OBJECTIVEProkineticin 2 (PK2) is a hypothalamic neuropeptide expressed in central nervous system areas known to be involved in food intake. We therefore hypothesized that PK2 plays a role in energy homeostasis.RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODSWe investigated the effect of nutritional status on hypothalamic PK2 expression and effects of PK2 on the regulation of food intake by intracerebroventricular (ICV) injection of PK2 and anti-PK2 antibody. Subsequently, we investigated the potential mechanism of action by determining sites of neuronal activation after ICV injection of PK2, the hypothalamic site of action of PK2, and interaction between PK2 and other hypothalamic neuropeptides regulating energy homeostasis. To investigate PK2's potential as a therapeutic target, we investigated the effect of chronic administration in lean and obese mice.RESULTSHypothalamic PK2 expression was reduced by fasting. ICV administration of PK2 to rats potently inhibited food intake, whereas anti-PK2 antibody increased food intake, suggesting that PK2 is an anorectic neuropeptide. ICV administration of PK2 increased c-fos expression in proopiomelanocortin neurons of the arcuate nucleus (ARC) of the hypothalamus. In keeping with this, PK2 administration into the ARC reduced food intake and PK2 increased the release of α-melanocyte–stimulating hormone (α-MSH) from ex vivo hypothalamic explants. In addition, ICV coadministration of the α-MSH antagonist agouti-related peptide blocked the anorexigenic effects of PK2. Chronic peripheral administration of PK2 reduced food and body weight in lean and obese mice.CONCLUSIONSThis is the first report showing that PK2 has a role in appetite regulation and its anorectic effect is mediated partly via the melanocortin system.

No abstract

Introduction There is a need to identify effective, safe treatments for COVID-19 (coronavirus disease) rapidly, given the current, ongoing pandemic. A systematic benefit-risk assessment was designed and conducted to examine the benefit-risk profile of remdesivir in COVID-19 patients compared with standard of care, placebo or other treatments. A key objective of this study was to provide a platform for a dynamic systematic benefit-risk evaluation, which starts with inevitably limited information (to meet the urgent unmet public health need worldwide), then update the benefit-risk evaluation as more data become available. Methods The Benefit-Risk Action Team (BRAT) framework was used to assess the overall benefit-risk of the use of remdesivir as a treatment for COVID-19 compared with standard of care, placebo or other treatments. We searched PubMed, Google Scholar and government agency websites to identify literature reporting clinical outcomes in patients taking remdesivir for COVID-19. A value tree was constructed and key benefits and risks were ranked by two clinicians in order of considered importance. Results Using the BRAT method, several key benefits and risks for use of remdesivir in COVID-19 compared with placebo have been identified. In one trial, the benefit of time to clinical improvement was not statistically significant (21 vs 23 days, HR 1.23, 95% CI 0.87-1.75), although the study was underpowered. In another trial, a shorter time to recovery in patients treated with remdesivir was observed (11 vs 15 days), with non-significant reduced mortality risk (8% vs 12%). Risk data were only available from one trial. This trial reported fewer serious adverse events in patients taking remdesivir (18%) compared with the placebo group (26%); however, more patients in the remdesivir group discontinued treatment as a result of an adverse event compared with those patients receiving placebo (12% vs 5%). Conclusions Preliminary clinical trial results suggest that there may be a favourable benefit-risk profile for remdesivir compared with placebo in severe COVID-19 infection and further data on benefits would strengthen this evaluation. There is limited safety data for remdesivir, which should be obtained in further studies. The current framework summarises the key anticipated benefits and risks for which further data are needed. Ongoing clinical trial data can be incorporated into the framework when available to provide an updated benefit-risk assessment.

Pancreas graft loss due to venous thrombosis is the leading non-immunological cause for graft failure following kidney-pancreas transplantation. Thromboelastography (TEG)-directed anticoagulation protocol has shown that approximately one-third of the patients undergoing pancreas transplantation require therapeutic anticoagulation to prevent the occurrence of graft thrombosis. This article presents the argument for individualised anticoagulation in these patients based on their TEG tracings and suggests the use of TEG in patients undergoing pancreas transplantation.