Drugs based on peptides and proteins (PPs) have been widely used in medicine, beginning with insulin therapy in patients with diabetes mellitus over a century ago. Although the oral route of drug administration is the preferred one by the vast majority of patients and improves compliance, medications of this kind due to their specific chemical structure are typically delivered parenterally, which ensures optimal bioavailability. In order to overcome issues connected with oral absorption of PPs such as their instability depending on digestive enzymes and pH changes in the gastrointestinal (GI) system on the one hand, but also their limited permeability across physiological barriers (mucus and epithelium) on the other hand, scientists have been strenuously searching for novel delivery methods enabling peptide and protein drugs (PPDs) to be administered enterally. These include utilization of different nanoparticles, transport channels, substances enhancing permeation, chemical modifications, hydrogels, microneedles, microemulsion, proteolytic enzyme inhibitors, and cell-penetrating peptides, all of which are extensively discussed in this review. Furthermore, this article highlights oral PP therapeutics both previously used in therapy and currently available on the medical market.

Obesity is a chronic disease caused primarily by the imbalance between the amount of calories supplied to the body and energy expenditure. Not only does it deteriorate the quality of life, but most importantly it increases the risk of cardiovascular diseases and the development of type 2 diabetes mellitus, leading to reduced life expectancy. In this review, we would like to present the molecular pathomechanisms underlying obesity, which constitute the target points for the action of anti-obesity medications. These include the central nervous system, brain–gut–microbiome axis, gastrointestinal motility, and energy expenditure. A significant part of this article is dedicated to incretin-based drugs such as GLP-1 receptor agonists (e.g., liraglutide and semaglutide), as well as the brand new dual GLP-1 and GIP receptor agonist tirzepatide, all of which have become “block-buster” drugs due to their effectiveness in reducing body weight and beneficial effects on the patient’s metabolic profile. Finally, this review article highlights newly designed molecules with the potential for future obesity management that are the subject of ongoing clinical trials.

Modern oncological therapy utilizes various types of immunotherapy. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), chimeric antigen receptor T cells (CAR-T) therapy, cancer vaccines, tumor-targeting monoclonal antibodies (TT-mAbs), bispecific antibodies and cytokine therapy improve patients’ outcomes. However, stimulation of the immune system, beneficial in terms of fighting against cancer, generates the risk of harm to other cells in a patient’s body. Kidney damage belongs to the relatively rare adverse events (AEs). Best described, but still, superficially, are renal AEs in patients treated with ICIs. International guidelines issued by the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) and the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) cover the management of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) during ICI therapy. There are fewer data concerning real occurrence and possible presentations of renal adverse drug reactions of other immunotherapeutic methods. This implies the need for the collection of safety data during ongoing clinical trials and in the real-life world to characterize the hazard related to the use of new immunotherapies and management of irAEs.

Modern oncological therapy utilizes various types of immunotherapy. Immune checkpoint inhib-itors (ICIs), chimeric antigen receptor T cells (CAR-T) therapy, cancer vaccines and bispecific an-tibodies are improving patients’ outcomes. However, stimulation of the immune system, benefi-cial in terms of fighting against cancer, generates the risk of harm to other cells in a patient's body. Kidney damage belongs to the relatively rare adverse events (AEs). Best described, but still, su-perficially, are renal AEs in patients treated with ICIs. International guidelines issued by Euro-pean Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) and American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) cover the management of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) during ICI therapy. There are scarce data concerning renal adverse drug reactions of other immunotherapeutic methods. This implicates the need for the collection of safety data during ongoing clinical trials and in the re-al-life world to characterize the hazard related to the use of new immunotherapies and manage-ment of irAEs.

Pharmacotherapy is a key component of obesity management, yet treatment failure remains a prevalent challenge in clinical practice. Such failure may present as insufficient pharmacological response, early discontinuation, or post-treatment weight regain, underscoring the discrepancy between clinical trial efficacy and real-world outcomes. The effectiveness of anti-obesity medications (AOMs) is influenced by psychiatric comorbidities, including depression, anxiety, and disordered eating patterns, as well as environmental and socioeconomic factors such as limited healthcare access, weight-related stigma, and high medication costs. Individual characteristics, including physical activity, body composition, visceral adiposity, and microbiome profile, further modulate treatment outcomes. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacotherapeutic limitations such as drug-phenotype mismatch, route of administration, suboptimal formulations, and exposure to counterfeit products also compromise efficacy. No less important are genetic and immunological factors, comprising pharmacogenomic variants of both incretin and melanocortin receptors along with antidrug antibodies (ADAs), which may constitute therapy resistance. Concomitant medications and comorbid endocrine disorders can additionally attenuate weight-loss effects. The objective of this review is to characterize the multifactorial nature of resistance and refractoriness to anti-obesity therapy, and the importance of identifying pretreatment predictive factors for recognizing individuals at risk of inadequate or lack of response, thereby enabling personalized management strategies and improving long-term clinical outcomes, particularly in “difficult-to-treat” patients.

Wstęp: Maślan sodu jest związkiem chemicznym, któremu przypisuje się liczne korzystne właściwości biologiczne, w tym zdolność łagodzenia objawów chorób przewodu pokarmowego. W konsekwencji stał się on częstym składnikiem terapii wspomagających. Wszystkie doustne preparaty zawierające maślan sodu dostępne na polskim rynku są jednak zarejestrowane jako suplementy diety, a żaden z nich nie posiada statusu produktu leczniczego, co może budzić wątpliwości dotyczące ich jakości. Materiał i metody: Maślan sodu z ośmiu różnych suplementów diety dostępnych na polskim rynku w kwietniu 2024 r. został wyekstrahowany z użyciem eteru dietylowego. Następnie eter odparowano, a pozostałość rozpuszczono w metanolu w celu przeprowadzenia wysokosprawnej chromatografii cieczowej (high-performance liquid chromatography – HPLC). Otrzymane roztwory przepuszczono przez kolumnę chromatograficzną, aby oznaczyć dokładną zawartość maślanu sodu w każdej próbce. Uzyskane piki porównano ze wzorcami i finalnie obliczono zawartość maślanu sodu w poszczególnych próbkach. Wyniki: Zawartość maślanu sodu wykryto we wszystkich analizowanych próbkach. Jednak stosunek ilości oznaczonej do deklarowanej przez producenta wahał się od 45.51% do 106.15%. Wnioski: W większości przypadków analizowane suplementy diety zawierały maślan sodu w ilościach zbliżonych do deklarowanych przez producentów, jednak zgodność z deklaracją producenta różniła się pomiędzy konkretnymi produktami, co podkreśla konieczność dalszych badań w tym zakresie.