISA using pooled human sera, or mixed anti-Bla g 1 and anti-Bla g 2 serum, was performed on the depleted extracts, and on depleted extracts reconstituted with rBla g 1 or rBla g 2. RESULTS: Unlike pooled human-allergic IgE sera, anti-Bla g 1 and anti-Bla g 2 IgG -- in dilutions as low as 10(-6), could be used in the competition ELISA to measure the loss of allergen in depleted E3Cg. As little as 0.001 microg/mL of added rBla g 1 and 0.1 microg/mL of added rBla g 2, could be detected. CONCLUSION: The competition ELISA can be highly sensitive to compositional differences in complex allergen mixtures, even when the specific detecting antibody is present in relatively small amounts.

Low level laser therapy (Classes I, II and III) for treating rheumatoid arthritis.

BACKGROUND: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) affects a large proportion of the population. Low Level Laser Therapy (LLLT) was introduced as an alternative non-invasive treatment for RA about ten years ago. LLLT is a light source that generates extremely pure light, of a single wavelength. The effect is not thermal, but rather related to photochemical reactions in the cells. The effectiveness of LLLT for rheumatoid arthritis is still controversial. This review is an update of the original review published in October 1998. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of LLLT in the treatment of RA. SEARCH STRATEGY: We initially searched MEDLINE, EMBASE (from 1998), the registries of the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group and the field of Rehabilitation and Related Therapies as well as the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) up to June 2001. This search has now been updated to include articles published up to June 2005. SELECTION CRITERIA: Following an a priori protocol, only randomized controlled trials of LLLT for the treatment of patients with a clinical diagnosis of RA were eligible. Abstracts were excluded unless further data could be obtained from the authors. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently selected trials for inclusion, then extracted data and assessed quality using predetermined forms. Heterogeneity was tested using chi-squared. A fixed effects model was used throughout for continuous variables, except where heterogeneity existed, in which case, a random effects model was used. Results were analyzed as weighted mean differences (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI), where the difference between the treated and control groups was weighted by the inverse of the variance. Dichotomous outcomes were analyzed with relative risks. MAIN RESULTS: A total of 222 patients were included in the five placebo-controlled trials, with 130 randomized to laser therapy. Relative to a separate control group, LLLT reduced pain by 1.10 points (95% CI: 1.82, 0.39) on visual analogue scale relative to placebo, reduced morning stiffness duration by 27.5 minutes (95%CI: 2.9 to 52 minutes) and increased tip to palm flexibility by 1.3 cm (95% CI: 0.8 to 1.7). Other outcomes such as functional assessment, range of motion and local swelling did not differ between groups. There were no significant differences between subgroups based on LLLT dosage, wavelength, site of application or treatment length. For RA, relative to a control group using the opposite hand, there was no difference observed between the control and treatment hand for morning stiffness duration, and also no significant improvement in pain relief RR 13.00 (95% CI: 0.79 to 214.06). However, only one study was included as using the contralateral limb as control. . AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: LLLT could be considered for short-term treatment for relief of pain and morning stiffness for RA patients, particularly since it has few side-effects. Clinicians and researchers should consistently report the characteristics of the LLLT device and the application techniques used. New trials on LLLT should make use of standardized, validated outcomes. Despite some positive findings, this meta-analysis lacked data on how LLLT effectiveness is affected by four important factors: wavelength, treatment duration of LLLT, dosage and site of application over nerves instead of joints. There is clearly a need to investigate the effects of these factors on LLLT effectiveness for RA in randomized controlled clinical trials.

[Stupor due to sleep apnea syndrome after total knee replacement].

Obstructive sleep apnea syndrome is defined as a condition of repeated episodes of apnea and hypopnea during sleep, accompanied by excessive daytime sleepiness. This syndrome is common among the adult population, and is related to an increased risk for significant complications, during and immediately after surgery. Often, this condition is undiagnosed, and is not considered in the pre-operative evaluation. Therefore, it is highly important to recognize this syndrome in patients who are scheduled for elective surgery, and provide appropriate management, in order to avoid life-threatening exacerbation in the perioperative period. Although this syndrome is common, there is low awareness of its expression in elective surgery in-patients. We present a case report of a patient who suffered from obstructive sleep apnea related respiratory distress following total knee replacement surgery.

Exploiting the avian immunoglobulin system to simplify the generation of recombinant antibodies to allergenic proteins.

BACKGROUND: Monoclonal antibodies are a valuable tool in the study of allergens, but the technology used in their generation can be slow and labour-intensive. Therefore, we have examined recombinant antibody development by phage-display against single allergens and protein mixtures. OBJECTIVE: We used the avian immunoglobulin system (generated from single V(H) and V(L) genes) to provide a rapid method for generating highly specific recombinant antibody fragments from a minimal number of animals. METHODS: A single-chain antibody fragment (scFv) library was generated from a single chicken immunized with model allergens. ScFvs were isolated by phage-display and their properties investigated by ELISA and Western blot. RESULTS: Mono-specific scFvs were generated against recombinant Fel d 1 and native Amb a 1. Pannings against yellow jacket venom extracts only yielded clones that reacted with multiple proteins in the venom extract. The scFvs from each panning type were effectively expressed in Escherichia coli and readily purified. Highly specific and sensitive recognition of Fel d 1 and Amb a 1 was demonstrated in ELISA, with scFvs displaying antibody-concentration-dependent absorbance curves down to picogram levels of antibody. The specificity of selected antibodies for their cognate antigen was further confirmed in Western blot analysis, with scFvs directed to either Fel d 1 or Amb a 1 showing no reactivity for the other antigens used in immunization. Anti-Amb a 1 scFvs also mapped Amb a 1-isoform location in Western blot of ragweed extracts separated by 2D SDS-PAGE. DNA sequence analysis of scFvs showed that multiple different clones had been generated against Fel d 1 and Amb a 1. Using two anti-Fel d 1 scFv for ELISA analysis of Fel d 1 content in crude cat pelt extracts, we could produce data which were highly similar (P=0.33 and 0.89 by paired t-test analysis) to those obtained using conventional assays (radial immunodiffusion). CONCLUSION: Phage-display technology may generate multiple allergen-specific recombinant antibody fragments from a single chicken, to allergens from mammalian, plant and insect sources. The resulting antibody fragments are of demonstrable use in allergen identification and quantification, in comparison with standard immunoassays.

Low level laser therapy (Classes I, II and III) for treating osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND: Osteoarthritis (OA) affects a large proportion of the population. Low Level Laser Therapy (LLLT) is a light source that generates extremely pure light, of a single wavelength. The effect is not thermal, but rather related to photochemical reactions in the cells. LLLT was introduced as an alternative non-invasive treatment for OA about 20 years ago, but its effectiveness is still controversial. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of LLLT in the treatment of OA. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Musculoskeletal registry, the registry of the Rehabilitation and Related Therapies field and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register up to January 30, 2004. SELECTION CRITERIA: Following an a priori protocol, only controlled clinical trials of LLLT for the treatment of patients with a clinical diagnosis of OA were eligible. Abstracts were excluded unless further data could be obtained from the authors. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently selected trials and abstracted data using predetermined forms. Heterogeneity was tested with Cochran's Q test. A fixed effects model was used throughout for continuous variables, except where heterogeneity existed, in which case, a random effects model was used. Results were analyzed as weighted mean differences (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI), where the difference between the treated and control groups was weighted by the inverse of the variance. Standardized mean differences (SMD) were calculated by dividing the difference between treated and control by the baseline variance. SMD were used when different scales were used to measure the same concept (e.g. pain). Dichotomous outcomes were analyzed with odds ratios. MAIN RESULTS: Seven trials were included, with 184 patients randomized to laser, 161 patients to placebo laser. Treatment duration ranged from 4 to 12 weeks. Pain was assessed by four trials. The pooled estimate (random effects) of three trials showed no effect on pain measured using a scale (SMD: -0.2, 95% CI: -1.0, +0.6), but there was statistically significant heterogeneity (p>0,05). Three of the trials showed no effect and two demonstrated very beneficial effects with laser. In another trial, with no scale-based pain outcome, significantly more patients reported pain relief (yes/no) with laser with an odds ratio of 0.05, (95% CI: 0.0 to 1.56). Only one study found significant results for increased knee range of motion (WMD: -10.62 degrees, 95% CI: -14.07,-7.17). Other outcomes of joint tenderness and strength were not significant. Lower dosage of LLLT was found as effective than higher dosage for reducing pain and improving knee range of motion. REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS: For OA, the results are conflicting in different studies and may depend on the method of application and other features of the LLLT application. Clinicians and researchers should consistently report the characteristics of the LLLT device and the application techniques used. New trials on LLLT should make use of standardized, validated outcomes. Despite some positive findings, this meta-analysis lacked data on how LLLT effectiveness is affected by four important factors: wavelength, treatment duration of LLLT, dosage and site of application over nerves instead of joints. There is clearly a need to investigate the effects of these factors on LLLT effectiveness for OA in randomized controlled clinical trials.

Low level laser therapy (Classes I, II and III) for treating osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND: Osteoarthritis (OA) affects a large proportion of the population. Low Level Laser Therapy (LLLT) is a light source that generates extremely pure light, of a single wavelength. The effect is not thermal, but rather related to photochemical reactions in the cells. LLLT was introduced as an alternative non-invasive treatment for OA about 10 years ago, but its effectiveness is still controversial. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of LLLT in the treatment of OA. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Musculoskeletal registry, the registry of the Rehabilitation and Related Therapies field and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register up to December 31, 2002. SELECTION CRITERIA: Following an a priori protocol, only controlled clinical trials of LLLT for the treatment of patients with a clinical diagnosis of OA were eligible. Abstracts were excluded unless further data could be obtained from the authors. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently selected trials and abstracted data using predetermined forms. Heterogeneity was tested with Cochran's Q test. A fixed effects model was used throughout for continuous variables, except where heterogeneity existed, in which case, a random effects model was used. Results were analyzed as weighted mean differences (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI), where the difference between the treated and control groups was weighted by the inverse of the variance. Standardized mean differences (SMD) were calculated by dividing the difference between treated and control by the baseline variance. SMD were used when different scales were used to measure the same concept (e.g. pain). Dichotomous outcomes were analyzed with odds ratios. MAIN RESULTS: Five trials were included, with 112 patients randomized to laser, 85 patients to placebo laser. Treatment duration ranged from 4 to 10 weeks. Pain was assessed by four trials. The pooled estimate (random effects) of three trials showed no statistically different effect on pain measured using a scale (SMD: -0.2, 95% CI: -1.0, +0.6), but there was statistically significant heterogeneity (p>0,05). Two of the trials showed no effect and one demonstrated very beneficial effects with laser. In another trial, with no scale-based pain outcome, significantly more patients reported pain relief (yes/no) with laser with an odds ratio of 0.05, (95% CI: 0.0 to 1.56). Other outcomes of joint tenderness, joint mobility and strength were not significant. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: For OA, the results are conflicting in different studies and may depend on the method of application and other features of the LLLT application. Clinicians and researchers should consistently report the characteristics of the LLLT device and the application techniques used. New trials on LLLT should make use of standardized, validated outcomes. Despite some positive findings, this meta-analysis lacked data on how LLLT effectiveness is affected by four important factors: wavelength, treatment duration of LLLT, dosage and site of application over nerves instead of joints. There is clearly a need to investigate the effects of these factors on LLLT effectiveness for OA in randomized controlled clinical trials.

Skin test antigens for immediate hypersensitivity prepared from infective larvae of Strongyloides stercoralis.

More rapid and simplified diagnostic procedures are needed for the diagnosis of strongyloidiasis. One approach is the use of an immediate hypersensitivity skin test that would reliably identify infected people. Accordingly, somatic and excretion/secretion (E/S) antigens were prepared from filariform larvae of Strongyloides stercoralis and were treated to remove possible adventitious agents. By use of a quantitative method for measurement of skin reactions, several preparations of the 2 antigens were tested in uninfected controls and in various groups of patients. Doses of 0.35 microg of E/S and 4 microg of somatic antigens elicited positive skin tests in 82-100% of infected people, depending on clinical status. A lower frequency of positive skin tests was found in strongyloidiasis patients also infected with human T-cell lymphotropic virus type 1. Cross-reactions, especially to somatic antigens, were frequently found in patients with filarial infections. Despite these limitations and the need for further study of specificity, these results provide a basis for future development of a diagnostic skin test antigen for strongyloidiasis.

Influence of human T-cell lymphocytotropic virus type 1 infection on serologic and skin tests for strongyloidiasis.

The aim of this study was to determine whether human T-cell lymphocytotropic virus type 1 (HTLV-1) infection may affect the levels of parasite-specific immunoglobulin (Ig) G and IgE and the positivity of the skin test for strongyloidiasis. Participants included 67 patients with strongyloidiasis (40 without HTLV-1 infection and 27 coinfected with HTLV-1). We determined IgG and IgE levels by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, and the immediate hypersensitivity skin test was performed with the metabolic Strongyloides stercoralis antigen. Specific IgE levels and the size of skin reactions in patients without HTLV-1 were higher (P < 0.01) than those observed in patients coinfected with HTLV-1. Additionally, 89% of patients without HTLV-1 had specific IgE and 92.5% had positive skin tests; however, these values were significantly reduced (P < 0.01) in patients coinfected with HTLV-1 (44% and 59%, respectively). These data show that HTLV-1 infection decreases the sensitivity of detection of S. stercoralis-specific IgE, the size of the immediate hypersensitivity reaction, and the sensitivity of these tests in the diagnosis of strongyloidiasis.

Resistance to treatment in Kala-azar: speciation of isolates from northeast India.

Kala-azar in India is becoming increasingly difficult to treat, which may be due to the presence of species other than Leishmania donovani; Leishmania tropica was reported to cause the same clinical syndrome in the area. Over the past 3 years, we have collected samples from 241 patients with visceral leishmaniasis from across the region. Of the 189 isolates that grew on diphasic medium, 159 were successfully transferred to liquid medium for typing. Clinically, 80% of these were resistant to antimony. Lipophosphoglycan-specific monoclonal antibodies were used to distinguish the 2 species by agglutination of promastigotes; all 159 were shown to be L. donovani. Eighty-three isolates were confirmed to be L. donovani by isoenzyme analysis, by amplification of kinetoplast DNA, or both, in comparison with multiple reference strains; none were L. tropica. Thus, the rising incidence of clinical resistance to treatment is unlikely to be due to a different species causing kala-azar in north Bihar.

Immunogenicity of well-characterized synthetic Plasmodium falciparum multiple antigen peptide conjugates.

Given the emerging difficulties with malaria drug resistance and vector control, as well as the persistent lack of an effective vaccine, new malaria vaccine development strategies are needed. We used a novel methodology to synthesize and fully characterize multiple antigen peptide (MAP) conjugates containing protective epitopes from Plasmodium falciparum and evaluated their immunogenicity in four different strains of mice. A di-epitope MAP (T3-T1) containing two T-cell epitopes of liver stage antigen-1 (LSA-1), a di-epitope MAP containing T-cell epitopes from LSA-1 and from merozoite surface protein-1, and a tri-epitope MAP (T3-CS-T1) containing T3-T1 and a potent B-cell epitope from the circumsporozoite protein central repeat region were tested in this study. Mice of all four strains produced peptide-specific antibodies; however, the magnitude of the humoral response indicated strong genetic restriction between the different strains of mice. Anti-MAP antibodies recognized stage-specific proteins on the malaria parasites in an immunofluorescence assay. In addition, serum from hybrid BALB/cJ x A/J CAF1 mice that had been immunized with the tri-epitope MAP T3-CS-T1 successfully inhibited the malaria sporozoite invasion of hepatoma cells in vitro. Spleen cells from immunized mice also showed a genetically restricted cellular immune response when stimulated with the immunogen in vitro. This study indicates that well-characterized MAPs combining solid-phase synthesis and conjugation chemistries are potent immunogens and that this approach can be utilized for the development of subunit vaccines.

Low level laser therapy for osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis: a metaanalysis.

OBJECTIVE: Osteoarthritis (OA) and rheumatoid arthritis (RA) affect a large proportion of the population. Low level laser therapy (LLLT) was introduced as an alternative noninvasive treatment for RA and OA about 10 years ago, but its effectiveness is still controversial. We assessed the effectiveness of LLLT in the treatment of RA and OA. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted, following an a priori protocol, according to the methods recommended by the Cochrane Collaboration. Trials were identified by a literature search of Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register. Only randomized controlled trials of LLLT for the treatment of patients with a clinical diagnosis of RA or OA were eligible. Thirteen trials were included, with 212 patients randomized to laser and 174 patients to placebo laser, and 68 patients received active laser on one hand and placebo on the opposite hand. Treatment duration ranged from 4 to 10 weeks. Followup was reported by only 2 trials for up to 3 months. RESULTS: In patients with RA, relative to a separate control group, LLLT reduced pain by 70% relative to placebo and reduced morning stiffness by 27.5 min (95% CI -52.0 to -2.9), and increased tip to palm flexibility by 1.3 cm (95% CI -1.7 to -0.8). Other outcomes such as functional assessment, range of motion, and local swelling were not different between groups. There were no significant differences between subgroups based on LLLT dosage, wavelength, site of application, or treatment length. In RA, relative to a control group using the opposite hand, there was no difference between control and treatment hand, but all hands were improved in terms of pain relief and disease activity. For OA, a total of 197 patients were randomized. Pain was assessed by 3 trials. The pooled estimate (random effects) showed no effect on pain (standardized mean difference -0.2, 95% CI -1.0 to +0.6), but there was statistically significant heterogeneity (p > 0.05). Other outcomes of joint tenderness, joint mobility, and strength were not significant. CONCLUSION: LLLT should be considered for short term relief of pain and morning stiffness in RA, particularly since it has few side effects. For OA, the results are conflicting in different studies and may depend on the method of application and other features of the LLLT. Clinicians and researchers should consistently report the characteristics of the LLLT device and the application techniques. New trials on LLLT should make use of standardized, validated outcomes. Despite some positive findings, this metaanalysis lacked data on how effectiveness of LLLT is affected by 4 factors: wavelength, treatment duration of LLLT, dosage, and site of application over nerves instead of joints. There is a need to investigate the effects of these factors on effectiveness of LLLT for RA and OA in randomized controlled clinical trials.

Low level laser therapy (classes I, II and III) for the treatment of osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND: Osteoarthritis (OA) affects a large proportion of the population. Low Level Laser Therapy (LLLT) is a light source that generates extremely pure light, of a single wavelength. The effect is not thermal, but rather related to photochemical reactions in the cells. LLLT was introduced as an alternative non-invasive treatment for OA about 10 years ago, but its effectiveness is still controversial. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of LLLT in the treatment of OA. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Musculoskeletal registry, the registry of the Rehabilitation and Related Thereapies field and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register up to January 30, 2000. SELECTION CRITERIA: Following an a priori protocol, only controlled clinical trials of LLLT for the treatment of patients with a clinical diagnosis of OA were eligible. Abstracts were excluded unless further data could be obtained from the authors. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently selected trials and abstracted data using predetermined forms. Heterogeneity was tested with Cochran's Q test. A fixed effects model was used throughout for continuous variables, except where heterogeneity existed, in which case, a random effects model was used. Results were analyzed as weighted mean differences (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI), where the difference between the treated and control groups was weighted by the inverse of the variance. Standardized mean differences (SMD) were calculated by dividing the difference between treated and control by the baseline variance. SMD were used when different scales were used to measure the same concept (e.g. pain). Dichotomous outcomes were analyzed with odds ratios. MAIN RESULTS: Five trials were included, with 112 patients randomized to laser, 85 patients to placebo laser. Treatment duration ranged from 4 to 10 weeks. Pain was assessed by four trials. The pooled estimate (random effects) of three trials showed no effect on pain measured using a scale (SMD: -0.2, 95% CI: -1.0, +0.6), but there was statistically significant heterogeneity (p>0,05). Two of the trials showed no effect and one demonstrated very beneficial effects with laser. In another trial, with no scale-based pain outcome, significantly more patients reported pain relief (yes/no) with laser with an odds ratio of 0.05, (95% CI: 0.0 to 1.56). Other outcomes of joint tenderness, joint mobility and strength were not significant. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: For OA, the results are conflicting in different studies and may depend on the method of application and other features of the LLLT application. Clinicians and researchers should consistently report the characteristics of the LLLT device and the application techniques used. New trials on LLLT should make use of standardized, validated outcomes. Despite some positive findings, this meta-analysis lacked data on how LLLT effectiveness is affected by four important factors: wavelength, treatment duration of LLLT, dosage and site of application over nerves instead of joints. There is clearly a need to investigate the effects of these factors on LLLT effectiveness for OA in randomized controlled clinical trials.

Low level laser therapy (classes I, II and III) in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis.

BACKGROUND: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) affects a large proportion of the population. Low Level Laser Therapy (LLLT) was introduced as an alternative non-invasive treatment for RA about 10 years ago. LLLT is a light source that generates extremely pure light, of a single wavelength. The effect is not thermal, but rather related to photochemical reactions in the cells. The effectiveness of LLLT for rheumatoid arthritis is still controversial. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of LLLT in the treatment of RA. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the registries of the Cochrane Musculoskeletal group and the field of Rehabilitation and Related Therapies as well as the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register up to January 30, 2000. SELECTION CRITERIA: Following an a priori protocol, we selected only randomized controlled trials of LLLT for the treatment of patients with a clinical diagnosis of RA were eligible. Abstracts were excluded unless further data could be obtained from the authors. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently select trials for inclusion, then extracted data and assessed quality using predetermined forms. Heterogeneity was tested with Cochran's Q test. A fixed effects model was used throughout for continuous variables, except where heterogeneity existed, in which case, a random effects model was used. Results were analyzed as weighted mean differences (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI), where the difference between the treated and control groups was weighted by the inverse of the variance. Standardized mean differences (SMD) were calculated by dividing the difference between treated and control by the baseline variance. SMD were used when different scales were used to measure the same concept (e.g. pain). Dichotomous outcomes were analyzed with odds ratios. MAIN RESULTS: A total of 204 patients were included in the five placebo-controlled trials, with 112 randomized to laser therapy. Relative to a separate control group, LLLT reduced pain by 70% relative to placebo and reduced morning stiffness duration by 27.5 minutes (95%CI: 2.9 to 52 minutes) and increased tip to palm flexibility by 1.3 cm (95% CI: 0. 8 to 1.7 cm). Other outcomes such as functional assessment, range of motion and local swelling did not differ between groups. There were no significant differences between subgroups based on LLLT dosage, wavelength, site of application or treatment length. For RA, relative to a control group using the opposite hand, there was no difference between the control and treatment hand, but all hands improved in terms of pain relief and disease activity. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: In summary, LLLT for RA is beneficial as a minimum of a four-week treatment with reductions in pain and morning stiffness. On the one hand, this meta-analysis found that pooled data gave some evidence of a clinical effect, but the outcomes were in conflict, and it must therefore be concluded that firm documentation of the application of LLLT in RA is not possible. Clinicians and researchers should consistently report the characteristics of the LLLT device and the application techniques used. New trials on LLLT should make use of standardized, validated outcomes. Despite some positive findings, this meta-analysis lacked data on how LLLT effectiveness is affected by four important factors: wavelength, treatment duration of LLLT, dosage and site of application over nerves instead of joints.

Inhibition of interferon-gamma signaling by Leishmania donovani.

Leishmania infection causes marked down-regulation of interferon (IFN)-gamma-induced gene activity in macrophages, but the mechanism of the blockade has not been fully defined. The IFN-gamma signal transduction pathway was analyzed in Leishmania donovani-infected phorbol-differentiated U937 human promonocytic cells. IFN-gamma stimulation induced marked phosphorylation of its own receptor (IFN-gammaR)-alpha chain. Phosphorylation of the receptor subunit was significantly inhibited after 24 h of infection with the parasite, apparently because of decreased amounts of the receptor subunit. Formation of the IFN-gammaR complex, as assessed by tyrosine phosphorylation and association of Jak2, was strongly inhibited in cells infected for 24 h. Inhibition of the IFN-gammaR complex formation correlated with inhibition of STAT1alpha binding to the IFN-gamma response region. Pretreatment with purified parasite lipophosphoglycan before IFN-gamma stimulation had no effect on tyrosine phosphorylation. Thus, inhibition of tyrosine phosphorylation of the IFN-gammaR-alpha chain and subsequent signal transduction are most likely due to the decreased amount of IFN-gammaR-alpha protein after infection.

Protective immunity using recombinant human IL-12 and alum as adjuvants in a primate model of cutaneous leishmaniasis.

Protection from cutaneous leishmaniasis, a chronic ulcerating skin lesion affecting millions, has been achieved historically using live virulent preparations of the parasite. Killed or recombinant Ags that could be safer as vaccines generally require an adjuvant for induction of a strong Th1 response in murine models. Murine rIL-12 as an adjuvant with soluble Leishmania Ag has been shown to protect susceptible mice. We used 48 rhesus macaques to assess the safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy of a vaccine combining heat-killed Leishmania amazonensis with human rIL-12 (rhIL-12) and alum (aluminum hydroxide gel) as adjuvants. The single s.c. vaccination was found to be safe and immunogenic, although a small transient s.c. nodule developed at the site. Groups receiving rhIL-12 had an augmented in vitro Ag-specific IFN-gamma response after vaccination, as well as increased production of IgG. No increase in IL-4 or IL-10 was found in cell culture supernatants from either control or experimental groups. Delayed hypersensitivity reactions were not predictive of protection. Intradermal forehead challenge infection with 107 metacyclic L. amazonensis promastigotes at 4 wk demonstrated protective immunity in all 12 monkeys receiving 2 microgram rhIL-12 with alum and Ag. Partial efficacy was seen with lower doses of rhIL-12 and in groups lacking either adjuvant. Thus, a single dose vaccine with killed Ag using rhIL-12 and alum as adjuvants was safe and fully effective in this primate model of cutaneous leishmaniasis. This study extends the murine data to primates, and provides a basis for further human trials.

Evidence that the high incidence of treatment failures in Indian kala-azar is due to the emergence of antimony-resistant strains of Leishmania donovani.

The possibility that the high frequency of treatment failures in Indian kala-azar might be due to infection with antimony-resistant strains of Leishmania donovani has not been experimentally addressed. L. donovani isolates were obtained from splenic aspiration smears of 24 patients in Bihar, India, who either did not respond (15) or did respond (9) to 1 or more full courses of treatment with sodium antimony gluconate (SAG). A strong correlation (P<.001) between clinical response and SAG sensitivity in vitro was observed only when strains were assayed as intracellular amastigotes: responsive isolates ED50=2.4+/-2.6, ED90=6.4+/-7.8 microgram SAG/mL; unresponsive isolates ED50=7.4+/-3.7 microgram SAG/mL, ED90=29.1+/-11.1 SAG/mL. No correlation with clinical response was found by use of extracellular promastigotes (ED50=48+/-22 vs. 52+/-29 microgram/mL). The emergence of antimony-resistant L. donovani strains appears to be a cause of treatment failures in India.