-
European Urology Focus Sep 2018Gallium prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) ligand Ga-HBED-CC-PSMA (Ga-PSMA) is a promising radiotracer for positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
CONTEXT
Gallium prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) ligand Ga-HBED-CC-PSMA (Ga-PSMA) is a promising radiotracer for positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) of prostate cancer.
OBJECTIVE
To conduct a meta-analysis to evaluate detection rate, diagnostic test accuracy, and adverse effects of Ga-PSMA PET/CT or PET/magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for staging of prostate cancer and for restaging of rising prostate-specific antigen (PSA) after initial treatment.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines, our systematic review searched for articles in PubMed and EMBASE databases from 2012 to July 2016. The reference standard was pathology after biopsy or surgery. The analyses used a random effect model and a hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic model.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
Fifteen Ga-PSMA PET/CT studies with 1256 patients met the inclusion criteria. Seven studies of staging PET/CT or PET/MRI detected a regional site of cancer for 203 of 273 patients (74%). Nine studies of restaging PET/CT detected sites of recurrence in 799 of 983 patients (81%) with a 50% detection rate (74 of 147 patients) for restaging PSA of 0.2-0.49 ng/ml and a 53% detection rate (56 of 195 patients) for restaging PSA of 0.50-0.99 ng/ml. Staging Ga-PSMA PET/CT in the studies had higher detection rates of sites in the prostate bed than restaging Ga-PSMA PET/CT (mean 57% vs 14%, p=0.031, t test). Both staging and restaging Ga-PSMA PET/CT found that a subgroup of the patients had metastatic sites in pelvic lymph nodes or distant organs. Eight studies of staging PET/CT undertook histologic correlations. We performed prostate-segment-based analysis specifically regarding the primary cancer lesion for four of these studies, and patient-based analysis specifically regarding pelvic lymph node metastases for four other studies. The pooled sensitivities for staging in the two groups of studies were 70% and 61%, and the pooled specificities were 84% and 97%. None of the studies reported complications from the PET/CT imaging.
CONCLUSIONS
Ga-PSMA PET/CT has clinical relevance to detect sites of recurrence for patients with PSA recurrence after radical prostatectomy (RP) with PSA levels less than 1.0 ng/ml.
PATIENT SUMMARY
Choline positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) can detect sites of recurrent prostate cancer in an earlier phase of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) recurrence than bone scans and CT scans, but choline PET/CT is rarely positive for patients with restaging PSA levels under 1 ng/ml. A new radiotracer called Ga-PSMA for PET/CT was able to detect sites of recurring cancer in up to 50% of patients who had an early rise in PSA exceeding 0.5 ng/ml after initial radical prostatectomy. The published studies did not report adverse effects of Ga-PSMA PET/CT imaging.
Topics: Aged; Antigens, Surface; Choline; Edetic Acid; Gallium; Glutamate Carboxypeptidase II; Humans; Lymphatic Metastasis; Male; Middle Aged; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Neoplasm Staging; Outcome Assessment, Health Care; Positron Emission Tomography Computed Tomography; Prostate-Specific Antigen; Prostatectomy; Prostatic Neoplasms
PubMed: 28753806
DOI: 10.1016/j.euf.2016.11.002 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2021Anaemia is a condition where the number of red blood cells (and consequently their oxygen-carrying capacity) is insufficient to meet the body's physiological needs.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Anaemia is a condition where the number of red blood cells (and consequently their oxygen-carrying capacity) is insufficient to meet the body's physiological needs. Fortification of wheat flour is deemed a useful strategy to reduce anaemia in populations.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the benefits and harms of wheat flour fortification with iron alone or with other vitamins and minerals on anaemia, iron status and health-related outcomes in populations over two years of age.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, 21 other databases and two trials registers up to 21 July 2020, together with contacting key organisations to identify additional studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included cluster- or individually-randomised controlled trials (RCTs) carried out among the general population from any country, aged two years and above. The interventions were fortification of wheat flour with iron alone or in combination with other micronutrients. We included trials comparing any type of food item prepared from flour fortified with iron of any variety of wheat DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened the search results and assessed the eligibility of studies for inclusion, extracted data from included studies and assessed risks of bias. We followed Cochrane methods in this review.
MAIN RESULTS
Our search identified 3538 records, after removing duplicates. We included 10 trials, involving 3319 participants, carried out in Bangladesh, Brazil, India, Kuwait, Philippines, South Africa and Sri Lanka. We identified two ongoing studies and one study is awaiting classification. The duration of interventions varied from 3 to 24 months. One study was carried out among adult women and one trial among both children and nonpregnant women. Most of the included trials were assessed as low or unclear risk of bias for key elements of selection, performance or reporting bias. Three trials used 41 mg to 60 mg iron/kg flour, three trials used less than 40 mg iron/kg and three trials used more than 60 mg iron/kg flour. One trial used various iron levels based on type of iron used: 80 mg/kg for electrolytic and reduced iron and 40 mg/kg for ferrous fumarate. All included studies contributed data for the meta-analyses. Iron-fortified wheat flour with or without other micronutrients added versus wheat flour (no added iron) with the same other micronutrients added Iron-fortified wheat flour with or without other micronutrients added versus wheat flour (no added iron) with the same other micronutrients added may reduce by 27% the risk of anaemia in populations (risk ratio (RR) 0.73, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55 to 0.97; 5 studies, 2315 participants; low-certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether iron-fortified wheat flour with or without other micronutrients reduces iron deficiency (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.04; 3 studies, 748 participants; very low-certainty evidence) or increases haemoglobin concentrations (in g/L) (mean difference MD 2.75, 95% CI 0.71 to 4.80; 8 studies, 2831 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No trials reported data on adverse effects in children (including constipation, nausea, vomiting, heartburn or diarrhoea), except for risk of infection or inflammation at the individual level. The intervention probably makes little or no difference to the risk of Infection or inflammation at individual level as measured by C-reactive protein (CRP) (mean difference (MD) 0.04, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.11; 2 studies, 558 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Iron-fortified wheat flour with other micronutrients added versus unfortified wheat flour (nil micronutrients added) It is unclear whether wheat flour fortified with iron, in combination with other micronutrients decreases anaemia (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.46; 2 studies, 317 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The intervention probably reduces the risk of iron deficiency (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.99; 3 studies, 382 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and it is unclear whether it increases average haemoglobin concentrations (MD 2.53, 95% CI -0.39 to 5.45; 4 studies, 532 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No trials reported data on adverse effects in children. Nine out of 10 trials reported sources of funding, with most having multiple sources. Funding source does not appear to have distorted the results in any of the assessed trials.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Fortification of wheat flour with iron (in comparison to unfortified flour, or where both groups received the same other micronutrients) may reduce anaemia in the general population above two years of age, but its effects on other outcomes are uncertain. Iron-fortified wheat flour in combination with other micronutrients, in comparison with unfortified flour, probably reduces iron deficiency, but its effects on other outcomes are uncertain. None of the included trials reported data on adverse side effects except for risk of infection or inflammation at the individual level. The effects of this intervention on other health outcomes are unclear. Future studies at low risk of bias should aim to measure all important outcomes, and to further investigate which variants of fortification, including the role of other micronutrients as well as types of iron fortification, are more effective, and for whom.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Anemia; Child; Child, Preschool; Edetic Acid; Female; Ferric Compounds; Ferrous Compounds; Flour; Food, Fortified; Fumarates; Hemoglobin A; Humans; Infant; Iron; Iron Deficiencies; Male; Micronutrients; Middle Aged; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Triticum; Young Adult
PubMed: 33461239
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011302.pub3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2020Anaemia is a condition where the number of red blood cells (and consequently their oxygen-carrying capacity) is insufficient to meet the body's physiologic needs.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Anaemia is a condition where the number of red blood cells (and consequently their oxygen-carrying capacity) is insufficient to meet the body's physiologic needs. Fortification of wheat flour is deemed a useful strategy to reduce anaemia in populations.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the benefits and harms of wheat flour fortification with iron alone or with other vitamins and minerals on anaemia, iron status and health-related outcomes in populations over two years of age.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and other databases up to 4 September 2019.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included cluster- or individually randomised controlled trials (RCT) carried out among the general population from any country aged two years and above. The interventions were fortification of wheat flour with iron alone or in combination with other micronutrients. Trials comparing any type of food item prepared from flour fortified with iron of any variety of wheat were included.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently screened the search results and assessed the eligibility of studies for inclusion, extracted data from included studies and assessed risk of bias. We followed Cochrane methods in this review.
MAIN RESULTS
Our search identified 3048 records, after removing duplicates. We included nine trials, involving 3166 participants, carried out in Bangladesh, Brazil, India, Kuwait, Phillipines, Sri Lanka and South Africa. The duration of interventions varied from 3 to 24 months. One study was carried out among adult women and one trial among both children and nonpregnant women. Most of the included trials were assessed as low or unclear risk of bias for key elements of selection, performance or reporting bias. Three trials used 41 mg to 60 mg iron/kg flour, two trials used less than 40 mg iron/kg and three trials used more than 60 mg iron/kg flour. One trial employed various iron levels based on type of iron used: 80 mg/kg for electrolytic and reduced iron and 40 mg/kg for ferrous fumarate. All included studies contributed data for the meta-analyses. Seven studies compared wheat flour fortified with iron alone versus unfortified wheat flour, three studies compared wheat flour fortified with iron in combination with other micronutrients versus unfortified wheat flour and two studies compared wheat flour fortified with iron in combination with other micronutrients versus fortified wheat flour with the same micronutrients (but not iron). No studies included a 'no intervention' comparison arm. None of the included trials reported any other adverse side effects (including constipation, nausea, vomiting, heartburn or diarrhoea). Wheat flour fortified with iron alone versus unfortified wheat flour (no micronutrients added) Wheat flour fortification with iron alone may have little or no effect on anaemia (risk ratio (RR) 0.81, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61 to 1.07; 5 studies; 2200 participants; low-certainty evidence). It probably makes little or no difference on iron deficiency (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.17 to 1.07; 3 studies; 633 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and we are uncertain about whether wheat flour fortified with iron increases haemoglobin concentrations by an average 3.30 (g/L) (95% CI 0.86 to 5.74; 7 studies; 2355 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No trials reported data on adverse effects in children, except for risk of infection or inflammation at the individual level. The intervention probably makes little or no difference to risk of Infection or inflammation at individual level as measured by C-reactive protein (CRP) (moderate-certainty evidence). Wheat flour fortified with iron in combination with other micronutrients versus unfortified wheat flour (no micronutrients added) Wheat flour fortified with iron, in combination with other micronutrients, may or may not decrease anaemia (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.31; 2 studies; 322 participants; low-certainty evidence). It makes little or no difference to average risk of iron deficiency (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.00; 3 studies; 387 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and may or may not increase average haemoglobin concentrations (mean difference (MD) 3.29, 95% CI -0.78 to 7.36; 3 studies; 384 participants; low-certainty evidence). No trials reported data on adverse effects in children. Wheat flour fortified with iron in combination with other micronutrients versus fortified wheat flour with same micronutrients (but not iron) Given the very low certainty of the evidence, the review authors are uncertain about the effects of wheat flour fortified with iron in combination with other micronutrients versus fortified wheat flour with same micronutrients (but not iron) in reducing anaemia (RR 0.24, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.71; 1 study; 127 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and in reducing iron deficiency (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.97; 1 study; 127 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The intervention may make little or no difference to the average haemoglobin concentration (MD 0.81, 95% CI -1.28 to 2.89; 2 studies; 488 participants; low-certainty evidence). No trials reported data on the adverse effects in children. Eight out of nine trials reported source of funding with most having multiple sources. Funding source does not appear to have distorted the results in any of the assessed trials.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Eating food items containing wheat flour fortified with iron alone may have little or no effect on anaemia and probably makes little or no difference in iron deficiency. We are uncertain on whether the intervention with wheat flour fortified with iron increases haemoglobin concentrations improve blood haemoglobin concentrations. Consuming food items prepared from wheat flour fortified with iron, in combination with other micronutrients, has little or no effect on anaemia, makes little or no difference to iron deficiency and may or may not improve haemoglobin concentrations. In comparison to fortified flour with micronutrients but no iron, wheat flour fortified with iron with other micronutrients, the effects on anaemia and iron deficiency are uncertain as certainty of the evidence has been assessed as very low. The intervention may make little or no difference to the average haemoglobin concentrations in the population. None of the included trials reported any other adverse side effects. The effects of this intervention on other health outcomes are unclear.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Anemia; Child; Child, Preschool; Edetic Acid; Female; Ferric Compounds; Ferrous Compounds; Flour; Food, Fortified; Fumarates; Hemoglobin A; Humans; Infant; Iron; Iron Deficiencies; Male; Micronutrients; Middle Aged; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Triticum; Young Adult
PubMed: 32677706
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011302.pub2