Dataset Information

The relative merits of therapies being developed to tackle inappropriate ('self'-directed) complement activation.

ABSTRACT: The complement system is an enzyme cascade that helps defend against infection. Many complement proteins occur in serum as inactive enzyme precursors or reside on cell surfaces. Complement components have many biologic functions and their activation can eventually damage the plasma membranes of cells and some bacteria. Although a direct link between complement activation and autoimmune diseases has not been found, there is increasing evidence that complement activation significantly contributes to the pathogenesis of a large number of inflammatory diseases that may have autoimmune linkage. The inhibition of complement may therefore be very important in a variety of autoimmune diseases since their activation may be detrimental to the individual involved. However, a complete and long-term inhibition of complement may have some contra side effects such as increased susceptibility to infection. The site of complement activation will, however, determine the type of inhibitor to be used, its route of application and dosage level. Compared with conventional drugs, complement inhibitors may be the best option for treatment of autoimmune diseases. The review takes a critical look at the relative merits of therapies being developed to tackle inappropriate complement activation that are likely to result in sporadic autoimmune diseases or worsen already existing one. It covers the complement system, general aspects of complement inhibition therapy, therapeutic strategies and examples of complement inhibitors. It concludes by highlighting on the possibility that a better inhibitor of complement activation when found will help provide a formidable treatment for autoimmune diseases as well as preventing one.

SUBMITTER: Antwi-Baffour S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4775539 | biostudies-other | 2016 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The relative merits of therapies being developed to tackle inappropriate ('self'-directed) complement activation.

Antwi-Baffour Samuel S Kyeremeh Ransford R Adjei Jonathan Kofi JK Aryeh Claudia C Kpentey George G

Auto- immunity highlights 20160303 1

The complement system is an enzyme cascade that helps defend against infection. Many complement proteins occur in serum as inactive enzyme precursors or reside on cell surfaces. Complement components have many biologic functions and their activation can eventually damage the plasma membranes of cells and some bacteria. Although a direct link between complement activation and autoimmune diseases has not been found, there is increasing evidence that complement activation significantly contributes ...[more]

PMID: 26935316

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Although the benefits of using methodological frameworks are increasingly recognised, to date, there is no formal definition of what constitutes a 'methodological framework', nor is there any published guidance on how to develop one. For the purposes of this study we have defined a methodological framework as a structured guide to completing a process or procedure. This study's aims are to: (a) map the existing landscape on the use of methodological frameworks; (b) identify approaches used for the development of methodological frameworks and terminology used; and (c) provide suggestions for developing future methodological frameworks. We took a broad view and did not limit our study to methodological frameworks in research and academia. METHODS:A scoping review was conducted, drawing on Arksey and O'Malley's methods and more recent guidance. We systematically searched two major electronic databases (MEDLINE and Web of Science), as well as grey literature sources and the reference lists and citations of all relevant papers. Study characteristics and approaches used for development of methodological frameworks were extracted from included studies. Descriptive analysis was conducted. RESULTS:We included a total of 30 studies, representing a wide range of subject areas. The most commonly reported approach for developing a methodological framework was 'Based on existing methods and guidelines' (66.7%), followed by 'Refined and validated' (33.3%), 'Experience and expertise' (30.0%), 'Literature review' (26.7%), 'Data synthesis and amalgamation' (23.3%), 'Data extraction' (10.0%), 'Iteratively developed' (6.7%) and 'Lab work results' (3.3%). There was no consistent use of terminology; diverse terms for methodological framework were used across and, interchangeably, within studies. CONCLUSIONS:Although no formal guidance exists on how to develop a methodological framework, this scoping review found an overall consensus in approaches used, which can be broadly divided into three phases: (a) identifying data to inform the methodological framework; (b) developing the methodological framework; and (c) validating, testing and refining the methodological framework. Based on these phases, we provide suggestions to facilitate the development of future methodological frameworks.

Project description:ContextGastroenteritis remains a leading cause of childhood morbidity.ObjectiveBecause prior reviews have focused on isolated symptoms and studies conducted in developing countries, this study focused on interventions commonly considered for use in developed countries. Intervention specific, patient-centered outcomes were selected.Data sourcesMEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, trial registries, grey literature, and scientific meetings.Study selectionRandomized controlled trials, conducted in developed countries, of children aged <18 years, with gastroenteritis, performed in emergency department or outpatient settings which evaluated oral rehydration therapy (ORT), antiemetics, probiotics or intravenous fluid administration rate.Data extractionThe study was conducted in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and the PRISMA guidelines. Data were independently extracted by multiple investigators. Analyses employed random effects models.Results31 trials (4,444 patients) were included. ORT: Compared with intravenous rehydration, hospitalization (RR 0.80, 95%CI 0.24, 2.71) and emergency department return visits (RR 0.86, 95%CI 0.39, 1.89) were similar. Antiemetics: Fewer children administered an antiemetic required intravenous rehydration (RR 0.40, 95%CI 0.26, 0.60) While the data could not be meta-analyzed, three studies reported that ondansetron administration does increase the frequency of diarrhea. Probiotics: No studies reported on the primary outcome, three studies evaluated hospitalization within 7 days (RR 0.87, 95%CI 0.25, 2.98). Rehydration: No difference in length of stay was identified for rapid vs. standard intravenous or nasogastric rehydration. A single study found that 5% dextrose in normal saline reduced hospitalizations compared with normal saline alone (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.53, 0.92).ConclusionsThere is a paucity of patient-centered outcome evidence to support many interventions. Since ORT is a low-cost, non-invasive intervention, it should continue to be used. Routine probiotic use cannot be endorsed at this time in outpatient children with gastroenteritis. Despite some evidence that ondansetron administration increases diarrhea frequency, emergency department use leads to reductions in intravenous rehydration and hospitalization. No benefits were associated with ondansetron use following emergency department discharge.

Dataset Information

The relative merits of therapies being developed to tackle inappropriate ('self'-directed) complement activation.

Publications

The relative merits of therapies being developed to tackle inappropriate ('self'-directed) complement activation.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets