No abstract

Bronchoscopy with endobronchial biopsy (EBB) and/or bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) has become an important research tool in asthma. A recent report has suggested audit and reporting of the safety of these procedures.A total of 159 asthmatic patients (84 males, 75 females), aged 18-52 (median 27) yrs, forced expiratory volume in one second 53-120 (median 88) % predicted, underwent 273 bronchoscopies in six clinical research studies. On 228 occasions, EBB and BAL were performed and, on 45 occasions, EBB was performed alone. On 48 occasions, bronchoscopy was performed 24 h post-allergen challenge.Adverse events occurred on 34 out of 273 occasions, none of which were following allergen challenge. Post-EBB and BAL, four patients developed pleuritic chest pain, shortness of breath and fever. A further two patients experienced pleuritic chest pain alone post-EBB/BAL. Bronchospasm or worsening of asthma symptoms occurred on 14 occasions, 13 post-EBB/BAL and on one occasion post-EBB alone. Fever/flu-like symptoms were reported on nine occasions following EBB and BAL. One subject had haemoptysis post-EBB/BAL, but required no intervention.In conclusion, bronchoscopy, endobronchial biopsy and bronchoalveolar lavage can be performed safely in asthmatic patients. Most of the complications were seen where bronchoalveolar lavage and endobronchial biopsy were both performed, suggesting that bronchoalveolar lavage accounts for most of the adverse events. Fibreoptic bronchoscopy with endobronchial biopsy (EBB) or bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) has become an important tool in asthma research over the last two decades. These techniques have led to significant advances in the understanding of the pathogenesis of asthma and, in particular, the role of inflammatory cells and mediators [1][2][3][4]. In addition, intervention studies with new and existing treatments have provided useful insight into the mechanisms of action and efficacy of these treatments [5][6][7]. Following initial concerns over the safety of these techniques in asthmatic patients [8,9], consensus guidelines were published by the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute [10,11]. More recently, three papers have reported bronchoscopy to be safe and well-tolerated in a relatively small number of asthmatic patients [12][13][14]. Despite this, concerns still remain and a recent report has suggested audit and continued reporting of the safety of these procedures. The current authors report their experience of adverse events related to fibreoptic bronchoscopy performed in asthmatic subjects taking part in six clinical research studies. Methods Study subjectsA total of 159 patients with asthma (84 males, 75 females), forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) 53-120 (median 88) % predicted, aged 18-52 (median 27) yrs were recruited for six studies and underwent a total of 273 bronchoscopies. On 228 occasions, subjects underwent EBB and BAL, 48 of which were performed 24 h post-allergen challenge. On 45 occasions, subjects had EBB alone. Subjects were recruited from ...

The allergen-induced late asthmatic reaction (LAR) is associated with increases in bronchial eosinophils and basophils as well as upregulation of several eosinophil active cytokines and C-C chemokines. Cyclosporin A (CsA) was previously shown to inhibit the LAR, but not the early asthmatic reaction (EAR), and this was associated with a decrease in blood eosinophils. For these reasons, we determined whether CsA inhibited the allergen-induced increases in bronchial eosinophils, basophils, eotaxin, interleukin-5 (IL-5), and granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF). Subjects with a demonstrable LAR underwent bronchoscopy with biopsy and bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) at baseline and then were randomly allocated to receive either CsA (n = 13) or placebo (n = 11) before challenge. A second bronchoscopy was performed 24 h later. The LAR, but not the EAR, was significantly attenuated in the CsA group compared with placebo (p < 0.05). CsA significantly inhibited the allergen-induced increases in IL-5 (p = 0.02) and GM-CSF (p = 0. 0028) in mRNA+ cells in BAL, and in a mAB against human activated eosinophils (EG2+) (p = 0.0227). We conclude that inhibition of the LAR by CsA may be related to its inhibitory effects on eosinophil-associated cytokines and chemokines. The beneficial effect of CsA in asthma may also be the result of inhibition of eosinophil accumulation.

No abstract

Background: Glioblastoma Multiforme (GBM) is a deadly tumor with poor prognosis. Resistance to apoptosis considered as an important factor in treatment failure. Therefore, identification of new compounds that facilitates apoptosis is crucial. Natural Anti-inflammatory compounds have emerged as potential anti-cancer agents and should be explored for their apoptotic activity against GBM. Therefore, the present study aims to evaluate growth inhibitory and apoptotic activity of a natural anti-inflammatory compound "Opuntiol" against GBM cell line U87. Methods: MTT assay was performed to determine the effect of Temozolomide and Opuntiol on growth inhibition of U87 cell. While, TUNEL assay was used to assess their apoptotic activity. To further assess apoptosis, nuclear condensation and nuclear area factor (NAF) was evaluated through DAPI staining. Whereas, active caspase-3 protein expression determined using immunocytochemistry. Results: Significant growth inhibition was observed in U87 cells treated with Temozolomide (IC50 380 µM) and Opuntiol (IC 50 357 µM). Temozolomide (p<0.001) and Opuntiol (p<0.001) significantly improved rate of apoptosis when compared to control group. A significant decrease in NAF was also observed in Temozolomide (p < 0.05) and Opuntiol (p < 0.05) treated cells. There was a significant increase in active caspase-3 expression when observed in Temozolomide (p<0.001) and Opuntiol (p<0.05) treated groups as compared to control. Conclusion: In conclusion our findings suggests, Opuntiol repress cell viability and possess strong apoptotic activity against GBM cell line U-87. However, further mechanistic studies will be required to confirm whether it can be develop as a potential drug against GBM.