Concurrent with the misbalance of oxidizing agents and antioxidants, high blood pressure is a major physical burden condition in the current scenario. Tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) plays a vital role in the pathogenesis of hypertension. Tumor necrosis factor-α, inhibitor improves clinical symptoms however their outcome on high blood pressure has not been investigated. We investigated the inflammatory marker TNF-α, malondialdehyde (MDA) and ferric reducing antioxidant power (FRAP) in hypertensive patients. We measured randomly blood pressure using an ambulatory observe in hypertensive patients, measured systolic BP X 140 mmHg and/or diastolic BP X 90 mmHg were considered hypertensive. Total 60 cases were considered in the study that involves 30 hypertensive patients and 30 normal control. Measurements of serum concentrations of TNF-α, MDA, FRAP in hypertension patients was done in both the groups. Serum TNF-α was found to be remarkably increased in study subjects as compared to normal group (r=0.32, p<0.0001*). Serum MDA was also raised in hypertensive as compared to control (r=0.99**, p<0.0001*). While Serum FRAP was found to be decreased in hypertensive group in comparison to healthy control (r=0.23, p<0.0001*). It is concluded that high blood pressure leads to generation of oxidative stress with remarkable elevation of TNF-α and malondialdehyde levels. While reduced FRAP indicates its probable role in lipid peroxidation and in the pathogenesis of hypertension.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a major public health concern currently. To date, there are no approved antiviral drugs or vaccines against this transmissible disease. This report sheds light on available information for a better understanding of clinical trials and pharmacotherapy related to COVID-19. MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus databases, Web of Science, WHO, and EU clinical trial sites were used to perform comparative analysis. Information was collected on the use of therapeutic agents for human therapy in patients with COVID-19 up to May 2020. We have extracted data from 60 clinical trials. Amongst these trials, 34 were from the European Union database of clinical trials and 26 from the National Institute of Health. The data selection procedure includes active, completed, and recruitment in progress status. Most of the clinical trials are ongoing and hence, there is a lack of precise results for the treatment.There is a lack of high-quality clinical evidence. The protocol to be developed requires large randomized clinical trials with a combination of available drugs and prospective therapies. We propose the usage of a large number of cases and different statistical analyses to conduct systematic clinical trials. This could provide comprehensive information about the clinical trial and potential therapeutic progress.

Since December 2019, the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) has been a global health concern. The transmission method is human-to-human. Since this second wave of SARS-CoV-2 is more aggressive than the first wave, rapid testing is warranted to use practical diagnostics to break the transfer chain. Currently, various techniques are used to diagnose SARS-CoV-2 infection, each with its own set of advantages and disadvantages. A full review of online databases such as PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Google Scholar was analyzed to identify relevant articles focusing on SARS-CoV-2 and diagnosis and therapeutics. The most recent article search was on May 10, 2021. We summarize promising methods for detecting the novel Coronavirus using sensor-based diagnostic technologies that are sensitive, cost-effective, and simple to use at the point of care. This includes loop-mediated isothermal amplification and several laboratory protocols for confirming suspected 2019-nCoV cases, as well as studies with non-commercial laboratory protocols based on real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction and a field-effect transistor-based bio-sensing device. We discuss a potential discovery that could lead to the mass and targeted SARS-CoV-2 detection needed to manage the COVID-19 pandemic through infection succession and timely therapy.

Introduction Pharmacological asthma management focuses on the use of inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)-containing therapies, which reduce airway inflammation and provide bronchoprotection, improving symptom control and reducing exacerbation risk. ICS underuse due to poor adherence is common, leading to poor clinical outcomes including increased risk of mortality. This article reviews efficacy versus systemic activity profiles for various adherence patterns and dosing regimens of fluticasone furoate (FF)-containing and budesonide (BUD)-containing asthma therapies in clinical trials and real-world studies. Methods We performed a structured literature review (1 January 2000–3 March 2022) and mathematical modelling analysis of FF-containing and BUD-containing regular daily dosing in patients with mild-to-severe asthma, as-needed BUD/formoterol (FOR) in mild asthma, and BUD/FOR maintenance and reliever therapy (MART) dosing in moderate-to-severe asthma, to assess efficacy (bronchoprotection) and systemic activity (cortisol suppression) profiles of dosing patterns of ICS use in multiple adherence scenarios. Results A total of 22 manuscripts were included in full-text review and 18 in the model simulations. Focusing on FF-containing or BUD-containing treatments at comparable adherence rates, regular daily FF or FF/vilanterol (VI) dosing provided more prolonged bronchoprotection and fewer systemic effects than daily BUD, daily BUD/FOR, or BUD/FOR MART dosing, especially in low adherence scenarios. In model simulations and the real-world setting, FF/VI generally provided longer bronchoprotection, lower systemic activity, and greater clinical benefits over BUD/FOR as well as consistently higher adherence. Conclusion In this literature review and modelling analysis, FF/VI was found to show clinical advantages on asthma control over BUD/FOR. These findings have implications for helping clinicians select the most suitable inhaled therapy for their patients with asthma.

It is of interest to document the point-of-care test using heart-type fatty-acid binding protein (H-FABP) in comparison with CK-MB, Troponin T and hsCRP. This is a more sensitive and specific cardiac biomarker than cTnT and CK-MB, and it has a higher diagnostic effectiveness for detecting early acute myocardial infarction (AMI). The case-control study enrolled 220 participants (110 myocardial infarction patients as cases and 110 healthy subjects as control) > 18 years of either sex after ethical clearance and informed consent form. The study conducted was conducted in the OPD and IPD of Medicine and Biochemistry Department at Moti Lal Nehru Medical College and Swaroop Rani Nehru Hospital Prayagraj, Uttar Pradesh; Index Medical College & Hospital, Malwanchal University, India. The amount of H-FABP, CKMB and cTnT was measured using the Sandwich ELISA method and hs-CRP was evaluated using the immune-turbidimetry method. H-FABP correlation with selected markers (CK-MB, hs CRP and TnT) and CK-MB was significant. A positive correlation (r=0.2 to 0.29) was found when H-FABP was compared with CK-MB (p<0.05). Similar positive correlation was found in CK-MB with cTnT. H-FABP is a useful cardiac marker for the early diagnosis of young AMI and thus prediction of myocardial injury is possible. H-FABP compared with CK-MB showed positive correlation. CK-MB with cTnT also showed statistically significant relation. Thus, H-FABP and CK-MB, as well as the correlation between CK-MB and TnT, reflects utility in early-stage diagnosis of myocardial injury.