-
Annals of the New York Academy of... Jun 2016Mindfulness meditation represents a mental training framework for cultivating the state of mindful awareness in daily life. Recently, there has been a surge of interest... (Review)
Review
Mindfulness meditation represents a mental training framework for cultivating the state of mindful awareness in daily life. Recently, there has been a surge of interest in how mindfulness meditation improves human health and well-being. Although studies have shown that mindfulness meditation can improve self-reported measures of disease symptomatology, the effect that mindfulness meditation has on biological mechanisms underlying human aging and disease is less clear. To address this issue, we conducted the first comprehensive review of randomized controlled trials examining the effects of mindfulness meditation on immune system parameters, with a specific focus on five outcomes: (1) circulating and stimulated inflammatory proteins, (2) cellular transcription factors and gene expression, (3) immune cell count, (4) immune cell aging, and (5) antibody response. This analysis revealed substantial heterogeneity across studies with respect to patient population, study design, and assay procedures. The findings suggest possible effects of mindfulness meditation on specific markers of inflammation, cell-mediated immunity, and biological aging, but these results are tentative and require further replication. On the basis of this analysis, we describe the limitations of existing work and suggest possible avenues for future research. Mindfulness meditation may be salutogenic for immune system dynamics, but additional work is needed to examine these effects.
Topics: Awareness; Humans; Immune System; Immunity, Cellular; Meditation; Mindfulness; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Stress, Psychological
PubMed: 26799456
DOI: 10.1111/nyas.12998 -
Clinical Microbiology and Infection :... Aug 2021Only clinically validated HPV assays can be accepted in cervical cancer screening. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Only clinically validated HPV assays can be accepted in cervical cancer screening.
OBJECTIVES
To update the list of high-risk HPV assays that fulfil the 2009 international validation criteria (Meijer-2009).
DATA SOURCES
PubMed/Medline, Embase, Scopus, references from selected studies; published in January 2014 to August 2020.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
HPV test validation studies and primary screening studies, involving testing with an index HPV test and a comparator HPV test with reporting of disease outcome (occurrence of histologically confirmed cervical precancer; CIN2+).
PARTICIPANTS
Women participating in cervical cancer screening.
INTERVENTIONS
Testing with an index and a comparator HPV test of clinician-collected cervical specimens and assessment of disease outcome (
assays were HC2, GP5+/6+ PCR-EIA, recommended in validation guidelines, or tests with consistent previous validations. METHODS
Assessment of relative clinical accuracy (including non-inferiority statistics index vs comparator assay) and test reproducibility in individual studies; random effects meta-analyses of the relative clinical sensitivity and specificity of index vs comparator tests.
RESULTS
Seven hrHPV DNA tests consistently fulfilled all validation criteria in multiple studies using predefined test positivity cut-offs (Abbott RealTime High Risk HPV, Anyplex II HPV HR Detection, BD Onclarity HPV Assay, Cobas 4800 HPV Test, HPV-Risk Assay, PapilloCheck HPV-Screening Test and Xpert HPV). Another assay (Alinity m HR HPV Assay) was fully validated in one validation study. The newer Cobas 6800 HPV Test, was validated in two studies against Cobas 4800. Other tests partially fulfilled the international validation criteria (Cervista HPV HR Test, EUROArray HPV, Hybribio's 14 High-Risk HPV, LMNX Genotyping Kit GP HPV, MALDI-TOF, RIATOL qPCR and a number of other in-house developed assays) since the non-inferior accuracy was reached after a posteriori cut-off optimization, inconsistent accuracy findings in different studies, and/or insufficient reproducibility assessment. The APTIMA HPV Assay targeting E6/E7 mRNA of hrHPV was fully validated in one formal validation study and showed slightly lower pooled sensitivity but higher specificity than the standard comparator tests in seven screening studies. However, the current international validation criteria relate to DNA assays. The additional requirement for longitudinal performance data required for non-DNA based HPV assays was not assessed in this review.
CONCLUSIONS
Eleven hrHPV DNA assays fulfil all requirements for use in cervical cancer screening using clinician-collected specimens.
Topics: Alphapapillomavirus; Early Detection of Cancer; Female; Genotyping Techniques; Humans; Papillomaviridae; Papillomavirus Infections; Reproducibility of Results; Sensitivity and Specificity; Uterine Cervical Neoplasms
PubMed: 33975008
DOI: 10.1016/j.cmi.2021.04.031 -
Clinical Microbiology and Infection :... Oct 2018To provide a summary of evidence for the diagnostic accuracies of three multiplex PCR systems (mPCRs)-BioFire FilmArray RP (FilmArray), Nanosphere Verigene RV+ test... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
To provide a summary of evidence for the diagnostic accuracies of three multiplex PCR systems (mPCRs)-BioFire FilmArray RP (FilmArray), Nanosphere Verigene RV+ test (Verigene RV+) and Hologic Gen-Probe Prodesse assays-on the detection of viral respiratory infections.
METHODS
A comprehensive search up to 1 July 2017 was conducted on Medline and Embase for studies that utilized FilmArray, Verigene RV+ and Prodesse for diagnosis of viral respiratory infections. A summary of diagnostic accuracies for the following five viruses were calculated: influenza A virus (FluA), influenza B virus, respiratory syncytial virus, human metapneumovirus and adenovirus. Hierarchical summary receiver operating curves were used for estimating the viral detection performance per assay.
RESULTS
Twenty studies of 5510 patient samples were eligible for analysis. Multiplex PCRs demonstrated high diagnostic accuracy, with area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) equal to or more than 0.98 for all the above viruses except for adenovirus (AUROC 0.89). FilmArray, Verigene RV+ and ProFlu+ (the only Prodesse assay with enough data) demonstrated a summary sensitivity for FluA of 0.911 (95% confidence interval, 0.848-0.949), 0.949 (95% confidence interval, 0.882-0.979) and 0.954 (95% confidence interval, 0.871-0.985), respectively. The three mPCRs were comparable in terms of detection of FluA.
CONCLUSIONS
Point estimates calculated from eligible studies showed that the three mPCRs (FilmArray, Verigene RV+ and ProFlu+) are highly accurate and may provide important diagnostic information for early identification of respiratory virus infections. In patients with low pretest probability for FluA, these three mPCRs can predict a low possibility of infection and may justify withholding empirical antiviral treatments.
Topics: Humans; Multiplex Polymerase Chain Reaction; Respiratory Tract Infections; Virus Diseases; Viruses
PubMed: 29208560
DOI: 10.1016/j.cmi.2017.11.018 -
RMD Open Nov 2022To conduct a systematic literature review (SLR) on the screening and prophylaxis of opportunistic and chronic infections in autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases... (Review)
Review
Systematic literature review informing the 2022 EULAR recommendations for screening and prophylaxis of chronic and opportunistic infections in adults with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases.
OBJECTIVE
To conduct a systematic literature review (SLR) on the screening and prophylaxis of opportunistic and chronic infections in autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases (AIIRD).
METHODS
SLR (inception-12/2021) based on the following search domains: (1) infectious agents, (2) AIIRD, (3) immunosuppressives/immunomodulators used in rheumatology, (4) screening terms and (5) prophylaxis terms. Articles were retrieved having the terms from (1) AND (2) AND (3) plus terms from (4) OR(5). Databases searched: PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library.
EXCLUSION CRITERIA
studies on postoperative infections, paediatric AIIRD, COVID-19, vaccinations and non-Εnglish literature. Study quality was assessed with Newcastle-Ottawa scale for non-randomised controlled trials (RCTs), RoB-Cochrane for RCTs, AMSTAR2 for SLRs.
RESULTS
From 5641 studies were retrieved, 568 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility, with 194 articles finally included. For tuberculosis, tuberculin skin test (TST) is affected by treatment with glucocorticoids and conventional synthetic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and its performance is inferior to interferon gamma release assay (IGRA). Agreement between TST and IGRA is moderate to low. For hepatitis B virus (HBV): risk of reactivation is increased in patients positive for hepatitis B surface antigen. Anti-HBcore positive patients are at low risk for reactivation but should be monitored periodically with liver function tests and/or HBV-viral load. Risk for Hepatitis C reactivation is existing but low in patients treated with biological DMARDs. For , prophylaxis treatment should be considered in patients treated with prednisolone ≥15-30 mg/day for >2-4 weeks.
CONCLUSIONS
Different screening and prophylaxis approaches are described in the literature, partly determined by individual patient and disease characteristics.
Topics: Adult; Child; Humans; Antirheumatic Agents; COVID-19; Hepatitis B virus; Opportunistic Infections; Rheumatic Diseases
PubMed: 36323488
DOI: 10.1136/rmdopen-2022-002726 -
The American Journal of Psychiatry Jan 2023The aim of this study was to catalog and evaluate response biomarkers correlated with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) symptoms to improve clinical trials. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study was to catalog and evaluate response biomarkers correlated with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) symptoms to improve clinical trials.
METHODS
A systematic review of MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus was conducted in April 2020. Seven criteria were applied to focus on original research that includes quantifiable response biomarkers measured alongside ASD symptoms. Interventional studies or human studies that assessed the correlation between biomarkers and ASD-related behavioral measures were included.
RESULTS
A total of 5,799 independent records yielded 280 articles for review that reported on 940 biomarkers, 755 of which were unique to a single publication. Molecular biomarkers were the most frequently assayed, including cytokines, growth factors, measures of oxidative stress, neurotransmitters, and hormones, followed by neurophysiology (e.g., EEG and eye tracking), neuroimaging (e.g., functional MRI), and other physiological measures. Studies were highly heterogeneous, including in phenotypes, demographic characteristics, tissues assayed, and methods for biomarker detection. With a median total sample size of 64, almost all of the reviewed studies were only powered to identify biomarkers with large effect sizes. Reporting of individual-level values and summary statistics was inconsistent, hampering mega- and meta-analysis. Biomarkers assayed in multiple studies yielded mostly inconsistent results, revealing a "replication crisis."
CONCLUSIONS
There is currently no response biomarker with sufficient evidence to inform ASD clinical trials. This review highlights methodological imperatives for ASD biomarker research necessary to make definitive progress: consistent experimental design, correction for multiple comparisons, formal replication, sharing of sample-level data, and preregistration of study designs. Systematic "big data" analyses of multiple potential biomarkers could accelerate discovery.
Topics: Humans; Autism Spectrum Disorder; Biomarkers; Phenotype; Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Research Design
PubMed: 36475375
DOI: 10.1176/appi.ajp.21100992 -
Frontiers in Cellular and Infection... 2015Escherichia coli bacteria are the most common causes of diarrhea and septicemia in calves. Moreover, calves form a major reservoir for transmission of pathogenic E. coli... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Escherichia coli bacteria are the most common causes of diarrhea and septicemia in calves. Moreover, calves form a major reservoir for transmission of pathogenic E. coli to humans. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of publications on E. coli as calf pathogens and the role of calves as reservoir have not been done so far. We reviewed studies between 1951 and 2013 reporting the presence of virulence associated factors (VAFs) in calf E. coli and extracted the following information: year(s) and country of sampling, animal number, health status, isolate number, VAF prevalence, serotypes, diagnostic methods, and biological assays. The prevalence of VAFs or E. coli pathotypes was compared between healthy and diarrheic animals and was analyzed for time courses. Together, 106 papers with 25,982 E. coli isolates from 27 countries tested for VAFs were included. F5, F17, and F41 fimbriae and heat-stable enterotoxin (ST) - VAFs of enterotoxigenic E. coli (ETEC) were significantly associated with calf diarrhea. On the contrary, ETEC VAF F4 fimbriae and heat-labile enterotoxin as well as enteropathogenic (EPEC), Shiga toxin-producing (STEC), and enterohemorrhagic E. coli (EHEC) were not associated with diarrhea. The prevalence increased overtime for ST-positive isolates, but decreased for F5- and STEC-positive isolates. Our study provides useful information about the history of scientific investigations performed in this domain so far, and helps to define etiological agents of calf disease, and to evaluate calves as reservoir hosts for human pathogenic E. coli.
Topics: Animals; Cattle; Cattle Diseases; Disease Reservoirs; Escherichia coli; Escherichia coli Infections; Escherichia coli Proteins; Humans; Virulence
PubMed: 25815276
DOI: 10.3389/fcimb.2015.00023 -
Apoptosis : An International Journal on... Aug 2022Programmed cell death is considered a key player in a variety of cellular processes that helps to regulate tissue growth, embryogenesis, cell turnover, immune response,... (Review)
Review
Programmed cell death is considered a key player in a variety of cellular processes that helps to regulate tissue growth, embryogenesis, cell turnover, immune response, and other biological processes. Among different types of cell death, apoptosis has been studied widely, especially in the field of cancer research to understand and analyse cellular mechanisms, and signaling pathways that control cell cycle arrest. Hallmarks of different types of cell death have been identified by following the patterns and events through microscopy. Identified biomarkers have also supported drug development to induce cell death in cancerous cells. There are various serological and microscopic techniques with advantages and limitations, that are available and are being utilized to detect and study the mechanism of cell death. The complexity of the mechanism and difficulties in distinguishing among different types of programmed cell death make it challenging to carry out the interventions and delay its progression. In this review, mechanisms of different forms of programmed cell death along with their conventional and unconventional methods of detection of have been critically reviewed systematically and categorized on the basis of morphological hallmarks and biomarkers to understand the principle, mechanism, application, advantages and disadvantages of each method. Furthermore, a very comprehensive comparative analysis has been drawn to highlight the most efficient and effective methods of detection of programmed cell death, helping researchers to make a reliable and prudent selection among the available methods of cell death assay. Conclusively, how programmed cell death detection methods can be improved and can provide information about distinctive stages of cell death detection have been discussed.
Topics: Apoptosis; Biomarkers; Cell Death; Signal Transduction
PubMed: 35713779
DOI: 10.1007/s10495-022-01735-y -
Clinical Infectious Diseases : An... Jun 2020We conducted a systematic review of relevant syphilis diagnostic literature to address the question, "What is the sensitivity and specificity of the treponemal tests...
We conducted a systematic review of relevant syphilis diagnostic literature to address the question, "What is the sensitivity and specificity of the treponemal tests currently approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the diagnosis of syphilis (by stage)?" There were 16 treponemal assays evaluated: 13 immunoassays and 3 manual assays (fluorescent treponemal antibody absorbed test [FTA-ABS], microhemagglutination assay for Treponema pallidum antibodies [MHA-TP], Treponema pallidum particle agglutination assay [TP-PA]). MHA-TP and FTA-ABS were less sensitive in primary and secondary syphilis than TP-PA; TP-PA is the most specific manual treponemal assay. There is insufficient evidence to recommend one particular treponemal immunoassay (eg, enzyme immunoassays, chemiluminescence immunoassays, microbead immunoassays) over another based on published performance data. For diagnosis of neurosyphilis, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) TP-PA has similar performance to CSF FTA-ABS in studies with patients with definitive or presumptive neurosyphilis. However, CSF treponemal testing has limitations in its sensitivity and specificity and should be interpreted within the context of the clinical scenario, additional CSF test results and syphilis prevalence.
Topics: Antibodies, Bacterial; Humans; Neurosyphilis; Sensitivity and Specificity; Syphilis; Syphilis Serodiagnosis; Treponema pallidum
PubMed: 32578866
DOI: 10.1093/cid/ciaa349 -
Clinical Microbiology and Infection :... Mar 2020The FilmArray® meningitis/encephalitis (ME) panel is a multiplex PCR assay which can detect the most commonly identified pathogens in central nervous system infections.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The FilmArray® meningitis/encephalitis (ME) panel is a multiplex PCR assay which can detect the most commonly identified pathogens in central nervous system infections. It significantly decreases the time to diagnosis of ME and data has yielded several positive outcomes. However, in part, reports of both false positive and false negative detections have resulted in concerns about adoption.
OBJECTIVES
The aim was to evaluate the ME panel in a diagnostic test accuracy review.
DATA SOURCES
The PubMed and EMBASE databases were systematically searched through May 2019.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
Eligible studies were those providing sensitivity and specificity data for the ME panel compared with a reference standard. Studies providing details on false positive and false negative results of the panel as well as further investigation (adjudication) of the discordant results between the panel and comparator assays were included and assessed separately.
PARTICIPANTS
Patients with suspected ME for whom a panel was ordered were included.
METHODS
The ME panel was compared to reference standard methods for diagnosing community-acquired ME. We performed a meta-analysis and calculated the summary sensitivity and specificity of the ME panel. Moreover, we evaluated the false positive and false negative results of the panel.
RESULTS
Thirteen studies (3764 patients) were included in the review and 8 of them (3059 patients) were pooled in a meta-analysis. The summary estimates of sensitivity and specificity with 95% confidence intervals (CI) was 90% (95% CI 86-93%) and 97% (95% CI 94-99%), respectively. When we looked specifically at studies that assessed further the false positive and false negative results, false positive detections were 11.4% and 4% before and after adjudication, respectively. The highest proportion of false positive was observed for Streptococcus pneumoniae followed by Streptococcus agalactiae. False negative isolates were 2.2% and 1.5% before and after adjudication, respectively. Herpes simplex virus 1 and 2, enterovirus and Cryptococcus neoformans/gattii had the highest proportions of false negative determinations. False negative C. neoformans/gattii were mostly patients with positive antigen titres, on treatment or cleared disease.
CONCLUSIONS
The currently available literature suggests that the ME panel has high diagnostic accuracy. However, the decision for implementation should be individualized based on the needs of the patient population, the capabilities of the laboratory, and the knowledge of the healthcare providers that will utilize the test.
Topics: Encephalitis; Humans; Meningitis; Multiplex Polymerase Chain Reaction; Publication Bias; ROC Curve; Reagent Kits, Diagnostic; Reproducibility of Results; Sensitivity and Specificity
PubMed: 31760115
DOI: 10.1016/j.cmi.2019.11.016 -
Chest Jan 2017Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are the treatment of choice for most patients with atrial fibrillation and/or noncancer-associated venous thromboembolic disease.... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are the treatment of choice for most patients with atrial fibrillation and/or noncancer-associated venous thromboembolic disease. Although routine monitoring of these agents is not required, assessment of anticoagulant effect may be desirable in special situations. The objective of this review was to summarize systematically evidence regarding laboratory assessment of the anticoagulant effects of dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban.
METHODS
PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science were searched for studies reporting relationships between drug levels and coagulation assay results.
RESULTS
We identified 109 eligible studies: 35 for dabigatran, 50 for rivaroxaban, 11 for apixaban, and 13 for edoxaban. The performance of standard anticoagulation tests varied across DOACs and reagents; most assays, showed insufficient correlation to provide a reliable assessment of DOAC effects. Dilute thrombin time (TT) assays demonstrated linear correlation (r = 0.67-0.99) across a range of expected concentrations of dabigatran, as did ecarin-based assays. Calibrated anti-Xa assays demonstrated linear correlation (r = 0.78-1.00) across a wide range of concentrations for rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban.
CONCLUSIONS
An ideal test, offering both accuracy and precision for measurement of any DOAC is not widely available. We recommend a dilute TT or ecarin-based assay for assessment of the anticoagulant effect of dabigatran and anti-Xa assays with drug-specific calibrators for direct Xa inhibitors. In the absence of these tests, TT or APTT is recommended over PT/INR for assessment of dabigatran, and PT/INR is recommended over APTT for detection of factor Xa inhibitors. Time since last dose, the presence or absence of drug interactions, and renal and hepatic function should impact clinical estimates of anticoagulant effect in a patient for whom laboratory test results are not available.
Topics: Antithrombins; Atrial Fibrillation; Blood Coagulation; Drug Monitoring; Humans; Venous Thromboembolism
PubMed: 27637548
DOI: 10.1016/j.chest.2016.08.1462