Explore the vast range of titles available.

Antagonists of Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor (Anti-VEGF) are widely administered by intravitreal injection for the treatment of ocular pathologies such as Age-related Macular Degeneration, Diabetic Macular Edema, Proliferative Diabetic Retinopathy and occlusion of retinal vessels. Anti-VEGF agents, in particular bevacizumab, were introduced in oncology to inhibit tumor-induced angiogenesis feeding neoplastic tissues. Subsequently, other specific agents were developed for intraocular administration. Whereas systemic administration of anti-VEGF agents in oncology is burdened by increased risk of arterial hypertension and embolism, agents administered for ophthalmic indications are delivered locally into the eye globe in much smaller quantities. Nevertheless, clinical observations have raised the possibility that, even in these conditions, anti-VEGF agents may increase cardiovascular risk in patients who, being elderly and/or diabetic, are intrinsically prone to such events. This paper aims at reviewing the current knowledge on VEGF and its pharmacologic antagonists from mechanistic and side effect points of view, with specific reference to patients with sight-threatening conditions. Internists should be aware of the need to collaborate with ophthalmologists and pharmacovigilance operators to define as best as possible the risk/benefit balance of intravitreal agents in patients who might lose their sight if left untreated, or increase their risk of suffering a cardiovascular event if treated.

Diabetic retinopathy remains a leading cause of visual loss in people of working age. We examined whether candesartan treatment could slow the progression and, secondly, induce regression of retinopathy in people with type 2 diabetes. We did a randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trial in 309 centres worldwide. We recruited normoalbuminuric, normotensive, or treated hypertensive people with type 2 diabetes with mild to moderately severe retinopathy and assigned them to candesartan 16 mg once a day or placebo. After a month, the dose was doubled to 32 mg once per day. Investigators and patients were unaware of the treatment allocation status. Progression of retinopathy was the primary endpoint, and regression was a secondary endpoint. Analysis was by intention to treat. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00252694. 1905 participants (aged 37–75 years) were randomised to candesartan (n=951) or placebo (n=954). 161 (17%) patients in the candesartan group and 182 (19%) in the placebo group had progression of retinopathy by three steps or more on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study scale. The risk of progression of retinopathy was non-significantly reduced by 13% in patients on candesartan compared with those on placebo (hazard ratio [HR] 0·87, 95% CI 0·70–1·08, p=0·20). Regression on active treatment was increased by 34% (1·34, 1·08–1·68, p=0·009). HRs were not attenuated by adjustment for baseline risk factors or changes in blood pressure during the trial. An overall change towards less severe retinopathy by the end of the trial was observed in the candesartan group (odds 1·17, 95% CI 1·05–1·30, p=0·003). Adverse events did not differ between the treatment groups. Treatment with candesartan in type 2 diabetic patients with mild to moderate retinopathy might induce improvement of retinopathy. AstraZeneca and Takeda.

Results of previous studies suggest that renin-angiotensin system blockers might reduce the burden of diabetic retinopathy. We therefore designed the DIabetic REtinopathy Candesartan Trials (DIRECT) Programme to assess whether candesartan could reduce the incidence and progression of retinopathy in type 1 diabetes. Two randomised, double-blind, parallel-design, placebo-controlled trials were done in 309 centres worldwide. Participants with normotensive, normoalbuminuric type 1 diabetes without retinopathy were recruited to the DIRECT-Prevent 1 trial and those with existing retinopathy were recruited to DIRECT-Protect 1, and were assigned to candesartan 16 mg once a day or matching placebo. After 1 month, the dose was doubled to 32 mg. Investigators and participants were unaware of the treatment allocation status. The primary endpoints were incidence and progression of retinopathy and were defined as at least a two-step and at least a three-step increase on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) scale, respectively. These trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT00252733 for DIRECT-Prevent 1 and NCT00252720 for DIRECT-Protect 1. 1421 participants (aged 18–50 years) were randomly assigned to candesartan (n=711) or to placebo (n=710) in DIRECT-Prevent 1, and 1905 (aged 18–55 years) to candesartan (n=951) or to placebo (n=954) in DIRECT-Protect 1. Incidence of retinopathy was seen in 178 (25%) participants in the candesartan group versus 217 (31%) in the placebo group. Progression of retinopathy occurred in 127 (13%) participants in the candesartan group versus 124 (13%) in the placebo group. Hazard ratio (HR for candesartan vs placebo) was 0·82 (95% CI 0·67–1·00, p=0·0508) for incidence of retinopathy and 1·02 (0·80–1·31, p=0·85) for progression of retinopathy. The post-hoc outcome of at least a three-step increase for incidence yielded an HR of 0·65 (0·48–0·87, p=0·0034), which was attenuated but still significant after adjustment for baseline characteristics (0·71, 0·53–0·95, p=0·046). Final ETDRS level was more likely to have improved with candesartan treatment in both DIRECT-Prevent 1 (odds 1·16, 95% CI 1·05–1·30, p=0·0048) and DIRECT-Protect 1 (1·12, 95% CI 1·01–1·25, p=0·0264). Adverse events did not differ between the treatment groups. Although candesartan reduces the incidence of retinopathy, we did not see a beneficial effect on retinopathy progression. AstraZeneca and Takeda.

Aims Neurodegeneration and glial activation are primary events in the pathogenesis of diabetic retinopathy. Serum glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) and neurofilament light chain (NfL) are biomarkers of underlying neuroinflammatory and neurodegenerative disease processes. The aim of the present study was to assess the usefulness of these serum biomarkers for the identification and monitoring of retinal neurodysfunction in subjects with type 2 diabetes. Methods A case–control study was designed including 38 patients from the placebo arm of the EUROCONDOR clinical trial: 19 with and 19 without retinal neurodysfunction assessed by multifocal electroretinography. GFAP and NfL were measured by Simoa. Results Serum levels of GFAP and NfL directly correlated with age ( r  = 0.37, p  = 0.023 and r  = 0.54, p  < 0.001, respectively). In addition, a direct correlation between GFAP and NfL was observed ( r  = 0.495, p  = 0.002). Serum levels of GFAP were significantly higher at baseline in those subjects in whom neurodysfunction progressed after the 2 years of follow-up (139.1 ± 52.5 pg/mL vs. 100.2 ± 54.6 pg/mL; p  = 0.04). Conclusions GFAP could be a useful serum biomarker for retinal neurodysfunction. Monitoring retinal neurodysfunction using blood samples would be of benefit in clinical decision-making. However, further research is needed to validate this result as well as to establish the best cutoff values.

Background Here we study the effect of type 2 diabetes (T2DM) on bone cell precursors, turnover and cytokines involved in the control of bone cell formation and activity. Methods We enrolled in the study 21 T2DM women and 21 non diabetic controls matched for age and body mass index (BMI). In each subject we measured bone cell precursors, Receptor Activator of Nuclear Factor κB (RANKL), Osteoprotegerin (OPG), Sclerostin (SCL) and Dickoppf-1 (DKK-1) as cytokines involved in the control of osteoblast and osteoclast formation and activity, bone density (BMD) and quality trough trabecular bone score (TBS) and bone turnover. T2DM patients and controls were compared for the analyzed variables by one way ANOVA for Gaussian ones and by Mann-Whitney or Kruskal-Wallis test for non-Gaussian variables. Results RANKL was decreased and DKK-1 increased in T2DM. Accordingly, patients with T2DM have lower bone turnover compared to controls. BMD and TBS were not significantly different from healthy controls. Bone precursor cells were more immature in T2DM. However the number of osteoclast precursors was increased and that of osteoblasts decreased. Conclusions Patients with T2DM have more immature bone cells precursors, with increased number of osteoclasts and decreased osteoblasts, confirming low bone turnover and reduced cytokines such as RANKL and DKK-1. BMD and TBS are not significantly altered in T2DM although, in contrast with other studies, this may be due to the match of patients and controls for BMI rather than age.

Thiamine (vitamin B1) is an essential cofactor in most organisms and is required at several stages of anabolic and catabolic intermediary metabolism, such as intracellular glucose metabolism, and is also a modulator of neuronal and neuro-muscular transmission. Lack of thiamine or defects in its intracellular transport can cause a number of severe disorders. Thiamine acts as a coenzyme for transketolase (TK) and for the pyruvate dehydrogenase and α-ketoglutarate dehydrogenase complexes, enzymes which play a fundamental role for intracellular glucose metabolism. In particular, TK is able to shift excess fructose-6-phosphate and glycerhaldeyde-3-phosphate from glycolysis into the pentose-phosphate shunt, thus eliminating these potentially damaging metabolites from the cytosol. Diabetes might be considered a thiamine-deficient state, if not in absolute terms at least relative to the increased requirements deriving from accelerated and amplified glucose metabolism in non-insulin dependent tissues that, like the vessel wall, are prone to complications. A thiamine/TK activity deficiency has been described in diabetic patients, the correction of which by thiamine and/or its lipophilic derivative, benfotiamine, has been demonstrated in vitro to counteract the damaging effects of hyperglycaemia on vascular cells. Little is known, however, on the positive effects of thiamine/benfotiamine administration in diabetic patients, apart from the possible amelioration of neuropathic symptoms. Clinical trials on diabetic patients would be necessary to test this vitamin as a potential and inexpensive approach to the prevention and/or treatment of diabetic vascular complications.

Ceftobiprole is a fifth-generation cephalosporin approved by European and American regulatory agencies for the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) and hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP). Ceftobiprole administration is useful in severe CAP as well as HAP where the potential is to save other β-lactams including carbapenems or linezolid/vancomycin in clinical practice. The aim of this study was to report the real-world evidence of ceftobiprole in patients with CAP and HAP in a single center. In this retrospective study, we included 159 patients with CAP or HAP: 105 (66%) had CAP and 54 (34%) had HAP. The median age was 70 years (IQR 60–77), the median Charlson Comorbidity Index was 5 (IQR 3–7.5) and baseline INCREMENT ESBL score was 8 (IQR 6–11). Ceftobiprole was mostly given as a combination treatment (77%) or as a carbapenem-sparing strategy (44%). There were no differences in mortality between shorter and longer duration of treatment (<7 days compared with ≥7 days (HR 1.02, C.I. 0.58–1.77, p = 0.93) or between first-line (HR 1.00, C.I. 0.46–2.17, p = 0.989) and second-line therapy. Ceftobiprole use in CAP or HAP in the real world is effective as a first- and second-line treatment as well as a carbapenem-sparing strategy. Further studies are needed to explore the full potential of ceftobiprole, including its real-world use in antimicrobial stewardship programs.