ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Recently, carbon quantum dots (CQDs) have been widely used in various fields, especially in the diagnosis and therapy of neurological disorders, due to their excellent prospects. However, the associated inevitable exposure of CQDs to the environment and the public could have serious severe consequences limiting their safe application and sustainable development. RESULTS: In this study, we found that intranasal treatment of 5 mg/kg BW (20 µL/nose of 0.5 mg/mL) CQDs affected the distribution of multiple metabolites and associated pathways in the brain of mice through the airflow-assisted desorption electrospray ionization mass spectrometry imaging (AFADESI-MSI) technique, which proved effective in discovery has proven to be significantly alerted and research into tissue-specific toxic biomarkers and molecular toxicity analysis. The neurotoxic biomarkers of CQDs identified by MSI analysis mainly contained aminos, lipids and lipid-like molecules which are involved in arginine and proline metabolism, biosynthesis of unsaturated fatty acids, and glutamine and glutamate metabolism, etc. as well as related metabolic enzymes. The levels or expressions of these metabolites and enzymes changed by CQDs in different brain regions would induce neuroinflammation, organelle damage, oxidative stress and multiple programmed cell deaths (PCDs), leading to neurodegeneration, such as Parkinson's disease-like symptoms. This study enlightened risk assessments and interventions of QD-type or carbon-based nanoparticles on the nervous system based on toxic biomarkers regarding region-specific profiling of altered metabolic signatures. CONCLUSION: These findings provide information to advance knowledge of neurotoxic effects of CQDs and guide their further safety evaluation.
Subject(s)
Neurotoxicity Syndromes , Quantum Dots , Mice , Animals , Quantum Dots/toxicity , Carbon/toxicity , Carbon/chemistry , Metabolomics/methods , Brain , Neurotoxicity Syndromes/etiology , BiomarkersABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The goal of this study was to review relevant randomized controlled trials or case-control studies to determine the clinical efficacy of minodronate in the treatment of osteoporosis. METHOD: The relevant studies were identified on PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases using appropriate keywords. Pertinent sources in the literature were also reviewed, and all articles published through October 2019 were considered for inclusion. For each study, we assessed odds ratios, mean difference, and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) to evaluate and synthesize outcomes. RESULT: Thirteen studies comprising 3740 patients were included in this study. Compared with other drugs, minodronate significantly decreased N-telopeptide of type I collagen/creatinine (weighted mean difference [WMD]: -13.669, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -23.108 to -4.229), bone alkaline phosphatase (BAP) (WMD: -1.26, 95% CI: -2.04 to -0.47) and tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase 5b (WMD: -154.11, 95% CI: -277.85 to -30.37). Minodronate combined with other drugs would significantly decrease BAP (WMD: -3.10, 95% CI: -5.20 to -1.00) than minodronate. Minodronate-naïve would significantly decrease BAP (WMD: -3.00, 95% CI: -5.47 to 0.53) and tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase 5b (WMD: -128.20, 95% CI: -198.11 to -58.29) than minodronate-switch. The incidence of vertebral fracture was significantly decreased in the minodronate group than the other drugs (relative risk: 0.520, 95% CI: 0.363-0.744). CONCLUSION: Minodronate has better clinical efficacy in the treatment of osteoporosis than other drugs (alendronate, risedronate, raloxifene, or eldecalcitol).
