Background: The positive effects of ozone therapy have been described in many gastrointestinal disorders. The mechanisms of this positive effect of ozone therapy are poorly understood. The purpose of the present study was to investigate whether the use of ozone may potentiate the gut intestinal mucosal homeostasis in a rat model.
Methods: Adult rats weighing 250–280 g were randomly assigned to one of three experimental groups of 8 rats each: 1) Control rats were given 2 ml of water by gavage and intraperitoneally (IP) for 5 days; 2) O3-PO rats were treated with 2 ml of ozone/oxygen mixture by gavage and 2 ml of water IP for 5 days; 3) O3-IP rats were treated with 2 ml of water by gavage and 2 ml of ozone/oxygen mixture IP for 5 days. Rats were sacrificed on day 6. Bowel and mucosal weight, mucosal DNA and protein, villus height and crypt depth, and cell proliferation and apoptosis were evaluated following sacrifice.
Results: The group of O3-IP rats demonstrated a greater jejunal and ileal villus height and crypt depth, a greater enterocyte proliferation index in jejunum, and lower enterocyte apoptosis in ileum compared to control animals. Oral administration of the ozone/oxygen mixture resulted in a less significant effect on cell turnover.
Conclusions: Treatment with an ozone/oxygen mixture stimulates intestinal cell turnover in a rat. Intraperitoneal administration of ozone resulted in a more significant intestinal trophic effect than oral administration.
Harnessing the immune system to recognize and destroy tumor cells has been the central goal of anti-cancer immunotherapy. In recent years, there has been an increased interest in optimizing this technology in order to make it a clinically feasible treatment. One of the main treatment modalities within cancer immunotherapy has been adoptive T cell therapy (ACT). Using this approach, tumor-specific cytotoxic T cells are infused into cancer patients with the goal of recognizing, targeting, and destroying tumor cells. In the current review, we revisit some of the major successes of ACT, the major hurdles that have been overcome to optimize ACT, the remaining challenges, and future approaches to make ACT widely available.
Objective: To assess the association between normal CA125 levels at diagnosis of epithelial ovarian carcinoma (EOC) with prognostic factors and with outcome.
Methods: The study group consisted of histologically confirmed EOC patients with normal pretreatment CA125 levels, and the controls consisted of EOC patients with elevated (≥35 U/mL) pretreatment CA125 levels, diagnosed and treated between 1995 and 2012. Study and control group patients fulfilled the following criteria: 1) their pretreatment CA125 levels were assessed; 2) they had full standard primary treatment, i.e. cytoreductive surgery and cisplatin-based chemotherapy; and 3) they were followed every 2–4 months during the first two years and every 4–6 months thereafter.
Results: Of 114 EOC patients who fulfilled the inclusion criteria, 22 (19.3%) had normal pretreatment CA125 levels. The control group consisted of the remaining 92 patients with ≥35 U/mL serum CA125 levels pretreatment. The proportion of patients with early-stage and low-grade disease, with optimal cytoreduction, and with platin-sensitive tumors was significantly higher in the study group than in the control group. The progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were significantly higher in the study group than in the control group on univariate analysis but not on multivariate analysis.
Conclusion: It seems that a normal CA125 level at diagnosis in EOC may also be of prognostic significance for the individual patient.
Otto Heinrich Warburg (1883–1970; not to be confused with the Zionist of the same name) was a member of an illustrious Jewish family, known for some five centuries. From humble beginnings, the family became prominent in the world for their contributions to all aspects of society. The son of a German mother and a Jewish (converted) father, Otto H. Warburg became a major contributor to medical science in the field of cancer research. Considered for Nobel Prize more than once, he finally received it in 1931 for his discovery of the nature and mode of action of the cellular respiratory enzyme. Warburg’s personality was controversial: he was intolerant of opposing scientific views yet tolerant toward Nazi abuses. Accused of collaboration under the Nazi regime, Otto H. Warburg was nevertheless readmitted to the global scientific community after World War II. His contribution to cancer research remains influential to this day and has been superseded by discoveries that have built upon his work.
This paper presents the full debate held on October 1, 2014, which focused on the following resolution: “Publications which promote political agendas have no place in scientific and medical journals, and academics should refrain from publishing in such journals.”
The debate moderator was Professor Shimon Glick. Taking the pro stance was Professor A. Mark Clarfield; the con stance was held by Professor Rael D. Strous. Following the first part of the debate, Dr Richard Horton, Editor-in-Chief of The Lancet, gave his thoughts on the topic. This was followed by the opportunity for rebuttal by Professors Clarfield and Strous. The debate was summarized and closed by Professor Glick.
This paper provides a slightly edited text of the debate, for ease of reading.
In August of 2014, Manduca P et al. published “An open letter for the people in Gaza” in The Lancet. This letter was the response of those authors to their perspective of what was happening in Gaza during the summer-long conflict between Israel and Gaza. Israel was finally responding to years of bombardment from Gaza into civilian areas in the south of Israel. Two of the authors of the letters were known anti-Semites, and held connections with David Duke, a former Ku Klux Klan Grand Wizard in Louisiana and advocate of Nazism. Both these authors expressed sympathy and support for Duke’s rabidly anti-Jewish positions. In their letter they accused Israel’s medical community of complicity in committing terrible atrocities and even implied that chemical warfare was being used by Israel.
This paper is provided for the convenience of our readers and represents a full edited transcription of the Rambam Grand Rounds Lecture by Dr. Richard Horton, Editor-in-Chief of The Lancet. The lecture was given on October 2, 2014. The Editorial Board wishes to express its gratitude to Dr. Horton for giving permission to present his Rambam Grand Rounds lecture in Rambam Maimonides Medical Journal, in both the original video format and in this printed form.
In both primary care and consultative practices, patients presenting with fibromyalgia (FM) often have other medically unexplained somatic symptoms and are ultimately diagnosed as having central sensitization (CS). Central sensitization encompasses many disorders where the central nervous system amplifies sensory input across many organ systems and results in myriad symptoms. A pragmatic approach to evaluate FM and related symptoms, including a focused review of medical records, interviewing techniques, and observations, is offered here, giving valuable tools for identifying and addressing the most relevant symptoms. At the time of the clinical evaluation, early consideration of CS may improve the efficiency of the visit, reduce excessive testing, and help in discerning between typical and atypical cases so as to avoid an inaccurate diagnosis. Discussion of pain and neurophysiology and sensitization often proves helpful.
The Jewish principle concerning a decision with regard to a dangerous treatment is as following: A patient who is estimated to die within 12 months because of a fatal illness is permitted to undergo a treatment that on the one hand may extend his life beyond 12 months, but on the other hand may hasten his death. There are, however, several limitations to this ruling related to the chances of success with the proposed treatment, the nature of the treatment, whether it is intended to be curative or merely to postpone the danger and death, whether the treatment is absolutely necessary, and others. One is not obligated to undergo a dangerous treatment, but one is permitted to do so. The permissibility to forfeit a short life expectancy in order to achieve more prolonged life applies only with the patient’s consent. That consent is valid and is not considered a form of attempted suicide. Neither is a refusal to submit to treatment considered an act of suicide; the patient has the right to refuse a dangerous procedure. In all situations where a permissive ruling is granted for a patient to endanger his short life expectancy, the ruling should be arrived at after careful reflection and with the approval of the rabbinic authorities acting on the recommendation of the most expert physicians.
The “curative potential” in almost any clinical setting depends on a caregiver establishing and maintaining an empathic connection with patients so as to achieve “narrative competence” in discerning and acting in accord with their preferences and best interests. The “narrative medicine” model of shared “close reading of literature and reflective writing” among clinicians as a means of fostering a capacity for clinical empathy has gained validation with recent empirical studies demonstrating the enhancement of theory of mind (ToM), broadly conceived as empathy, in readers of literary fiction. Talmudic legends, like that of Rabbi Judah’s death, are under-appreciated, relevant sources of literary fiction for these efforts. The limitations of narrative medicine are readily counterbalanced by simultaneously practiced attention to traditional bioethical principles, including—especially—beneficence, non-maleficence, and autonomy.
