Gentianopsis barbata (G. barbata) represents a significant plant species with considerable ornamental and medicinal value in China. This investigation sought to elucidate the primary constituents within the plant and investigate their pharmacological properties. Fifty triterpenoids (1-50), including nine previously undescribed compounds (1, 2, 7, 10, 20, 28, 29, 37, and 41) were isolated and characterized from the whole plants of G. barbata. Notably, compounds 1 and 2 exhibited the novel 3,4;9,10-diseco-24-homo-cycloartane triterpenoid skeleton. The isolated triterpenoids demonstrated substantial anti-inflammatory activity through inhibition of tumor necrosis factor α (TNF-α) and interleukin-6 (IL-6) cytokine secretion in LPS-induced RAW264.7 macrophages, and hepatoprotective effects by preventing tert-butyl hydroperoxide (t-BHP)-induced oxidative injury in HepG2 cells. These results demonstrate both the presence of diverse triterpenoids in G. barbata and their therapeutic potential for inflammatory and hepatic conditions, providing scientific evidence supporting the clinical application of this traditional Mongolian medicinal plant.
Triterpenes/isolation & purification* ; Mice ; Anti-Inflammatory Agents/isolation & purification* ; Animals ; Humans ; RAW 264.7 Cells ; Hep G2 Cells ; Interleukin-6/genetics* ; Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha/genetics* ; Medicine, Mongolian Traditional ; Macrophages/immunology* ; Protective Agents/isolation & purification* ; Liver/drug effects* ; Gentianaceae/chemistry* ; Plant Extracts/chemistry* ; Molecular Structure

Objective:To evaluate the efficacy and safety of anaprazole (40 mg and 60 mg) and compared with rabeprazole (20 mg) in the treatment of reflux esophagitis (RE).Methods:This multicenter, randomized, double-blinded, positive drug parallel controlled study was led by the First Affiliated Hospital of Naval Medical University (Shanghai Changhai Hospital) and a total of 24 clinical trial institutions nationwide including the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Yichun People′s Hospital, Meihekou Central Hospital, the First Affiliated Hospital of Gannan Medical University, and Jinhua Central Hospital, participated in this research. A total of 156 patients with RE (Los Angeles grade A to D) were enrolled and randomly divided into 3 groups, anaprazole 40 mg group, anaprazole 60 mg group and rabeprazole 20 mg group, using a random number table in a ratio of 1∶1∶1. Patients in the above 3 groups were treated with the appropriate trial medication once per day for 4 or 8 weeks. The endoscopic healing rates were evaluated by Blinded Independent Central Review (BICR) and investigators. In addition, the improvement in the severity of individual symptoms (daytime reflux, daytime heartburn, nighttime reflux, nighttime heartburn) and medication safety were also evaluated. The endoscopic healing rates and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) at week-8 and -4 were calculated by groups, as well as the difference in the healing rates and their 95% CI among groups. The chi-square test was used for statistical analysis. Results:A total of 153 subjects were included in the full analysis set (FAS), 144 in the per-protocol analysis set (PPS) and 151 in the safety set (SS). In the FAS, after 8 weeks of treatment, the endoscopic healing rates of anaprazole 40 mg group, anaprazde 60 mg group and raberazole 20 mg group blindly assessed by BICR were 86.0% (43/50), 86.5% (45/52) and 86.3% (44/51), respectively, and the 95% CI were 76.4% to 95.6%, 77.3% to 95.8% and 76.8% to 95.7%, respectively.The endoscopic healing rates of anaprazole 40 mg group, anaprazde 60 mg group and raberazole 20 mg group blindly evaluated by investigators were 88.0% (44/50), 90.4% (47/52) and 86.3% (44/51), respectively, and the 95% CI were 79.0% to 97.0%, 82.4% to 98.4% and 76.8% to 95.7%, respectively. The endoscopic healing rates were similar among groups. In the FAS, the differences in healing rates(95% CI) assessed by BICR and investigators between anaprazole 40 mg, anaprazole 60 mg and rabeprazole 20 mg group were -0.3%(-13.7% to 13.2%), 0.6%(-12.3% to 13.6%), respectively and 1.7%(-11.3% to 14.8%), 3.9%(-8.5% to 16.3%), respectively. The results of the PPS were consistent with those of the FAS. After 8 weeks of treatment, the severity scores of individual symptoms (daytime reflux, daytime heartburn, nighttime reflux, nighttime heartburn) decreased in all groups. The differences between post-treatment and baseline in anaprazole 40 mg group, anaprazole 60 mg group and rabeprazole 20 mg group were -1.54±1.00, -1.91±1.00, -1.51±0.76, -1.45±0.71; -1.30±0.94, -1.59±0.96, -1.33±0.65, -1.42±0.60; and -1.74±0.85, -1.76±0.93, -1.45±0.66, -1.66±0.79, respectively. The incidence of treatment emergent adverse event of anaprazole 40 mg group, anaprazole 60 mg group and rabeprazole 20 mg group were 57.1% (28/49), 48.1% (25/52) and 60.0% (30/50), respectively, and the incidence of treatment related adverse event were 18.4% (9/24), 25.0% (13/52) and 24.0% (12/50), respectively. There were no statistically significant differences in the incidence of treatment emergent adverse event and treatment related adverse event among 3 groups (all P>0.05). Conclusion:The efficacy and safety of anaprazole 40, 60 mg/d, and rabeprazole 20 mg/d in the treatment of RE are comparable.

Objective:To evaluate the efficacy and safety of high-dose injectable dexlansoprazole in the treatment of acute upper gastrointestinal ulcer hemorrhage.Methods:This study was a randomized, double-blind, positive drug parallel controlled, multicenter clinical trial led by the First Affiliated Hospital of Naval Medical University (Shanghai Changhai Hospital), with participation from 43 hospitals such as Yichun People′s Hospital, Army Medical Center of PLA (Chongqing Daping Hospital), etc. From August 31, 2019 to May 25, 2020, 346 patients with upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage caused by acute gastric and (or) duodenal ulcer were selected. The subjects were randomly divided into experimental group and control group according to a 2 to 1 stratification scheme using the SAS 9.4 software. The medication regimen for the experimental group was intravenous injection of dexlansoprazole 30 mg/times, once every 12 h, while the medication regimen for the control group was intravenous injection of lansoprazole and dexlansoprazole mimetics, 30 mg/times, once every 12 h; the treatment course was 5 days. The primary efficacy indicator (72 h effective hemostasis rate), the secondary efficacy indicator(clinical hemostasis rate at 24, 48, and 120 h, and the proportion of subjects who underwent endoscopic treatment or surgical procedures again due to hemorrhage within 5 days), and the incidence of adverse reactions were compared between the 2 groups. Binomial distribution normal approximation method was performed to calculate the 95% confidence interval (95% CI) of the difference in hemostasis rate between the experimental group and the control group. Fisher′s exact test was used for statistical analysis. Results:A total of 329 patients (219 cases in the experimental group and 110 cases in the control group) were enrolled. The 72 h effective hemostasis rate (95% CI) of the experimental and control group was 95.9%(210/219, 92.3% to 98.1%) and 93.6%(103/110, 87.3% to 97.4%), respectively, and the difference was not statistically significant ( P>0.05). The difference in the 72-hour effective hemostasis rate(95% CI) between the experimental and the control group was 2.3% (-3.0% to 7.5%). The clinical hemostasis rates at 24, 48, and 120 h of the treatment were 82.2% (176/214), 99.1%(210/212), and 100.0%(210/210) in the experimental group, and 85.2%(92/108), 98.1%(104/106), and 100.0%(105/105) in the control group, respectively, and the differences were not statistically significant (all P>0.05). The proportion of subjects who underwent endoscopic treatment and surgical procedure again within 5 days (95% CI)of the experimental group and control group was 0 (0 to 1.7%) and 1.9% (0.2% to 6.5%), respectively, and the difference was not statistically significant ( P>0.05). The result of safety evaluation showed that the overall incidence of adverse reactions of the experimental group and the control group was 6.4% (14/219) and 11.8% (13/110), respectively, and the difference was not statistically significant ( P>0.05). Conclusion:High dose injectable dexlansoloprazole is an effective and safe treatment for upper gastrointestinal ulcer hemorrhage, and suitable for clinical application.

Objective:To evaluate the efficacy and safety of anaprazole (40 mg and 60 mg) and compared with rabeprazole (20 mg) in the treatment of reflux esophagitis (RE).Methods:This multicenter, randomized, double-blinded, positive drug parallel controlled study was led by the First Affiliated Hospital of Naval Medical University (Shanghai Changhai Hospital) and a total of 24 clinical trial institutions nationwide including the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Yichun People′s Hospital, Meihekou Central Hospital, the First Affiliated Hospital of Gannan Medical University, and Jinhua Central Hospital, participated in this research. A total of 156 patients with RE (Los Angeles grade A to D) were enrolled and randomly divided into 3 groups, anaprazole 40 mg group, anaprazole 60 mg group and rabeprazole 20 mg group, using a random number table in a ratio of 1∶1∶1. Patients in the above 3 groups were treated with the appropriate trial medication once per day for 4 or 8 weeks. The endoscopic healing rates were evaluated by Blinded Independent Central Review (BICR) and investigators. In addition, the improvement in the severity of individual symptoms (daytime reflux, daytime heartburn, nighttime reflux, nighttime heartburn) and medication safety were also evaluated. The endoscopic healing rates and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) at week-8 and -4 were calculated by groups, as well as the difference in the healing rates and their 95% CI among groups. The chi-square test was used for statistical analysis. Results:A total of 153 subjects were included in the full analysis set (FAS), 144 in the per-protocol analysis set (PPS) and 151 in the safety set (SS). In the FAS, after 8 weeks of treatment, the endoscopic healing rates of anaprazole 40 mg group, anaprazde 60 mg group and raberazole 20 mg group blindly assessed by BICR were 86.0% (43/50), 86.5% (45/52) and 86.3% (44/51), respectively, and the 95% CI were 76.4% to 95.6%, 77.3% to 95.8% and 76.8% to 95.7%, respectively.The endoscopic healing rates of anaprazole 40 mg group, anaprazde 60 mg group and raberazole 20 mg group blindly evaluated by investigators were 88.0% (44/50), 90.4% (47/52) and 86.3% (44/51), respectively, and the 95% CI were 79.0% to 97.0%, 82.4% to 98.4% and 76.8% to 95.7%, respectively. The endoscopic healing rates were similar among groups. In the FAS, the differences in healing rates(95% CI) assessed by BICR and investigators between anaprazole 40 mg, anaprazole 60 mg and rabeprazole 20 mg group were -0.3%(-13.7% to 13.2%), 0.6%(-12.3% to 13.6%), respectively and 1.7%(-11.3% to 14.8%), 3.9%(-8.5% to 16.3%), respectively. The results of the PPS were consistent with those of the FAS. After 8 weeks of treatment, the severity scores of individual symptoms (daytime reflux, daytime heartburn, nighttime reflux, nighttime heartburn) decreased in all groups. The differences between post-treatment and baseline in anaprazole 40 mg group, anaprazole 60 mg group and rabeprazole 20 mg group were -1.54±1.00, -1.91±1.00, -1.51±0.76, -1.45±0.71; -1.30±0.94, -1.59±0.96, -1.33±0.65, -1.42±0.60; and -1.74±0.85, -1.76±0.93, -1.45±0.66, -1.66±0.79, respectively. The incidence of treatment emergent adverse event of anaprazole 40 mg group, anaprazole 60 mg group and rabeprazole 20 mg group were 57.1% (28/49), 48.1% (25/52) and 60.0% (30/50), respectively, and the incidence of treatment related adverse event were 18.4% (9/24), 25.0% (13/52) and 24.0% (12/50), respectively. There were no statistically significant differences in the incidence of treatment emergent adverse event and treatment related adverse event among 3 groups (all P>0.05). Conclusion:The efficacy and safety of anaprazole 40, 60 mg/d, and rabeprazole 20 mg/d in the treatment of RE are comparable.

Objective:To evaluate the efficacy and safety of high-dose injectable dexlansoprazole in the treatment of acute upper gastrointestinal ulcer hemorrhage.Methods:This study was a randomized, double-blind, positive drug parallel controlled, multicenter clinical trial led by the First Affiliated Hospital of Naval Medical University (Shanghai Changhai Hospital), with participation from 43 hospitals such as Yichun People′s Hospital, Army Medical Center of PLA (Chongqing Daping Hospital), etc. From August 31, 2019 to May 25, 2020, 346 patients with upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage caused by acute gastric and (or) duodenal ulcer were selected. The subjects were randomly divided into experimental group and control group according to a 2 to 1 stratification scheme using the SAS 9.4 software. The medication regimen for the experimental group was intravenous injection of dexlansoprazole 30 mg/times, once every 12 h, while the medication regimen for the control group was intravenous injection of lansoprazole and dexlansoprazole mimetics, 30 mg/times, once every 12 h; the treatment course was 5 days. The primary efficacy indicator (72 h effective hemostasis rate), the secondary efficacy indicator(clinical hemostasis rate at 24, 48, and 120 h, and the proportion of subjects who underwent endoscopic treatment or surgical procedures again due to hemorrhage within 5 days), and the incidence of adverse reactions were compared between the 2 groups. Binomial distribution normal approximation method was performed to calculate the 95% confidence interval (95% CI) of the difference in hemostasis rate between the experimental group and the control group. Fisher′s exact test was used for statistical analysis. Results:A total of 329 patients (219 cases in the experimental group and 110 cases in the control group) were enrolled. The 72 h effective hemostasis rate (95% CI) of the experimental and control group was 95.9%(210/219, 92.3% to 98.1%) and 93.6%(103/110, 87.3% to 97.4%), respectively, and the difference was not statistically significant ( P>0.05). The difference in the 72-hour effective hemostasis rate(95% CI) between the experimental and the control group was 2.3% (-3.0% to 7.5%). The clinical hemostasis rates at 24, 48, and 120 h of the treatment were 82.2% (176/214), 99.1%(210/212), and 100.0%(210/210) in the experimental group, and 85.2%(92/108), 98.1%(104/106), and 100.0%(105/105) in the control group, respectively, and the differences were not statistically significant (all P>0.05). The proportion of subjects who underwent endoscopic treatment and surgical procedure again within 5 days (95% CI)of the experimental group and control group was 0 (0 to 1.7%) and 1.9% (0.2% to 6.5%), respectively, and the difference was not statistically significant ( P>0.05). The result of safety evaluation showed that the overall incidence of adverse reactions of the experimental group and the control group was 6.4% (14/219) and 11.8% (13/110), respectively, and the difference was not statistically significant ( P>0.05). Conclusion:High dose injectable dexlansoloprazole is an effective and safe treatment for upper gastrointestinal ulcer hemorrhage, and suitable for clinical application.

随着铜绿假单胞菌（铜绿）的耐药性逐年增强，铜绿感染已经成为公共医疗卫生的重点关注问题。线粒体自噬及其介导的线粒体功能障碍在多种细菌感染中已被报道，但线粒体功能障碍在宿主调控铜绿感染中的作用尚不明确。因此，本研究建立铜绿刺激小鼠巨噬细胞感染模型和小鼠急性铜绿感染模型，探讨铜绿是否通过诱导线粒体自噬改变线粒体功能，进而影响宿主免疫炎症反应和细胞毒性，并通过监测生存率和肺组织病理学变化进一步确定线粒体自噬在小鼠铜绿体内感染模型中的作用。结果表明，铜绿引起小鼠腹腔巨噬细胞线粒体功能障碍，并通过线粒体自噬途径清除铜绿刺激引起的活性氧（ROS）累积，从而抑制铜绿引起的促炎性细胞因子分泌并增强细胞毒性。体内实验进一步确认线粒体自噬在铜绿体内感染中的作用。
Mice ; Animals ; Reactive Oxygen Species/metabolism* ; Pseudomonas aeruginosa ; Macrophages/metabolism* ; Mitochondria ; Cytokines/metabolism*

Objective:To quantify any correlation between the severity of spinal curvature of an adolescent with idiopathic scoliosis and their cardiopulmonary exercise endurance.Methods:The cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET) results and the full-length spinal X-rays in a standing position of 64 adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis were reviewed retrospectively. Independent t-tests were used to compare the two datasets obtained from those with left or right thoracic scoliosis. The correlation between the Cobb angle and cardiopulmonary exercise endurance was analyzed using Pearson correlation coefficients, multiple factor linear regression and two-stage linear regression.Results:After adjusting for gender, age, height and weight, the multiple linear regression analysis showed that the Cobb angle was significantly negatively correlated with maximum tidal volume (β=-0.013) and significantly positively correlated with the rate of respiration (β=0.421). The relationship between the Cobb angle and cardiopulmonary exercise endurance was non-linear. With a Cobb angle > 34°, a 1° increase reduces cardiopulmonary exercise endurance by a factor of 1.4 on average. At smaller Cobb angles the corresponding increase is about 0.87 times.Conclusions:The Cobb angle is a negative predictor of ventilation during exercise among adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis. The more severe a patient′s spinal curvature, the lower the cardiopulmonary exercise endurance is likely to be.

Background::The pharmacokinetic and clinical behaviors of many proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) in peptic ulcer treatment are altered by CYP2C19 genetic polymorphisms. This non-inferiority study evaluated the efficacy and safety of the novel PPI anaprazole compared with rabeprazole. We also explored the influence of Helicobacter pylori ( H. pylori) infection status and CYP2C19 polymorphism on anaprazole. Methods::In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, positive-drug parallel-controlled, phase III study, Chinese patients with duodenal ulcers were randomized 1:1 to receive rabeprazole 10 mg + anaprazole placebo or rabeprazole placebo + anaprazole 20 mg once daily for 4 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was the 4-week ulcer healing rate assessed by blinded independent review. Secondary endpoints were the proportion of patients with improved overall and individual duodenal ulcer symptoms at 4 weeks. Furthermore, exploratory subgroup analysis of the primary endpoint by H. pylori status and CYP2C19 polymorphism was conducted. Adverse events were monitored for safety. Non-inferiority analysis was conducted for the primary endpoint. Results::The study enrolled 448 patients (anaprazole, n = 225; rabeprazole, n = 223). The 4-week healing rates were 90.9% and 93.7% for anaprazole and rabeprazole, respectively (difference, -2.8% [95% confidence interval, -7.7%, 2.2%]), demonstrating non-inferiority of anaprazole to rabeprazole. Overall duodenal ulcer symptoms improved in 90.9% and 92.5% of patients, respectively. Improvement rates of individual symptoms were similar between the groups. Healing rates did not significantly differ by H. pylori status or CYP2C19 genotype for either treatment group. The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was similar for anaprazole (72/220, 32.7%) and rabeprazole (84/219, 38.4%). Conclusions::The efficacy of anaprazole is non-inferior to that of rabeprazole in Chinese patients with duodenal ulcers.Registration::ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04215653.

Objective:To explore the efficacy and safety of intermittent infusion of ilaprazole sodium and high-dose continuous infusion of esomeprazole sodium in preventing rebleeding in patients with peptic ulcer bleeding after successful endoscopic hemostasis.Methods:This is a multi-center, interval randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel controlled study. From March 3rd to June 15th, 2021, 151 patients with high risk of peptic ulcer bleeding and successfully underwent endoscopic hemostasis from 33 hospitals including the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine were enrolled. Patients were interval randomly divided into the trial group (74 cases) and the control group (77 cases). Patients in the trial group received intermittent intravenous infusion of ilaprazole sodium once daily (20 mg administered as a 60 min intravenous infusion on day 1, and 10 mg administered as a 30 min intravenous infusion on day 2 and 3); patients in the control group received continuous intravenous infusion of esomeprazole sodium for 72 h (esomeprazole sodium 80 mg at first dose in half an hour, and 8 mg per hour continuous intravenous infusion for 71.5 h). After intravenous infusion treatment, patients of both groups were given oral ilaprazole enteric-coated tablets, 10 mg each time, once a day for 4 d. The rebleeding rate after 72 h and within 7 d after treatment and the proportion of patients who received endoscopic retreatment or surgery due to rebleeding within 72 h after treatment were analysised based on the full analysis set (72 cases in the trial group and 75 cases in the control group); and the incidence rate of adverse reactions was observed in the two groups based on the safety analysis set (74 cases in the trial group and 76 cases in the control group). Chi-square test or Fisher exact probability test was used for statistical analysis.Results:There was no rebleeding case in the trial group within 72 h and 1 case of rebleeding within 7 d (1.39%, 1/72). In the control group, there was 1 case of rebleeding (1.33%, 1/75) within 72 h and 4 cases of rebleeding (5.33%, 4/75) within 7 d. There was no significant difference in rebleeding rate either after 72 h or within 7 d after treatment between the two groups (both P>0.05). Within 72 h of treatment, no patients in both groups needed endoscopic or surgical retreatment due to rebleeding. Adverse reactions occurred in 5 cases (6.8%, 5/74) and 6 cases (7.9%, 6/76) in the trial group and control group, respectively, which recovered spontaneously without treatment. No serious adverse reactions occurred in both groups. Conclusion:In patients with high-risk peptic ulcer bleeding with successful endoscopic hemostasis, intermittent intravenous infusion of ilaprazole sodium has similar efficacy and safety as continuous high-dose intravenous infusion of esomeprazole sodium, but the dosage of intermitten regimen is less, the administration is more convenient, and it is worthy of clinical promotion.

Objective: To analyze the association between polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons(PAHs)exposure and rheumatoid arthritis(RA)based on large sample data. Methods: The RA patients(RA group)and non-RA patients(non-RA group)with complete data were selected from the National Health and Nutrition Survey Database in the United States(NHANES)(2005—2014). The logistic regression model was used to analyze the association between 8 monohydroxylated(OH-)PAH metabolites in the urine and RA. Results: A total of 357 RA patients and 5, 256 non-RA participants were included.After adjusting the confounding factors by logistic analysis, the level of OH-PAHs mixture at the highest quartile(Q4)was associated with increased risk of RA compared with that at the lowest quartile(Q1)(OR=1.60, 95%CI: 1.16-2.23). For a single kind of OH-PAHs, the Q4 levels of 1-hydroxynaphthalene(OR=1.59, 95%CI: 1.14-2.23), 2-hydroxynaphthalene(OR=1.66, 95%CI: 1.19-2.32), 2-hydroxyfluorene(OR=1.61, 95%CI: 1.17-2.22), 3-hydroxyfluorene(OR=1.64, 95%CI: 1.18-2.27)and 1-hydroxyphenanthrene(OR=1.38, 95%CI: 1.00-1.94)were all associated with significantly increased risk of RA compared with the Q1 level(all P<0.05). However, the Q2 level of 1-hydroxypyrene(OR=0.60, 95%CI: 0.43-0.83)was related to a decreased incidence of RA(P<0.01). Conclusions OH-PAHs mixed exposure is a risk factor for RA.The association between the level of individual OH-PAH and the rate of RA is bidirectional and is depended on the type and concentration of OH-PAHs.