History, presence, and future of mitomycin C in glaucoma filtration surgery.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Mitomycin C (MMC) is an alkylating agent with extraordinary ability to crosslink DNA, preventing DNA synthesis. By this virtue, MMC is an important antitumor drug. In addition, MMC has become the gold standard medication for glaucoma filtration surgery (GFS). This eye surgery creates a passage for drainage of aqueous humor (AqH) out of the eye into the sub-Tenon's space with the aim of lowering the intraocular pressure. A major cause of failure of this operation is fibrosis and scarring in the sub-Tenon's space, which will restrict AqH outflow. Intraoperative application of MMC during GFS has increased GFS success rate, presumably mainly by reducing fibrosis after GFS. However, still 10% of glaucoma surgeries fail within the first year. RECENT FINDINGS: In this review, we evaluate risks and benefits of MMC as an adjuvant for GFS. In addition, we discuss possible improvements of its use by adjusting dose and method of administration. SUMMARY: One way of improving GFS outcome is to prolong MMC delivery by using a drug delivery system.

Historical Considerations and Innovations in the Perioperative Use of Mitomycin C for Glaucoma Filtration Surgery and Bleb Revisions.

Although there is a currently a revolution in angle-based procedures, subconjunctival filtration surgery with mitomycin C (MMC) wound modification remains a vital skill for glaucoma surgeons. MMC is a potent antifibrotic agent that has been an invaluable adjunct for successful glaucoma filtration surgery for over 20 years, but it must be used judiciously to avoid serious complications, including hypotony, corneal decompensation, bleb avascularity, bleb leaks, blebitis, and endophthalmitis. The purpose of this report is to describe the historical lessons learned from MMC use, along with updated methods of MMC delivery during primary trabeculectomy, bleb needling at the slit lamp, bleb revisions in the operating room, and newer and less invasive ab-interno filtering procedures. Information for the review was gathered using an extensive search on PubMed, a review of all available peer-reviewed literature, and the authors' personal clinical judgment and experience.

A short story of anti-rheumatic therapy. VIII. The immunodepressants.

The use of immunosuppressive drugs in rheumatology is fairly recent, starting just after the Second World War with the introduction of the first alkylating agents in oncohematology. When it became clear that some rheumatic diseases, particularly rheumatoid arthritis and systemic lupus erythematosus, showed an immune-mediated pathogenesis, including proliferation of immunocompetent cells, an application was soon found for immunosuppressive drugs in their treatment. This review outlines the historical milestones that led to the current use of drugs belonging to the major groups of immunosuppressants, i.e. alkylating agents (cyclophosphamide), folic acid (methotrexate) and purine (azathioprine) antagonists. We will also talk about the history of cyclosporin A, the first "selective" immunosuppressive agent, and that of some immunoactive drugs used more recently in rheumatology, such as mycophenolate mofetil, dapson and thalidomide, is briefly described.

History of multiple myeloma.

Multiple Myeloma has been recognized since Ancient Times. The first well-documented case was reported in 1844 by Samuel Solly. The most commonly recognized case is that of Thomas Alexander McBean, a highly respectable tradesman from London in 1850. Mr. McBean excreted a large amount of protein that was described by Henry Bence Jones in the middle of the 19th century. Jones was a well-known physician and made many contributions to medicine. One of the best known cases of multiple myeloma was that of Dr. Loos that was reported by Otto Kahler. The recognition of plasma cells and subsequently their product, a monoclonal protein has been described in detail. The authors have reviewed the treatment of multiple myeloma including the novel agents, thalidomide, bortezomib and lenalidomide.

[Acute poisoning by chemical warfare agent: sulfur mustard]. / Intoxication aiguë par arme chimique vésicante: l'ypérite.

OBJECTIVE: To review story, mechanism of action, clinical and therapeutic bases of a sulfur mustard poisoning, by accidental, terrorism or war exposure. DATA SOURCES: References were obtained from computerised bibliographic research (Medline), from personnel data (academic memoir, documents under approbation of the National Defense Office) and from the Library of Military Medical Service. DATA SYNTHESIS: Sulfur mustard is a chemical warfare agent with peace time results: leak, accidental handling, acts of terrorism. Sulfur mustard is a vesicant agent, an organochlorine agent, who alkylate DNA. Under liquid or gas form its main target are skin and lungs. Clinical effects are like burns with loss of immunity, with respiratory failure, ophthalmic, gastrointestinal and haematological signs. The last studies have improved knowledge about the mechanism of action, detection, protection and treatment. Methods for determination of sulfur mustard are based on gas chromatographic method and mass spectrometry. During sulfur mustard contamination the first priorities of treatment are to remove victims from the contaminated place and to initiate decontamination. Emergency workers and materials must take protection to avoid secondary contamination of emergency unit. With treatment of vital functions and respiratory failure, the new ways of treatment are about N-acetyl cysteine for lung injury, poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors, calmodulin antagonists and Ca(++) chelators. Interactions between sulfur mustard and anaesthetic agents are not well known and are based on clinical observations. CONCLUSION: Emergency care unit can be confronted with sulfur mustard during accidental contamination or acts of terrorism. First and most efficacy priorities of treatment are to remove and to decontaminate victims. New means of detection and treatment are studied since several years but are not still appropriate to human victims or mass treatment.

Cancer chemotherapy. Historical aspects and future considerations.

Effective cancer chemotherapeutic agents were developed rapidly during the 1940s, 1950s, and 1960s. With recognition of the curability with chemotherapy of certain selected advanced cancers the emphasis of treatment has changed from a palliative to a curative mode. Several important biological advances, such as increased understanding of pharmacokinetics and the principles of combination chemotherapy, have strongly influenced the administration of chemotherapeutic agents. Other major conceptual changes, such as the recognition that regional lymph nodes are not effective barriers to tumor spread, have also had a major impact on the course of cancer treatment. The 1980s will be as productive as the preceding decades, but it is difficult at this time to determine if biologic response modifiers, monoclonal antibodies, differentiating agents, or some other as yet unrecognized therapy will be the major advance.