Enhanced potency of recombinant factor VIIa with increased affinity to activated platelets.

BACKGROUND: Recombinant factor VIIa (rFVIIa) enhances thrombin generation in a platelet-dependent manner; however, rFVIIa binds activated platelets with relatively low affinity. Triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cells (TREM)-like transcript (TLT)-1 is expressed exclusively on activated platelets. OBJECTIVE: To enhance the potency of rFVIIa via binding TLT-1. METHODS: Recombinant FVIIa was conjugated to a TLT-1 binding Fab. In vitro potency of this platelet-targeted rFVIIa (PT-rFVIIa) was evaluated using factor X activation assays and by measuring viscoelastic changes in whole blood. In vivo potency was evaluated using a tail vein transection model in F8-/- mice expressing human TLT-1. RESULTS: PT-rFVIIa and rFVIIa had similar dissociation constant values for tissue factor binding and similar tissue factor-dependent factor X activation. However, PT-rFVIIa had increased catalytic efficiency on TLT-1-loaded vesicles and activated platelets. The in vitro potency in normal human blood with antibody-induced hemophilia A was dependent on assay conditions used; with maximally activated platelets, the half maximal effective concentration for clot time for PT-rFVIIa was 49-fold lower compared with rFVIIa. In the murine bleeding model, a 53-fold lower half maximal effective concentration was observed for blood loss for PT-rFVIIa, supporting the relevance of the assay conditions with maximally activated platelets. In vitro analysis of blood from subjects with hemophilia A confirmed the data obtained with normal blood. CONCLUSIONS: Increasing the affinity of rFVIIa to activated platelets resulted in approximately 50-fold increased potency both in vitro and in the mouse model. The correlation of in vivo with in vitro data using maximally activated platelets supports that these assay conditions are relevant when evaluating platelet-targeted hemostatic concepts.

Head-to-head comparison of intensive lifestyle intervention (U-TURN) versus conventional multifactorial care in patients with type 2 diabetes: protocol and rationale for an assessor-blinded, parallel group and randomised trial.

INTRODUCTION: Current pharmacological therapies in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) are challenged by lack of sustainability and borderline firm evidence of real long-term health benefits. Accordingly, lifestyle intervention remains the corner stone in the management of T2D. However, there is a lack of knowledge regarding the optimal intervention programmes in T2D ensuring both compliance as well as long-term health outcomes. Our objective is to assess the effects of an intensive lifestyle intervention (the U-TURN intervention) on glycaemic control in patients with T2D. Our hypothesis is that intensive lifestyle changes are equally effective as standard diabetes care, including pharmacological treatment in maintaining glycaemic control (ie, glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c)) in patients with T2D. Furthermore, we expect that intensive lifestyle changes will decrease the need for antidiabetic medications. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The study is an assessor-blinded, parallel group and a 1-year randomised trial. The primary outcome is change in glycaemic control (HbA1c), with the key secondary outcome being reductions in antidiabetic medication. Participants will be patients with T2D (T2D duration <10 years) without complications who are randomised into an intensive lifestyle intervention (U-TURN) or a standard care intervention in a 2:1 fashion. Both groups will be exposed to the same standardised, blinded, target-driven pharmacological treatment and can thus maintain, increase, reduce or discontinue the pharmacological treatment. The decision is based on the standardised algorithm. The U-TURN intervention consists of increased training and basal physical activity level, and an antidiabetic diet including an intended weight loss. The standard care group as well as the U-TURN group is offered individual diabetes management counselling on top of the pharmacological treatment. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has been approved by the Scientific Ethical Committee at the Capital Region of Denmark (H-1-2014-114). Positive, negative or inconclusive findings will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals, at national and international conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02417012.