DocumentsDate added
Letters to the editor
*Boghos L. Artinian
Affiliation:-
*Boghos L. Artinian M.D.,
Member of the Lebanese Order of Physicians, Beirut, Lebanon
Core idea: Social phenomena resemble those occurring in tissues, ie. There is homology between the two levels of organization. A case in point, genocide, is taken to show the homology between it and the rejection reaction in immunology.
*Corresponding author:
Boghos L. Artinian, M.D.,
Beirut, Lebanon.
Email: artinian@inco.com.lb; Contact No: 961-3647877
Abstract:
Social behavior resembles to a large extent the behavior of cells and tissues. There is a semblance of the phenomenon of genocide at the social level to tissue rejection at the cellular level. The socio-compatibility complex, whose antigens are religion, language and nationality correspond to the cell surface antigens used by the Histo-Compatibility Complex Genes. This ‘Host-Versus-Graft Reaction’ in society might be overcome by management similar to Immuno-suppression.
Key words: Histo-Compatibility Complex; Socio-Compatibility Complex; Genocide; Host-Versus-Graft-Reaction.
REFERENCE
1.Daderian VU. The History of the Armenian Genocide: Ethnic Conflict from the Balkans to Anatolia, to the Caucasus. Providence/Oxford: Berghahn Books, 1995.
Article citation:
Boghos L. Artinian., The social parallel of host-versus-graft reaction. Journal of pharmaceutical and biomedical sciences (J Pharm Biomed Sci.) 2013 October; 35(35):1752-1753.
Original article
V Sravan Reddy*, I Sarath Chandra, M Pramod Reddy,CM Pavan Kumar Reddy
Affiliation:-
Department of psychiatry,
Mamta General Hospital, Khammam, Andrapradesh-507002, India.
The name of the Department and Institution to which the work should be attributed:-
Department of psychiatry,
Mamta General Hospital, Khammam, Andrapradesh-507002, India.
Author contributions:
V Sravan Reddy: Contributes towards concept, design, literature survey, experimental design, data and statistical analysis, manuscript preparation, editing & review.
I Sarath Chandra: Worked on, data and statistical analysis, manuscript preparation, editing & review
M Pramod Reddy: Contributes towards manuscript preparation, editing & review
CM Pavan Kumar Reddy: Contributes towards manuscript preparation, editing & review.
Core Idea: This is a cross sectional study conducted to assess the relationship between smoking and severity of illness in schizophrenia. 65.8% of our study sample was smokers. Smoking is significantly associated with elder age group patients, unemployment and higher mean scores on PANSS scale. There was a significant association between severity of smoking and higher mean scores on positive symptom domain and lower mean scores on negative symptom domains of PANSS, which indicate that smoking may, improves negative symptoms and worsens the positive symptoms in schizophrenia.
*Correspondence to:
Dr Vangala Sravan Reddy
Department of psychiatry,
Mamta General Hospital, Khammam, Andrapradesh-507002 India.
Contact number:+91-9849625869
Abstract:
Aims and objectives: To find out the prevalence of smoking in Schizophrenic patients and its association with socio demographic variables and severity of illness.
Method: The study was conducted in the outpatient department of Mamata General Hospital, Khammam, Andhra Pradesh in India, for a period of five months. All the patients were systematically interviewed and their socio-demographic details were noted. The diagnosis of schizophrenia was revised in accordance to ICD-10 RDC. Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) was used to assess the severity of the illness. Patients were divided into smokers and non smokers based on their current smoking status and patients who smoke were administered Fagerstrom Test for Nicotine Dependence (FTND) questionnaire to assess the severity of smoking.
Results: 65.8% of our study sample was smokers. A significant association was found between smoking and elder age group, unemployment and severity of schizophrenic symptoms. Patients who were severely dependent were found to be having higher mean scores on positive and general psychopathology subscales and lower mean scores on negative subscales of PANSS.
Conclusions: Findings suggests that there is a need for further longitudinal studies to assess the direct causality of smoking, weather beneficial or harmful in patients with schizophrenia.
Key words: Schizophrenia; Smoki ng; Severity; Psychopathology.
REFRENCES
1.WHO Report on the Global Tobacco Epidemic, 2008: The MPOWER Package; World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2008.
2.Mathers, C.D.; Loncar, D. Projections of global mortality and burden of disease from 2002 to 2030. PLoS. Med. 2006, 3, e442.
3.GATS. Global Adult Tobacco Survey; 2009-2010.
4.Chandra PS, Carey MP, Carey KB, Jairam KR, Girish NS, Rudresh HP. Prevalence and correlates of tobacco use and nicotine dependence am-ong psychiatric patients in India. Addict Behav 2005;30:1290-1299.
5.Neufeld KJ, Peters DH, Rani M, Bonu S, Brooner RK. Regular use of alcohol and tobacco in India and its association with age, gender, and poverty. Drug Alcohol Depend 2005;77:283-291.
6.Schizophrenia.NIH pub no 06-3517.Bethesda,Md, Us Department of Health and Human services.National institute Of Health ,2006
7.De Leon J, Dadvand M, Canuso C, White AO, Stanilla jK,Simpson GM. Schizophrenia and smoking: an epidemiological survey in a state hospital. Am J Psychiatry 1995; 152:453-455.
8.Etter M, Mohr S, Garin C, Etter JF. Stages of change in smokerswith schizophrenia or schizoaffecdve disorder and in the generalpopulation. Schizophr Bull 2004; 30:359-368.
9.De Leon , Diaz F. A meta-analysis of worldwide studiesdemonstrates an association between schizophrenia and tobaccosmoking behaviors. Schizophr Res 2005; 76:135-157.
10.De Leon J. Smoking and vulnerability for schizophrenia. Schizophrenia Bull. 1996; 22(3):405–409.
11.De Leon J, Becona E, Gurpegui M, Conzalea-Pinto A, Diaz FJ. The association between high nicotine dependence and severe mental illness may be consistent across countries. JClin Psychiatry. 2002;63(9):812–816. [PubMed: 12363123]
12.Hughes JR, Hatsukami DK, Mitchell JE, Dahlgren LA. Prevalence of smoking among psychiatric outpatients. Am J Psychiatry. 1986; 143(8):993–997. [PubMed: 3487983]
13.Simosky JK, Stevens KE, Freedman R. Nicotinic agonists and psychosis. Curr Drug Targets CNS Neurol Disord. 2002; 1(2):149–162. [PubMed: 12769624].
14.Leonard S, Breese C, Adams C, et al. Smoking and schizophrenia: Abnormal nicotinic receptorexpression. Eur J Pharmacol. 2000; 393(1-3):237–242. [PubMed: 10771019]
15. Berlin I, Singleton EG, Pedarriosse AM, Lancrenon S, RamesA, Aubin HJ, Niaura R. The modified reasons for smokingscale: factorial structure, gender effects and relationship withnicotine dependence and smoking cessation in French smokers.Addiction 2003; 98:1575-1583.
16.Ziedonis DM, Kosten TR, Glazer WM, Frances RJ. Nicotinedependence and schizophrenia. Hosp Community Psychiatry1994; 45:204-206.
17.Lyon ER. A review of the effects of nicotine on schizophreniaand antipsychotic medications. Psychiatr Serv 1999; 50:1346-1350.
18.Nomikos GG, Schilstorm B, Hiidebrand BE, Panagis G, GrenhoffJ, Sven'sson TH. Role of alpha 7 nicotine receptors in nicotinedependence and implications for psychiatric illness. Behav Brain Res 2000; 113:97-113.
19.Kumari V; Postma P. Nicotine use in schizophrenia: the selfmedication hypotheses.Neurosci Biobehav Rev 2005;29:1021-1034.
20.Lavin M, Siris S, Mason S. What is the clinical importance of cigarette smoking in schizophrenia? Am J Addict 1996;5:189-208.
21. Srinivasan TN, Thara R. Smoking in schizophrenia all is not biologi¬cal. Schizophr Res 2002;56:6774.
22.Saddichha S, Rekha DP, Patil BK, Murthy P, Benegal V, Isaac MK. Knowledge, attitude and practices of Indian dental surgeons towards tobacco control: advances towards prevention. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2010; 11:939-942.
23.Saddichha S, Khess CR. Prevalence of tobacco use among young adult males in India: a community-based epidemiological study. Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse 2010; 36:73-77.
24.Berlin I, Singleton EG, Pedarriosse AM, Lancrenon S, RamesA, Aubin HJ, Niaura R. The modified reasons for smokingscale: factorial structure, gender effects and relationship withnicotine dependence and smoking cessation in French smokers. Addiction 2003; 98(5):1575-1583.
24.WHO, International Classification of diseases-10 Research Diagnostic Criteria; 1992.
25.Kay SR,Fiszbein A, Opler LA.The positive and negative syndrome scale (PANSS) for schizophrenia. Schizophr Bull. 1987;13:261–276.
26.Heatherton TF, Kozlowski LT, Frecker RC, Fagerstrom KO. The Fager¬strom Test for Nicotine Dependence: a revision of the FagerstromtoleranceQuestionnaire. Br J Addict 1991; 86:1119-1127.
27.Kelly C, McCreadie RG. Smoking habits, current symptoms, and pre¬morbid characteristics of schizophrenic patients in Nithsdale, Scotland. Am J Psychiatry 1999;156:1751-1757.
28.Xiang YT, Ma X, Lu JY et al. Alcohol-related disorders inBeijing, China: prevalence, sociodemographic correlates, andunmet need for treatment. Alcohol Clin Exp Res 2009; 33:1111–1118.
29.Sorensen G Gupta PC Pednekr MS.Social disparities in tobacco use in Mumbai:The roles of occupation ,education ,and gender .AMJ PUBLIC HEALTH.2005 JUNE ;95(6):1003-1008
30.Rajeev krishnadas,sameer jauhar,susan tefler,somashekara,shivashenkar.Nicotine dependence and illness severity in schizophrenia Bjp October 2012 201:306-312
31.Okan Ekinci,Asli Ekinci,.Dusunen Adam the journal of psychiatry and neurological sciences 2012;25(4). 285-296.
32.Van Dongen, C. J.). Smoking and persistent mental illness:An exploratory study. Journal of Psychosocial Nursing, 1999; 37 (11): 26–34.
33.Ziedonis, D. M. & George, T. P. Schizophrenia andnicotine use: report of a pilot smoking cessation program andreview of neurobiological and clinical issues. Schizophrenia
Bulletin, 1997; 23:247–254.
34.Forchuk, C., Norman, R., Malla, A., Vos, A. & Martin, M. L. Smoking and schizophrenia. of Psychiatricand Mental Health Journal Nursing, 1997; 4:355–359.
35.Dalack, G. W. & Meador-Woodruff, J. H. Smoking withdrawal and schizophrenia: case reports and areview of the literature. Schizophrenia Research, 1996; 22, 133–141.
36.Lohr, J. B. & Flynn, K.Smoking and schizophrenia. Schizophrenia Research, 1992; 8: 93–102.
Article citation:-
V Sravan Reddy, I Sarath Chandra, M Pramod Reddy,CM Pavan Kumar Reddy. Smoking and illness severity in schizophrenia. Journal of pharmaceutical and biomedical sciences (J Pharm Biomed Sci.) 2013 October; 35(35): 1814-1819. Available at http: //www.jpbms.info
Copyright © 2013 V Sravan Reddy, I Sarath Chandra, M Pramod Reddy,CM Pavan Kumar Reddy. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Original article:
*1Sharma Priyanka, 2Sen Meenal, 3Yadav Rajeev, 4Sen Vandna & 5Swarnkar Madhusudan
Affiliation:
1M.B.B.S. Resident, Pathology Department, Mahatma Gandhi Medical College, Jaipur, Rajasthan, India
2M.B.B.S. Resident Gynecology & Obstetric Department, M.S. Ramaiah Medical College, Bangalore, India
3M.D. (P.S.M), Assistant Professor, P. S. M. Department, SMS Medical College, Jaipur, Rajasthan, India
4M.D. (P.S.M), Professor, P. S. M. Department, NIMS Medical College, Jaipur, Rajasthan, India
5M.D. (P.S.M) Assistant Professor, P. S. M. Department, Jhalawar Medical College, Jhalawar, Rajasthan, India
Author’s contribution:
Dr.Priyanka Sharma worked on concepts, design, clinical studies, data acquisition and statical analysis. Dr.Meenal Sen contributed towards literature survey,data acquisition and Statistical analysis analysis. Dr.Rajeev Yadav contributed towards data acquisition, Statistical analysis and manuscript editing. Dr.Vandna Sen contributed towards concepts, design, literature search and article preparation. Dr.Madhusudan Swarnkar contributed towards manuscript preparation, editing and review.
Core idea: Despite having favourable attitude towards early detection (81.42% women) of breast carcinoma only one in eight (12.85%) women knew about self breast examination(SBE), which can be used as a tool for primary prevention of breast cancer in a country like India, where majority of the population live in villages & general public can not afford sophisticated methods like screening mammography.
*Corresponding author:
Dr. Vandna Sen.
202, AWHO Colony, Jaipur-302023, Rajasthan, India
Contact No. : 9460143884
Abstract:
Background: Among Indian women cancer of breast & cervix account for nearly 60% of all the cancers. Early detection is very vital, as in early stages breast cancer treatment is easier & more successful. Objective: To assess the knowledge attitude & practice regarding breast carcinoma and socio-demographic factors affecting the knowledge in the study subjects with the attitude & practice of self-breast examination (SBE). Methodology: A descriptive study was conducted from January to March 2013 on 328 women of 21 to 65 years of age who were admitted as indoor patients in different specialty wards of Mahatma Gandhi medical colleges, Hospital, Jaipur, Rajasthan, India. Statistical Analysis: was done by percentage & proportions & Chi Square test (x2).
Result: Though 77.13% women had knowledge about different types of cancers but knowledge about breast carcinoma was present in 27.66% of women (P<0.001).Majority of these women i.e. 84.28% could link it with signs & symptoms of breast carcinoma & its risk factors (P<0.001).With the increase in the educational level & socioeconomic status there was increase in the knowledge about carcinoma. Despite 81.42% women who had favorable attitude towards early detection of carcinoma (P<0.001), only 12.85% of them knew about self-breast examination (P<0.001) & 66.66% of them were doing it themselves (P>0.05).
Conclusions: Despite 81.42% women, who had favorable attitude towards early detection of breast carcinoma, only 12.85% of them had knowledge about self-breast examination (SBE) & 66.66% of them were doing it themselves.
Key words: Breast Cancer; Self-breast examination; Mammography.
REFERENCES
1.WHO (2003) World cancer report by Bernard W. Stewart and Paul Kleihues.
2.WHO (1999)Health situation in South East Asia Region 1994-1997, Regional office for SEAR, New Delhi.
3.WHO (1984), Bulletin WHO, 62(6): 861-869.
4.Mahajan & Gupta,Text book of Preventive & Social Medicine, Fourth Edition, Jaypee Brother Medical Publisher,(P) Ltd. New Delhi, P.133-134
5.Bhurquri Hadi, Gowani Ali Saquib, Itrat Ahmed, Samani Saira, Zuberi Akbar, Siddique Saulat Momin &Quidwai Waris: Awareness of cancer risk factors among patients & attendants presenting to a tertiary care hospital in Karachi, Pakistan, Community Health Sciences,2008, ecommons@aku.edu. Aga Khan University
6.ICMR Bulletin 2010: Myths & Facts about breast carcinoma : 40 (2) P9-12.
7.Tara.S., Agarwal CS, AgarwalA,: Validating Self breast examination as screening modalities for breast cancer in eastern region of Nepal : A population based study Kathmandu University Medical Journal 2008, Vol.6,No.1, Issue21, P.89-93.
8.SuryakanthaA.H., Text book of Community Medicine with Recent Advances, Third Edition, Japee Brothers Medical Publishers (P)Ltd.New Delhi,P706-707.
Article citation:-
Sharma Priyanka,Sen Meenal,Yadav Rajeev,Sen Vandna, Swarnkar Madhusudan., Cross sectional study of knowledge attitude & practice (KAP) regarding breast carcinoma in women of 21 To 65 years of age in a medical college hospital, Jaipur, Rajasthan, India. Journal of pharmaceutical and biomedical sciences (J Pharm Biomed Sci.) 2013 October; 35(35):1747-1751.
Copyright © 2013 Sharma Priyanka,Sen Meenal,Yadav Rajeev,Sen Vandna, Swarnkar Madhusudan. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Review article
Shashikanth D, N. Vishal Gupta*, Raghunandan H.V.
Affiliation:-
Pharmaceutical Quality Assurance Group, Department of Pharmaceutics, JSS College of Pharmacy, JSS University, Sri Shivarathreeshwara Nagar, Mysore-570015, Karnataka, India. Tel.: +919242157508.
Author’s contributions: - All the contributed equally to this paper.
The name of the Department and Institution to which the work should be attributed:-
Pharmaceutics, JSS College of Pharmacy, JSS University, Sri Shivarathreeshwara Nagar, Mysore-570015, Karnataka, India.
*Corresponding author:
Dr.Vishal Gupta. N,
Pharmaceutical Quality Assurance Group, Department of Pharmaceutics, JSS College of Pharmacy, JSS University, Sri Shivarathreeshwara Nagar, Mysore-570015, Karnataka, India.
Contact no. +919242157508.
Abstract:
Background: During the 1960s, the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare (HEW) commissioned the Cooper Committee to study the adverse effects of medical devices for human use. In 1970, the study committee recommended a classification for medical devices based on comparative risk. In 1976, the Dalkon Shield intrauterine device injured several thousand women who aided the emphasis for regulatory oversight and therapeutic requirements provided by the U.S. legislation.
Aim: To Provide an overview of present Global Regulations on Medical devices
Discussion: The medical device market changes frequently in terms of technology, risk potential, marketing and reimbursement. Therefore, it is imperative to be aware of existing requirements and new developments in the global medical device regulation. This Article reviews the latest updates of Medical device regulations in different regulatory and non-regulatory bodies across the globe, which includes countries like Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Europe, and USA (United States of America) which are regulated and non-regulated bodies like India. Over 85 countries today regulate Medical Devices across the globe. Different regulatory bodies of respected nation provides regulations for placing medical devices in market and different quality systems and standards are involved in regulation of medical devices and also future developments in regulations on medical devices. Most of the countries have similar requirements for registration of medical devices and are striving to harmonize with the GHTF guidelines (Global Harmonization Task Force).
Conclusion: With the rapid growth in the global market for medical devices, there is a need to harmonize national standards in order to minimize regulatory barriers and to facilitate trade. Harmonization also reduces the cost of local industry, government regulations & increases communication between the countries to a better level.
Key Words: Medical devices; Quality systems; Regulatory bodies safety.
Article citation:-
Shashikanth D, N. Vishal Gupta, Raghunandan H.V. Global medical device regulations update - A review. Journal of pharmaceutical and biomedical sciences (J Pharm Biomed Sci.) 2013 October; 35(35): 1774-1782. Available at http://www.jpbms.info.
REFERENCES
1.World Health Organization. Medical Device Regulations: Global Overview and Guiding Principles. ISBN 92 4 154618 2 Available from bookorders@who.int.
2.European commission. Guidelines to classification of medical devices available from: (http://europa.eu.int/comm/enterprise/medical_device/meddev/index.htm )
3.Australian government. Department of Health and Aging. Australian Regulatory Guidelines for Medical Devices (AGRMD), TGA, Health Safety Regulation, Version 1.1, May 2011.
4.EMERGO Group. Resolution ‐ RDCNº 185 from October 22, 2001. Republished in the D.O.U, 11/06/2001available from: http://www.emergogroup.com/files/brazil-anvisa-rdc-no-185-2001-english.pdf
5.U.S. Department of Commerce. Medical Device Regulatory Requirements for Brazil, International Trade Administration, March 2011available from: http://www.ita.doc.gov/td/health/brazilmdprofile.pdf
6.A full description of ANVISA’s structure and responsibilities. Available from: http://www.anvisa.gov.br/eng/institution/index.htm (accessed on 11/06/2012).
7.U.S. Department of Commerce. “Medical Device Regulatory Requirements for Brazil, International Trade Administration”, Available from: http://www.ita.doc.gov/td/health/brazilmdprofile.pdf (accessed on 10/06/2012).
8.Authority of the Minister of Health, Canada. Guidance Document - Medical Device Licence Renewal and Fees for the Right to Sell Licensed Medical Devices. 2012 April 1.
9.Brazil’s regulatory process for medical devices. Medical Device Registration in Brazil, EMERGO Group, available from: http://www.emergogroup.com/literature.
10.Health Canada. Medical Devices Chapter 2. An Overview of the Quality System Requirements for the Sale of Medical Devices in Canada. Available from: http://www.emergogroup.com/files/CA_reqs-chapter-2.pdf
11.Health Canada. Guidance Document - Medical Device Licence Renewal and Fees for the Right to Sell Licensed Medical Devices, April 1, 2012, Published by authority of the Minister of Health, Canada. Available from: http://www.elsevierbi.com/~/media/Images/Publications/Archive/The%20Gray%20Sheet/37/32/01110808001/080811_canada_userfees.pdf
12.Health Canada. Medical Device Regulatory Requirements for Canada Updated: June, 2011. Available from: http://ita.doc.gov/td/health/canadamdprofile.pdf
13.Medical Device Regulations in Global Market, A summary of The market Entry Regulations for Medical Devices in The Thirteen main Markets, Available from: http://www.sgs.ca/~/media/Global/Documents/White%20Papers/MEDICAL%20DEVICE%20REGULATIONS%20IN%20THE%20MAIN%20GLOBAL%20MARKETS_Whitepaper_WEB.pdf
14.Medical Device Diagnostic Industry (MDDI), Medical device regulation update: China &Japan. Available from: http://www.mddionline.com/article/medical-device-regulatory-update-china-and-japan.
15.European Commission, Guide to the implementation of directives based on the New Approach and the Global Approach. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the EC; 2000. ISBN 92–828–7500–8. Available from: http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/single-market-goods/files/blue-guide/guidepublic_en.pdf
16.MHRA (Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency), MDA (Medical Device Agency) Competent Authority (UK) Bulletin No. 4 Conformity Assessment Procedures (Medical Devices Regulations) Updated March. Available on: http://www.mhra.gov.uk/home/groups/es-era/documents/publication/con007492.pdf
17.U.S. Commerce Service, United States of America, Department of Commerce, “Healthcare Technologies Resource Guide - A Reference for US Exporters to World Markets”; 2011-12 edition. Available on: http://ita.doc.gov/td/health/2012healthcareguide.pdf
18.John J, Smith MD. Regulation of medical devices in radiology: current standards and future opportunities. Radiology 2001, Pageno-218,329-335. Available on: http://radiology.rsna.org/content/218/2/329.full.pdf
19.Dr B Hari Gopal, Draft Bill, The Medical Devices Regulation Bill, 2006 No XX of 2006, Advisor Department of Science & Technology Bhavan, New Mehrauli Road New Delhi – 110016. Available on: http://www.dst.gov.in/whats_new/whats_new07/MDRA-Act.pdf
20.Central Drugs Standard Control Organization (CDSCO), Directorate General of Health Services, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, Govt. of India Guidance Document on Common Submission Format for Manufacturing of Notified Medical Devices Under CLAA Scheme, Doc No: CDSCO/MD/GD/CLAA/01/00, Dated on: 31.10.2012, Effective Date from: 01st January 2013. Available on: http://cdsco.nic.in/Medical_div/Final%20Guidance_Doc_Form-28_31-10-2012.pdf
21.Central Drugs Standard Control Organization (CDSCO), Medical Device Regulatory Profile for India, Directorate General of Health Services Ministry of Health and Family Welfare Government of India Nirman Bhavan, New Delhi -110011 Available on: http://cdsco.nic.in/FAQIMPORT%20&%20REGISTRATION%2002022013_DONEE.pdf.
Copyright © 2013 Shashikanth D, N. Vishal Gupta, Raghunandan H.V.. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Review article
* Sam Straw
Affiliation:-
*Medical student, Scleroderma Research Group, Leeds Institute of Molecular Medicine, St James’ University Hospital, Beckett Street, Leeds, LS9 7TF, UK.
*Corresponding author:
Sam Straw.
Medical student, Scleroderma Research Group, Leeds Institute of Molecular Medicine, St James’ University Hospital, Beckett Street, Leeds, LS9 7TF, UK
Abstract:
Systemic sclerosis (SSc) is a highly heterogeneous disease which would benefit from the adoption of a stratified medicine approach, to improve outcomes for patients and reduce costs to the healthcare system. SSc is orphan of disease activity biomarkers, as the current gold standard prognostic test: the modified Rodnan skin score (MRSS) is flawed. The MRSS has been shown to be unreliable, insensitive to change and not specific in measuring skin fibrosis. Physical measurements of skin thickness, genetic risk factors and autoantibodies may all allow patient stratification, however as proteins are the mediators of biological function; proteomics may offer the best approach. Proteomic studies to identify biomarkers are hypothesized to fulfill the outcome measured in rheumatology (OMERACT) filter criteria of: truth, discrimination and feasibility.
Key words: Stratified medicine; scleroderma; systemic sclerosis; biomarkers; health economics; modified Rodnan skin score; OMERACT; proteomics; autoantibodies; genetic risk factor; skin thickness.
References:
1.Castro S, J.S., Biomarkers in systemic sclerosis. Biomarkers Med 2010;4(1): 133-147.
2. Moon, Ki Won; Song, Ran; Kim, Jin Hyun; Lee, Eun Young; Lee, Eun Bong; Song, Yeong Wook. Rheumatology International
2012 August ;32(8); 2465 – 2470. DOI: 10.1007/s00296-011-1993-9.
3.Matucci-Cerinic M, S.V., Nash P, et al., The complexity of managing systemic sclerosis: screening and diagnosis. Rheumatology 2009; 48: iii8-iii13.
4.Furst D, K.D., Matucci-Cerinic M, et al., Systemic sclerosis - continuing progress in developing clinical measures of response. J Rheumatol 2007; 34:1194-1200.
5.Czirják L, N.Z., Aringer M, et al., The EUSTAR model for teaching and implementing the modified Rodnan skin score in systemic sclerosis. Ann Rheum Dis 2007; 66(7):966-969.
6.Chifflot H, F.B., Sordet C, et al., Incidence and Prevalenc of Systemic Sclerosis: A Systemic Literature Review. Semin. Arthritis Rheum 2007; 37(4): 223-235.
7.Abignano G, B.M., Emery P, Del Galdo F, Biomarkers in the management of scleroderma: An update. Curr Rheumatol Rep 2011; 13(4): 4-12.
8.Kaldas M, K.P., Furst D, et al., Sensitivity to change of the moodified Rodnan skin score in diffuse systemic sclerosis - assessment of individual body sites in two large randomized clinical trials. Rheumatology 2009; 48(9):1143-1146.
9.Clements P, L.P.S.J., et al., Skin thickness score in systemic sclerosis: an assessment of interobserver variability in 3 independent studies. J Rheumatol 1993 20(11):1892-1896.
10.Czirják L, F.I., Müller-Ladner U, Skin involvement in systemic sclerosis. Rhuematology (Oxford) 2008; 47(5):44-45.
11.Moinzadeh P, D.C., Ong V, et al., Biomarkers for skin involvement and fibrotic activity in scleroderma. JEADV.
12.Trusheim M, B.E., Douglas F, Stratified medicine: strategic and economic implications of combining drugs and clinical biomarkers. Nature Reviews: Drug Discovery 2007; 6:287-293.
13.B, H., Developing tools for stratified medicine. Nat Rev Drug Discov, 2009; 8(12):919-920.
14.NICE recommends trastuzumab (Herceptin) for advanced breast cancer. 2010 28/12/2010 25/11/2011]; Available from: http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/index.jsp?action=article&r=true&o=32318.
15.J, R., Letter from the Editor: stratified medicine. MAbs 2010; 2(2): 107.
16.Chasman J, P.D., Subrahmanyan L, et al., Pharmacogenetic study of statin therapy and cholesterol reduction. JAMA 2004; 291(23): 2821-2827.
17.Bernatsky S, H.M., Panopalis P, et al., The cost of systemic sclerosis. Arthritis and Rheumatism 2009; 61(1):119-123.
18.Boers M, B.P., Strand CV, et al., The OMERACT filter for Outcome Measures in Rheumatology. J Rheumatol 1998; 25(2):198-199.
19.Del Galdo F, S.A., Jimenez S, Proteomic analysis identification of a pattern on shared alterations in the secretome of dermal fibroblasts from systemic sclerosis and nephrogenic systemic fibrosis. Am J Pathol 2010; 177(4):1638-1645.
20.Ionescu R, R.S., Damjanov N, et al., Repeated teeaching courses of the modified Rodnan skin score in systemic sclerosis. Clin Exp Rheumatol 2010; 28(2):37-41.
21.Furst D, C.P., Steen V, et al., The modified Rodnan skin score is an accurate reflection of skin biopsy thickness in systemic sclerosis. J Rheumatol 1998; 25(1): 84-88.
22.Postlewaite A, W.W., Clements P, et al., A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of oral type I collagen treatment in patients with diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis. I. Oral type I collagen does not improve skin in all patients, but may improve skin in late-phase disease. Arthritis Rheum 2008; 58:1810-1822.
23.Khanna D, C.P., Furst D, et al., Recombinant human relaxin in the treatment of systemic sclerosis with diffuse cutaneous involvement: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Arthritis Rheum 2009; 60:1102-1111.
24.Rohekar G, P.J., Test-retest reliability of patient global assessment and physician global assessment in rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol 2009; 36(10):2178-2182.
25.Milano A, P.S., Sargent J, et al., Molecular subsets in the gene expression signatures of scleroderma skin. PLoS ONE 2008; 3(10):e2696.
26.Kissin E, S.A., Gelbard R, et al., Durometry for the assessment of skin disease and systemic sclerosis. Arthritis Rheum 2006; 55(4):603-609.
27.Domsic R, R.-R.T., Lucas M, et al., Skin thickness progression rate: a predictor of mortality and early internal organ involvement in diffuse scleroderma. Ann Rheum Dis 2011; 70:104-109.
28.Arnett G, G.P., Shete S, et al., Major histocompatability complex (MHC) class II alleles, haplotypes and epitopes which confer susceptibility or protection in systemic sclerosis: analyses in 1300 Caucasian, African-American and Hispanic cases and 1000 controls. Ann Rheum Dis 2010; 69:822-827.
29.Gorman C, R.A., Zhang Z, et al., Polymorphisms in the CD3Z gene influence TCRzeta expression in systemic lupus erythematous patients and healthy controls. J Immunol 2008; 180:1060-1070.
30.Glas J, S.J., Nagy M, et al., Evidence for STAT4 as a common autoimmune gene: rs7574865 is associated with colonic Crohn's disease and early disease onset. PLoS ONE, 2010. 5(e10373).
31.Morgan A, R.J., Conahan P, et al., Evaluation of the rheumatoid arthritis susceptability loci HLA-DRB1, PTPN22, OLIG3/TNFAIP£, STAT4 and TRAF1/C5 in an inception cohort. Arthritis Res Ther 2010; 12(R57).
32.Gorlova O, M.J., Reuda B, et al., Identification of Novel Genetic Markers Associated with Clinical Phenotypes of Systemic Sclerosis through a Genome-Wide Association Strategy. PLoS Genet 2011; 7(7): e1002178.
33.V, S., Autoantibodies in systemic sclerosis. Semin. Arthritis Rheum 2005; 35:35-42.
34.Shero J, B.B., Rothfield N., High titers of autoantibodies to topoisomerase I (scl-70) in sera from scleroderma patients. Science 1986; 231:737-740.
35.Czömpöly T, S.D., Czirják L, Antitopoisomerase I autoantibodies in systemic sclerosis. Autoimmun. Rev2009; 8: 692-696.
36.CG., K., Anti-centromere antibodies (ACA). Clin. Rheumatol 1990; 9:S136-S139.
37.Basu D, R.J., Anti-Scl-70. Autoimmunity 2005 38:65-72.
38.LeRoy E, B.C., Fleischmajer R et al., Scleroderma (systemic sclerosis): classification, subsets and pathogenesis. J Rheumatol 1988; 15:202-205.
39.Tramposch H, S.C., Senecal J, et al., A long-term longitudinal study of anticentromere antibodies. Arthritis Rheum 1984; 27:121-124.
40.Bargagli E, O.C., Prasse A, et al., Calgranulin B (S100A9) levels in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid of patients with intersitital lung diseases. Inflammation, 2008 31:351-354.
41.Rottoli P, M.B., Perari M, et al., Cytokine profile and proteome analysis in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid of patients with sarcoidosis, pulmonary fibrosis associated with systemic sclerosis and idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Proteomics 2005 5:1423-1430.
42.Giusti L, B.L., Baldini C et al., Specific proteins identified in whole saliva from patients with diffuse systemic sclerosis. J Rheumatol 2007; 34: 2063-2069.
43.Bogatkevich G, L.-B.A., Singleton C, et al., Proteomic analysis of CTGT-activated lung fibroblats: identification of IQGAP1 as a key player in lung fibroblast migration. Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol 2008. 295:L603-L611.
44.Aden N, S.X., Aden D, et al., Proteomic analysis of scleroderma lesional skin reveals activated wound healing phenotype of epidermal cell layer. Rheumatology 2008 47: 1754-1760.
45.Carlsson A, W.D., Ingvarsson J, et al., Serum protein profiling of systemic lupus erythematous and systemic sclerosis using recombinant antibody microarrays. Molecular and cellular proteomics 2011; 10(5):M110.005033.
Article citation:
Sam Straw., Stratified medicine approach for systemic sclerosis: state of the art and the need for clinical biomarkers. Journal of pharmaceutical and biomedical sciences (J Pharm Biomed Sci.) 2013 October; 35(35):1754-1762.