RESUMO
AIMS: To compare gastric acid suppression by netazepide, a gastrin/CCK2 receptor antagonist, with that by a proton pump inhibitor (PPI), and to determine if netazepide can prevent the trophic effects of PPI-induced hypergastrinaemia. METHODS: Thirty healthy subjects completed a double-blind, randomized, parallel group trial of oral netazepide and rabeprazole, alone and combined, once daily for 6 weeks. Primary end points were: basal and pentagastrin-stimulated gastric acid and 24 h circulating gastrin and chromogranin A (CgA) at baseline, start and end of treatment, gastric biopsies at baseline and end of treatment and basal and pentagastrin-stimulated gastric acid and dyspepsia questionnaire after treatment withdrawal. RESULTS: All treatments similarly inhibited pentagastrin-stimulated gastric acid secretion. All treatments increased serum gastrin, but the combination and rabeprazole did so more than netazepide alone. The combination also reduced basal acid secretion. Rabeprazole increased plasma CgA, whereas netazepide and the combination reduced it. None of the biopsies showed enterochromaffin-like (ECL) cell hyperplasia. Withdrawal of treatments led neither to rebound hyperacidity nor dyspepsia. CONCLUSIONS: Netazepide suppressed pentagastrin-stimulated gastric acid secretion as effectively as did rabeprazole. The reduction in basal acid secretion and greater increase in serum gastrin by the combination is consistent with more effective acid suppression. Despite our failure to show rabeprazole-induced ECL cell hyperplasia and rebound hyperacidity, the increase in plasma CgA after rabeprazole is consistent with a trophic effect on ECL cells, which netazepide prevented. Thus, netazepide is a potential treatment for the trophic effects of hypergastrinaemia and, with or without a PPI, is a potential treatment for acid-related conditions.
Assuntos
Benzodiazepinonas/farmacologia , Ácido Gástrico/metabolismo , Compostos de Fenilureia/farmacologia , Rabeprazol/farmacologia , Receptor de Colecistocinina B/antagonistas & inibidores , Estômago , Adulto , Idoso , Benzodiazepinonas/administração & dosagem , Benzodiazepinonas/efeitos adversos , Benzodiazepinonas/sangue , Método Duplo-Cego , Quimioterapia Combinada , Feminino , Mucosa Gástrica/efeitos dos fármacos , Mucosa Gástrica/metabolismo , Mucosa Gástrica/ultraestrutura , Gastrinas/sangue , Voluntários Saudáveis , Humanos , Hiperplasia/induzido quimicamente , Hiperplasia/prevenção & controle , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Compostos de Fenilureia/administração & dosagem , Compostos de Fenilureia/efeitos adversos , Compostos de Fenilureia/sangue , Rabeprazol/administração & dosagem , Rabeprazol/efeitos adversos , Rabeprazol/sangue , Estômago/efeitos dos fármacos , Estômago/patologia , Adulto JovemRESUMO
RNA-binding proteins (RBPs) play an important role in RNA metabolism, regulating the stability, localization, and functional dynamics of RNAs. Alternation in the RBP-RNA network has profound implications in cellular physiology, and is related to the development and spread of cancer in certain cases. To regulate the expression of specific genes and their biological activities, various strategies have been applied to target RBPs for cancer treatments, including small-molecule inhibitors, small-interfering RNA, peptides, and aptamers. Recently, the deployment of the CRISPR-Cas9 technology has provided a new platform for RBP screening and regulation. This review summarizes the delivery systems of the CRISPR-Cas9 system and their role in RBP-based cancer therapeutics, including identification of novel RBPs and regulation of cancer-associated RBPs. The efficient delivery of the CRISPR-Cas9 system is important to the profound understanding and clinical transition of RBPs as cancer therapeutic targets.
Assuntos
Sistemas CRISPR-Cas , Neoplasias/genética , Proteínas de Ligação a RNA/genética , Detecção Precoce de Câncer , Terapia Genética , HumanosRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Over-the-counter provision of emergency contraception pills (ECP) has increased since deregulation of progestogen-only formulations and is now the most common public health service provided by UK pharmacists. Important questions relate to women's perceptions of their experience of receiving ECPs from pharmacists. METHODS: Qualitative study: in-depth interviews with young women reporting ECP use, recruited from clinic (10); pharmacy (6) and community settings (5) in London. RESULTS: Key advantages of pharmacy provision were ease and speed of access and convenience. Disadvantages included a less personal service, inadequate attention to information needs and to prevention of recurrence of ECP need, and unsupportive attitudes of pharmacy staff. Suggested service improvements included increasing privacy, providing more contraceptive advice, adopting a more empathetic approach and signposting follow-up services. CONCLUSION: Pharmacies are important in the choice of settings from which ECPs can be obtained and many aspects of pharmacy provision are appreciated by young women. There is scope to further enhance pharmacists' role.