Guest guest Posted June 4, 2002 Report Share Posted June 4, 2002 I looked into the IMPACs I mentioned in my last post a little bit more. I found some info on two of them that seemed interesting. The first is called CMT-8. It has been shown to inhibit TNF-(alpha). TNF-(alpha) makes the skin more receptive to VEGF, and in the Fall of 2001, the NRS began a study to see if inhibiting TNF-(alpha) might inhibit cea development. I'm not sure if the study is finished yet. I guess I would assume that if it is, and we haven't heard anything, that it was a bust.. but.. this is their second year studying VEGF so obviously they found something promising about it the first time... so.. hopefully the study just isnt finished yet.. It also reduces blood levels of serum fructosamine, prostaglandin E2 and nitric oxide. This was all done at concentrations which could be delivered without toxicity in animal models. I think these are very early on in development and so far have only been tested in rats. The other was CMT-3 which inhibits the invasion of Candida albicans Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 4, 2002 Report Share Posted June 4, 2002 Group, While at this years Society for Investigative Dermatology meeting last month in Los Angeles, I went to a satellite symposium held by the National cea Society. It was mainly a forum for the awardees of their grants to show the results of their studies. Dr. Lynn Drake (Now at Harvard in Derm) gave a 45 minute introductory talk about a consortium that was convened to BEGIN to come up with a standardized method of IDENTIFYING cea in the clinic. It seems as though there is a bit of " difference of opinion " on the diagnosis of cea among Dermatologists and the consortium was brought together to set standards. The outcome of that has been published as a special report by the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology (J Am Acad Derm 2002;46:584-7) entitled, " Standard classification of rosacea: Report of the National cea Society Expert Committee on the Classification and Staging of cea " . I attended this minisymposium and it was apparent from some of the discussion (Dr. Al Kligman generated much discussion) that there still is no consensus across Dermatologists as to what cea actually is. Perhaps the biggest point of contention was that in most of the studies currently being performed to look at new treatments, the criterion for election into the study is that the patient must have papules and pustules in addition to the flushing. Dr. Kligman's opinion is that these patients only comprised a small portion of the total rosacea population (meaning many rosacea sufferers may have the flushing w/out papule and pustule involvement)and that the study results are inherently skewed. I tend to agree. Regarding Adam's question about TNF-alpha and VEGF, the only paper presented was by Marita Kosmadaki, a research fellow at Boston Univ. The research (funded by the NRS) showed that UV-induces VEGF through a TNF-alpha independent pathway. The work did not relate specifically to rosacea, but to the mechanism by which UV induces VEGF. They did draw some parallels and implications for rosacea, but no direct link was demonstrated. As far as clinical data was concerned, none was presented. Pilcher > I looked into the IMPACs I mentioned in my last post a little bit > more. I found some info on two of them that seemed interesting. > > The first is called CMT-8. It has been shown to inhibit > TNF-(alpha). TNF-(alpha) makes the skin more receptive to VEGF, > and in the Fall of 2001, the NRS began a study to see if > inhibiting TNF-(alpha) might inhibit cea development. I'm > not sure if the study is finished yet. I guess I would assume > that if it is, and we haven't heard anything, that it was a > bust.. but.. this is their second year studying VEGF so obviously > they found something promising about it the first time... so.. > hopefully the study just isnt finished yet.. > > It also reduces blood levels of serum fructosamine, prostaglandin > E2 and nitric oxide. This was all done at concentrations which > could be delivered without toxicity in animal models. I think > these are very early on in development and so far have only been > tested in rats. > > The other was CMT-3 which inhibits the invasion of Candida > albicans > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 4, 2002 Report Share Posted June 4, 2002 Group, While at this years Society for Investigative Dermatology meeting last month in Los Angeles, I went to a satellite symposium held by the National cea Society. It was mainly a forum for the awardees of their grants to show the results of their studies. Dr. Lynn Drake (Now at Harvard in Derm) gave a 45 minute introductory talk about a consortium that was convened to BEGIN to come up with a standardized method of IDENTIFYING cea in the clinic. It seems as though there is a bit of " difference of opinion " on the diagnosis of cea among Dermatologists and the consortium was brought together to set standards. The outcome of that has been published as a special report by the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology (J Am Acad Derm 2002;46:584-7) entitled, " Standard classification of rosacea: Report of the National cea Society Expert Committee on the Classification and Staging of cea " . I attended this minisymposium and it was apparent from some of the discussion (Dr. Al Kligman generated much discussion) that there still is no consensus across Dermatologists as to what cea actually is. Perhaps the biggest point of contention was that in most of the studies currently being performed to look at new treatments, the criterion for election into the study is that the patient must have papules and pustules in addition to the flushing. Dr. Kligman's opinion is that these patients only comprised a small portion of the total rosacea population (meaning many rosacea sufferers may have the flushing w/out papule and pustule involvement)and that the study results are inherently skewed. I tend to agree. Regarding Adam's question about TNF-alpha and VEGF, the only paper presented was by Marita Kosmadaki, a research fellow at Boston Univ. The research (funded by the NRS) showed that UV-induces VEGF through a TNF-alpha independent pathway. The work did not relate specifically to rosacea, but to the mechanism by which UV induces VEGF. They did draw some parallels and implications for rosacea, but no direct link was demonstrated. As far as clinical data was concerned, none was presented. Pilcher > I looked into the IMPACs I mentioned in my last post a little bit > more. I found some info on two of them that seemed interesting. > > The first is called CMT-8. It has been shown to inhibit > TNF-(alpha). TNF-(alpha) makes the skin more receptive to VEGF, > and in the Fall of 2001, the NRS began a study to see if > inhibiting TNF-(alpha) might inhibit cea development. I'm > not sure if the study is finished yet. I guess I would assume > that if it is, and we haven't heard anything, that it was a > bust.. but.. this is their second year studying VEGF so obviously > they found something promising about it the first time... so.. > hopefully the study just isnt finished yet.. > > It also reduces blood levels of serum fructosamine, prostaglandin > E2 and nitric oxide. This was all done at concentrations which > could be delivered without toxicity in animal models. I think > these are very early on in development and so far have only been > tested in rats. > > The other was CMT-3 which inhibits the invasion of Candida > albicans > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 4, 2002 Report Share Posted June 4, 2002 , do you know where we can get a copy of that NRS Classification paper to post online? All Matija and I could find to post legally are summaries that don't go into enough detail. It's frustrating that neither the ADA nor NRS have the classification, much less the paper, on their Web sites. Like you, I don't see a direct link between Dr. Kosmadaki work -- interesting and important as it may be -- and rosacea. Adam, your efforts are laudable but you're starting to repeat studies. (See #39224, from last week.) Speaking of which, am I the only one watching rosacea-support's odometer inching closer to 40,000? We should start a pool (cool water and no chlorine, of course) for what day it will turn. Marjorie Marjorie Lazoff, MD > > I looked into the IMPACs I mentioned in my last post a little bit > > more. I found some info on two of them that seemed interesting. > > > > The first is called CMT-8. It has been shown to inhibit > > TNF-(alpha). TNF-(alpha) makes the skin more receptive to VEGF, > > and in the Fall of 2001, the NRS began a study to see if > > inhibiting TNF-(alpha) might inhibit cea development. I'm > > not sure if the study is finished yet. I guess I would assume > > that if it is, and we haven't heard anything, that it was a > > bust.. but.. this is their second year studying VEGF so obviously > > they found something promising about it the first time... so.. > > hopefully the study just isnt finished yet.. > > > > It also reduces blood levels of serum fructosamine, prostaglandin > > E2 and nitric oxide. This was all done at concentrations which > > could be delivered without toxicity in animal models. I think > > these are very early on in development and so far have only been > > tested in rats. > > > > The other was CMT-3 which inhibits the invasion of Candida > > albicans > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 4, 2002 Report Share Posted June 4, 2002 , thanks for your generous offer. I already have the electronic version of the article, that's not the problem. I should have been clearer: the problem is that it isn't legal for anyone to post a copyrighted article directly on a public Web site without permission from the publisher. It's not something we normally think about in academia since we have implied permission to hardcopy articles for educational purposes. But that doesn't apply to freely distributing an article on the Web. I thought you might know where we could get a copy from another Web site (since it's OK for us to link to it, and probably even copy/paste it, if it's already freely available on the Web), or a comparable article that we could legally post here. Marjorie Marjorie Lazoff, MD > > > > I looked into the IMPACs I mentioned in my last post a little > bit > > > > more. I found some info on two of them that seemed interesting. > > > > > > > > The first is called CMT-8. It has been shown to inhibit > > > > TNF-(alpha). TNF-(alpha) makes the skin more receptive to VEGF, > > > > and in the Fall of 2001, the NRS began a study to see if > > > > inhibiting TNF-(alpha) might inhibit cea development. I'm > > > > not sure if the study is finished yet. I guess I would assume > > > > that if it is, and we haven't heard anything, that it was a > > > > bust.. but.. this is their second year studying VEGF so > obviously > > > > they found something promising about it the first time... so.. > > > > hopefully the study just isnt finished yet.. > > > > > > > > It also reduces blood levels of serum fructosamine, > prostaglandin > > > > E2 and nitric oxide. This was all done at concentrations which > > > > could be delivered without toxicity in animal models. I think > > > > these are very early on in development and so far have only been > > > > tested in rats. > > > > > > > > The other was CMT-3 which inhibits the invasion of Candida > > > > albicans > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 4, 2002 Report Share Posted June 4, 2002 , thanks for your generous offer. I already have the electronic version of the article, that's not the problem. I should have been clearer: the problem is that it isn't legal for anyone to post a copyrighted article directly on a public Web site without permission from the publisher. It's not something we normally think about in academia since we have implied permission to hardcopy articles for educational purposes. But that doesn't apply to freely distributing an article on the Web. I thought you might know where we could get a copy from another Web site (since it's OK for us to link to it, and probably even copy/paste it, if it's already freely available on the Web), or a comparable article that we could legally post here. Marjorie Marjorie Lazoff, MD > > > > I looked into the IMPACs I mentioned in my last post a little > bit > > > > more. I found some info on two of them that seemed interesting. > > > > > > > > The first is called CMT-8. It has been shown to inhibit > > > > TNF-(alpha). TNF-(alpha) makes the skin more receptive to VEGF, > > > > and in the Fall of 2001, the NRS began a study to see if > > > > inhibiting TNF-(alpha) might inhibit cea development. I'm > > > > not sure if the study is finished yet. I guess I would assume > > > > that if it is, and we haven't heard anything, that it was a > > > > bust.. but.. this is their second year studying VEGF so > obviously > > > > they found something promising about it the first time... so.. > > > > hopefully the study just isnt finished yet.. > > > > > > > > It also reduces blood levels of serum fructosamine, > prostaglandin > > > > E2 and nitric oxide. This was all done at concentrations which > > > > could be delivered without toxicity in animal models. I think > > > > these are very early on in development and so far have only been > > > > tested in rats. > > > > > > > > The other was CMT-3 which inhibits the invasion of Candida > > > > albicans > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.