FreshRSS

🔒
❌ Acerca de FreshRSS
Hay nuevos artículos disponibles. Pincha para refrescar la página.
AnteayerTus fuentes RSS

Effects of (2<i>R</i>,6<i>R</i>)-hydroxynorketamine in assays of acute pain-stimulated and pain-depressed behaviors in mice

by Todd M. Hillhouse, Kaitlyn J. Partridge, Patrick I. Garrett, Sarah C. Honeycutt, Joseph H. Porter

Ketamine has been shown to produce analgesia in various acute and chronic pain states; however, abuse liability concerns have limited its utility. The ketamine metabolite (2R,6R)-hydroxynorketamine (HNK) has been shown to produce antidepressant-like effects similar to ketamine without abuse liability concerns. (2R,6R)-HNK produces sustained analgesia in models of chronic pain, but has yet to be evaluated in models of acute pain. The present study evaluated the efficacy of acute (2R,6R)-HNK administration (one injection) in assays of pain-stimulated (52- and 56-degree hot plate test and acetic acid writhing) and pain-depressed behavior (locomotor activity and rearing) in male and female C57BL/6 mice. In assays of pain-stimulated behaviors, (2R,6R)-HNK (1–32 mg/kg) failed to produce antinociception in the 52- and 56-degree hot plate and acetic acid writhing assays. In assays of pain-depressed behaviors, 0.56% acetic acid produced a robust depression of locomotor activity and rearing that was not blocked by pretreatment of (2R,6R)-HNK (3.2–32 mg/kg). The positive controls morphine (hot plate test) and ketoprofen (acetic acid writhing, locomotor activity, and rearing) blocked pain-stimulated and pain-depressed behaviors. Finally, the effects of intermittent (2R,6R)-HNK administration were evaluated in 52-degree hot plate and pain-depressed locomotor activity and rearing. Intermittent administration of (2R,6R)-HNK also did not produce antinociceptive effects in the hot plate or pain-depressed locomotor activity assays. These results suggest that (2R,6R)-HNK is unlikely to have efficacy in treating acute pain; however, the efficacy of (2R,6R)-HNK in chronic pain states should continue to be evaluated.

Scaling hypertension treatment in 24 low-income and middle-income countries: economic evaluation of treatment decisions at three blood pressure cut-points

Por: Hutchinson · B. · Walter · A. · Campbell · N. · Whelton · P. K. · Varghese · C. · Husain · M. J. · Nugent · R. · Kostova · D. · Honeycutt · A.
Objective

Estimate the incremental costs and benefits of scaling up hypertension care in adults in 24 select countries, using three different systolic blood pressure (SBP) treatment cut-off points—≥140, ≥150 and ≥160 mm Hg.

Intervention

Strengthening the hypertension care cascade compared with status quo levels, with pharmacological treatment administered at different cut-points depending on the scenario.

Target population

Adults aged 30+ in 24 low-income and middle-income countries spanning all world regions.

Perspective

Societal.

Time horizon

30 years.

Discount rate

4%.

Costing year

2020 USD.

Study design

Data sources

Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation’s Epi Visualisations database—country-specific cardiovascular disease (CVD) incidence, prevalence and death rates. Mean SBP and prevalence—National surveys and NCD-RisC. Treatment protocols—WHO HEARTS. Treatment impact—academic literature. Costs—national and international databases.

Outcome measures

Health outcomes—averted stroke and myocardial infarction events, deaths and disability-adjusted life-years; economic outcomes—averted health expenditures, value of averted mortality and workplace productivity losses.

Results of analysis

Across 24 countries, over 30 years, incremental scale-up of hypertension care for adults with SBP≥140 mm Hg led to 2.6 million averted CVD events and 1.2 million averted deaths (7% of expected CVD deaths). 68% of benefits resulted from treating those with very high SBP (≥160 mm Hg). 10 of the 12 highest-income countries projected positive net benefits at one or more treatment cut-points, compared with 3 of the 12 lowest-income countries. Treating hypertension at SBP≥160 mm Hg maximised the net economic benefit in the lowest-income countries.

Limitations

The model only included a few hypertension-attributable diseases and did not account for comorbid risk factors. Modelled scenarios assumed ambitious progress on strengthening the care cascade.

Conclusions

In areas where economic considerations might play an outsized role, such as very low-income countries, prioritising treatment to populations with severe hypertension can maximise benefits net of economic costs.

❌