-
Clinical Rheumatology Sep 2023Systematic r eview to evaluate the quality of the clinical practice guidelines (CPG) for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) management and to provide a synthesis of high-quality... (Review)
Review
Systematic r eview to evaluate the quality of the clinical practice guidelines (CPG) for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) management and to provide a synthesis of high-quality CPG recommendations, highlighting areas of consistency, and inconsistency. Electronic searches of five databases and four online guideline repositories were performed. RA management CPGs were eligible for inclusion if they were written in English and published between January 2015 and February 2022; focused on adults ≥ 18 years of age; met the criteria of a CPG as defined by the Institute of Medicine; and were rated as high quality on the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II instrument. RA CPGs were excluded if they required additional payment to access; only addressed recommendations for the system/organization of care and did not include interventional management recommendations; and/or included other arthritic conditions. Of 27 CPGs identified, 13 CPGs met eligibility criteria and were included. Non-pharmacological care should include patient education, patient-centered care, shared decision-making, exercise, orthoses, and a multi-disciplinary approach to care. Pharmacological care should include conventional synthetic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs), with methotrexate as the first-line choice. If monotherapy conventional synthetic DMARDs fail to achieve a treatment target, this should be followed by combination therapy conventional synthetic DMARDs (leflunomide, sulfasalazine, hydroxychloroquine), biologic DMARDS and targeted synthetic DMARDS. Management should also include monitoring, pre-treatment investigations and vaccinations, and screening for tuberculosis and hepatitis. Surgical care should be recommended if non-surgical care fails. This synthesis offers clear guidance of evidence-based RA care to healthcare providers. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The protocol for this review was registered with Open Science Framework ( https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/UB3Y7 ).
Topics: Adult; Humans; Antirheumatic Agents; Arthritis, Rheumatoid; Hydroxychloroquine; Methotrexate; Sulfasalazine; Practice Guidelines as Topic
PubMed: 37291382
DOI: 10.1007/s10067-023-06654-0 -
Cancer Discovery Dec 2019A challenge in oncology is to rationally and effectively integrate immunotherapy with traditional modalities, including radiotherapy. Here, we demonstrate that...
A challenge in oncology is to rationally and effectively integrate immunotherapy with traditional modalities, including radiotherapy. Here, we demonstrate that radiotherapy induces tumor-cell ferroptosis. Ferroptosis agonists augment and ferroptosis antagonists limit radiotherapy efficacy in tumor models. Immunotherapy sensitizes tumors to radiotherapy by promoting tumor-cell ferroptosis. Mechanistically, IFNγ derived from immunotherapy-activated CD8 T cells and radiotherapy-activated ATM independently, yet synergistically, suppresses SLC7A11, a unit of the glutamate-cystine antiporter xc, resulting in reduced cystine uptake, enhanced tumor lipid oxidation and ferroptosis, and improved tumor control. Thus, ferroptosis is an unappreciated mechanism and focus for the development of effective combinatorial cancer therapy. SIGNIFICANCE: This article describes ferroptosis as a previously unappreciated mechanism of action for radiotherapy. Further, it shows that ferroptosis is a novel point of synergy between immunotherapy and radiotherapy. Finally, it nominates SLC7A11, a critical regulator of ferroptosis, as a mechanistic determinant of synergy between radiotherapy and immunotherapy..
Topics: Amino Acid Transport System y+; Animals; Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological; CD8-Positive T-Lymphocytes; Cell Line, Tumor; Cell Survival; Down-Regulation; Ferroptosis; Gene Expression Regulation, Neoplastic; Humans; Immunotherapy; Interferon-gamma; Lipid Metabolism; Melanoma, Experimental; Mice; Oxidation-Reduction; Sulfasalazine; Xenograft Model Antitumor Assays
PubMed: 31554642
DOI: 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-19-0338 -
Theranostics 2022: Intracellular bacterial survival is a major factor causing chronic or recurrent infection, leading to the failure of both host defense and/or antibiotic treatment....
: Intracellular bacterial survival is a major factor causing chronic or recurrent infection, leading to the failure of both host defense and/or antibiotic treatment. However, the elimination of intracellular bacteria is challenging as they are protected from antibiotics and host immune attack. Recent studies have indicated that iron helps macrophages against intracellular bacteria, contradictory to traditional "nutritional immunity", in which iron is considered a key nutrient for bacterial survival in host cells. However, how iron facilitates intracellular bacterial death has not been fully clarified. In this study, we found that ferroptotic stress can help macrophages suppress intracellular bacteria by reversing the importation of ferrous iron into bacterial vacuoles via ferroportin and thereby inducing ferroptosis-like bacterial death. : A macrophage model of bacterial invasion was established to monitor dynamic changes in ferroptotic hallmarks, including ferrous iron and lipid peroxidation. Ferroptosis inducers and inhibitors were added to the model to evaluate the relationship between ferroptotic stress and intracellular bacterial survival. We then determined the spatiotemporal distributions of ferroportin, ferrous iron, and lipid peroxidation in macrophages and intracellular bacteria. A bacterial infection mouse model was established to evaluate the therapeutic effects of drugs that regulate ferroptotic stress. : Ferrous iron and lipid peroxidation increased sharply in the early stage of bacterial infection in the macrophages, then decreased to normal levels in the late stage of infection. The addition of ferroptosis inducers (ras-selective lethal small molecule 3, sulfasalazine, and acetaminophen) in macrophages promoted intracellular bacterial suppression. Further studies revealed that ferrous iron could be delivered to the intracellular bacterial compartment via inward ferroportin transportation, where ferrous iron induced ferroptosis-like death of bacteria. In addition, ferroptotic stress declined to normal levels in the late stage of infection by regulating iron-related pathways in the macrophages. Importantly, we found that enhancing ferroptotic stress with a ferroptosis inducer (sulfasalazine) successfully suppressed bacteria in the mouse infection models. : Our study suggests that the spatiotemporal response to ferroptosis stress is an efficient pathway for macrophage defense against bacterial invasion, and targeting ferroptosis may achieve therapeutic targets for infectious diseases challenged by intracellular pathogens.
Topics: Animals; Cell Death; Ferroptosis; Iron; Macrophages; Mice; Sulfasalazine
PubMed: 35265210
DOI: 10.7150/thno.66663 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2016Randomized trials investigating the efficacy of aminosalicylates for the treatment of mildly to moderately active Crohn's disease have yielded conflicting results. A... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Randomized trials investigating the efficacy of aminosalicylates for the treatment of mildly to moderately active Crohn's disease have yielded conflicting results. A systematic review was conducted to critically examine current available data on the efficacy of sulfasalazine and mesalamine for inducing remission or clinical response in these patients.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the efficacy of aminosalicylates compared to placebo, corticosteroids, and other aminosalicylates (alone or in combination with corticosteroids) for the treatment of mildly to moderately active Crohn's disease.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE and the Cochrane Central Library from inception to June 2015 to identify relevant studies. There were no language restrictions. We also searched reference lists from potentially relevant papers and review articles, as well as proceedings from annual meetings (1991-2015) of the American Gastroenterological Association and American College of Gastroenterology.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomized controlled trials that evaluated the efficacy of sulfasalazine or mesalamine in the treatment of mildly to moderately active Crohn's disease compared to placebo, corticosteroids, and other aminosalicylates (alone or in combination with corticosteroids) were included.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Data extraction and assessment of methodological quality was independently performed by the investigators and any disagreement was resolved by discussion and consensus. We assessed methodological quality using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. The overall quality of the evidence supporting the outcomes was evaluated using the GRADE criteria. The primary outcome measure was a well defined clinical endpoint of induction of remission or response to treatment. Secondary outcomes included mean Crohn's disease activity index (CDAI) scores, adverse events, serious adverse events and withdrawal due to adverse events. For dichotomous outcomes we calculated the pooled risk ratio (RR) and corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) using a random-effects model. For continuous outcomes we calculated the mean difference (MD) and 95% CI using a random-effects model. Sensitivity analyses based on a fixed-effect model and duration of therapy were conducted where appropriate.
MAIN RESULTS
Twenty studies (2367 patients) were included. Two studies were judged to be at high risk of bias due to lack of blinding. Eight studies were judged to be at high risk of bias due to incomplete outcomes data (high drop-out rates) and potential selective reporting. The other 10 studies were judged to be at low risk of bias. A non-significant trend in favour of sulfasalazine over placebo for inducing remission was observed, with benefit confined mainly to patients with Crohn's colitis. Forty-five per cent (63/141) of sulfasalazine patients entered remission at 17-18 weeks compared to 29% (43/148) of placebo patients (RR 1.38, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.89, 2 studies). A GRADE analysis rated the overall quality of the evidence supporting this outcome as moderate due to sparse data (106 events). There was no difference between sulfasalazine and placebo in adverse event outcomes. Sulfasalazine was significantly less effective than corticosteroids and inferior to combination therapy with corticosteroids (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.86, 1 study, 110 patients). Forty-three per cent (55/128) of sulfasalazine patients entered remission at 17 to 18 weeks compared to 60% (79/132) of corticosteroid patients (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.91; 2 studies, 260 patients). A GRADE analysis rated the overall quality of the evidence supporting this outcome as moderate due to sparse data (134 events). Sulfasalazine patients experienced significantly fewer adverse events than corticosteroid patients (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.82; 1 study, 159 patients). There was no difference between sulfasalazine and corticosteroids in serious adverse events or withdrawal due to adverse events. Olsalazine was less effective than placebo in a single trial (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.71; 91 patients). Low dose mesalamine (1 to 2 g/day) was not superior to placebo for induction of remission. Twenty-three per cent (43/185) of low dose mesalamine patients entered remission at week 6 compared to 15% (18/117) of placebo patients (RR = 1.46, 95% CI 0.89 to 2.40; n = 302). A GRADE analysis indicated that the overall quality of the evidence supporting this outcome was low due to risk of bias (incomplete outcome data) and sparse data (61 events). There was no difference between low dose mesalamine and placebo in the proportion of patients who had adverse events (RR 1.33, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.96; 3 studies, 342 patients) or withdrew due to adverse events (RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.95; 3 studies, 342 patients). High dose controlled-release mesalamine (4 g/day) was not superior to placebo, inducing a clinically non significant reduction in CDAI (MD -19.8 points, 95% CI -46.2 to 6.7; 3 studies, 615 patients), and was also inferior to budesonide (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.78; 1 study, 182 patients, GRADE = low). While high dose delayed-release mesalamine (3 to 4.5 g/day) was not superior to placebo for induction of remission (RR 2.02, 95% CI 0.75 to 5.45; 1 study, 38 patients, GRADE = very low), no significant difference in efficacy was found when compared to conventional corticosteroids (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.36; 3 studies, 178 patients, GRADE = moderate) or budesonide (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.05; 1 study, 307 patients, GRADE = moderate). However, these trials were limited by risk of bias (incomplete outcome data) and sparse data (small numbers of events). There was a lack of good quality clinical trials comparing sulfasalazine with other mesalamine formulations. Adverse events that were commonly reported included headache, nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain and diarrhea.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Sulfasalazine is only modestly effective with a trend towards benefit over placebo and is inferior to corticosteroids for the treatment of mildly to moderately active Crohn's disease. Olsalazine and low dose mesalamine (1 to 2 g/day) are not superior to placebo. High dose mesalamine (3.2 to 4 g/day) is not more effective than placebo for inducing response or remission. However, trials assessing the efficacy of high dose mesalamine (4 to 4.5 g/day) compared to budesonide yielded conflicting results and firm conclusions cannot be made. Future large randomized controlled trials are needed to provide definitive evidence on the efficacy of aminosalicylates in active Crohn's disease.
Topics: Aminosalicylic Acids; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Budesonide; Crohn Disease; Delayed-Action Preparations; Gastrointestinal Agents; Humans; Induction Chemotherapy; Mesalamine; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sulfasalazine
PubMed: 27372735
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008870.pub2 -
CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association... Jul 1989An increasing number of options are available for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease; the selection depends on the extent and severity of the disease.... (Review)
Review
An increasing number of options are available for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease; the selection depends on the extent and severity of the disease. Experience with sulfasalazine and corticosteroids has led to a proliferation of 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA) compounds and experimentation with alternative corticosteroid preparations. Given rectally 5-ASA is particularly effective in the treatment of distal ulcerative colitis, and experience is accumulating with several oral formulations. Metronidazole is useful in some cases, and immunosuppressive agents have a role in some patients with chronic refractory disease. A variety of measures, such as nutritional therapy, surgery and psychosocial support, are important elements of therapy. Further therapeutic innovations are expected as the etiology and pathogenesis are clarified.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Aminosalicylic Acids; Delayed-Action Preparations; Drug Evaluation; Forecasting; Humans; Immunosuppressive Agents; Inflammatory Bowel Diseases; Mesalamine; Metronidazole; Sulfasalazine
PubMed: 2568163
DOI: No ID Found -
Journal of Medicine and Life Aug 2023Ulcerative colitis is a chronic inflammatory disease with high mortality and morbidity worldwide. It causes inflammation in the lining of the colon, resulting in several...
Ulcerative colitis is a chronic inflammatory disease with high mortality and morbidity worldwide. It causes inflammation in the lining of the colon, resulting in several symptoms that negatively impact the quality of life. Unfortunately, there is currently no known cure for this condition. Therefore, it is crucial to explore alternative treatment approaches. This research aimed to investigate the anti-inflammatory and antioxidative effects of a combination therapy involving Sulfasalazine+Ezetimibe compared to Sulfasalazine alone in a rat model of ulcerative colitis. Forty adult rats were divided into four groups for this study. The groups consisted of a control group (negative control), an acetic acid group (positive control), an acetic acid+Sulfasalazine (100 mg/kg per day) group, and an acetic acid+Sulfasalazine (50 mg/kg)+Ezetimibe (5 mg/kg) group. Rats were treated for one week, and colitis was induced by administering 2 ml of 4% (v/v) acetic acid inter-rectally. After sacrifice, the colonic tissue homogenate was analyzed for several markers, including proinflammatory cytokines (TNF-α, IL-1β, NF-κB), oxidative stress markers (malondialdehyde, myeloperoxidase), and adhesive molecule markers (E-selectin, ICAM-1). Sulfasalazine and the combination of Sulfasalazine+Ezetimibe significantly reduced the colonic levels of TNF-α, IL-1β, NF-κB, MDA, and E-selectin in the homogenate. However, the combination therapy of Sulfasalazine and Ezetimibe demonstrated a superior effect.
Topics: Rats; Animals; Sulfasalazine; Colitis, Ulcerative; E-Selectin; NF-kappa B; Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha; Quality of Life; Colitis; Colon; Biomarkers; Acetates
PubMed: 38024826
DOI: 10.25122/jml-2023-0194 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2014Ankylosing spondylitis (AS) is a chronic inflammatory disease of unknown cause and affects mainly the spine, but can also affect other joints. Disease progression may... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Ankylosing spondylitis (AS) is a chronic inflammatory disease of unknown cause and affects mainly the spine, but can also affect other joints. Disease progression may result in loss of mobility and function. Sulfasalazine is a disease-modifying antirheumatic drug used in the treatment of AS. However, its efficacy remains unclear. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2005.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the benefits and harms of sulfasalazine for the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis (AS).
SEARCH METHODS
We searched for relevant randomized and quasi-randomized trials in any language, using the following sources: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 11); MEDLINE (2003 to 28 November 2013); EMBASE (2003 to 27 November 2013); CINAHL (2003 to 28 November 2013); Ovid MEDLINE data, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (28 November 2013); and the reference sections of retrieved articles.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We evaluated randomized and quasi-randomized trials examining the benefits and harms of sulfasalazine on AS.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently reviewed unblinded trial reports according to the selection criteria. Disagreements on the inclusion of the studies were resolved, when necessary, by recourse to a third review author. The same authors independently assessed the risk of bias of included trials and entered the data extracted from the included trials. We combined results using mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) for continuous data, and risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous data.We restructured outcome measures for this update based on recommendations from the editorial group. Major outcomes included: pain, Bath ankylosing spondylitis disease activity index (BASDAI), Bath ankylosing spondylitis function index (BASFI), Bath ankylosing spondylitis metrology index (BASMI), radiographic progression, total number of withdrawals due to adverse events, and serious adverse events.
MAIN RESULTS
We did not add any new studies to this review following the updated search. In the original review, we included 11 studies in the analysis, involving 895 participants in total. All included studies compared sulfasalazine with placebo. We judged most of the studies as low risk of bias or unclear risk of bias in five domains (random sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding of outcome assessment, selective reporting, and other sources of bias). However, for incomplete outcome data, we only judged one trial at low risk of bias.None of the included trials assessed BASDAI, BASFI, BASMI or radiographic progression. Different parameters were used to assess pain. The pooled MD for back pain measured on a 0 to 100 mm visual analogue scale was -2.96 (95% confidence interval (CI) -6.33 to 0.41; absolute risk difference 3%, 95% CI 1% to 6%; 6 trials). Compared to placebo, a significantly higher rate of withdrawals due to adverse effects (RR 1.50, 95% CI 1.04 to 2.15; absolute risk difference 4%, 95% CI 0.4% to 8.8%; 11 trials) was found in the sulfasalazine group. A serious adverse reaction was reported in one patient taking sulfasalazine (Peto odds ratio 7.50, 95% CI 0.15 to 378.16).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is not enough evidence to support any benefit of sulfasalazine in reducing pain, disease activity, radiographic progression, or improving physical function and spinal mobility in the treatment of AS. A statistically significant benefit in reducing the erythrocyte sedimentation rate and easing spinal stiffness was mentioned in the previous version. However, the effect size was very small and not clinically meaningful. More withdrawals because of side effects occurred with sulfasalazine. Further studies, with larger sample sizes, longer duration, and using validated outcome measures are needed to verify the uncertainty of sulfasalazine in AS.
Topics: Antirheumatic Agents; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Spondylitis, Ankylosing; Sulfasalazine
PubMed: 25427435
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004800.pub3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... 2000To estimate the short-term efficacy and toxicity of sulfasalazine for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
To estimate the short-term efficacy and toxicity of sulfasalazine for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA).
SEARCH STRATEGY
We searched the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group trials register, and Medline, up to July 1997, using the search strategy developed by the Cochrane Collaboration (Dickersin 1994). The search was complemented with bibliography searching of the reference list of the trials retrieved from the electronic search. Key experts in the area were contacted for further published and unpublished articles.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) comparing sulfasalazine against placebo in patients with RA.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two reviewers determined the studies to be included based on inclusion and exclusion criteria (GW, MSA). Data were independently abstracted by two reviewers (EB, MSA), and checked by a third reviewer (BS) using a pre-developed form for the rheumatoid arthritis sub-group of the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group. The same two reviewers, using a validated scale (Jadad 1996) assessed the methodological quality of the RCTs and CCTs independently. Rheumatoid arthritis outcome measures were extracted from the publications. The pooled analysis was performed using standardized mean differences (SMDs) for joint counts, pain, and global and functional assessments. Weighted mean differences (WMDs) were used for erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR). Toxicity was evaluated with pooled odds ratios (OR) for withdrawals. A chi-square test was used to assess heterogeneity among trials. Fixed effects models were used throughout and random effects for outcomes showing heterogeneity.
MAIN RESULTS
Six trials, including 468 patients were included. A statistically significant benefit was observed for sulfasalazine when compared to placebo for tender and swollen joint scores, pain and ESR. The standardized weighted mean difference between treatment and placebo was -0.49 for tender and swollen joint scores, and -0.42 for pain. The difference for ESR was -17.6mm. Withdrawals from adverse reactions were significantly higher in the sulfasalazine group (OR=3.0). Patients receiving placebo were four times more likely to discontinue treatment because of lack of efficacy than patients receiving sulfasalazine.
REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS
Sulfasalazine appears to have a clinically and statistically significant benefit on the disease activity of patients with RA. Its effects on overall health status and radiological progression are not clear at this time, but would appear to be modest.
Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Antirheumatic Agents; Arthritis, Rheumatoid; Humans; Sulfasalazine
PubMed: 10796400
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000958 -
Epilepsia Jul 2019Currently prescribed antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) are ineffective in treating approximately 30% of epilepsy patients. Sulfasalazine (SAS) is an US Food and Drug...
OBJECTIVE
Currently prescribed antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) are ineffective in treating approximately 30% of epilepsy patients. Sulfasalazine (SAS) is an US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved drug for the treatment of Crohn disease that has been shown to inhibit the cystine/glutamate antiporter system xc- (SXC) and decrease tumor-associated seizures. This study evaluates the effect of SAS on distinct pharmacologically induced network excitability and determines whether it can further decrease hyperexcitability when administered with currently prescribed AEDs.
METHODS
Using in vitro cortical mouse brain slices, whole-cell patch-clamp recordings were made from layer 2/3 pyramidal neurons. Epileptiform activity was induced with bicuculline (bic), 4-aminopyridine (4-AP) and magnesium-free (Mg -free) solution to determine the effect of SAS on epileptiform events. In addition, voltage-sensitive dye (VSD) recordings were performed to characterize the effect of SAS on the spatiotemporal spread of hyperexcitable network activity and compared to currently prescribed AEDs.
RESULTS
SAS decreased evoked excitatory postsynaptic currents (eEPSCs) and increased the decay kinetics of evoked inhibitory postsynaptic currents (eIPSCs) in layer 2/3 pyramidal neurons. Although application of SAS to bic and Mg -free-induced epileptiform activity caused a decrease in the duration of epileptiform events, SAS completely blocked 4-AP-induced epileptiform events. In VSD recordings, SAS decreased VSD optical signals induced by 4-AP. Co-application of SAS with the AED topiramate (TPM) caused a significantly further decrease in the spatiotemporal spread of VSD optical signals.
SIGNIFICANCE
Taken together this study provides evidence that inhibition of SXC by SAS can decrease network hyperexcitability induced by three distinct pharmacologic agents in the superficial layers of the cortex. Furthermore, SAS provided additional suppression of 4-AP-induced network activity when administered with the currently prescribed AED TPM. These findings may serve as a foundation to assess the potential for SAS or other compounds that selectively target SXC as an adjuvant treatment for epilepsy.
Topics: Animals; Anticonvulsants; Brain; Disease Models, Animal; Epilepsy; Excitatory Postsynaptic Potentials; Mice; Mice, Inbred C57BL; Patch-Clamp Techniques; Sulfasalazine
PubMed: 31211419
DOI: 10.1111/epi.16073 -
Brazilian Journal of Medical and... 2021We aimed to reveal the anti-convulsant effects sulfasalazine and its mechanism in pentylenetetrazole (PTZ)-induced seizures in rats. Forty-eight male Wistar albino rats...
We aimed to reveal the anti-convulsant effects sulfasalazine and its mechanism in pentylenetetrazole (PTZ)-induced seizures in rats. Forty-eight male Wistar albino rats (200-250 g) were randomly divided into two groups: 24 for electroencephalography (EEG) recording (group A) and 24 for behavioral studies (group B). About 70 mg/kg PTZ was used for behavioral studies after sulfasalazine administration and 35 mg/kg PTZ was used for EEG recording after sulfasalazine administration. Electrodes were implanted on the dura mater over the left frontal cortex and the reference electrode was implanted over the cerebellum for EEG recording. Racine's convulsion scale, first myoclonic jerk onset time, spike percentages, brain malondialdehyde (MDA), superoxide dismutase (SOD), and prostaglandin F2α (PGF2α) levels were evaluated between the groups. First myoclonic jerk onset time was significantly shorter in the saline group than both 250 and 500 mg/kg sulfasalazine groups (P<0.05). Racine's convulsion scores were significantly lower in the 250 and 500 mg/kg sulfasalazine groups than the saline group (P<0.05, P<0.001). The two sulfasalazine groups had lower spike percentages than the saline group (P<0.05). Significantly lower MDA and PGF2α levels were observed in the 250 and 500 mg/kg sulfasalazine groups compared with the saline group (P<0.05, P<0.001, respectively). SOD increased significantly in both sulfasalazine groups compared with the PTZ+saline group (P<0.05). Our study demonstrated that sulfasalazine had protective effects on PTZ-induced convulsions by protecting against oxidative and inflammatory damage associated with PTZ.
Topics: Animals; Male; Rats; Pentylenetetrazole; Rats, Sprague-Dawley; Rats, Wistar; Seizures; Sulfasalazine
PubMed: 34878064
DOI: 10.1590/1414-431X2021e11541