Search

Objective: We aimed to determine if intravenous synthetic human secretin (sHS) improves refractory type B pain in patients with chronic pancreatitis (CP)., Methods: In a phase II dose escalation trial, patients with CP received sHS of varying doses (0.05-0.8 µg/kg) for 3 days. The primary outcomes were changes in the visual analogue pain score (VAS), short form (SF)-36, and opiate use from baseline at 30 days after infusion., Results: Twelve patients (mean age, 42 years, 6 men) were included. Mean pain scores (VAS) were 5.79, 4.80, 4.72, and 4.90, at baseline, day 4, day 10, and day 30, respectively (P = 0.25, 0.19, and 0.27 when compared with baseline, respectively). Daily opiate use (oral morphine equivalents) decreased throughout the study from a baseline value of 136 to 111 mg on day 4 (P = 0.52) and to 104 mg on day 30 (P = 0.34). In subgroup analysis, women had the most improvement (VAS baseline, 5.42 vs. VAS day 30, 3.67; P = 0.07; baseline morphine equivalents, 107 mg vs. 84 mg; P = 0.21)., Conclusions: In patients, especially women, with refractory type B pain from CP, intravenous sHS administration demonstrated a trend toward improvement in self-reported pain and opiate use at 30 days after infusion, although statistical significance was not achieved (clinicaltrials.gov registration number NCT01265875).

Context: As many as 1 in every 110 children in the United States has an autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Secretin is 1 of many medical treatments studied for treating the symptoms of ASDs, but there is currently no consensus regarding which interventions are most effective., Objective: To systematically review evidence regarding the use of secretin in children with ASDs who are aged 12 years and younger., Methods: We searched the Medline, PsycINFO, and ERIC (Education Resources Information Center) databases from 2000 to May 2010 and reference lists of included articles. Two reviewers independently assessed each study against predetermined inclusion/exclusion criteria. Two reviewers independently extracted data regarding participant and intervention characteristics, assessment techniques, and outcomes and assigned overall quality and strength-of-evidence ratings on the basis of predetermined criteria., Results: Evidence from 7 randomized controlled trials supports a lack of effectiveness of secretin for the treatment of ASD symptoms including language and communication impairment, symptom severity, and cognitive and social skill deficits. No studies have resulted in significantly greater improvements in measures of language, cognition, or autistic symptoms when compared with placebo; study authors who reported improvement over time did so equally for both the intervention and placebo groups., Conclusions: Secretin has been studied extensively in multiple randomized controlled trials, and there is clear evidence that it lacks benefit. The studies of secretin included in this review uniformly point to a lack of significant impact of secretin in the treatment of ASD symptoms. Given the high strength of evidence for a lack of effectiveness, secretin as a treatment approach for ASDs warrants no further study.

Background: Standardised measures of behaviour have failed to detect short term improvement in children with autism following treatment with secretin. However, it is possible that standardised measures are insensitive to dimensions of child behaviour that are nonetheless detectable by parents., Aim: To determine the ability of parents of children with autism to guess, under double blind conditions, whether their child had received secretin or placebo., Methods: 2x2 crossover randomised blinded study, comparing the effect of synthetic human secretin 2 U/kg to placebo (saline). Sixty two children with autism (aged 43-103 months) were randomly allocated to two groups: group 1 received placebo, followed six weeks later by secretin, and group 2 received secretin followed by placebo. At the conclusion of the study, parents were asked to guess their child's group assignment., Results: Twenty seven families guessed their child's group assignment correctly and 27 guessed incorrectly. In 48 instances, parents based their guess on perceived improvement; in six cases, parents based their guess on perceived deterioration. Six families saw no difference after either infusion, and offered no guess. One family dropped out after the first infusion, and one family was lost to follow up after the second infusion., Conclusion: In a controlled setting, parents of young children with autism are unable to distinguish the short term behavioural effects of secretin from placebo.

Aims: To examine the effect of a single dose of human synthetic secretin (HSS) on behaviour and communication in children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) using an objective measure of communication and social reciprocity and standardised rating scales., Methods: Randomised, crossover, double blind, and placebo controlled trial of a single intravenous dose of human synthetic secretin (HSS) 2 CU/kg. The 62 subjects (3-8 years) were assigned to group 1 (saline placebo/HSS) or group 2 (HSS/saline placebo). Diagnosis was confirmed by ADI-R (Autism Diagnostic Interview-Revised) algorithm. Severity of symptoms was rated using the CARS (Childhood Autism Rating Scale). Outcome measures included Communication and Symbolic Behavior Scale (CSBS), Ritvo Real-life Rating Scale, weekly Global Rating Scale (GBRS) by parents and teachers, and daily log of gastrointestinal symptoms. The communication subscale of the CSBS, specifying communication function, reciprocity, and social-affective signalling was videotaped and scored by a blinded, trained observer., Results: Sixty one children completed the study. After randomisation, there were no significant differences in gender, race, age, and parent and teacher GBRS and Ritvo Scale between the two groups. Compared with placebo, secretin treatment was not associated with significant improvement of CSBS standard scores from baseline to 2 or 4 weeks post-infusion. Five children showed clinical improvement in standard scores: two after HSS and three after placebo. There were no significant changes in gastrointestinal symptoms after HSS or saline placebo., Conclusions: A single dose of intravenous human secretin is not effective in changing behaviour and communication in children with ASD when compared to placebo.

In the United States, pancreatic cancer is the fourth most frequent cause of cancer death in males as well as females, after lung, prostate or breast, and colorectal cancer. Each year, approximately 30 000 Americans are diagnosed with pancreatic cancer and about the same number die of it. Germline mutations in a few genes including p16 and BRCA2 have been implicated in a small fraction of cases, as has chronic pancreatitis. The one established risk factor for pancreatic cancer is cigarette smoking: current smokers have two to three times the risk of nonsmokers. Studies of dietary factors have not been entirely consistent but do suggest associations of higher risk with consumption of smoked or processed meats or with animal foods in general and lower risk with consumption of fruits and vegetables. Colonization by Helicobacter pylori appears to increase risk, and a history of diabetes mellitus may also increase risk. The purpose of this epidemiologic review is to consider the possibility that risk of pancreatic cancer is increased by factors associated with pancreatic N-nitrosamine or N-nitrosamide exposures and with chronic excess gastric or duodenal acidity. Host genetic variation in inflammatory cytokine mechanisms may also be involved in this process. Many features of the evidence bearing on the pathophysiology of pancreatic cancer appear to support connections with N-nitroso compounds and with gastric acidity.

Secretin has been proposed as a treatment alternative for autistic spectrum disorders, but empirical support is lacking. A double-blind placebo-controlled study examined the effect of a single dose of synthetic human secretin on aberrant behavior. Parent and teacher data from the Aberrant Behavior Checklist for eight male children were analyzed for reliable change in a clinical replication series. By parent and teacher report, the majority of change occurred either on the placebo trial or reflected deterioration subsequent to secretin infusion. Repeated-measures multivariate analysis of variance results were similar. Results are consistent with other studies, suggesting that secretin may not be an effective treatment option.

Secretin, a gastrointestinal (GI) hormone, was reported in a preliminary study to improve language and behavior in children with autism/pervasive developmental disorder (PDD) and chronic diarrhea. To determine the efficacy of secretin, we completed a double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover (3 weeks) study in children with autism/PDD and various GI conditions using a single dose of intravenous porcine secretin. Children with chronic, active diarrhea showed a reduction in aberrant behaviors when treated with the secretin but not when treated with the placebo. Children with no GI problems are unaffected by either secretin or placebo. The improvement seen with secretin in children with autism/PDD and chronic diarrhea suggests that there may be a subtype of children with autism/PDD who respond to secretin.

Objective: To examine the efficacy of intravenous porcine secretin for the treatment of autistic disorder., Method: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover design. Fifty-six subjects with autistic disorder received either a secretin or placebo infusion at baseline and the other substance at week 4. Subjects were given the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule (ADOS) and other pertinent developmental measures at baseline and at weeks 4 and 8 to assess drug effects., Results: For the primary efficacy analysis, change of ADOS social-communication total score from week 0 to week 4, no statistically significant difference was obtained between placebo (-0.8 +/- 2.9) and secretin groups (-0.6 +/- 1.4; t54 = 0.346, p < .73). The other measures showed no treatment effect for secretin compared with placebo., Conclusion: There was no evidence for efficacy of secretin in this randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial.

Background: Biologically derived porcine secretin has been used as a diagnostic agent in clinical gastrointestinal practice for many years. Pure synthetic porcine secretin is now available for investigational clinical use., Aim: To compare the pharmacology of synthetic porcine secretin and biologically derived porcine secretin in healthy volunteers., Methods: Secretin stimulation tests were performed in 12 volunteer subjects in a double-blind, randomized, Latin square crossover design study comparing three doses of synthetic porcine secretin (0.05, 0.2, and 0.4 microgram/kg) with a standard dose of biologically derived porcine secretin (1 CU/kg). Duodenal aspirates were analysed for total volume and for bicarbonate concentration. Total bicarbonate output was calculated., Results: Twelve subjects completed four dosing regimens. A multiple comparison test was used to compare dosing regimens. The 0.2 and 0.4 microgram/kg doses of synthetic porcine secretin were not different from the 1 CU/kg dose of biologically derived porcine secretin for volume, bicarbonate concentration and total output from 0 to 60 min. Only one patient had an adverse event, which was mild, transient flushing after the 0.2 and 0.4 microgram/kg doses of synthetic porcine secretin and after the 1 CU/kg dose of biologically derived porcine secretin., Conclusions: Synthetic porcine secretin has identical pharmacologic effects to biologically derived porcine secretin in normal subjects. Both drugs were safe and well-tolerated. This study validates synthetic porcine secretin as a substitute for biologically derived porcine secretin.

Recent anecdotal reports have touted the gastrointestinal (GI) hormone secretin as a treatment modality for autism, though there is little clinical evidence or literature to support its viability. We undertook a two-part clinical trial to investigate these claims. Fifty-six patients (49 boys, 7 girls, mean age = 6.4 years, SD = 2.7) enrolled in an open-label trial of secretin, during which they received one injection of the hormone (2 IU/kg). All subjects were evaluated by their parents at baseline and follow-up visits (3-6 weeks later, M = 3.7, SD = 1.4 weeks) with Childhood Autism Rating Scales (CARS). Thirty-four patients were labeled with Pervasive Developmental Disorder Not Otherwise Specified, and 22 met diagnostic criteria for Autistic Disorder. Forty-five patients were concurrently on other drug treatments. At follow-up, some reported minimal but potentially significant improvements including changes in GI symptoms, expressive and/or receptive language function, and improved awareness and social interactions. No adverse effects were reported or observed. Subsequently, 17 of the most responsive patients from Study 1 began a double-blind trial that also included 8 newly enrolled patients. Patients in this second study were alternatively entered into one of two groups and received injections of secretin or placebo with crossover at 4 weeks. Patients from Study 1 entered into Study 2 at an average of 6.5 (SD = 0.8) weeks after beginning Study 1. Results of both inquiries indicate that although treatment with secretin was reported to cause transient changes in speech and behavior in some children, overall it produced few clinically meaningful changes when compared to children given placebo injections.

The present study was aimed to determine the cardiovascular effects of secretin in healthy rats and rats with streptozotocin-induced diabetes mellitus. In vivo studies involved measurements of the systolic and diastolic blood pressure, and heart rate of rats given secretin at the following doses: 0.75; 1.5; 3.0 mumol/kg. In vitro, the isolated heart function was studied according to the modification of Langendorff's method. The cardiac contraction amplitude, heart rate and coronary outflow were measured while secretin was given at the following three doses: 110.0; 485.2; 1100.0 nmol/0.1 ml. The results were compared with effects of secretin in diabetic rats. In vivo, secretin slightly increased systolic and diastolic blood pressure. Diabetes abolished hypertensive effect of the peptide, while the highest dose slightly increased heart rate. Secretin given at two higher doses in vitro increased the amplitude, but did not change the heart rate and coronary outflow. In diabetes, the secretin influence on the amplitude was preserved, the drug did not change the heart rate and at two higher doses increased the coronary outflow. In conclusion, the study has shown that diabetic state changes the cardiovascular effects of secretin.

Because a majority of duodenal-ulcer patients responded locally to intradermal secretin, skin samples from 7 patients with duodenal ulceration and 6 patients with goitre or cholelithiasis were incubated with "tris" buffer alone and with tris buffer containing 20 C.U./ml synthetic secretin or 100 microng/ml compound 48/80. Skin from duodenal-ulcer patients released significantly more histamine than did that of controls (p less 0-01). Histological examination of skin samples from these patients showed that the number of histamine-containing mast-cells averaged 5-7 per field and dropped to 1-2 per field after incubation with secretin. It is concluded that in a certain type of duodenal ulceration intradermal secretin releases histamine from mast-cells and thus induces a local anaphylactic reaction. This might prove suitable for preclinical ulcer diagnosis and/or for detection of patients at risk of acquiring that disease.

In a healthy subject infusions of either secretion or glucagon caused no diarrhea. A combinations of gastrin and glucagon induced severe watery diarrhea immediately after the end of the 3 hour infusion. No diarrhea occurred from the combination of secretin and gastrin.

Secretin and cholecystokinin (CCK) have trophic effects on the pancreas and may therefore have a place in the treatment of pancreatic cancer. The present study was performed to examine whether these hormones may cause harm in patients with pancreatic cancer receiving cytostatics. The cytostatics were 5-fluorouracil, adriamycin, and mitomycin C(FAM). Secretin plus Thr28Nle31CCK25-33, in doses stimulating pancreatic secretion to about 60% of maximal, were given as a continuous 6-day intravenous infusion just before (four patients) or immediately after (five patients) starting treatment with FAM. Five patients received FAM only. When considering symptoms, laboratory findings, abdominal CT scans, and survival, no evidence was found that secretin and CCK may cause serious or unpleasant side effects in patients with pancreatic cancer receiving cytostatics.

The gastric effects of synthetic secretin given in a depot preparation as subcutaneous injection or in different doses as intravenous infusion were studied in 10 healthy volunteers. Peptone-stimulated gastric acid secretion and serum gastrin were significantly suppressed with a clear dose-response inhibition of acid output. There was a significant correlation between percentage inhibition of acid secretion and plasma secretin concentrations which were greatly above those seen physiologically. Serum lipase and trypsin increased significantly. Most subjects lost fluid from diuresis and diarrhoea, so that serum sodium and total protein concentrations also increased significantly. These side effects cast doubt on the clinical value of prolonged infusions of pharmacological doses of synthetic secretion in critically ill patients.

Hospitalized male patients with endoscopically verified duodenal ulcer were studied to determine the effect of secretin on the clinical course of their disease. Seven patients received synthetic porcine secretin, 333 mug subcutaneously every 4 hr for 10 days, and 6 patients received placebo injections on the same schedule. Repeat endoscopy was performed within 48 hr of completing the 10-day treatment period. The trial was discontinued because of transient, asymptomatic, hyperamylasemia in secretin-treated patients. Although significant gastric alkalinization could be reproducibly demonstrated in secretin-treated patients, secretin was not more effective than placebo in relieving pain or healing duodenal ulcer. However, because the number of patients was small, definitive conclusions regarding efficacy of secretin in ulcer treatment could not be drawn.

In healthy controls (n = 7), patients with duodenal ulcer (n = 7), primary hyperparathyroidism (n = 7), and 1 case of excluded gastric antrum the effects of intravenous secretin ("Karolinska"; 3 U/kg/h for 90 min) upon serum calcium fractions, total protein, and the integrated response of gastrin and glucagon were investigated. In all groups total calcium, total protein, and protein-bound calcium fraction rose significantly but the inonized calcium fraction remained stable. Since serum concentration of gastrin and glucagon could not be altered in any of the groups a direct interference of these hormones with calcium homeostasis during secretin infusion can be ruled out. Hyperparathyroid patients had higher baseline glucagon values (209 +/- 30 pg/ml) than normals (127 +/- 6 pg/ml) and ulcer patients (138 +/- 11 pg/ml) and maintained a higher hormone output throughout the experiment. Together with data on the patient with excluded antral parts it is concluded that the hypercalcemic effect of secretin is not mediated by calcium-regulating hormones but must be of an unspecific nature.