OBJECTIVE:To prepare and establish quality control for the compo und metronidazole hollow suppository.METHODS:The compound metronidazole hollow suppository was prepared with semisynthesis fatty acid glyceride as ground substance;The contents of metronidazole and ofloxacin were determined by dual-wave length K-ratio method and equivalent absorption dual-wave length method.RESULTS:The detecting concentration linear range of metronidazole and ofloxacin were6.0～18.0?g/ml and3.0～9.0?g/ml respectively,the average recovery were100.98%and99.56%(n=5)respectively,RSD were0.82%?0.80%respectively.CONCLUSION:This method is convenient,accurate and reproducible,which can be used for the quality control of compound metronidazole suppository.

Sect. Aptera (Gentiana L.) is the plant origin of Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) "Qinjiao", which is used to treat rheumatism and pains with a long history. The plants of Sect. Aptera mainly contain iridoids, triterpenes and steroids, and possess anti-inflammatory, analgesia, stomach invigorate and bacteria inhibitory effects, etc. Herein, we reviewed the advances of chemical and pharmacological investigations of Sect. Aptera for further research.
Animals ; Drug Therapy ; Drugs, Chinese Herbal ; chemistry ; pharmacology ; Gentiana ; chemistry ; Humans ; Plant Extracts ; chemistry ; pharmacology

Maintenance of skeletal integrity requires the coordinated activity of multinucleated bone-resorbing osteoclasts and bone-forming osteoblasts. Osteoclasts form resorption lacunae on bone surfaces in response to cytokines by fusion of precursor cells. Osteoblasts are derived from mesenchymal precursors and lay down new bone in resorption lacunae during bone remodeling. Nuclear factorkappa B (NF-κB) signaling regulates osteoclast and osteoblast formation and is activated in osteoclast precursors in response to the essential osteoclastogenic cytokine, receptor activator of NF-κB ligand (RANKL), which can also control osteoblast formation through RANK-RANKL reverse signaling in osteoblast precursors. RANKL and some pro-inflammatory cytokines, including tumor necrosis factor (TNF), activate NF-κB signaling to positively regulate osteoclast formation and functions. However, these cytokines also limit osteoclast and osteoblast formation through NF-κB signaling molecules, including TNF receptor-associated factors (TRAFs). TRAF6 mediates RANKL-induced osteoclast formation through canonical NF-κB signaling. In contrast, TRAF3 limits RANKL- and TNF-induced osteoclast formation, and it restricts transforming growth factor β (TGFβ)-induced inhibition of osteoblast formation in young and adult mice. During aging, neutrophils expressing TGFβ and C-C chemokine receptor type 5 (CCR5) increase in bone marrow of mice in response to increased NF-κB-induced CC motif chemokine ligand 5 (CCL5) expression by mesenchymal progenitor cells and injection of these neutrophils into young mice decreased bone mass. TGFβ causes degradation of TRAF3, resulting in decreased glycogen synthase kinase-3β/β-catenin-mediated osteoblast formation and age-related osteoporosis in mice. The CCR5 inhibitor, maraviroc, prevented accumulation of TGFβ+/CCR5+ neutrophils in bone marrow and increased bone mass by inhibiting bone resorption and increasing bone formation in aged mice. This paper updates current understanding of how NF-κB signaling is involved in the positive and negative regulation of cytokine-mediated osteoclast and osteoblast formation and activation with a focus on the role of TRAF3 signaling, which can be targeted therapeutically to enhance bone mass.

Osteoclasts are multinucleated cells formed mainly on bone surfaces in response to cytokines by fusion of bone marrow-derived myeloid lineage precursors that circulate in the blood. Major advances in understanding of the molecular mechanisms regulating osteoclast formation and functions have been made in the past 20 years since the discovery that their formation requires nuclear factor-kappa B (NF-kappaB) signaling and that this is activated in response to the essential osteoclastogenic cytokine, receptor activator of NF-kappaB ligand (RANKL), which also controls osteoclast activation to resorb (degrade) bone. These studies have revealed that RANKL and some pro-inflammatory cytokines, including tumor necrosis factor, activate NF-kappaB and downstream signaling, including c-Fos and nuclear factor of activated T-cells, cytoplasmic 1 (NFATc1), and inhibition of repressors of NFATc1 signaling, to positively regulate osteoclast formation and functions. However, these cytokines also activate NF-kappaB signaling that can limit osteoclast formation through the NF-kappaB signaling proteins, TRAF3 and p100, and the suppressors of c-Fos/NFATc1 signaling, IRF8, and RBP-J. This paper reviews current understanding of how NF-kappaB signaling is involved in the positive and negative regulation of cytokine-mediated osteoclast formation and activation.
Cytokines ; NF-kappa B ; NFATC Transcription Factors ; Osteoclasts ; RANK Ligand ; Receptor Activator of Nuclear Factor-kappa B ; TNF Receptor-Associated Factor 3 ; Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha

Objective: To investigate the differences of clinicopathological features, diagnosis, treatment and prognosis between patients with extra-gastrointestinal stromal tumors (EGIST) and duodenal gastrointestinal stromal tumors (DGIST). Methods: A retrospective case - control study was performed. Case inclusion criteria: (1) tumor confirmed by histology and pathology; (2) primary tumor locating in the extra - gastrointestinal tract or duodenum; (3) without other synchronous tumors; (4) complete clinical and pathological data. Clinical data of 20 EGIST patients and 32 DGIST patients from March 2011 to September 2016 at Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine were retrospectively collected and analyzed. The observational parameters included clinicopathological characteristics, treatment and prognosis conditions. Continuous data of abnormal distribution were expressed as median (range) and compared using the Mann-Whitney U-test. Survival curves were drawn by the Kaplan-Meier method and compared with the Log-rank test. Results: Of the 20 EGIST patients, 8 were males and 12 were females with age of 61.0 (30.0 to 86.0) years and of the 32 DGIST patients, 12 were males and 20 were females with age of 55.5 (27.0 to 70.0) years. Compared with DGIST patients, EGIST patients were older (U=188.000, P=0.012], had larger tumor size [10.0 (3.0 to 29.0) cm vs. 4.0 (1.5 to 10.0) cm, U=98.500, P<0.001] and higher ratio of high risk classification [85.0% (17/20) vs. 12.5% (4/32), χ²=26.870, P<0.001]. Among the 20 EGIST patients, 5 were diagnosed with distal metastasis and received imatinib (400 mg/d), and the other 15 patients underwent radical resection who were included in survival analysis. All the 32 DGIST patients underwent radical resection. The median follow-up of whole group was 43 (14 to 76) months. The 3-year recurrence/metastasis-free survival rate of 15 cases undergoing radical resection in the EGIST group was 85.6%, which was lower than that of the DGIST group (88.6%), and the difference was not statistically significant (P=0.745). There was no significant difference in the 3-year overall survival rate between the EGIST group (92.9%) and the DGIST group (100%) (P=0.271). Conclusions As compared to DGIST, EGIST mostly occurs in those with older age, larger tumor size and higher risk grade. The prognosis of EGIST patients after radical resection is similar to that of DGIST patients.

Objective To investigate the differences of clinicopathological features, diagnosis, treatment and prognosis between patients with extra?gastrointestinal stromal tumors (EGIST) and duodenal gastrointestinal stromal tumors (DGIST). Methods A retrospective case?control study was performed. Case inclusion criteria: (1) tumor confirmed by histology and pathology; (2) primary tumor locating in the extra?gastrointestinal tract or duodenum; (3) without other synchronous tumors; (4) complete clinical and pathological data. Clinical data of 20 EGIST patients and 32 DGIST patients from March 2011 to September 2016 at Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine were retrospectively collected and analyzed. The observational parameters included clinicopathological characteristics, treatment and prognosis conditions. Continuous data of abnormal distribution were expressed as median (range) and compared using the Mann?Whitney U?test. Survival curves were drawn by the Kaplan?Meier method and compared with the Log?rank test. Results Of the 20 EGIST patients, 8 were males and 12 were females with age of 61.0 (30.0 to 86.0) years and of the 32 DGIST patients, 12 were males and 20 were females with age of 55.5 (27.0 to 70.0) years. Compared with DGIST patients, EGIST patients were older (U=188.000, P=0.012], had larger tumor size [10.0 (3.0 to 29.0) cm vs. 4.0 (1.5 to 10.0) cm, U=98.500, P<0.001] and higher ratio of high risk classification [85.0% (17/20) vs. 12.5% (4/32), χ2=26.870, P<0.001]. Among the 20 EGIST patients, 5 were diagnosed with distal metastasis and received imatinib (400 mg/d), and the other 15 patients underwent radical resection who were included in survival analysis. All the 32 DGIST patients underwent radical resection. The median follow?up of whole group was 43 (14 to 76) months. The 3?year recurrence/metastasis?free survival rate of 15 cases undergoing radical resection in the EGIST group was 85.6%, which was lower than that of the DGIST group (88.6%), and the difference was not statistically significant (P=0.745). There was no significant difference in the 3?year overall survival rate between the EGIST group (92.9%) and the DGIST group (100%) (P=0.271). Conclusions As compared to DGIST, EGIST mostly occurs in those with older age, larger tumor size and higher risk grade. The prognosis of EGIST patients after radical resection is similar to that of DGIST patients.

Objective To investigate the differences of clinicopathological features, diagnosis, treatment and prognosis between patients with extra?gastrointestinal stromal tumors (EGIST) and duodenal gastrointestinal stromal tumors (DGIST). Methods A retrospective case?control study was performed. Case inclusion criteria: (1) tumor confirmed by histology and pathology; (2) primary tumor locating in the extra?gastrointestinal tract or duodenum; (3) without other synchronous tumors; (4) complete clinical and pathological data. Clinical data of 20 EGIST patients and 32 DGIST patients from March 2011 to September 2016 at Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine were retrospectively collected and analyzed. The observational parameters included clinicopathological characteristics, treatment and prognosis conditions. Continuous data of abnormal distribution were expressed as median (range) and compared using the Mann?Whitney U?test. Survival curves were drawn by the Kaplan?Meier method and compared with the Log?rank test. Results Of the 20 EGIST patients, 8 were males and 12 were females with age of 61.0 (30.0 to 86.0) years and of the 32 DGIST patients, 12 were males and 20 were females with age of 55.5 (27.0 to 70.0) years. Compared with DGIST patients, EGIST patients were older (U=188.000, P=0.012], had larger tumor size [10.0 (3.0 to 29.0) cm vs. 4.0 (1.5 to 10.0) cm, U=98.500, P<0.001] and higher ratio of high risk classification [85.0% (17/20) vs. 12.5% (4/32), χ2=26.870, P<0.001]. Among the 20 EGIST patients, 5 were diagnosed with distal metastasis and received imatinib (400 mg/d), and the other 15 patients underwent radical resection who were included in survival analysis. All the 32 DGIST patients underwent radical resection. The median follow?up of whole group was 43 (14 to 76) months. The 3?year recurrence/metastasis?free survival rate of 15 cases undergoing radical resection in the EGIST group was 85.6%, which was lower than that of the DGIST group (88.6%), and the difference was not statistically significant (P=0.745). There was no significant difference in the 3?year overall survival rate between the EGIST group (92.9%) and the DGIST group (100%) (P=0.271). Conclusions As compared to DGIST, EGIST mostly occurs in those with older age, larger tumor size and higher risk grade. The prognosis of EGIST patients after radical resection is similar to that of DGIST patients.