ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Drug-disease interactions negatively affect the benefit/risk ratio of drugs for specific populations. In these conditions drugs should be avoided, adjusted, or accompanied by extra monitoring. The motivation for many drug-disease interactions in the Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC) is sometimes insufficiently supported by (accessible) evidence. As a consequence the translation of SmPC to clinical practice may lead to non-specific recommendations. For the translation of this information to the real world, it is necessary to evaluate the available knowledge about drug-disease interactions, and to formulate specific recommendations for prescribers and pharmacists. The aim of this paper is to describe a standardized method how to develop practice recommendations for drug-disease interactions by literature review and expert opinion. METHODS: The development of recommendations for drug-disease interactions will follow a six-step plan involving a multidisciplinary expert panel (1). The scope of the drug-disease interaction will be specified by defining the disease and by describing relevant effects of this drug-disease interaction. Drugs possibly involved in this drug-disease interaction are selected by checking the official product information, literature, and expert opinion (2). Evidence will be collected from the official product information, guidelines, handbooks, and primary literature (3). Study characteristics and outcomes will be evaluated and presented in standardized reports, including preliminary conclusions on the clinical relevance and practice recommendations (4). The multidisciplinary expert panel will discuss the reports and will either adopt or adjust the conclusions (5). Practice recommendations will be integrated in clinical decision support systems and published (6). The results of the evaluated drug-disease interactions will remain up-to-date by screening new risk information, periodic literature review, and (re)assessments initiated by health care providers. ACTIONABLE RECOMMENDATIONS: The practice recommendations will result in advices for specific DDSI. The content and considerations of these DDSIs will be published and implemented in all Clinical Decision Support Systems in the Netherlands. DISCUSSION: The recommendations result in professional guidance in the context of individual patient care. The professional will be supported in the decision making in concerning pharmacotherapy for the treatment of a medical problem, and the clinical risks of the proposed medication in combination with specific diseases.
ABSTRACT
Apolipoprotein-E (apoE) plays important roles in neurobiology and the apoE4 isoform increases risk for Alzheimer's disease (AD). ApoE peptides are biologically active and may be produced in the brain. It is unclear if apoE proteolysis is dependent on isoform or AD status and this was addressed here. Hippocampus, frontal cortex, occipital lobe and cerebellum samples were homogenized into fractions that were soluble in Tris-buffered saline (TBS), Triton X-100 or guanidine hydrochloride and analysed for apoE fragmentation by Western blotting. Approximately 20% of apoE3 was detected as fragments and this was predominantly as a 25 kDa peptide in TBS-soluble fractions. The concentration of TBS-soluble apoE fragments was two- to three-fold higher in apoE3 compared to apoE4 subjects. This difference was observed in all areas of the brain examined and was not related to AD status. Cathepsin-D treatment generated apoE fragments that were very similar to those detected in brain, however, no apoE isoform-specific differences in susceptibility to cathepsin-D proteolysis were detected. This indicates that proteolytic processing of apoE to form soluble fragments in the human brain is dependent on apoE isoform but not AD status.
