Evaluation of Tooth Sensitivity of In-office Bleaching with Different Light Activation Sources: A Systematic Review and a Network Meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: A systematic review and network meta-analysis were performed to answer the following research question: Are there differences in the risk and the intensity of tooth sensitivity (TS) among eight light activation systems for in-office bleaching in adults? METHODS: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared at least two different in-office bleaching light activations were included. The risk of bias (RoB) was evaluated with the RoB tool version 1.0 from the Cochrane Collaboration tool. A random-effects Bayesian mixed treatment comparison (MTC) model was used independently for high- and low-concentration hydrogen peroxide. The certainty of the evidence was evaluated using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations) approach. A comprehensive search was performed in PubMed, Bridge Base Online (BBO), Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature database (LILACS), Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science, and grey literature without date and language restrictions on April 23, 2017 (updated on September 26, 2019). Dissertations and theses, unpublished and ongoing trials registries, and IADR (International Association for Dental Research) abstracts (2001-2019) were also searched. RESULTS: After title and abstract screening and the removal of duplicates, 32 studies remained. Six were considered to be at low RoB, three had high RoB, and the remaining had an unclear RoB. The MTC analysis showed no significant differences among the treatments in each network. In general, the certainty of the evidence was graded as low due to unclear RoB and imprecision. CONCLUSION: There is no evidence that the risk and intensity of TS are affected by light activation during in-office bleaching.

Evaluation of the insulin-releasing and glucose-lowering effects of GPR120 activation in pancreatic ß-cells.

AIMS: To assess the potency and selectivity of various GPR120 agonists and to determine the cellular localization of GPR120 in clonal ß-cells and pancreatic islets. METHODS: Insulin secretion and alterations in intracellular Ca(2+) and cAMP response to glucose and GPR120 agonists, including endogenous agonists α-linolenic acid (ALA), docosahexaenoic acid (DHA), eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and a synthetic analogue (GW-9508), were examined using clonal pancreatic BRIN-BD11 cells, mouse pancreatic islets and in vivo studies using NIH Swiss mice. Cytotoxicity was assessed by lactate dehydrogenase release. Cellular localization of GPR120 was explored by double-staining immunohistochemistry. RESULTS: The most potent and selective GPR120 agonist tested was ALA (half maximum effective concentration 1.2 × 10(-8) mol/l) with a maximum stimulation of insulin secretion of 53% at 10(-4) mol/l (p < 0.001) in BRIN-BD11 cells. Stimulation of insulin secretion was also observed with GW-9508 (6.4 × 10(-8) mol/l; 47%), EPA (7.9 × 10(-8) mol/l; 36%) and DHA (1.0 × 10(-7) mol/l; 50%). Results were corroborated by islet studies, with no evidence of cytotoxic effects. Dose-dependent insulin secretion by GPR120 agonists was glucose-sensitive and accompanied by significant elevations of intracellular Ca(2+) and cAMP. Immunocytochemistry showed GPR120 expression on BRIN-BD11 cells and was confined to islet ß-cells with no distribution on α-cells. Administration of GPR120 agonists (0.1 µmol/kg body weight) in glucose tolerance studies significantly reduced plasma glucose and augmented insulin release in mice. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that GPR120 is expressed on pancreatic ß-cells and that agonists at this receptor are potent insulin secretagogues with therapeutic potential for type 2 diabetes.

Evaluation of the insulin releasing and antihyperglycaemic activities of GPR55 lipid agonists using clonal beta-cells, isolated pancreatic islets and mice.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: G-protein coupled receptor (GPR)55 is a novel lipid sensing receptor activated by both cannabinoid endogenous ligands (endocannabinoids) and other non-cannabinoid lipid transmitters. This study assessed the effects of various GPR55 agonists on glucose homeostasis. EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH: Insulin secretion and changes in intracellular Ca(2) (+) and cAMP in response to glucose and a range of GPR55 agonists [endogenous ligands (OEA, PEA), chemically synthetic cannabidiol (CBD) analogues (Abn-CBD, 0-1602), an analogue of rimonabant (AM-251) and antagonist (CBD)] were investigated in clonal BRIN-BD11 cells and mouse pancreatic islets. Cytotoxicity was assessed by LDH release, cellular localization by double-staining immunohistochemistry and in vivo effects assessed in mice. KEY RESULTS: The most potent and selective GPR55 agonist was the synthetic CBD analogue, Abn-CBD (pEC50 10.33), maximum stimulation of 67% at 10(-4) mol·L(-1) (P < 0.001) in BRIN-BD11 cells. AM-251 (pEC50 7.0), OEA (pEC50 7.0), 0-1602 (pEC50 7.3) and PEA (pEC50 6.0) stimulated insulin secretion. Results were corroborated by islet studies, with no cytotoxic effects. Concentration-dependent insulin secretion by GPR55 agonists was glucose-sensitive and accompanied by elevations of [Ca(2) (+) ]i (P < 0.01-P < 0.001) and cAMP (P < 0.05-P < 0.01). GPR55 agonists exhibited insulinotropic and glucose lowering activity in vivo. GPR55 was expressed on BRIN-BD11 cells and confined to islet beta cells with no distribution on alpha cells. CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS: These results demonstrate GPR55 is distributed in pancreatic beta cells and is a strong activator of insulin secretion, with glucose-lowering effects in vivo. Development of agents agonizing the GPR55 receptor may have therapeutic potential in the treatment of type 2 diabetes.