scholarly journals AB0953 CANNABINOIDS: FRIEND OR FOE OR A BYSTANDER?

2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1774.2-1774
Author(s):  
N. Jain ◽  
N. Reddy ◽  
A. Moorthy
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Complementary Medicine ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Primary Care Physicians ◽  
Therapeutic Potential ◽  
Current Therapy ◽  
Common Diagnosis ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Ongoing Pain ◽  
Primary Physicians

Background:Cannabinoids has recently gained popularity for use in chronic pain. There is a lot of inquisitiveness among our patients wherein health care professionals are asked about its efficacy, side effects and sometimes even ask for a prescription! As there is paucity of data and research about its use in rheumatology, patient reported outcome(PROM) can guide ahead in expanding our knowledge and experience.Objectives:To study usage of cannabinoids by rheumatology patientsTo study awareness among primary physicians regarding Cannabinoid usage in rheumatology.Methods:Cross sectional survey with two arms. Arm 1 Information from patients attending tertiary rheumatology clinic,including perception regarding the use of Cannabinoids.Arm 2 consisted of collecting data via web-based survey with20-question from 100 GPs of Leicestershire. Questions on demographics, perspectives on and knowledge of cannabinoid use. Statistical analysis SPSS software.Results:Arm1 Total 102 rheumatology patients with 60%were females and 45% secondary education. 48% were unemployed. 75% Caucasians, 18% Asians. RA most common diagnosis followed by OA and FMS. 40 % depression and anxiety in addition to Rheumatic disease. 94% reported ongoing pain with 6-8 on a VAS scale. 79% were satisfied with their current therapy. 65% had heard about complementary medicine and 15% reported using cannabinoids.Most common form Cannabinoids oil 60% followed by smoking 20%. 56% reported using >3 months and majority 72% use daily. Median age 55 years. 88% users Caucasians. Mean disease duration 6.25 years among users indicates chronicity of disease has a direct proportion in usage. All users had ongoing pain of 7 on VAS. 87% believed it helps them managing pain effectively with a pain free state. On an average spends between 50-100 pounds per week. More than half believe cannabinoids should be available as a prescription drug in NHS and 30% interested to know more about it.In Arm 2 consisting of Primary care physicians, response rate 50%. Average clinical experience 5 years. Only 20% heard about usage of complementary medicine by rheumatology patient. Most replied that 10% of their patients use Cannabinoids for pain management. Most did not believe use of cannabinoids benefited the patients. Only 4% recommend its usage. 25% think it should be available as prescription. 40% experienced patients asking about cannabinoids during appointment. 88% of respondents did not know much about cannabinoid usage in rheumatology and have never prescribed it in their practice.Conclusion:Cannabinoids widely used by the rheumatology patients with PROM favouring its efficacy for control of chronic pain. Preclinical data suggest that cannabinoids might have a therapeutic potential RA1, OA, FMS2. Clinical data regarding cannabinoid treatment for rheumatic diseases are scarce, therefore, recommendations concerning cannabinoid treatment cannot be made. All patients who reported using it suffered from moderate to severe chronic pain. Thus main indication of usage was pain rather than recreational purpose. Although a small survey it clearly highlights lack of knowledge among primary physicians. These results emphasise the need for further research regarding the benefits and risks of cannabinoids in rheumatology.References:[1]RichardsonD. etal Characterisation ofthe cannabinoid receptor system in synovial tissue andfluid in patients with OA and RA Arthritis Res.Ther. 10, R43 (2008).[2]Walitt, B etal Cannabinoids for fibromyalgia. Cochrane DatabaseSyst. Rev. 7, CD011694 (2016).Disclosure of Interests:Nibha Jain: None declared, Neelima Reddy: None declared, Arumugam Moorthy Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Novartis,UCB,MSD

Navigating the health care system: perceptions of patients with chronic pain

2009 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 162-168
Author(s):  
AL Dewar ◽  
K Gregg ◽  
MI White ◽  
J Lander
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Health Care System ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Primary Care Physicians ◽  
Treatment Compliance ◽  
Care Utilization ◽  
Semistructured Interviews ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Care System

A new framework is needed for patients with chronic pain and their primary care physicians that acknowledges the individual’s experiences and provides evidence-informed education and better linkages to community-based resources. This study describes the experience of 19 chronic-pain sufferers who seek relief via the health care system. Their experiences were recorded through in-depth semistructured interviews and analyzed through qualitative methods. The participants reported early optimism, then disillusionment, and finally acceptance of living with chronic pain. Both individuals with chronic pain and their health care professionals need evidence-informed resources and information on best practices to assist them to manage pain. Empathetic communication between health care professionals and individuals with chronic pain is crucial because insensitive communication negatively affects the individual, reduces treatment compliance and increases health care utilization.

scholarly journals Chronic Pain in Canada: Have We Improved Our Management of Chronic Noncancer Pain?

2007 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-47 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aline Boulanger ◽  
Alexander J Clark ◽  
Pamela Squire ◽  
Edward Cui ◽  
GLA Horbay
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Primary Care Physicians ◽  
Survey Methodology ◽  
Treatment Success ◽  
Regional Distribution ◽  
Standards Of Care ◽  
Computer Assisted ◽  
Chronic Noncancer Pain ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Noncancer Pain

BACKGROUND: Chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) is a global issue, not only affecting individual suffering, but also impacting the delivery of health care and the strength of local economies.OBJECTIVES: The current study (the Canadian Chronic Pain Study II [CCPSII]) was designed to assess any changes in the prevalence and treatment of CNCP, as well as in attitudes toward the use of strong analgesics, compared with a 2001 study (the CCPSI), and to provide a snapshot of the current standards of care for pain management in Canada.METHODS: Standard, computer-assisted telephone interview survey methodology was applied in two segments, ie, a general population survey and a survey targeting randomly selected primary care physicians (PCPs) who treat moderate to severe CNCP.RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: The patient-reported prevalence of CNCP within Canada has not markedly changed since 2001 but the duration of suffering has decreased. There have been minor changes in regional distribution and generally more patients receive medical treatment, which includes prescription analgesics. Physicians continue to demonstrate opiophobia in their prescribing practices; however, although this is lessened relating to addiction, abuse remains an important concern to PCPs. Canadian PCPs, in general, are implementing standard assessments, treatment approaches, evaluation of treatment success and tools to prevent abuse and diversion, in accordance with guidelines from the Canadian Pain Society and other pain societies globally, although there remains room for improvement and standardization.

Collecting patient reported outcomes to facilitate prescription opioid management: Development and testing of the Opioid Management App (OM-App) (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jessica Robinson-Papp ◽  
Gabriela Cedillo ◽  
Richa Deshpande ◽  
Mary Catherine George ◽  
Qiuchen Yang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Pain Intensity ◽  
Risk Behaviors ◽  
Digital Health ◽  
Monitoring Program ◽  
Prescription Opioid ◽  
Research Database ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Study Duration ◽  
Patient Reported

BACKGROUND Collecting patient-reported data needed by clinicians to adhere to opioid prescribing guidelines represents a significant time burden. OBJECTIVE We developed and tested an opioid management app (OM-App) to collect these data directly from patients. METHODS OM-App used a pre-existing digital health platform to deliver daily questions to patients via text-message and organize responses into a dashboard. We pilot tested OM-App over 9 months in 40 diverse participants with HIV who were prescribed opioids for chronic pain. Feasibility outcomes included: ability to export/integrate OM-App data with other research data; patient-reported barriers and adherence to OM-App use; capture of opioid-related harms, risk behaviors and pain intensity/interference; comparison of OM-App data to urine drug testing, prescription drug monitoring program data, and validated questionnaires. RESULTS OM-App data was exported/integrated into the research database after minor modifications. Thirty-nine of 40 participants were able to use OM-App, and over the study duration 70% of all OM-App questions were answered. Although the cross-sectional prevalence of opioid-related harms and risk behaviors reported via OM-App was low, some of these were not obtained via the other measures, and over the study duration all queried harms/risks were reported at least once via OM-App. Clinically meaningful changes in pain intensity/interference were captured. CONCLUSIONS OM-App was used by our diverse patient population to produce clinically relevant opioid- and pain-related data, which was successfully exported and integrated into a research database. These findings suggest that OM-App may be a useful tool for remote monitoring of patients prescribed opioids for chronic pain. CLINICALTRIAL NCT03669939 INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT RR2-doi:10.1016/j.conctc.2019.100468

scholarly journals Adaptive mechanisms driving maladaptive pain: how chronic ongoing activity in primary nociceptors can enhance evolutionary fitness after severe injury

2019 ◽  
Vol 374 (1785) ◽  
pp. 20190277 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edgar T. Walters
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Motor Impairment ◽  
Low Frequency ◽  
Severe Injury ◽  
Ongoing Activity ◽  
Pain Mechanisms ◽  
Bodily Injury ◽  
Adaptive Mechanisms ◽  
Survival And Reproduction ◽  
Ongoing Pain

Chronic pain is considered maladaptive by clinicians because it provides no apparent protective or recuperative benefits. Similarly, evolutionary speculations have assumed that chronic pain represents maladaptive or evolutionarily neutral dysregulation of acute pain mechanisms. By contrast, the present hypothesis proposes that chronic pain can be driven by mechanisms that evolved to reduce increased vulnerability to attack from predators and aggressive conspecifics, which often target prey showing physical impairment after severe injury. Ongoing pain and anxiety persisting long after severe injury continue to enhance vigilance and behavioural caution, decreasing the heightened vulnerability to attack that results from motor impairment and disfigurement, thereby increasing survival and reproduction (fitness). This hypothesis is supported by evidence of animals surviving and reproducing after traumatic amputations, and by complex specializations that enable primary nociceptors to detect local and systemic signs of injury and inflammation, and to maintain low-frequency discharge that can promote ongoing pain indefinitely. Ongoing activity in nociceptors involves intricate electrophysiological and anatomical specializations, including inducible alterations in the expression of ion channels and receptors that produce persistent hyperexcitability and hypersensitivity to chemical signals of injury. Clinically maladaptive chronic pain may sometimes result from the recruitment of this powerful evolutionary adaptation to severe bodily injury. This article is part of the Theo Murphy meeting issue ‘Evolution of mechanisms and behaviour important for pain’.

scholarly journals Healthcare Provider Perspectives on Bipolar I Disorder Screening and the Rapid Mood Screener (RMS), a Pragmatic, New Tool

CNS Spectrums ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 181-183
Author(s):  
Michael E. Thase ◽  
Stephen M. Stahl ◽  
Roger S. McIntyre ◽  
Tina Matthews-Hayes ◽  
Mehul Patel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Depressive Symptoms ◽  
Nurse Practitioners ◽  
Primary Care Physicians ◽  
Screening Tool ◽  
Positive Impact ◽  
Screening Tools ◽  
Predictive Values ◽  
Bipolar I Disorder ◽  
Provider Perspectives ◽  
Patient Reported

AbstractIntroductionAlthough mania is the hallmark symptom of bipolar I disorder (BD-I), most patients initially present for treatment with depressive symptoms. Misdiagnosis of BD-I as major depressive disorder (MDD) is common, potentially resulting in poor outcomes and inappropriate antidepressant monotherapy treatment. Screening patients with depressive symptoms is a practical strategy to help healthcare providers (HCPs) identify when additional assessment for BD-I is warranted. The new 6-item Rapid Mood Screener (RMS) is a pragmatic patient-reported BD-I screening tool that relies on easily understood terminology to screen for manic symptoms and other BD-I features in <2 minutes. The RMS was validated in an observational study in patients with clinically confirmed BD-I (n=67) or MDD (n=72). When 4 or more items were endorsed (“yes”), the sensitivity of the RMS for identifying patients with BP-I was 0.88 and specificity was 0.80; positive and negative predictive values were 0.80 and 0.88, respectively. To more thoroughly understand screening tool use among HCPs, a 10-minute survey was conducted.MethodsA nationwide sample of HCPs (N=200) was selected using multiple HCP panels; HCPs were asked to describe their opinions/current use of screening tools, assess the RMS, and evaluate the RMS versus the widely recognized Mood Disorder Questionnaire (MDQ). Results were reported by grouped specialties (primary care physicians, general nurse practitioners [NPs]/physician assistants [PAs], psychiatrists, and psychiatric NPs/PAs). Included HCPs were in practice <30 years, spent at least 75% of their time in clinical practice, saw at least 10 patients with depression per month, and diagnosed MDD or BD in at least 1 patient per month. Findings were reported using descriptive statistics; statistical significance was reported at the 95% confidence interval.ResultsAmong HCPs, 82% used a tool to screen for MDD, while 32% used a tool for BD. Screening tool attributes considered to be of the greatest value included sensitivity (68%), easy to answer questions (66%), specificity (65%), confidence in results (64%), and practicality (62%). Of HCPs familiar with screening tools, 70% thought the RMS was at least somewhat better than other screening tools. Most HCPs were aware of the MDQ (85%), but only 29% reported current use. Most HCPs (81%) preferred the RMS to the MDQ, and the RMS significantly outperformed the MDQ across valued attributes; 76% reported that they were likely to use the RMS to screen new patients with depressive symptoms. A total of 84% said the RMS would have a positive impact on their practice, with 46% saying they would screen more patients for bipolar disorder.DiscussionThe RMS was viewed positively by HCPs who participated in a brief survey. A large percentage of respondents preferred the RMS over the MDQ and indicated that they would use it in their practice. Collectively, responses indicated that the RMS is likely to have a positive impact on screening behavior.FundingAbbVie Inc.

scholarly journals Reference programme: diagnosis and treatment of headache disorders and facial pain. Danish Headache Society, 3rd edition, 2020

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Henrik W. Schytz ◽  
Faisal M. Amin ◽  
Rigmor H. Jensen ◽  
Louise Carlsen ◽  
Stine Maarbjerg ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Primary Care Physicians ◽  
Facial Pain ◽  
Common Interest ◽  
Diagnosis And Treatment ◽  
Primary Headaches ◽  
Secondary Headache ◽  
Great Success ◽  
Headache Disorders

AbstractHeadache and facial pain are among the most common, disabling and costly diseases in Europe, which demands for high quality health care on all levels within the health system. The role of the Danish Headache Society is to educate and advocate for the needs of patients with headache and facial pain. Therefore, the Danish Headache Society has launched a third version of the guideline for the diagnosis, organization and treatment of the most common types of headaches and facial pain in Denmark. The second edition was published in Danish in 2010 and has been a great success, but as new knowledge and treatments have emerged it was timely to revise the guideline. The recommendations for the primary headaches and facial pain are largely in accordance with the European guidelines produced by the European Academy of Neurology. The guideline should be used a practical tool for use in daily clinical practice for primary care physicians, neurologists with a common interest in headache, as well as other health-care professionals treating headache patients. The guideline first describes how to examine and diagnose the headache patient and how headache treatment is organized in Denmark. This description is followed by sections on the characteristics, diagnosis and treatment of each of the most common primary and secondary headache disorders and trigeminal neuralgia. The guideline includes many tables to facilitate a quick overview. Finally, the particular challenges regarding migraine and female hormones as well as headache in children are addressed.

scholarly journals POS0128 PHYSICIAN AND PATIENT PERCEPTIONS OF SURGICAL PROCEDURES FOR KNEE OA ACROSS JAPAN, THE US AND 5 EU COUNTRIES: RESULTS OF A REAL-WORLD STUDY

2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 275.2-276
Author(s):  
N. Fukui ◽  
P. G. Conaghan ◽  
K. Togo ◽  
N. Ebata ◽  
L. Abraham ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Surgical Procedures ◽  
Primary Care Physicians ◽  
Total Joint Replacement ◽  
Functional Improvement ◽  
Published Data ◽  
Knee Oa ◽  
Obesity And Diabetes ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
The Us ◽  
Effective Option

Background:Patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA) who do not achieve adequate pain relief and functional improvement with a combination of non-pharmacologic and pharmacologic therapies are recommended an arthroplasty as an effective option to relieve severe pain and functional limitations. However, some patients are reluctant to undergo surgical interventions, and clinicians may choose to avoid or delay surgery due to safety risks and/or the financial cost. It is of interest to understand if the use and perception of surgery differs between countries, however, few published data exist.Objectives:To demonstrate how surgery and the use of surgical procedures differs across Japan, United States of America (US) and 5 major European countries (EU5) and to evaluate patient perception towards surgery.Methods:Data were drawn from the Adelphi OA Disease Specific Programme (2017-18), a point-in-time survey of primary care physicians (PCP), rheumatologists (rheums), orthopaedic surgeons (orthos) and their OA patients. Patients with physician-diagnosed knee OA were included and segmented into two categories: had previous surgery (PS) and never had surgery (NS). A Fisher’s exact test was performed on the two groups. Physicians reported on patient demographics; whether patients had undergone surgery; type of surgery; success of surgery; how success was defined; and reasons for wanting to delay surgery. Patients reported their willingness to undergo surgery; reasons for not wanting surgery; how successful their surgery was; and how they defined this success.Results:Physician/patient reported data were available for 302,230 (Japan), 527,283 (US) and 1487,726 (EU5) patients with diagnosed knee OA. Patients were categorised by their physicians as mild (40% Japan; 34% US; 24% EU5), moderate (49% Japan; 49% US; 56% EU5) or severe (9% Japan; 17% US; 19% EU5). Patients in Japan were more likely to be female (78% vs 54% US; 58% EU5), older (73 vs 65 US; 66 EU5) and have a lower BMI than patients in the US and EU5. Obesity and diabetes were much less prevalent among patients in Japan. One in ten patients in Japan had undergone a surgery (10%), far fewer than in the US (22%) or EU5 (17%). When surgery was performed, this was more likely to be a total joint replacement (TJR) in Japan, whereas in the EU and US, arthroscopic washout was more commonly performed.For over half of Japanese patients (56%), successful surgery was more likely to be defined as having no more pain (vs. 35% US; 14% EU5). Improved mobility and a reduction in pain were also commonly reported reasons. Physicians (in each region) were more likely to suggest pain reduction, rather than no pain, and improved mobility as markers of success. Patients in Japan were much more likely to say they would not agree to surgery if recommended by their doctor, or were unsure (84% vs. 68% US; 62% EU5). The main reason for patient reluctance in Japan was fear of surgery, whereas in the US and EU5 the main reason given was that surgery was not needed. This finding was also evident among physicians in Japan, who frequently reported that patient reluctance was a key reason for delaying surgery. Physicians in Japan, do however, report that patient request was one of their main triggers for recommending surgery (45% vs 20% US; 16% EU5).Conclusion:Although surgery can be an effective option for those with OA who have exhausted other treatment options, some patients are reluctant to undergo surgery out of fear, especially in Japan, possibly due to the higher patient age. Physicians aiming to delay surgery were driven by patient reluctance in Japan, whereas cost to patient was a bigger factor in the US and EU5. The higher level of TJR vs. other surgery options among patients in Japan may suggest physicians are looking for higher levels of efficacy.Disclosure of Interests:Naoshi Fukui Speakers bureau: Pfizer, Consultant of: Pfizer, Philip G Conaghan Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Novartis, Consultant of: AstraZeneca, BMS, Eli Lilly, EMD Serono, Flexion Therapeutics, Galapagos, Gilead, Novartis, Pfizer, Kanae Togo Shareholder of: Pfizer, Employee of: Pfizer, Nozomi Ebata Shareholder of: Pfizer, Employee of: Pfizer, Lucy Abraham Shareholder of: Pfizer, Employee of: Pfizer, James Jackson: None declared, Jessica Jackson: None declared, Mia Berry: None declared, Hemant Pandit Paid instructor for: Bristol Myers Squibb, Consultant of: Johnson and Johnson, Grant/research support from: GSK

scholarly journals An interview study to determine the experiences of cellulitis diagnosis amongst health care professionals in the UK

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (10) ◽  
pp. e034692
Author(s):  
Mitesh Patel ◽  
Siang Ing Lee ◽  
Nick J Levell ◽  
Peter Smart ◽  
Joe Kai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Features ◽  
Clinical Experience ◽  
Lower Limb ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Secondary Outcome ◽  
Snowball Sampling ◽  
Acute Medicine ◽  
Common Diagnosis ◽  
The Uk ◽  
National Networks

ObjectivesTo explore healthcare professionals (HCPs) experiences and challenges in diagnosing suspected lower limb cellulitis.SettingUK nationwide.Participants20 qualified HCPs, who had a minimum of 2 years clinical experience as an HCP in the national health service and had managed a clinical case of suspected cellulitis of the lower limb in the UK. HCPs were recruited from departments of dermatology (including a specialist cellulitis clinic), general practice, tissue viability, lymphoedema services, general surgery, emergency care and acute medicine. Purposive sampling was employed to ensure that participants included consultant doctors, trainee doctors and nurses across the specialties listed above. Participants were recruited through national networks, HCPs who contributed to the cellulitis priority setting partnership, UK Dermatology Clinical Trials Network, snowball sampling where participants helped recruit other participants and personal networks of the authors.Primary and secondary outcomesPrimary outcome was to describe the key clinical features which inform the diagnosis of lower limb cellulitis. Secondary outcome was to explore the difficulties in making a diagnosis of lower limb cellulitis.ResultsThe presentation of lower limb cellulitis changes as the episode runs its course. Therefore, different specialties see clinical features at varying stages of cellulitis. Clinical experience is essential to being confident in making a diagnosis, but even among experienced HCPs, there were differences in the clinical rationale of diagnosis. A group of core clinical features were suggested, many of which overlapped with alternative diagnoses. This emphasises how the diagnosis is challenging, with objective aids and a greater understanding of the mimics of cellulitis required.ConclusionCellulitis is a complex diagnosis and has a variable clinical presentation at different stages. Although cellulitis is a common diagnosis to make, HCPs need to be mindful of alternative diagnoses.

The therapeutic potential of Nrf2 inducers in chronic pain: Evidence from preclinical studies

2021 ◽  
pp. 107846
Author(s):  
Ya-Qun Zhou ◽  
Wei Mei ◽  
Xue-Bi Tian ◽  
Yu-Ke Tian ◽  
Dai-Qiang Liu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Therapeutic Potential ◽  
Preclinical Studies

scholarly journals Relevance of Translation Initiation in Diffuse Glioma Biology and its Therapeutic Potential

Cells ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (12) ◽  
pp. 1542 ◽  
Author(s):  
Digregorio Marina ◽  
Lombard Arnaud ◽  
Lumapat Paul Noel ◽  
Scholtes Felix ◽  
Rogister Bernard ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Translation Initiation ◽  
Protein Production ◽  
Therapeutic Potential ◽  
Environmental Stressors ◽  
Current Therapy ◽  
Diffuse Glioma ◽  
Overall Survival Rate ◽  
Malignant Cells ◽  
Translational Machinery ◽  
Initiation Step

Cancer cells are continually exposed to environmental stressors forcing them to adapt their protein production to survive. The translational machinery can be recruited by malignant cells to synthesize proteins required to promote their survival, even in times of high physiological and pathological stress. This phenomenon has been described in several cancers including in gliomas. Abnormal regulation of translation has encouraged the development of new therapeutics targeting the protein synthesis pathway. This approach could be meaningful for glioma given the fact that the median survival following diagnosis of the highest grade of glioma remains short despite current therapy. The identification of new targets for the development of novel therapeutics is therefore needed in order to improve this devastating overall survival rate. This review discusses current literature on translation in gliomas with a focus on the initiation step covering both the cap-dependent and cap-independent modes of initiation. The different translation initiation protagonists will be described in normal conditions and then in gliomas. In addition, their gene expression in gliomas will systematically be examined using two freely available datasets. Finally, we will discuss different pathways regulating translation initiation and current drugs targeting the translational machinery and their potential for the treatment of gliomas.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document