Conclusions: Our findings demonstrate that fusion cell vaccination of patients with metastatic breast and renal cancer is a feasible, nontoxic approach associated with the induction of immunological and clinical antitumor responses.
We examined the effects of metformin on diabetes prevention and the subgroups that benefited most over 15 years in the Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) and its follow-up, the Diabetes Prevention Program Outcomes Study (DPPOS). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS During the DPP (1996-2001), adults at high risk of developing diabetes were randomly assigned to masked placebo (n = 1,082) or metformin 850 mg twice daily (n = 1,073). Participants originally assigned to metformin continued to receive metformin, unmasked, in the DPPOS (2002-present). Ascertainment of diabetes development was based on fasting or 2-h glucose levels after an oral glucose tolerance test or on HbA 1c. Reduction in diabetes incidence with metformin was compared with placebo in subgroups by hazard ratio (HR) and rate differences (RDs). RESULTS During 15 years of postrandomization follow-up, metformin reduced the incidence (by HR) of diabetes compared to placebo by 17% or 36% based on glucose or HbA 1c levels, respectively. Metformin's effect on the development of glucose-defined diabetes was greater for women with a history of prior gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) (HR 0.59, RD 24.57 cases/100 person-years) compared with parous women without GDM (HR 0.94, RD 20.38 cases/100 person-years [interaction P = 0.03 for HR, P = 0.01 for RD]). Metformin also had greater effects, by HR and RD, at higher baseline fasting glucose levels. With diabetes development based on HbA 1c , metformin was more effective in subjects with higher baseline HbA 1c by RD, with metformin RD 21.03 cases/100 person-years with baseline HbA 1c <6.0% (42 mmol/mol) and 23.88 cases/100 person-years with 6.0-6.4% (P = 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS Metformin reduces the development of diabetes over 15 years. The subsets that benefitted the most include subjects with higher baseline fasting glucose or HbA 1c and women with a history of GDM.
Background-Little is known about whether direct angiotensin receptor blockade can reduce atherosclerosis and plaque disruption. This study evaluated the effect of angiotensin receptor blockade on both the development of atherosclerosis and the disruption of plaque in a modified Constantinides animal model. Methods and Results-Twenty-eight New Zealand White rabbits underwent aortic balloon injury followed by a 1% cholesterol diet for 8 weeks. Thirteen rabbits received candesartan at 0.5 mg · kg Ϫ1 · d Ϫ1 beginning 2 days before aortic balloon injury and continued for the total 8 weeks of the cholesterol diet. The rabbits were then pharmacologically triggered and humanely killed, and their aortas were analyzed. The degree of atherosclerosis was determined by intima-media ratio of the infrarenal portion of the aorta. The frequency of intra-aortic thrombosis, a measure of plaque disruption, and the percentages of macrophage area and collagen-staining area of the plaque were determined. Candesartan-treated rabbits had less atherosclerosis (intima-media infrarenal aorta ratio of 1.18Ϯ0.08 versus 1.57Ϯ0.08[meanϮSEM] for the placebo group, PϽ0.001); fewer thrombi (3 of 13 versus 11 of 15; PϽ0.05); lower percentage area of macrophages to total plaque (18.8Ϯ2.7% versus 27Ϯ2.5%, PϽ0.05); and higher collagen to total plaque area (45Ϯ3% versus 35Ϯ2%, PϽ0.01).Conclusions-These results demonstrate that angiotensin receptor blockade attenuates the degree of atherosclerosis and reduces both plaque disruption and macrophage accumulation while increasing collagen deposition in the aortas of this animal model.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.