Search

OBJECTIVE: CCR2 is a chemokine receptor expressed by monocytes, macrophages, and a subset of T cells. Its ligand, CCL2 (monocyte chemotactic protein 1), is abundantly present in the synovium of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Blocking CCR2 prevents CCL2-mediated chemotaxis in vitro and modulates arthritis in animal models of RA. In this study we examined the effects of CCR2 blockade on synovial inflammation in RA. METHODS: The study was designed as a phase IIa clinical trial with a human CCR2 blocking antibody (MLN1202) in patients with active RA. Thirty-two patients received 3 infusions, over a period of 6 weeks, with either placebo (n = 9) or anti-CCR2 monoclonal antibody at 0.5 mg/kg (n = 7), 1.5 mg/kg (n = 7), or 4.0 mg/kg (n = 9). Safety was monitored with laboratory tests, immunotoxicity assessments, and documenting of adverse events, and European League Against Rheumatism and American College of Rheumatology response criteria were used to assess clinical improvement. Synovial tissue was obtained at baseline and after 43 days of treatment, for pharmacodynamic analysis using immunohistochemistry and digital image analysis. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compare groups, and the Wilcoxon signed rank test was used to assess changes within the groups. RESULTS: All patients completed the study. Treatment with CCR2 blocking antibody reduced the levels of free CCR2 on CD14+ monocytes by at least 57% and up to 94% (P < 0.001), demonstrating the biologic activity of the compound. However, there was no reduction in the levels or expression of any of the synovial biomarkers. Accordingly, no clinical improvement was observed. CONCLUSION: Treatment with anti-CCR2 blocking antibody did not result in amelioration of synovial inflammation in active RA. The results do not support the notion that blockade of CCR2 may be sufficient to induce clinical improvement in RA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Arterial stiffness increases with age, and is associated with adverse cardiovascular outcome including increased mortality. The effect of the oral small molecule SIRT1 activator, SRT2104, on arterial stiffness was examined in otherwise healthy cigarette smokers and participants with type 2 diabetes mellitus., Methods: 24 otherwise healthy cigarette smokers and 15 people with stable type 2 diabetes were randomised in a double-blind placebo-controlled crossover trial and received 28 days of oral SRT2104 (2.0 g/day) or matched placebo. Blood pressure was measured using non-invasive oscillatory sphygmomanometry. Pulse wave analysis and velocity were measured using applanation tonometry at baseline and the end of each treatment period. Owing to the small sample size and similar trends for both groups, data for the two groups were pooled (post hoc analysis)., Results: Compared to placebo, treatment with SRT2104 was associated with a significant reduction in augmentation pressure (p=0.0273) and a trend towards improvement in the augmentation index and corrected augmentation index (p>0.05 for both). However, no changes were observed in pulse wave velocity and time to wave reflection (p>0.05). Systolic and diastolic blood pressures remained unchanged throughout the study. Treatment by cohort interaction was not significant for any of the pulse wave parameters, suggesting that the response to SRT2104 in otherwise healthy smokers and people with diabetes was consistent., Conclusions: SRT2104 may improve measures of arterial stiffness in otherwise healthy cigarette smokers and in participants with type 2 diabetes. Definitive conclusions are not possible given the small sample size and exploratory nature of this analysis., Trial Registration Number: NCT01031108.

Unlabelled: Activation of Sirtuin (silent mating type information regulation 2 homolog) 1, or SIRT1, is an unexplored therapeutic approach for treatment of inflammatory diseases. We randomized 40 patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis (4:1) to three escalating doses of SRT2104, a selective activator of SIRT1, or placebo. Across all SRT2104 groups, 35% of patients (p<0.0001) achieved good to excellent histological improvement based on skin biopsies taken at baseline and day 84 but was not consistently in agreement with PASI. Improvement in histology was associated with modulation of IL-17 and TNF-α signaling pathways and keratinocyte differentiation target genes. 27 subjects (69%) across all treatment groups, including placebo, experienced at least one treatment emergent adverse event. The majority of AEs were either mild or moderate. Most common were headache (8%), dizziness (8%), upper respiratory tract infection (8%), and psoriatic arthropathy (8%). Average drug exposure increased in a dose-dependent manner for escalating doses of SRT2104 and had high intra-subject variability in exposure (AUC %CV: 51–89%). Given the interesting signals of clinical activity, impact on gene expression and the generally favorable safety profile seen in this study, further investigation of SIRT1 activators for the treatment of psoriasis is warranted., Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01154101.

Aim: SRT2104 is a selective activator of SIRT1. In animal models, SRT2104 improves glucose homeostasis and increases insulin sensitivity. We evaluated the tolerability and pharmacokinetics of SRT2104, and its effects on glycaemic control, in adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus., Method: Type 2 diabetics with glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c) ≥ 7.5% and ≤10.5%, fasting glucose ≥160 and ≤240 mg dl(-1) , and on stable doses of metformin were evenly randomized to placebo or SRT2104 0.25 g, 0.5 g, 1.0 g or 2.0 g, administered orally once daily for 28 days. Changes in fasting and post-prandial glucose and insulin were analyzed., Results: Safety evaluation found no major differences between groups in the frequency of adverse events. SRT2104 concentrations did not increase in a dose-proportional fashion. Significant variability in exposure was observed. Treatment with SRT2104 did not lead to any consistent, dose-related changes in glucose or insulin. Day 28 change from baseline (mean (SD)): fasting glucose (mmol l(-1) ) = -1.17 (2.42), -1.11 (3.45), -0.52 (2.60), -0.97 (2.83) and -0.15 (2.38) for placebo, 0.25 g, 0.5 g, 1.0 g and 2.0 g, respectively. Day 28 change from baseline (mean (SD)): fasting insulin (mmol l(-1) ) = 1.0 (51.66), 8.9 (95.04), -6.9 (41.45), 4.1 (57.16) and 15.2 (138.79) for placebo, 0.25 g, 0.5 g, 1.0 g and 2.0 g, respectively) Treatment with SRT2104 was associated with improvement in lipid profiles., Conclusion: Treatment with SRT2104 for 28 days did not result in improved glucose or insulin control which is likely due to the observed pharmacokinetics which were not dose proportional and had large between subject variability., (© 2014 The British Pharmacological Society.)

Background: We examined the effect of the oral SIRT1 activator SRT2104 on cardiovascular function in otherwise healthy cigarette smokers., Methods and Results: Twenty-four otherwise healthy cigarette smokers participated in a randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover trial and received 28 days of oral SRT2104 (2.0 g/day) or matched placebo. Plasma SRT2104 concentrations, serum lipid profile, plasma fibrinolytic factors, and markers of platelet and monocyte activation were measured at baseline and at the end of each treatment period together with an assessment of forearm blood flow during intra-arterial bradykinin, acetylcholine, and sodium nitroprusside infusions. Three hours postdose, mean plasma SRT2104 concentration was 1328 ± 748 ng/mL after 28 days of active treatment. Compared with placebo, serum lipid profile improved during SRT2104 administration, with reductions in serum total cholesterol (-11.6 ± 20 versus 6 ± 21 mg/dL), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (-10 ± 17 versus 3 ± 21 mg/dL), and triglyceride (-39.8 ± 77 versus 13.3 ± 57 mg/dL) concentrations (P<0.05 for all). All vasodilators produced a dose-dependent increase in blood flow (P<0.0001) that was similar during each treatment period (P>0.05 for all). No significant differences in fibrinolytic or blood flow parameters were observed between placebo and SRT2014., Conclusions: SRT2104 appears to be safe and well tolerated and associated with an improved lipid profile without demonstrable differences in vascular or platelet function in otherwise healthy cigarette smokers., Clinical Trial Registration: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01031108.

Objective: To investigate the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and efficacy of apilimod mesylate, an oral interleukin-12 (IL-12)/IL-23 inhibitor, in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA)., Methods: We performed a phase IIa, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled proof-of-concept study of apilimod, in combination with methotrexate, in 29 patients with active RA (3:1 ratio of apilimod-treated to placebo-treated patients) in 3 stages. Patients received apilimod 100 mg/day or placebo for 4 weeks (stage 1) or 8 weeks (stage 2). In stage 3, patients received apilimod 100 mg twice a day or placebo for 8 weeks, with an optional extension of 4 weeks. Clinical response (Disease Activity Score in 28 joints [DAS28] and American College of Rheumatology [ACR] criteria) was assessed throughout; synovial tissue samples collected at baseline and on day 29 (stages 1 and 2) or day 57 (stage 3) were stained for cellular markers and cytokines for immunohistochemistry analysis., Results: While only mild adverse events were observed in stages 1 and 2, in stage 3, all patients experienced headache and/or nausea. Among apilimod-treated patients (100 mg/day), there was a small, but significant, reduction in the DAS28 on day 29 and day 57 compared with baseline. ACR20 response was reached in only 6% of patients on day 29 and 25% of patients on day 57, similar to the percentage of responders in the placebo group. Increasing the dosage (100 mg twice a day) did not improve clinical efficacy. Consistent with clinical results, apilimod did not have an effect on expression of synovial biomarkers. Of importance, we also did not observe an effect of apilimod on synovial IL-12 and IL-23 expression., Conclusion: Our results do not support the notion that IL-12/IL-23 inhibition by apilimod is able to induce robust clinical improvement in RA., (Copyright © 2012 by the American College of Rheumatology.)

Background: The detection of incidental findings (IF) in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies is common and increases as a function of age. Responsible handling of IF is required, with implications for the conduct of research and the provision of good clinical care., Aim: To investigate the prevalence and clinical significance of IF in a prospective cohort of healthy elderly volunteers who underwent MRI of the torso as a baseline investigation for a phase I trial. We assessed the follow-up pathway with consequent cost implications and impact on trial outcomes., Methods: A total of 29 elderly healthy volunteers (mean age 67, range 61-77, 59% female) were eligible at screening and underwent MRI for assessment of visceral and subcutaneous fat., Results: IF were detected in 19 subjects (66%). Suspected IF of high and low clinical significance were found in 14% and 52% of participants, respectively. Follow up of IF was conducted in 18 individuals, confirming abnormalities in 13 subjects, 3 of whom were recommended for deferred clinical re-evaluation. The remaining 5 subjects had false positive IF based on second line imaging tests. Costs of follow-up medical care were considerable., Conclusion: MRI abnormalities are common in elderly individuals, as a result of age and non-diagnostic quality of research scans. In the presence of IF in the context of clinical trials, immediate referrals and follow up assessments may be required to rule out suspected pathology prior to exposing trial participants to investigational medicine products (IMP). Unanticipated costs, ethical implication and the possible impact of IF on trial outcomes need to be taken into account when designing and conducting trials with an IMP.

The phytochemical resveratrol has undergone extensive preclinical investigation for its putative cancer chemopreventive properties. Low systemic availability of the parent compound due to rapid and extensive metabolism may confound its usefulness as a potential agent to prevent malignancies in organs remote from the site of absorption. Micronization allows increased drug absorption, thus increasing availability. Here we describe a pilot study of SRT501, micronized resveratrol, given as 5.0 g daily for 14 days, to patients with colorectal cancer and hepatic metastases scheduled to undergo hepatectomy. The purpose of the study was to assess the safety, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of the formulation. SRT501 was found to be well tolerated. Mean plasma resveratrol levels following a single dose of SRT501 administration were 1,942 ± 1,422 ng/mL, exceeding those published for equivalent doses of nonmicronized resveratrol by 3.6-fold. Resveratrol was detectable in hepatic tissue following SRT501 administration (up to 2,287 ng/g). Cleaved caspase-3, a marker of apoptosis, significantly increased by 39% in malignant hepatic tissue following SRT501 treatment compared with tissue from the placebo-treated patients. SRT501 warrants further clinical exploration to assess its potential clinical utility., (©2011 AACR.)

Objective: To assess the clinical efficacy and adverse effects of gamma-linolenic acid (GLA), a plant seed oil-derived unsaturated fatty acid that suppresses inflammation and joint tissue injury in animal models, in the treatment of active rheumatoid arthritis (RA)., Methods: Fifty-six patients with active RA were randomized to treatment groups in a 6-month, double-blind trial of GLA versus placebo. This was followed by a 6-month, single-blind trial during which all patients received GLA. Patients were treated with 2.8 gm/day of GLA as the free fatty acid or with sunflower seed oil (placebo) administered in identical capsules., Results: Treatment with GLA for 6 months resulted in statistically significant and clinically relevant reductions in the signs and symptoms of disease activity in patients with RA. Overall meaningful responses (at least 25% improvement in 4 measures) were also better in the GLA treatment group (14 of 22 patients versus 4 of 19 in the placebo group; P = 0.015). During the second 6 months, both groups exhibited improvement in disease activity. Thus, patients taking GLA during the entire study showed progressive improvement during the second 6 months. In this group, 16 of 21 patients showed meaningful improvement at 12 months compared with study entry., Conclusion: GLA at doses used in this study is a well-tolerated and effective treatment for active RA. GLA is available as a component of several plant seed oils and is usually taken in far lower doses than were used in this trial. It is not approved in the United States for the treatment of any condition, and should not be viewed as therapy for any disease. Further controlled studies of its in RA are warranted.