Ho, Ming-Fen

ABSTRACT Aims Opioid use disorder remains a major public health crisis in the United States, driven largely by rising overdose deaths from synthetic opioids, such as fentanyl. Emerging population‐level evidence suggests that GLP‐1 receptor agonists (GLP‐1RAs) may reduce overdose risk. However, their underlying molecular mechanisms are not well understood. We investigated the transcriptional effects of fentanyl and GLP‐1RAs using human induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC)‐derived forebrain organoids and neurons. Methods Organoids were treated with fentanyl, liraglutide, or exenatide, followed by RNA sequencing. We extended these analyses to iPSC‐derived neurons exposed to additional therapeutic candidates, including the anticonvulsants topiramate and gabapentin, and the metabolic modulator β‐hydroxybutyrate. All compounds were tested at clinically relevant concentrations, and transcriptomic and functional genomic assays were performed. Results Across models and drug classes, we identified modulation of endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stress signaling as a shared molecular mechanism. Fentanyl and GLP‐1RAs consistently downregulated ER stress‐related genes, with TRIB3 as the most strongly suppressed target. We further identified CEBPB as a key upstream regulator and confirmed reduced CEBPB DNA‐binding activity in ER stress‐related genes. Conclusion These findings highlight ER stress modulation as a convergent pathway with potential therapeutic relevance for substance use disorders.

ABSTRACTOpioid use disorder is a persistent epidemic despite several FDA‐approved medications for its treatment. While the pathogenesis of opioid use disorder has been classically attributed to dopamine pathways in the brain, there is emerging evidence and interest surrounding the role of inflammation and inflammatory signaling in its development and treatment. Buprenorphine has become the most prescribed medication for opioid use disorder, largely due to its ease of access and tolerability. This review aimed to better characterize contemporary knowledge of how buprenorphine modulates the human immune system and inflammatory functions in this population. A comprehensive review was conducted using 11 key databases, including Embase, MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov. This review captured 8177 records, and 14 studies were ultimately selected for inclusion and discussion in this review. Notably, all 14 clinical studies evaluated buprenorphine's effect on the peripheral immune system, and the majority of the studies supported the notion that initiation and maintenance of buprenorphine restore immune suppression caused by opioid use disorder. In addition, we discuss how recent and ongoing work utilizing advanced imaging and cellular technologies is advancing the understanding of how buprenorphine affects the immune and inflammatory signaling in the brain.

Abstract Opioid use disorder (OUD) affects over 40 million people worldwide, creating significant social and economic burdens. Medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) is often considered the primary treatment approach for OUD. MOUD, including methadone, buprenorphine, and naltrexone, is effective for some, but its benefits may be limited by poor adherence to treatment recommendations. Immunopharmacotherapy offers an innovative approach by using vaccines to generate antibodies that neutralize opioids, blocking them from crossing the blood-brain barrier and reducing their psychoactive effects. To date, only 3 clinical trials for opioid vaccines have been published. While these studies demonstrated the potential of opioid vaccines for relapse prevention, there is currently no standardized protocol for evaluating their effectiveness. We have reviewed recent preclinical studies that demonstrated the efficacy of vaccines targeting opioids, including heroin, morphine, oxycodone, hydrocodone, and fentanyl. These studies showed that vaccines against opioids reduced drug reinforcement, decreased opioid-induced antinociception, and increased survival rates against lethal opioid doses. These studies also demonstrated the importance of vaccine formulation and the use of adjuvants in enhancing antibody production and specificity. Finally, we highlighted the strengths and concerns associated with the opioid vaccine treatment, including ethical considerations.

Abstract The human angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and transmembrane serine protease 2 (TMPRSS2) proteins play key roles in the cellular internalization of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the coronavirus responsible for the coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. We set out to functionally characterize the ACE2 and TMPRSS2 protein abundance for variant alleles encoding these proteins that contained non-synonymous single-nucleotide polymorphisms (nsSNPs) in their open reading frames (ORFs). Specifically, a high-throughput assay, deep mutational scanning (DMS), was employed to test the functional implications of nsSNPs, which are variants of uncertain significance in these two genes. Specifically, we used a ‘landing pad’ system designed to quantify the protein expression for 433 nsSNPs that have been observed in the ACE2 and TMPRSS2 ORFs and found that 8 of 127 ACE2, 19 of 157 TMPRSS2 isoform 1 and 13 of 149 TMPRSS2 isoform 2 variant proteins displayed less than ~25% of the wild-type protein expression, whereas 4 ACE2 variants displayed 25% or greater increases in protein expression. As a result, we concluded that nsSNPs in genes encoding ACE2 and TMPRSS2 might potentially influence SARS-CoV-2 infectivity. These results can now be applied to DNA sequence data for patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 to determine the possible impact of patient-based DNA sequence variation on the clinical course of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Background and Purpose Acamprosate is an anti‐craving drug used for the pharmacotherapy of alcohol use disorder (AUD). However, only some patients achieve optimal therapeutic outcomes. This study was designed to explore differences in metabolomic profiles between patients who maintained sobriety and those who relapsed, to determine whether those differences provide insight into variation in acamprosate treatment response phenotypes. Experimental Approach We previously conducted an acamprosate trial involving 442 AUD patients, and 267 of these subjects presented themselves for a 3‐month follow‐up. The primary outcome was abstinence. Clinical information, genomic data and metabolomics data were collected. Baseline plasma samples were assayed using targeted metabolomics. Key Results Baseline plasma arginine, threonine, α‐aminoadipic acid and ethanolamine concentrations were associated with acamprosate treatment outcomes and baseline craving intensity, a measure that has been associated with acamprosate treatment response. We next applied a pharmacometabolomics‐informed genome‐wide association study (GWAS) strategy to identify genetic variants that might contribute to variations in plasma metabolomic profiles that were associated with craving and/or acamprosate treatment outcome. Gene expression data for induced pluripotent stem cell‐derived forebrain astrocytes showed that a series of genes identified during the metabolomics‐informed GWAS were ethanol responsive. Furthermore, a large number of those genes could be regulated by acamprosate. Finally, we identified a series of single nucleotide polymorphisms that were associated with acamprosate treatment outcomes. Conclusion and Implications These results serve as an important step towards advancing our understanding of disease pathophysiology and drug action responsible for variation in acamprosate response and alcohol craving in AUD patients.

Abstract We previously reported, on the basis of a genome-wide association study for aromatase inhibitor-induced musculoskeletal symptoms, that single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) near the T-cell leukemia/lymphoma 1A (TCL1A) gene were associated with aromatase inhibitor-induced musculoskeletal pain and with estradiol (E2)-induced TCL1A expression. Furthermore, variation in TCL1A expression influenced the downstream expression of proinflammatory cytokines and cytokine receptors. Specifically, the top hit genome-wide association study SNP, rs11849538, created a functional estrogen response element (ERE) that displayed estrogen receptor (ER) binding and increased E2 induction of TCL1A expression only for the variant SNP genotype. In the present study, we pursued mechanisms underlying the E2-SNP-dependent regulation of TCL1A expression and, in parallel, our subsequent observations that SNPs at a distance from EREs can regulate ERα binding and that ER antagonists can reverse phenotypes associated with those SNPs. Specifically, we performed a series of functional genomic studies using a large panel of lymphoblastoid cell lines with dense genomic data that demonstrated that TCL1A SNPs at a distance from EREs can modulate ERα binding and expression of TCL1A as well as the expression of downstream immune mediators. Furthermore, 4-hydroxytamoxifen or fulvestrant could reverse these SNP-genotype effects. Similar results were found for SNPs in the IL17A cytokine and CCR6 chemokine receptor genes. These observations greatly expand our previous results and support the existence of a novel molecular mechanism that contributes to the complex interplay between estrogens and immune systems. They also raise the possibility of the pharmacological manipulation of the expression of proinflammatory cytokines and chemokines in a SNP genotype-dependent fashion.

Abstract Background: The use of anti-estrogen (AE) therapies (selective estrogen receptor modulators [SERMs], aromatase inhibitors [AIs]) in breast cancer (BC) patients was recently associated with risk of developing rheumatoid arthritis (RA) (J Rheum 2015;42:55-9). We attempted to replicate and extend these results using electronic health record (EHR) enhanced cancer registry data that assessed specific AE therapies and also accounted for potential confounding by age, smoking status, and chemotherapy use. Methods: Using cancer registry and EHR data, we identified a cohort of BC patients who were newly diagnosed and treated at Mayo Clinic Rochester from 1998-2011 and had no previous diagnosis of RA. Smoking status at diagnosis, BC treatments and RA at diagnosis and during follow-up were identified using validated EHR-based algorithms. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) from a multivariate Cox model were used to estimate the association of AE use with risk of RA, controlling for age, smoking status at BC diagnosis, and BC chemotherapy use. Results: The analytic cohort of 9,244 newly diagnosed BC patients treated and followed at Mayo Clinic had a median age at diagnosis of 59 years (range 18-97); 32% were smokers; and 29% were treated with chemotherapy. During a median follow-up of 49 months (range 1-191), 19 patients developed RA. Compared to BC patients not receiving any AE therapy, those receiving AI monotherapy, but not SERM monotherapy or both SERMs and AIs, were at significantly increased risk of developing RA (Table). AE Therapy# of RA Cases / # patientsHR* (95% CI)P-valueNo AE therapy6/4,0711.00 (reference)SERMs only5/2,5371.20 (0.36 - 3.95)0.77AIs only5/7126.37 (1.77 - 22.92)0.005SERMs then AIs3/1,8750.90AI then SERMs0/490.91 (0.21 - 3.86)*Adjusted for age, smoking status and use of chemotherapy Conclusions: Our findings indicate that the use of AIs for BC therapy, but not SERMs or SERMs followed by AIs, is associated with increased risk for development of RA, when controlling for smoking status and use of chemotherapy. While needing replication, these findings suggest a specific role for AIs in RA development and suggest pathways that could be targeted to prevent this potential treatment complication. Citation Format: Matthew K. Breitenstein, Ming-Fen Ho, Richard M. Weinshilboum, James R. Cerhan, Jyotishman Pathak, Tim Bongartz, Liewei Wang, James N. Ingle. Association of anti-estrogen therapy in breast cancer patients and subsequent risk of rheumatoid arthritis: An electronic health record study. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 106th Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2015 Apr 18-22; Philadelphia, PA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2015;75(15 Suppl):Abstract nr LB-191. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2015-LB-191