AQ4N (banoxantrone) is a prodrug that, under hypoxic conditions, is enzymatically converted to a cytotoxic DNA-binding agent, AQ4. Incorporation of AQ4N into conventional chemoradiation protocols therefore targets both oxygenated and hypoxic regions of tumors, and potentially will increase the effectiveness of therapy. This current pharmacodynamic and efficacy study was designed to quantify tumor exposure to AQ4 following treatment with AQ4N, and to relate exposure to outcome of treatment. A single dose of 60 mg/kg AQ4N enhanced the response of RT112 (bladder) and Calu-6 (lung) xenografts to treatment with cisplatin and radiation therapy. AQ4N was also given to separate cohorts of tumor-bearing mice 24 hours before tumor excision for subsequent analysis of metabolite levels. AQ4 was detected by high performance liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry in all treated samples of RT112 and Calu-6 tumors at mean concentrations of 0.23 and 1.07 microg/g, respectively. These concentrations are comparable with those shown to be cytotoxic in vitro. AQ4-related nuclear fluorescence was observed in all treated tumors by confocal microscopy, which correlated with the high performance liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry data. The presence of the hypoxic marker Glut-1 was shown by immunohistochemistry in both Calu-6 tumors and RT112 tumors, and colocalization of AQ4 fluorescence and Glut-1 staining strongly suggested that AQ4N was activated in these putatively hypoxic areas. This is the first demonstration that AQ4N will increase the efficacy of chemoradiotherapy in preclinical models; the intratumoral levels of AQ4 found in this study are comparable with tumor AQ4 levels found in a recent phase I clinical study, which suggests that these levels could be potentially therapeutic.

A metformina é a droga de escolha no tratamento inicial do diabetes mellitus tipo 2 (DM2). Não existe consenso na literatura sobre qual seria a segunda melhor opção terapêutica após a falência desta em longo prazo. Objetivo: avaliar a eficácia em longo prazo de gliflozinas e gliptinas após a falência do tratamento primário com metformina no DM2. Material e métodos: foi realizada uma revisão sistemática para o maior tempo de tratamento nas bases de dados bases Embase, Pubmed (via Medline), Lilacs e Cochrane Library e metanálise em rede com as sulfoniluréias (glimepirida e glipizida) como meta comparador. Desfechos: eficácia da medicação (valor final da HbA1c e porcentagem de pacientes com HbA1c < 7%), variação de peso e frequência de pacientes com hipoglicemia. Resultados: O maior tempo de segmento foi de quatro anos. Foram selecionados um artigo com empagliflozina, um artigo com dapagliflozina e um artigo com saxagliptina com dados faltantes. Após um ano de tratamento, mais de 50% dos pacientes estavam com HbA1c > 7%. O perfil de eficácia em quatro anos da empagliflozina (23%) foi melhor que da dapagliflozina (5%) e saxagliptina (7%), porém com valores de HbA1c não estatisticamente significantes (7,4 e 7,3% entre as gliflozinas), sem dados para a saxagliptina. Entretanto, a empagliflozina foi superior à glimepirida no período de quatro anos (diferença média padronizada/DMP: 0,40, intervalo de confiança/IC95%: 0,23- 0,56). A variação de peso permaneceu estável após um ano de tratamento, com vantagem em quatro anos para a empa (DMP: 1,56, IC95%: 1,23- 1,88). A frequência de pacientes com hipoglicemia não diferiu entre empagliflozina e dapagliflozina (razão de chances: 1,53, IC95%: 0,80- 2,91) e foi significativamente menor do que em relação às sulfoniluréias. Conclusões: a falência da segunda terapia com gliflozinas ocorre em menos de um ano de tratamento ( > 50% dos pacientes com HbA1c > 7%). A empagliflozina obteve um controle glicêmico melhor em relação às sulfoniluréias, porém semelhante à dapagliflozina. A perda de peso foi mantida por quatro anos, com superioridade para empagliflozina. Houve uma baixa frequência de hipoglicemia nas gliflozinas em comparação com as sulfoniluréias. Mais estudos são necessários para avaliar a eficácia de gliptinas e gliflozinas em longo prazo, após a falência terapêutica com metformina / Metformin is the first-choice treatment in people with type 2 diabetes (TD2). There is no consensus in the medical literature about which drug would be a second-best option of treatment in the case of metformin failure in long-term. Objective: to assess the long-term efficacy of gliflozins and gliptins once metformin has failed as the primary treatment for TD2. Materials and methods: a systematic review was performed considering the longest period found in Embase, Pubmed (via Medline), Lilacs and Cochrane Library databases and also network meta-analyses using sulfonylureas (glimepiride and glipizide) as a meta comparator. Clinical outcomes where efficacy of medical treatment (final value of HbA1c and percentage of patients with HbA1c < 7%), weight variation and frequency of patients with hypoglycemia. Results: the longest period of the segment was 4 years. It was selected 1 article on empagliflozin, 1 article on dapagliflozin, and 1 article on saxagliptin with missing data. After one year of treatment, over 50% of the patients presented HbA1c > 7%. Efficacy rate in 4 years of empagliflozin (23%) was better than dapagliflozin (5%) and saxagliptin (7%), however presenting statistically non-significant values for HbA1c (7.4 and 7.3% between gliflozins), and missing data for the saxaglifozin. Nonetheless, empagliflozin performed better than glimepiride in the 4-year period (standardized mean difference SMD 0.4, confidence interval CI 95% 0.23 to 0.56). Weight variation remained stable after one year of treatment, presenting empagliflozin better results in the 4-year period (SMD 1.56, CI 95% 1.23 to 1.88). The frequency of patients with hyperglycemia did not vary for empagliflozin and dapagliflozin (odds ratio 1.53, CI 95% 0.8 to 2.91), and it was significantly lower when compared to the sulfonylureas. Conclusions: the failure of the secondary treatment using gliflozins occurs in less than one year of treatment (less than 50% of the patients presenting HbA1c > 7 %). Empagliflozin offered a better glycemic control compared to the sulfonylureas, but similar to dapagliflozin. The weight loss was maintained for 4 years, being empagliflozin the one with better results. There was a low frequency of hypoglycemia for the gliflozins when compared to the sulfonylureas. Further studies are required to evaluate the efficacy of gliptins and gliflozins in the long-term after metformin failure

A metformina é a droga de escolha no tratamento inicial do diabetes mellitus tipo 2 (DM2). Não existe consenso na literatura sobre qual seria a segunda melhor opção terapêutica após a falência desta em longo prazo. Objetivo: avaliar a eficácia em longo prazo de gliflozinas e gliptinas após a falência do tratamento primário com metformina no DM2. Material e métodos: foi realizada uma revisão sistemática para o maior tempo de tratamento nas bases de dados bases Embase, Pubmed (via Medline), Lilacs e Cochrane Library e metanálise em rede com as sulfoniluréias (glimepirida e glipizida) como meta comparador. Desfechos: eficácia da medicação (valor final da HbA1c e porcentagem de pacientes com HbA1c < 7%), variação de peso e frequência de pacientes com hipoglicemia. Resultados: O maior tempo de segmento foi de quatro anos. Foram selecionados um artigo com empagliflozina, um artigo com dapagliflozina e um artigo com saxagliptina com dados faltantes. Após um ano de tratamento, mais de 50% dos pacientes estavam com HbA1c > 7%. O perfil de eficácia em quatro anos da empagliflozina (23%) foi melhor que da dapagliflozina (5%) e saxagliptina (7%), porém com valores de HbA1c não estatisticamente significantes (7,4 e 7,3% entre as gliflozinas), sem dados para a saxagliptina. Entretanto, a empagliflozina foi superior à glimepirida no período de quatro anos (diferença média padronizada/DMP: 0,40, intervalo de confiança/IC95%: 0,23- 0,56). A variação de peso permaneceu estável após um ano de tratamento, com vantagem em quatro anos para a empa (DMP: 1,56, IC95%: 1,23- 1,88). A frequência de pacientes com hipoglicemia não diferiu entre empagliflozina e dapagliflozina (razão de chances: 1,53, IC95%: 0,80- 2,91) e foi significativamente menor do que em relação às sulfoniluréias. Conclusões: a falência da segunda terapia com gliflozinas ocorre em menos de um ano de tratamento ( > 50% dos pacientes com HbA1c > 7%). A empagliflozina obteve um controle glicêmico melhor em relação às sulfoniluréias, porém semelhante à dapagliflozina. A perda de peso foi mantida por quatro anos, com superioridade para empagliflozina. Houve uma baixa frequência de hipoglicemia nas gliflozinas em comparação com as sulfoniluréias. Mais estudos são necessários para avaliar a eficácia de gliptinas e gliflozinas em longo prazo, após a falência terapêutica com metformina / Metformin is the first-choice treatment in people with type 2 diabetes (TD2). There is no consensus in the medical literature about which drug would be a second-best option of treatment in the case of metformin failure in long-term. Objective: to assess the long-term efficacy of gliflozins and gliptins once metformin has failed as the primary treatment for TD2. Materials and methods: a systematic review was performed considering the longest period found in Embase, Pubmed (via Medline), Lilacs and Cochrane Library databases and also network meta-analyses using sulfonylureas (glimepiride and glipizide) as a meta comparator. Clinical outcomes where efficacy of medical treatment (final value of HbA1c and percentage of patients with HbA1c < 7%), weight variation and frequency of patients with hypoglycemia. Results: the longest period of the segment was 4 years. It was selected 1 article on empagliflozin, 1 article on dapagliflozin, and 1 article on saxagliptin with missing data. After one year of treatment, over 50% of the patients presented HbA1c > 7%. Efficacy rate in 4 years of empagliflozin (23%) was better than dapagliflozin (5%) and saxagliptin (7%), however presenting statistically non-significant values for HbA1c (7.4 and 7.3% between gliflozins), and missing data for the saxaglifozin. Nonetheless, empagliflozin performed better than glimepiride in the 4-year period (standardized mean difference SMD 0.4, confidence interval CI 95% 0.23 to 0.56). Weight variation remained stable after one year of treatment, presenting empagliflozin better results in the 4-year period (SMD 1.56, CI 95% 1.23 to 1.88). The frequency of patients with hyperglycemia did not vary for empagliflozin and dapagliflozin (odds ratio 1.53, CI 95% 0.8 to 2.91), and it was significantly lower when compared to the sulfonylureas. Conclusions: the failure of the secondary treatment using gliflozins occurs in less than one year of treatment (less than 50% of the patients presenting HbA1c > 7 %). Empagliflozin offered a better glycemic control compared to the sulfonylureas, but similar to dapagliflozin. The weight loss was maintained for 4 years, being empagliflozin the one with better results. There was a low frequency of hypoglycemia for the gliflozins when compared to the sulfonylureas. Further studies are required to evaluate the efficacy of gliptins and gliflozins in the long-term after metformin failure

No / Observational studies have shown that attentional bias for smoking-related cues is associated with increased craving and relapse. Laboratory experiments have shown that manipulating attentional bias may change craving. Interventions to reduce attentional bias could reduce relapse in smokers seeking to quit. We report a clinical trial of attentional retraining in treatment-seeking smokers. This was a double-blind randomised controlled trial that took place in UK smoking cessation clinics. Smokers interested in quitting were randomised to five weekly sessions of attentional retraining (N=60) or placebo training (N = 58) using a modified visual probe task from one week prior to quit day. Both groups received 21 mg nicotine patches (from quit day onwards) and behavioural support. Primary outcomes included change in attentional bias reaction times four weeks after quit day on the visual probe task and craving measured weekly using the Mood and Physical Symptoms Scale. Secondary outcomes were changes in withdrawal symptoms, time to first lapse and prolonged abstinence. No attentional bias towards smoking cues was found in the sample at baseline (mean difference = 3 ms, 95% CI = -2, 9). Post-training bias was not significantly lower in the retraining group compared with the placebo group (mean difference = -9 ms, 95% CI = -20, 2). There was no difference between groups in change in craving (p = 0.89) and prolonged abstinence at four weeks (risk ratio = 1.00, 95% CI = 0.70, 1.43). Taken with one other trial, there appears to be no effect from clinic-based attentional retraining using the visual probe task. Attentional retraining conducted out of clinic may prove more effective. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: UK Clinical Trials ISRCTN 54375405.