Transfer of maternal immunity to piglets is involved in early protection against Mycoplasma hyosynoviae infection.

Mycoplasma hyosynoviae causes arthritis in pigs older than 12 weeks. The role of colostrum in protection of piglets against M. hyosynoviae infection is not clear. Our objective was therefore to investigate whether transfer of maternal immunity to piglets was involved in early protection against the infection. Experimental infections were carried out in three groups of weaners receiving different levels of M. hyosynoviae-specific colostrum components; Group NC derived from Mycoplasma free sows and possessed no specific immunity to M. hyosynoviae. Group CAb pigs, siblings of the NC group, received colostrum with M. hyosynoviae-specific antibodies immediately after birth. Group CCE pigs were born and raised by infected sows and presumably had the full set of colostrally transferred factors, including specific antibodies. When 4½ weeks old, all pigs were inoculated intranasally with M. hyosynoviae. The course of infection was measured through clinical observations of lameness, cultivation of M. hyosynoviae from tonsils, blood and synovial fluid and observation for gross pathological lesions in selected joints. Specific immune status in the pigs was evaluated through detection of antibodies by immunoblotting and measurement of M. hyosynoviae-specific T-cell proliferation. The latter analysis may possibly indicate that M. hyosynoviae infection induces a T-cell response. The CCE piglets were significantly protected against development of lameness and pathology, as well as infection with M. hyosynoviae in tonsils, blood and joints, when compared to the two other groups. Raising the CCE pigs in an infected environment until weaning, with carrier sows as mothers, apparently made them resistant to M. hyosynoviae-arthritis when challenge-infected at 4½ weeks of age. More pigs in group NC had M. hyosynoviae related pathological lesions than in group CAb, a difference that was significant for cubital joints when analysed on joint type level. This finding indicates a partially protective effect of passively transferred M. hyosynoviae-specific colostral antibodies upon development of M. hyosynoviae related pathology. Thus, the level of passive immunity transferred from sow to piglet seems to provide, at least partial, protection against development of arthritis. It cannot be ruled out that the CCE pigs, by growing up in an infected environment, have had the chance to establish an active anti-M. hyosynoviae immune response that complements the maternally transferred immune factors. Evident from this study is that the general absence of M. hyosynoviae arthritis in piglets can be ascribed mainly to their immunological status.

Randomised clinical trial: the burden of illness of uninvestigated dyspepsia before and after treatment with esomeprazole--results from the STARS II study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with dyspepsia often experience troublesome symptoms. AIM: To assess the burden of uninvestigated dyspepsia (symptoms, health-related quality of life [HRQL] and work productivity) before and after 8 weeks' esomeprazole treatment. METHODS: Patients (n=1250) with uninvestigated dyspepsia (no endoscopy within 6 months and ≤ 2 endoscopies within 10 years) underwent a 1-week esomeprazole acid-suppression test before randomisation to 7 weeks' esomeprazole or placebo. The Reflux Disease Questionnaire (RDQ), Quality of Life in Reflux and Dyspepsia (QOLRAD) and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) questionnaires were completed at baseline (1-week off-treatment) and 8 weeks. WPAI results were further analysed among patients who responded to the acid-suppression test. RESULTS: The highest baseline symptom score was for the RDQ dyspepsia domain, and the highest disease burden was for QOLRAD vitality and food/drink problems. After 8 weeks, significant improvements vs. placebo were observed for all RDQ and QOLRAD domains. The sub-population of acid-suppression test responders, but not the total WPAI population, had a significant work productivity improvement vs. placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Uninvestigated dyspepsia is associated with high symptom load and impacts on HRQL and work productivity. Esomeprazole improves HRQL among such patients, and improves work productivity among 1-week acid-suppression trial responders. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00251992.

Combination products regulation at the FDA.

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is responsible for protecting the public health by assuring the safety, efficacy, and security of drugs, biological products, and medical devices. As single-entity products, drugs are generally regulated by the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER), devices by the Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH), and biologics by the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER). In recent years, technological advances have led to a blurring of the historical lines of separation between the centers.

One-week acid suppression trial in uninvestigated dyspepsia patients with epigastric pain or burning to predict response to 8 weeks' treatment with esomeprazole: a randomized, placebo-controlled study.

BACKGROUND: While empiric acid-suppressive therapy for uninvestigated dyspepsia patients with symptoms of epigastric pain or burning is standard practice, it is unknown whether an early response to therapy predicts outcome. AIM: To evaluate whether a 1-w acid suppression trial is effective for predicting 8-w response in such patients. METHODS: Helicobacter pylori-negative patients (aged 18-50 years) in primary care with uninvestigated epigastric pain or burning were randomized to esomeprazole 40 mg q.d.s. or b.d. for 1w, followed by esomeprazole 40 mg q.d.s. or placebo for 7w. Each day, patients rated the severity of their symptoms. RESULTS: Based on the last 3d, 1-w response rates were 39% (231 of 588) and 43% (258 of 596) with esomeprazole 40 mg q.d.s. and b.d., respectively. Based on the last 7d, response rates at 4w were 38% (283 of 738) and 25% (93 of 380) for esomeprazole and placebo, respectively, and 47% (339 of 716) and 34% (124 of 368), respectively, at 8w (both P < 0.001 vs. placebo). The sensitivity and specificity of esomeprazole treatment were 58% and 70%, respectively, at 8w. CONCLUSION: A 1-w acid suppression trial is of limited clinical value for predicting 8-w response in patients with symptoms of epigastric pain or burning. Esomeprazole provides greater symptom control than placebo at 4w and 8w.

Randomized-controlled trial of esomeprazole in functional dyspepsia patients with epigastric pain or burning: does a 1-week trial of acid suppression predict symptom response?

BACKGROUND: Early identification of true responders to acid suppression in functional dyspepsia patients with symptoms of epigastric pain or burning may enable clinicians to optimally tailor treatment. AIM: To evaluate whether a 1-w acid suppression trial is useful for identifying true responders in this population. METHODS: Patients (18-70 years) were randomized to either esomeprazole 40 mg q.d.s., b.d. or placebo for 1w, and then esomeprazole 40 mg q.d.s. or placebo for 7w. Epigastric pain and/or burning were recorded on a 4-point scale (0 = none, 3 = severe). Trial-week response was defined as symptom score sum < or = 1 on last 3d of therapy; response at 8w was symptom score sum < or = 1 over preceding 7d. RESULTS: 1-w response rates were 33% (199 of 597), 29% (188 of 629) and 23% (71 of 315) with esomeprazole q.d.s., esomeprazole b.d. and placebo, respectively (P = 0.002 for esomeprazole groups vs. placebo). At 8w, trial week sensitivity and specificity were 46% and 80%, respectively, for esomeprazole (40 or 80 mg), and 33% and 87%, respectively, for placebo. The positive and negative predictive values for esomeprazole were 60% and 69%. CONCLUSION: Response to a 1-w acid suppression trial is of limited use for predicting symptom response at 8w in patients with unexplained epigastric pain or burning.

Esomeprazole 20 mg vs. pantoprazole 20 mg for maintenance therapy of healed erosive oesophagitis: results from the EXPO study.

BACKGROUND: Following initial healing of erosive oesophagitis, most patients require maintenance therapy to prevent relapse. AIM: To compare endoscopic and symptomatic remission rates over 6 months' maintenance therapy with esomeprazole or pantoprazole (both 20 mg once daily) in patients with healed erosive oesophagitis. METHODS: Patients with symptoms of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease and endoscopically confirmed erosive oesophagitis at baseline were randomized to receive esomeprazole 40 mg or pantoprazole 40 mg for up to 8 weeks. Patients with healed erosive oesophagitis and free of moderate/severe heartburn and acid regurgitation at 4 weeks or, if necessary, 8 weeks entered the 6-month maintenance therapy phase of the study. RESULTS: A total of 2766 patients (63% men; mean age 50 years) received esomeprazole 20 mg (n = 1377) or pantoprazole 20 mg (n = 1389) and comprised the intention-to-treat population. Following 6 months of treatment, the proportion of patients in endoscopic and symptomatic remission was significantly greater for those receiving esomeprazole 20 mg (87.0%) than pantoprazole 20 mg (74.9%, log-rank test P < 0.0001). Esomeprazole 20 mg produced a higher proportion of patients free of moderate to severe gastro-oesophageal reflux disease symptoms and fewer discontinuations because of symptoms than pantoprazole 20 mg (92.2% vs. 88.5%, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Esomeprazole 20 mg is more effective than pantoprazole 20 mg for maintenance therapy following initial healing of erosive oesophagitis and relief of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease symptoms.

A randomized comparative study of esomeprazole 40 mg versus pantoprazole 40 mg for healing erosive oesophagitis: the EXPO study.

AIM: To assess the efficacy of the 8-week therapy with esomeprazole 40 mg vs. pantoprazole 40 mg for healing erosive oesophagitis (EE) as part of a management study. METHODS: Patients had a history of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease symptoms (> or =6 months) and had suffered heartburn on at least 4 of the 7 days preceding enrollment. Endoscopies were performed to grade EE severity using the Los Angeles (LA) classification system at baseline, 4 and 8 weeks (if unhealed at 4 weeks). Heartburn severity was recorded by patients on diary cards. The primary end point was healing of EE by week 8 of treatment. RESULTS: Of 3170 patients randomized, the intent-to-treat population consisted of 3151 patients (63% male, mean age: 50.6 years, 27% Helicobacter pylori-positive). Esomeprazole 40 mg healed a significantly greater proportion of EE patients than pantoprazole 40 mg at both 4 weeks (life table estimates: esomeprazole 81%, pantoprazole 75%, P < 0.001) and 8 weeks (life table estimates: esomeprazole 96%, pantoprazole 92%, P < 0.001). The median time to reach sustained heartburn resolution was 6 days in patients receiving esomeprazole and 8 days with pantoprazole (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Esomeprazole 40 mg is more effective than pantoprazole 40 mg for healing EE and providing resolution of associated heartburn.

The role of acid suppression in patients with endoscopy-negative reflux disease: the effect of treatment with esomeprazole or omeprazole.

BACKGROUND: Patients with endoscopy-negative reflux disease have reflux symptoms, mainly heartburn, but not mucosal breaks characteristic of erosive oesophagitis. Standard-dose proton pump inhibitors can provide symptom relief in endoscopy-negative reflux disease but the effect of greater acid suppression has not been studied. AIM: To test the hypothesis that esomeprazole produces heartburn resolution in a greater proportion of patients with ENRD than omeprazole. METHODS: Three multi-centre randomized, controlled, double-blind, 4-week acute treatment studies were conducted in endoscopy-negative reflux disease patients. In study A (n = 1282), patients received either esomeprazole 40 mg, esomeprazole 20 mg or omeprazole 20 mg daily; in studies B (n = 693) and C (n = 670) patients received either esomeprazole 40 mg or omeprazole 20 mg (B), and esomeprazole 20 mg or omeprazole 20 mg (C), respectively. RESULTS: Resolution of heartburn at 4 weeks (no heartburn symptoms during the last 7 days) was achieved in similar proportions of patients in each treatment arm in study A (esomeprazole 40 mg, 56.7%; esomeprazole 20 mg, 60.5%; omeprazole 20 mg, 58.1%), study B (esomeprazole 40 mg, 70.3%; omeprazole 20 mg, 67.9%) and study C (esomeprazole 20 mg, 61.9%; omeprazole 20 mg, 59.6%). There were no significant differences between treatment groups within each study. CONCLUSIONS: More than 60% of endoscopy-negative reflux disease patients reported heartburn resolution but, after 4 weeks of therapy, these proportions did not differ significantly between treatments.

Is it possible to predict treatment response to a proton pump inhibitor in functional dyspepsia?

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of proton pump inhibitors in functional dyspepsia is modest and the prognostic factors are almost unknown. METHODS: Data were pooled on patients (n = 826) with a diagnosis of functional dyspepsia from two placebo-controlled trials who were treated with omeprazole, 10 or 20 mg once daily, for 4 weeks. Self-administered questionnaires for the assessment of symptoms and health-related quality of life were completed before entry, and epigastric pain/discomfort was recorded on diary cards. Treatment success was defined as the complete absence of epigastric pain/discomfort on each of the last 3 days of week 4. Prognostic factors were identified by multiple logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: The most discriminating predictor of treatment success (P < 0.0001) was the number of days with epigastric pain/discomfort during the first week of treatment. Fewer days with symptoms during the first week led to higher response rates at 4 weeks. In addition, age > 40 years, bothersome heartburn, low scores for bloating, epigastric pain and diarrhoea, history of symptoms for < 3 months and low impairment of vitality at baseline were identified as positive predictors of outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Early response to treatment with a proton pump inhibitor, during the first week, seems to predict the outcome after 4 weeks in patients with functional dyspepsia.

Esomeprazole 20 mg and lansoprazole 15 mg in maintaining healed reflux oesophagitis: Metropole study results.

INTRODUCTION: Esomeprazole, the first proton pump inhibitor to be developed as an optical isomer, has demonstrated more effective healing vs. omeprazole and lansoprazole in patients with reflux oesophagitis (RO). However, RO recurs in a high proportion (approximately 80%) of these patients within 12 months of initial therapy, highlighting the importance of maintenance treatment. Previous studies have shown esomeprazole to be effective as maintenance therapy in healed RO patients. AIM: This study was conducted to compare esomeprazole 20 mg once daily (o.d.) with lansoprazole 15 mg o.d. for the prevention of recurrence of RO. METHODS: 1391 patients with endoscopically verified RO (LA classification) were enrolled in this randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, multicentre trial. During the initial healing phase of the study, all patients received 4-8 weeks' open treatment with esomeprazole 40 mg: 1236 healed (identified by endoscopy at 4 and 8 weeks) and symptom-free (i.e. no heartburn or acid regurgitation) patients were randomized to 6 months' maintenance treatment with esomeprazole 20 mg o.d. or lansoprazole 15 mg o.d. Time to relapse (relapse of RO and/or discontinuation due to symptom recurrence) was analysed using a log-rank test. RESULTS: Esomeprazole maintained a significantly higher proportion of patients in remission than lansoprazole over the 6-month course of treatment (P < 0.0001, intention-to-treat analysis). After 6 months' treatment, 83% of esomeprazole recipients were in remission compared with 74% of lansoprazole recipients (life-table estimates). Esomeprazole gave a longer time to relapse than lansoprazole irrespective of baseline LA Grade, significantly so for baseline LA Grades B, C and D (P < 0.05 for each comparison). Significantly more patients were free from heartburn in the esomeprazole group compared with the lansoprazole group at 1, 3 and 6 months (P < 0.05). Significant differences at 6 months between esomeprazole 20 mg o.d. and lansoprazole 15 mg o.d. were also observed for control of epigastric pain and acid regurgitation (P < 0.05 and P < 0.001, respectively). Both treatment regimens were well tolerated. CONCLUSION: Esomeprazole 20 mg o.d. is a more effective maintenance treatment than lansoprazole 15 mg o.d. for symptom-free patients with healed RO.

Esomeprazole 20 mg and lansoprazole 15 mg in maintaining healed reflux oesophagitis: Metropole study results.

AIM: To compare the efficacy of esomeprazole, 20 mg once daily, vs. lansoprazole, 15 mg once daily, for the maintenance treatment of patients with healed reflux oesophagitis. METHODS: During the initial open healing phase, 1391 patients with endoscopically verified reflux oesophagitis and a history of heartburn, with or without acid regurgitation, received esomeprazole 40 mg for 4-8 weeks. Patients who were healed (identified by endoscopy at 4 or 8 weeks) and symptom free were then randomized to receive 6 months of treatment with esomeprazole, 20 mg once daily, or lansoprazole, 15 mg once daily. RESULTS: Esomeprazole, 20 mg once daily, maintained a significantly higher proportion of patients in remission than lansoprazole, 15 mg once daily, over 6 months [83% (95% CI, 80-86%) of esomeprazole recipients compared with 74% (95% CI, 70-78%) of lansoprazole recipients; P < 0.0001; life table estimates]. When data were analysed according to baseline Los Angeles grade classification, esomeprazole, 20 mg once daily, achieved consistently higher remission rates across all grades of disease severity, whereas the efficacy of lansoprazole decreased to a greater extent with increasing severity of reflux oesophagitis. CONCLUSION: Esomeprazole, 20 mg once daily, is more effective than lansoprazole, 15 mg once daily, in maintaining remission in patients with healed reflux oesophagitis.

Dose finding study of mosapride in functional dyspepsia: a placebo-controlled, randomized study.

BACKGROUND: Prokinetic agents have shown variable efficacy in the treatment of functional dyspepsia. Mosapride is a new prokinetic 5-hydroxytryptamine-4 agonistic agent. AIM: To evaluate the efficacy of three dosage regimens of mosapride compared with placebo in the treatment of functional dyspepsia. METHODS: Patients were randomly allocated to treatment with placebo or mosapride (5 mg b.d., 10 mg b.d. or 7.5 mg t.d.s.) in a double-blind, prospective, multicentre, multinational study. The change in symptom severity score from an untreated baseline week to the sixth week of treatment was used to compare treatment efficacy. RESULTS: There were 141, 140, 143 and 142 patients valid for evaluation in the intention-to-treat population in the placebo, mosapride 5 mg b.d., mosapride 10 mg b.d. and mosapride 7.5 mg t.d.s. groups, respectively. The mean changes in the overall dyspeptic symptom score were - 0.90, - 0.94, - 0.88 and - 0.89, respectively, and the proportions of patients feeling better at the end of the treatment period were 60%, 59%, 59% and 61%, respectively. No statistically significant difference was seen. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of functional dyspepsia with mosapride was not superior to placebo. The result raises the question of whether treatment with prokinetic agents is appropriate for functional dyspepsia.

The potential role of acid suppression in functional dyspepsia: the BOND, OPERA, PILOT, and ENCORE studies.

Dyspepsia is a common condition in the general population but data are lacking on the benefits of effective acid inhibition with proton pump inhibitors in functional dyspepsia. The results of the large, randomised, double blind clinical trials, BOND and OPERA, the Scandinavian PILOT study, and a follow up study, ENCORE, are reviewed. BOND, OPERA, and PILOT aimed to address the question of whether effective acid inhibition with the proton pump inhibitor omeprazole relieves symptoms in patients with functional dyspepsia. ENCORE followed on from this, addressing the consequences of relieving symptoms in patients with functional dyspepsia once they are off therapy.

Fluorescence lifetime system for microscopy and multiwell plate imaging with a blue picosecond diode laser.

We report a wide-field fluorescence lifetime imaging (FLIM) system that uses a blue picosecond pulsed diode laser as the excitation source. This represents a significant miniaturization and simplification compared with other time-domain FLIM instruments that should accelerate the development of clinical and real-world applications of FLIM. We have demonstrated this instrument in two configurations: a macroimaging setup applied to multiwell plate assays of chemically and biologically interesting fluorophores and a microscope system that has been applied to imaging of tissue sections. The importance of the adjustable repetition rate of this laser source is discussed with respect to noise reduction and precision in the lifetime determination, illustrating a further significant advantage over conventional mode-locked solid-state lasers.

Self-administered symptom questionnaires in patients with dyspepsia and their yield in discriminating between endoscopic diagnoses.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Symptoms are generally considered to be poor predictors of organic findings in patients with dyspepsia. We aimed at evaluating whether specific gastrointestinal symptoms, identified by self-administered questionnaires, correlate with specific endoscopic diagnoses and discriminate organic from functional dyspepsia. METHODS: Adult patients with pain or discomfort centred in the upper abdominal region were consecutively enrolled. Patients with heartburn, acid regurgitation, or defaecation and bowel habit problems as their predominant symptoms were excluded. Three self-administered questionnaires were applied before an oesophagogastroduodenoscopy was performed. RESULTS: Among the 799 patients, 50.6% had a normal endoscopy. Endoscopic diagnoses comprised: non-erosive oesophagitis (7.5%), erosive oesophagitis (11.1%), Barrett's oesophagus (1.1%), gastritis/duodenitis (8.4%), gastric ulcer (4.5%), duodenal ulcer (8.3%), and cancer (1.3%). Non-dominant heartburn and acid regurgitation were significantly more common in patients with organic dyspepsia, whereas hunger pains and rumbling occurred more often in those with functional dyspepsia. Multivariate analyses demonstrated that younger age, female gender, high scores for hunger pain, rumbling, hard stools, low scores for heartburn, and acid regurgitation predicted functional dyspepsia. CONCLUSIONS: Self-administered questionnaires revealed differences in the symptom patterns between patients with functional and organic dyspepsia. Furthermore, the health-related well-being in patients with functional and organic dyspepsia centred was impaired to the same extent.

Effect of profound acid suppression in functional dyspepsia: a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Functional dyspepsia (FD) is defined as persistent or recurrent pain/discomfort centred in the upper abdomen, where no structural explanation for the symptoms is found. The role of drug treatment remains controversial. The aim in this study was to evaluate the effect of omeprazole 20 mg twice daily (b.i.d) and to test methods for symptom assessment. METHODS: 197 patients fulfilling the criteria for FD were randomly allocated to double-blind treatment with omeprazole 20 mg b.i.d (n = 100) or placebo (n = 97) for 14 days. Patients with a known gastrointestinal disorder or with main symptoms indicating gastro-oesophageal reflux disease or irritable bowel syndrome were excluded. Helicobacter pylori testing and 24-h intra-oesophageal 24-h pH-metry were performed before randomization. The patients recorded dyspeptic symptoms on diary cards. RESULTS: A stringent endpoint, 'complete symptom relief on the last day of treatment', was the primary efficacy variable. For the APT cohort, this was achieved in 29.0% and 17.7% on omeprazole and placebo, respectively (95% CI of difference (11.3%): -0.4%-23.0%, P = 0.057). Similar figures in the PP cohort were 31.0% and 15.5%, respectively (95% Cl of difference (15.5%): 3.2%-27.7%, P = 0.018). The benefit of omeprazole in the PP cohort was confirmed by secondary endpoints such as, no dyspeptic symptoms on the last 2 days of treatment and overall treatment response. H. pylori status and the level of oesophageal acid exposure did not significantly influence the response to therapy. CONCLUSION: A subset of patients with FD will respond to therapy with omeprazole.

Epidemiology of NSAID-related gastroduodenal mucosal injury.

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are among the agents most frequently used against musculoskeletal and rheumatic disorders throughout the world. The gastroduodenal adverse effects include dyspepsia without endoscopically proven damage, asymptomatic endoscopic lesions of submucosal haemorrhage, erosions and ulcers, and-most important-ulcer complications. Established risk factors for NSAID-associated ulcer complications include patient-specific factors such as advanced age, female gender, a history of peptic ulcer, and drug-specific factors such as the use of non-selective NSAIDs (type, dose, duration, multiple use) and concomitant anticoagulant drugs or corticosteroids. Probable risk factors comprise Helicobacter pylori infection and heavy consumption of alcohol, whereas use of selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitors, smoking and a number of other factors have also been proposed to contribute. Knowledge of absolute risk estimates is important for clinical decision making. The aim of this chapter is to summarize the epidemiological data related to the broad spectrum of iatrogenic gastroduodenal mucosal injury.

Ribozyme targeting demonstrates that the nuclear receptor coactivator AIB1 is a rate-limiting factor for estrogen-dependent growth of human MCF-7 breast cancer cells.

Human breast tumorigenesis is promoted by the estrogen receptor pathway, and nuclear receptor coactivators are thought to participate in this process. Here we studied whether one of these coactivators, AIB1 (amplified in breast cancer 1), was rate-limiting for hormone-dependent growth of human MCF-7 breast cancer cells. We developed MCF-7 breast cancer cell lines in which the expression of AIB1 can be modulated by regulatable ribozymes directed against AIB1 mRNA. We found that depletion of endogenous AIB1 levels reduced steroid hormone signaling via the estrogen receptor alpha or progesterone receptor beta on transiently transfected reporter templates. Down-regulation of AIB1 levels in MCF-7 cells did not affect estrogen-stimulated cell cycle progression but reduced estrogen-mediated inhibition of apoptosis and cell growth. Finally, upon reduction of endogenous AIB1 expression, estrogen-dependent colony formation in soft agar and tumor growth of MCF-7 cells in nude mice was decreased. From these findings we conclude that, despite the presence of different estrogen receptor coactivators in breast cancer cells, AIB1 exerts a rate-limiting role for hormone-dependent human breast tumor growth.

Esomeprazole 20 mg maintains symptom control in endoscopy-negative gastro-oesophageal reflux disease: a controlled trial of 'on-demand' therapy for 6 months.

BACKGROUND: Most patients with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GERD), regardless of endoscopic status, suffer symptomatic relapse within 6 months of stopping acid suppressant therapy. AIM: To assess the efficacy of 'on-demand' treatment of GERD with esomeprazole, the first proton pump inhibitor developed as an optical isomer. METHODS: In this multicentre, double-blind study, 342 endoscopy-negative GERD patients demonstrating complete resolution of heartburn during the final week of a 4-week treatment period with esomeprazole 20 mg or omeprazole 20 mg once daily were randomized to receive esomeprazole 20 mg or placebo on demand (maximum of one dose per day) for a further 6 months. Use of rescue antacids was permitted. RESULTS: All 342 patients (191 males), aged 19-79 (mean 49) years, were evaluable in the intention-to-treat analysis. The proportion of patients who discontinued treatment due to insufficient control of heartburn was significantly higher among placebo compared to esomeprazole recipients (51% vs. 14%; P < 0.0001). Patients randomized to esomeprazole on-demand therapy remained in the study longer than those in the placebo group (mean 165 vs. 119 days). Over 50% took the study medication for periods of 1--3 consecutive days (esomeprazole) or 4--13 consecutive days (placebo). Use of antacids was > 2-fold higher among placebo recipients. The frequency of adverse events was similar in the two groups, when adjusted for time spent in the study, as were the clinical laboratory profiles. CONCLUSIONS: On-demand therapy with esomeprazole 20 mg is effective and well tolerated in maintaining symptom control in endoscopy-negative GERD.

Switch from systemic steroids to budesonide in steroid dependent patients with inactive Crohn's disease.

BACKGROUND: Steroid dependent patients with Crohn's disease are at high risk of developing glucocorticosteroid induced side effects. AIMS: We evaluated the possibility of switching from systemic steroids to budesonide (Entocort) in prednisolone/prednisone dependent patients with inactive Crohn's disease affecting the ileum and/or ascending colon. PATIENTS: Steroid dependent patients with a Crohn's disease activity index 200 and an increase of 60 points from baseline or withdrawal due to disease deterioration. RESULTS: After one and 13 weeks without prednisolone, relapse rates were 17% and 32%, respectively, in the budesonide group, and 41% and 65% in the placebo group (95% confidence intervals for the difference in percentages -41%, -8% and -51%, -16%; p=0.004 and p<0.001, respectively). The number of glucocorticosteroid side effects was reduced by 50% by switching from prednisolone and was similar in the budesonide and placebo groups. Basal plasma cortisol increased in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of patients with steroid dependent ileocaecal Crohn's disease may be switched to budesonide controlled ileal release capsules 6 mg without relapse, resulting in a sharp decrease in glucocorticosteroid side effects similar to placebo, and with an increase in plasma cortisol levels.