Journal of Internal Medicine最新文献

Steatotic liver disease (SLD) is a worldwide public health problem, causing considerable morbidity and mortality. Patients with SLD are at increased risk for major adverse cardiovascular (CV) events, type 2 diabetes mellitus and chronic kidney disease. Conversely, patients with cardiometabolic conditions have a high prevalence of SLD. In addition to epidemiological evidence linking many of these conditions, there is evidence of shared pathophysiological processes. In December 2022, a unique multi-stakeholder, multi-specialty meeting, called MOSAIC (Metabolic multi Organ Science Accelerating Innovation in Clinical Trials) was convened to foster collaboration across metabolic, hepatology, nephrology and CV disorders. One of the goals of the meeting was to consider approaches to drug development that would speed regulatory approval of treatments for multiple disorders by combining liver and cardiorenal endpoints within a single study. Non-invasive tests, including biomarkers and imaging, are needed in hepatic and cardiorenal trials. They can be used as trial endpoints, to enrich trial populations, to diagnose and risk stratify patients and to assess treatment efficacy and safety. Although they are used in proof of concept and phase 2 trials, they are often not acceptable for regulatory approval of therapies. The challenge is defining the optimal combination of biomarkers, imaging and morbidity/mortality outcomes and ensuring that they are included in future trials while minimizing the burden on patients, trialists and trial sponsors. This paper provides an overview of some of the wide array of CV, liver and kidney measurements that were discussed at the MOSAIC meeting.

Platelet hyperreactivity and hyperlipidaemia contribute significantly to atherosclerosis. Thus, it is desirable to review the platelet–hyperlipidaemia interplay and its impact on atherogenesis. Native low-density lipoprotein (nLDL) and oxidized LDL (oxLDL) are the key proatherosclerotic components of hyperlipidaemia. nLDL binds to the platelet-specific LDL receptor (LDLR) ApoE-R2′, whereas oxLDL binds to the platelet-expressed scavenger receptor CD36, lectin-type oxidized LDLR 1 and scavenger receptor class A 1. Ligation of nLDL/oxLDL induces mild platelet activation and may prime platelets for other platelet agonists. Platelets, in turn, can modulate lipoprotein metabolisms. Platelets contribute to LDL oxidation by enhancing the production of reactive oxygen species and LDLR degradation via proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 release. Platelet-released platelet factor 4 and transforming growth factor β modulate LDL uptake and foam cell formation. Thus, platelet dysfunction and hyperlipidaemia work in concert to aggravate atherogenesis. Hypolipidemic drugs modulate platelet function, whereas antiplatelet drugs influence lipid metabolism. The research prospects of the platelet–hyperlipidaemia interplay in atherosclerosis are also discussed.

In the last decades, the development of high-throughput molecular assays has revolutionised cancer diagnostics, paving the way for the concept of personalised cancer medicine. This progress has been driven by the introduction of such technologies through biomarker-driven oncology trials. In this review, strengths and limitations of various state-of-the-art sequencing technologies, including gene panel sequencing (DNA and RNA), whole-exome/whole-genome sequencing and whole-transcriptome sequencing, are explored, focusing on their ability to identify clinically relevant biomarkers with diagnostic, prognostic and/or predictive impact. This includes the need to assess complex biomarkers, for example microsatellite instability, tumour mutation burden and homologous recombination deficiency, to identify patients suitable for specific therapies, including immunotherapy. Furthermore, the crucial role of biomarker analysis and multidisciplinary molecular tumour boards in selecting patients for trial inclusion is discussed in relation to various trial concepts, including drug repurposing. Recognising that today's exploratory techniques will evolve into tomorrow's routine diagnostics and clinical study inclusion assays, the importance of emerging technologies for multimodal diagnostics, such as proteomics and in vivo drug sensitivity testing, is also discussed. In addition, key regulatory aspects and the importance of patient engagement in all phases of a clinical trial are described. Finally, we propose a set of recommendations for consideration when planning a new precision cancer medicine trial.

Myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) is a chronic disease presenting with severe fatigue, post-exertional malaise, and cognitive disturbances—among a spectrum of symptoms—that collectively render the patient housebound or bedbound. Epigenetic studies in ME/CFS collectively confirm alterations and/or malfunctions in cellular and organismal physiology associated with immune responses, cellular metabolism, cell death and proliferation, and neuronal and endothelial cell function. The sudden onset of ME/CFS follows a major stress factor that, in approximately 70% of cases, involves viral infection, and ME/CFS symptoms overlap with those of long COVID. Viruses primarily linked to ME/CFS pathology are the symbiotic herpesviruses, which follow a bivalent latent–lytic lifecycle. The complex interaction between viruses and hosts involves strategies from both sides: immune evasion and persistence by the viruses, and immune activation and viral clearance by the host. This dynamic interaction is imperative for herpesviruses that facilitate their persistence through epigenetic regulation of their own and the host genome. In the current article, we provide an overview of the epigenetic signatures demonstrated in ME/CFS and focus on the potential strategies that latent viruses—particularly Epstein–Barr virus—may employ in long-term epigenetic reprograming in ME/CFS. Epigenetic studies could aid in elucidating relevant biological pathways impacted in ME/CFS and reflect the physiological variations among the patients that stem from environmental triggers, including exogenous viruses and/or altered viral activity.

Older adults have multiple medical and social care needs, requiring a shift toward an integrated person-centered model of care. Our objective was to describe and summarize Swedish experiences of integrated person-centered care by reviewing studies published between 2000 and 2023, and to identify the main challenges and scientific gaps through expert discussions. Seventy-three publications were identified by searching MEDLINE and contacting experts. Interventions were categorized using two World Health Organization frameworks: (1) Integrated Care for Older People (ICOPE), and (2) Integrated People-Centered Health Services (IPCHS). The included 73 publications were derived from 31 unique and heterogeneous interventions pertaining mainly to the micro- and meso-levels. Among publications measuring mortality, 15% were effective. Subjective health outcomes showed improvement in 24% of publications, morbidity outcomes in 42%, disability outcomes in 48%, and service utilization outcomes in 58%. Workshop discussions in Stockholm (Sweden), March 2023, were recorded, transcribed, and summarized. Experts emphasized: (1) lack of rigorous evaluation methods, (2) need for participatory designs, (3) scarcity of macro-level interventions, and (4) importance of transitioning from person- to people-centered integrated care. These challenges could explain the unexpected weak beneficial effects of the interventions on health outcomes, whereas service utilization outcomes were more positively impacted. Finally, we derived a list of recommendations, including the need to engage care organizations in interventions from their inception and to leverage researchers’ scientific expertise. Although this review provides a comprehensive snapshot of interventions in the context of Sweden, the findings offer transferable perspectives on the real-world challenges encountered in this field.

Prediabetes is an intermediate state of glucose homeostasis whereby plasma glucose concentrations are above normal but below the threshold of diagnosis for diabetes. Over the last several decades, criteria for prediabetes have changed as the cut points for normal glucose concentration and diagnosis of diabetes have shifted. Global consensus does not exist for prediabetes criteria; as a result, the clinical course and risk for type 2 diabetes vary. At present, we can identify individuals with prediabetes based on three glycemic tests (hemoglobin A1c, fasting plasma glucose, and 2-h plasma glucose during an oral glucose tolerance test). The majority of individuals diagnosed with prediabetes meet only one of these criteria. Meeting one, two, or all glycemic criteria changes risk for type 2 diabetes, but this information is not widely known and does not currently guide intervention strategies for individuals with prediabetes. This review summarizes current epidemiology, prognosis, and intervention strategies for individuals diagnosed with prediabetes and suggests a call for more precise risk stratification of individuals with prediabetes as elevated (one prediabetes criterion), high risk (two prediabetes criteria), and very high risk (three prediabetes criteria). In addition, the roles of oral glucose tolerance testing and continuous glucose monitoring in the diagnostic criteria for prediabetes need reassessment. Finally, we must reframe our goals for prediabetes and prioritize intensive interventions for those at high and very high risk for type 2 diabetes.