Tolerability and Feasibility of the Upper Esophageal Sphincter Assist Device in Preventing Acute and Chronic Allograft Rejection Among Lung Transplant Recipients.

GOALS: We aimed to evaluate a novel upper esophageal sphincter (UES) assist device loaner program for the prevention of acute cellular rejection and chronic lung allograft dysfunction among lung transplant (LTx) recipients. BACKGROUND: Laryngopharyngeal reflux can lead to chronic microaspiration and LTx rejection. The UES assist device applies external pressure at the level of UES to decrease reflux. STUDY: We prospectively enrolled and issued UES assist devices to consecutive transplant patients referred for gastrointestinal motility testing from 2016 to 2020. Device tolerability was defined by successful utilization as a bridge to ambulatory pH monitoring and/or antireflux procedure, or as permanent therapy. Incidence of rejection was analyzed before, during, and after device implementation. RESULTS: Twenty-six participants were issued devices (15 pathologic, 5 physiological, 6 unknown reflux status), none of whom developed acute rejection episodes or chronic lung allograft dysfunction while using the device. Thirteen adopted the device promptly after transplantation (mean 1.7 mo) and remained free of rejection episodes over a mean 24.7 months of follow-up. Among those with pathologic reflux, lag time to device adoption strongly correlated with the development of rejection ( r =0.8, P =0.0006). There was no such correlation among those with physiological reflux. Five developed acute rejection after device return. CONCLUSIONS: The device was tolerated by a majority of LTx patients and appears feasible as a barrier measure in the prevention of rejection. Delayed treatment of laryngopharyngeal reflux may lead to early allograft failure; therefore, the UES assist device should be given important consideration in transplant protection.

West Nile encephalitis mimicking neuropsychiatric lupus in a patient with systemic lupus erythematosus.

A man in his 70s with known systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) was admitted with confusion, worsening proteinuria and cutaneous vasculitis despite adherence to his home immunosuppressive regimen. Admission laboratories were consistent with active lupus. Despite treatment with pulse-dose glucocorticoids and intravenous immunoglobulin, he developed worsening mental status and meningeal signs. Investigations revealed cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) neutrophilic and plasmacytic pleocytosis and negative cultures. Empiric treatment for SLE flare with potential neuropsychiatric involvement was continued while workup for altered mental status was ongoing. Ultimately, West Nile encephalitis was diagnosed by CSF serologies, and steroids were tapered. Altered mental status in a patient with SLE has a broad differential, and primary neuropsychiatric SLE should be considered only after exclusion of secondary causes. Although evidence of end-organ SLE activity usually lends support to a neuropsychiatric SLE diagnosis, in this case, serological and clinical evidence of SLE activity may have been triggered by acute viral infection.

Cancer chemoprevention: current state of the art.

The aim of cancer chemoprevention is disruption or delay of the molecular pathways that lead to carcinogenesis. Chemopreventive blocking and/or suppressing agents disrupt the molecular mechanisms that drive carcinogenesis such as DNA damage by reactive oxygen species, increased signal transduction to NF-κB, epigenomic deregulation, and the epithelial mesenchymal transition that leads to metastatic progression. Numerous dietary phytochemicals have been observed to inhibit the initiation phase of carcinogenesis, and therefore are useful in primary chemoprevention. Moreover, phytochemicals are capable of interfering with the molecular mechanisms of metastasis. Likewise, numerous synthetic compounds are relevant and clinically viable as chemopreventive agents during the fundamental stages of carcinogenesis. While molecularly targeted anti-cancer therapies are in constant stages of development, superior patient outcomes are observed if carcinogenic processes are prevented altogether. This article reviews the role of chemopreventive compounds in inhibition of cancer initiation and their ability to reduce cancer progression.