-
Multiple Sclerosis and Related Disorders Nov 2023Cognitive reserve (CR) describes an individual's ability to adapt cognitive processes in response to brain atrophy, and has been reported to explain some of the... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Cognitive reserve (CR) describes an individual's ability to adapt cognitive processes in response to brain atrophy, and has been reported to explain some of the discrepancy between brain atrophy and cognitive functioning outcomes in multiple sclerosis (MS). CR in MS is typically investigated by assessing an individual's pre- and/or post-diagnosis enrichment, which includes premorbid intellectual abilities, educational level, occupational attainment, and engagement in cognitively enriching leisure activities. Common MS symptoms (e.g., physical disability, fatigue, depression, anxiety) may impact an individual's ability to engage in various CR-enhancing activities post-diagnosis. It is unknown to what extent these MS symptoms have been taken into account in MS research on CR. As such, we identified whether studies assessed CR using measures of premorbid or continuous (including post-diagnosis) enrichment. For studies investigating continuous enrichment, we identified whether studies accounted for MS-impact, which MS symptoms were accounted for, and how, and whether studies acknowledged MS symptoms as potential CR-confounds.
METHODS
Three electronic databases (PsycINFO, PubMed, Scopus) were searched. Eligible studies investigated CR proxies (e.g., estimated premorbid intellectual abilities, vocabulary knowledge, educational level, occupational attainment, cognitively enriching leisure activities, or a combination thereof) in relation to cognitive, brain atrophy or connectivity, or daily functioning outcomes in adult participants with MS. We extracted data on methods and measures used, including any MS symptoms taken into account. Objectives were addressed using frequency analyses and narrative synthesis.
RESULTS
115 studies were included in this review. 47.8% of all studies investigated continuous enrichment. Approximately half of the studies investigating continuous enrichment accounted for potential MS-impact in their analyses, with only 31.0% clearly identifying that they treated MS symptoms as potential confounds for CR-enhancement. A narrative synthesis of studies which investigated CR with and without controlling statistically for MS-impact indicated that accounting for MS symptoms may impact findings concerning the protective nature of CR.
CONCLUSION
Fewer than half of the studies investigating CR proxies in MS involved continuous enrichment. Just over half of these studies accounted for potential MS-impact in their analyses. To achieve a more complete and accurate understanding of CR in MS, future research should investigate both pre-MS and continuous enrichment. In doing so, MS symptoms and their potential impact should be considered. Establishing greater consistency and rigour across CR research in MS will be crucial to produce an evidence base for the development of interventions aimed at improving quality of care and life for pwMS.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Multiple Sclerosis; Cognitive Reserve; Brain; Depression; Anxiety; Atrophy; Fatigue
PubMed: 37806233
DOI: 10.1016/j.msard.2023.105017 -
Frontiers in Immunology 2023Pemphigus foliaceus (PF) differs from pemphigus vulgaris (PV) in that it affects only the skin and mucous membranes are not involved. Pemphigus is commonly treated with...
BACKGROUND
Pemphigus foliaceus (PF) differs from pemphigus vulgaris (PV) in that it affects only the skin and mucous membranes are not involved. Pemphigus is commonly treated with systemic corticosteroids and immunosuppressive agents (ISAs). More recently, biologics have been used. The current literature on biologic therapy often combines treatment of PF with PV, hence it is often difficult for clinicians to isolate the treatment of PF from PV. The purpose of this review was to provide information regarding the use of current biological therapy, specifically in PF.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A search of PubMed, Embase, and other databases was conducted using keywords pemphigus foliaceus (PF), rituximab (RTX), intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg), and biologics. Forty-one studies were included in this review, which produced 105 patients with PF, treated with RTX, IVIg, or a combination of both. Eighty-five patients were treated with RTX, eight patients with IVIg, and 12 received both RTX and IVIg.
RESULTS
Most patients in this review had PF that was nonresponsive to conventional immunosuppressive therapies (CIST), and had significant side effects from their use. RTX treatment resulted in complete remission (CR) in 63.2%, a relapse rate of 39.5%, an infection rate of 19.7%, and a mortality rate of 3.9%. Relapse was greater in the lymphoma (LP) protocol than the rheumatoid arthritis (RA) protocol (p<0.0001). IVIg led to CR in 62.5% of patients, with no relapses or infections. Patients receiving both biologics experienced better outcomes when RTX was first administered, then followed by IVIg. Follow-up durations for patients receiving RTX, IVIg, and both were 22.1, 24.8, and 35.7 months, respectively.
DISCUSSION
In pemphigus foliaceus patients nonresponsive to conventional immunosuppressive therapy or in those with significant side effects from CIST, RTX and IVIg appear to be useful agents. Profile of clinical response, as well as relapse, infection, and mortality rates in PF patients treated with RTX were similar to those observed in PV patients. The data suggests that protocols specific for PF may produce better outcomes, less adverse effects, and improved quality of life.
Topics: Humans; Pemphigus; Immunoglobulins, Intravenous; Quality of Life; Immunosuppressive Agents; Rituximab; Recurrence; Biological Products
PubMed: 37901249
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2023.1267668 -
Frontiers in Immunology 2023Whether neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) is an applicative predictor of poor prognosis in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains controversial. In... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
Whether neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) is an applicative predictor of poor prognosis in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains controversial. In response to the current conflicting data, this meta-analysis was conducted to gain a comprehensive and systematic understanding of prognostic value of NLR in HCC.
METHODS
Several English databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library, with an update date of February 25, 2023, were systematically searched. We set the inclusion criteria to include randomized controlled trial (RCT) studies that reported the prognostic value of serum NLR levels in patients with HCC receiving treatment. Both the combined ratio (OR) and the diagnosis ratio (DOR) were used to assess the prognostic performance of NLR. Additionally, we completed the risk of bias assessment by Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool.
RESULTS
This meta-analysis ultimately included 16 studies with a total of 4654 patients with HCC. The results showed that high baseline NLR was significantly associated with poor prognosis or recurrence of HCC. The sensitivity of 0.67 (95% confidence interval [CI]. 0.59-0.73); specificity of 0.723 (95% CI: 0.64-0.78) and DOR of 5.0 (95% CI: 4.0-7.0) were pooled estimated from patient-based analyses. Subsequently, the combined positive likelihood ratio (PLR) and negative likelihood ratio (NLHR) were calculated with the results of 2.4 (95% CI: 1.9-3.0) and 0.46 (95% CI: 0.39-0.56), respectively. In addition, area under the curve (AUC) of the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) reflecting prognostic accuracy was calculated to be 0.75 (95% CI: 0.71-0.78). The results of subgroup analysis suggested that high NLR was an effective predictive factor of poor prognosis in HCC in mainland China as well as in the northern region.
CONCLUSION
Our findings suggest that high baseline NLR is an excellent predictor of poor prognosis or relapse in patients with HCC, especially those from high-incidence East Asian populations.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/#recordDetails, identifier CRD42023440640.
Topics: Humans; Carcinoma, Hepatocellular; Neutrophils; Liver Neoplasms; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Lymphocytes; Prognosis
PubMed: 37809083
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2023.1211399 -
WMJ : Official Publication of the State... Dec 2023Cutaneous manifestations before other symptoms have great potential for early COVID-19 diagnosis to prevent surge.
INTRODUCTION
Cutaneous manifestations before other symptoms have great potential for early COVID-19 diagnosis to prevent surge.
METHODS
We conducted a search of PubMed and Embase databases through April 11, 2021 to include 39 studies reporting skin manifestations occurring prior to any other COVID-19 symptoms in laboratory-confirmed cases.
RESULTS
Ninety-seven patients were included. Urticarial (24.7%) and maculopapular (22.7%) lesions were most common, followed by pernio (17.5%), vesicular (14.4%), papulosquamous (8.2%), and purpuric (5.1%) lesions. Cutaneous to systemic symptom latency ranged from 2 to 20 days in cases that reported it (26%), while skin lesions were the only presentation in 23 cases (23.7%). Skin lesions were the only COVID-19 manifestation in 58.8% of pernio, 40% of vesicular, 16.6% of urticarial, 18.2% of maculopapular, and 12.5% of papulosquamous presymptomatic cases. Although sample size is limited, all purpuric cases developed other symptom(s) later.
CONCLUSIONS
Pernio and purpuric lesions have been well-associated with COVID-19, but papulosquamous, vesicular, mild maculopapular, and urticarial lesions can easily be dismissed as unrelated to COVID-19. Pernio lesions are thought to be related to strong immune response and low contagiousness, while purpuric and vesicular cases are speculated to be related to higher SARS-CoV2 viral load, severity, and contagiousness. All rashes, even without other symptoms, should necessitate high level of suspicion for isolation or contact tracing.
Topics: Humans; Chilblains; COVID-19; COVID-19 Testing; Public Health; RNA, Viral; SARS-CoV-2
PubMed: 38180923
DOI: No ID Found -
BMC Cancer Feb 2024The benefit of adding Zolbetuximab to the treatment in patients with Claudin-18 isoform 2 (CLDN18.2)-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, locally... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Efficacy and safety of Zolbetuximab plus chemotherapy for advanced CLDN18.2-positive gastric or gastro-oesophageal adenocarcinoma: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.
BACKGROUND
The benefit of adding Zolbetuximab to the treatment in patients with Claudin-18 isoform 2 (CLDN18.2)-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, locally advanced unresectable or metastatic gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (GC/GEJ) is not yet fully elucidated.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, Embase and Cochrane databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated Zolbetuximab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone for GC or GEJ adenocarcinoma. We computed hazard-ratios (HRs) or odds-ratios (ORs) for binary endpoints, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
RESULTS
Three studies and 1,233 patients were included. Comparing with Zolbetuximab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone, progression-free survival (PFS) rate (HR 0.64; 95% CI 0.49-0.84; p < 0.01) and overall survival (OS) rate (HR 0.72; 95% CI 0.62-0.83; p < 0.01) were significant in favor of the Zolbetuximab group. Regarding effectiveness, the Objective Response Rate (ORR) was (OR 1.15; 95% CI 0.87-1.53; p = 0.34).
CONCLUSIONS
In this comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs, the incorporation of Zolbetuximab alongside chemotherapy offers a promising prospect for reshaping the established treatment paradigms for patients diagnosed with advanced CLDN18.2-positive GC/GEJ cancer.
Topics: Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Stomach Neoplasms; Antibodies, Monoclonal; Adenocarcinoma; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Esophagogastric Junction; Claudins; Esophageal Neoplasms
PubMed: 38383390
DOI: 10.1186/s12885-024-11980-w -
Medicine Nov 2023This study aimed to conduct a comparative analysis of the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant chemotherapy combined with endocrine therapy against the backdrop of single... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
This study aimed to conduct a comparative analysis of the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant chemotherapy combined with endocrine therapy against the backdrop of single neoadjuvant chemotherapy or endocrine therapy, specifically in the context of hormone receptor-positive (HR+) breast cancer treatment.
METHODS
We conducted a thorough literature search across several databases, including China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang, Weipu, Chinese Journal Full-text Database, PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE, adhering to the guidelines outlined in the PRISMA statement. Our specific focus was on identifying randomized controlled trials that directly compared the combined approach of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and endocrine therapy with single chemotherapy or endocrine therapy in the context of treating HR+ breast cancer. Subsequently, we utilized statistical packages implemented in R software to perform comparative analyses of key clinical indicators, encompassing the complete response, objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate, pathological complete response (pCR), and adverse reactions.
RESULTS
A total of 11 randomized controlled trials, involving 1359 patients, all of whom met our inclusion criteria and were thus included in our comprehensive analysis. Within this cohort, 688 patients (50.63%) administered neoadjuvant chemotherapy combined with endocrine therapy (NCET), 642 patients (47.24%) received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) alone, while 29 patients (2.13%) underwent neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET) alone. The results of our meta-analysis revealed that NCET exhibited a statistically significant enhancement in both ORR and pCR (P < .05). Nonetheless, when compared to NCT or NET, NCET did not yield a significant impact on complete response, disease control rate, and safety (P > .05). In addition, NCET demonstrated a significant improvement in ORR among patients with HR+, HER2-negative breast cancer (P < .05). However, it was also linked to a heightened incidence of serious adverse reactions within this particular patient subgroup (P < .05).
CONCLUSION
The combination of Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and endocrine therapy stands out as a significant contributor to enhancing the ORR and pCR for HR+ breast cancer patients. For breast cancer patients with HER2- status, NCET demonstrates a remarkable improvement in ORR but is also associated with the emergence of adverse reactions.
Topics: Humans; Female; Breast Neoplasms; Neoadjuvant Therapy; Receptor, ErbB-2; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; China
PubMed: 37986364
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000035928 -
European Urology Oncology Jun 2024Testing for mutations in Breast Cancer Gene 1/2 (BRCA) has emerged as a novel decision-making tool for clinicians. Patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Comparative Study Review
Poly (ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors Have Comparable Efficacy with Platinum Chemotherapy in Patients with BRCA-positive Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer. A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
CONTEXT
Testing for mutations in Breast Cancer Gene 1/2 (BRCA) has emerged as a novel decision-making tool for clinicians. Patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) harboring pathogenic BRCA mutations can benefit from poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor (PARPi) and platinum treatments, whereas the impact of the mutation on sensitivity to cabazitaxel and prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-ligand therapy is currently unknown.
OBJECTIVE
To assess the efficacy of PARPi, platinum, cabazitaxel, and PSMA-ligand therapies in BRCA-positive mCRPC.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
Databases were queried in February 2022. We performed data synthesis by using both proportional and individual patient data. For prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response rate (≥50% decrease from baseline [PSA50]) evaluation, we pooled event rates with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Progression-free (PFS) and overall (OS) survival analyses with individual patient data were performed with the mixed-effect Cox proportional hazard model and single-arm random-effect analysis, providing pooled medians.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
We included 23 eligible studies with 901 BRCA-positive mCRPC patients. PSA50 response rates for PARPi and platinum were 69% (CI: 53-82%), and 74% (CI: 49-90%), respectively. Analyses of OS data showed no difference between PARPi and platinum treatments (hazard ratio: 0.86; CI: 0.49-1.52; p = 0.6). The single-arm OS and PFS analyses revealed similarities among different PARPis; pooled PFS and OS medians were 9.7 mo (CI: 8.1-12.5) and 17.4 mo (CI: 12.7-20.1), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
Our data revealed that different PARPis were similarly effective in terms of PFS and OS. Moreover, we found that PARPi and platinum therapy were comparable in terms of PSA50 response rate and OS, highlighting that platinum is a valid treatment option for BRCA-positive mCRPC patients. However, prospective interventional studies comparing these agents are essential to provide a higher level of evidence.
PATIENT SUMMARY
In this report, we found that different poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors had similar efficacy, and platinum was a valid treatment option in BRCA-positive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients.
Topics: Humans; Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant; Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors; Male; Treatment Outcome; BRCA2 Protein; Antineoplastic Agents; Neoplasm Metastasis; BRCA1 Protein
PubMed: 37722977
DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2023.09.001 -
Frontiers in Oncology 2024In recent years, we have observed the pivotal role of immunotherapy in improving survival for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, the...
BACKGROUND
In recent years, we have observed the pivotal role of immunotherapy in improving survival for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, the effectiveness of immunotherapy in the perioperative (neoadjuvant + adjuvant) treatment of resectable NSCLC remains uncertain. We conducted a comprehensive analysis of its antitumor efficacy and adverse effects (AEs) by pooling data from the KEYNOTE-671, NADIM II, and AEGEAN clinical trials.
METHODS
For eligible studies, we searched seven databases. The randomized controlled trials (RCTs) pertaining to the comparative analysis of combination neoadjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy plus perioperative immunotherapy (PIO) versus perioperative placebo (PP) were included. Primary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and event-free survival (EFS). Secondary endpoints encompassed drug responses, AEs, and surgical outcomes.
RESULTS
Three RCTs (KEYNOTE-671, NADIM II, and AEGEAN) were included in the final analysis. PIO group (neoadjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy plus perioperative immunotherapy) exhibited superior efficacy in OS (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.63 [0.49-0.81]), EFS (HR: 0.61 [0.52, 0.72]), objective response rate (risk ratio [RR]: 2.21 [1.91, 2.54]), pathological complete response (RR: 4.36 [3.04, 6.25]), major pathological response (RR: 2.79 [2.25, 3.46]), R0 resection rate (RR: 1.13 [1.00, 1.26]) and rate of adjuvant treatment (RR: 1.08 [1.01, 1.15]) compared with PP group (neoadjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy plus perioperative placebo). In the subgroup analysis, EFS tended to favor the PIO group in almost all subgroups. BMI (>25), T stage (IV), N stage (N1-N2) and pathological response (with pathological complete response) were favorable factors in the PIO group. In the safety assessment, the PIO group exhibited higher rates of serious AEs (28.96% vs. 23.51%) and AEs leading to treatment discontinuation (12.84% vs. 5.81%). Meanwhile, although total adverse events, grade 3-5 adverse events, and fatal adverse events tended to favor the PP group, the differences were not statistically significant.
CONCLUSION
PIO appears to be superior to PP for resectable stage II-III NSCLC, demonstrating enhanced survival and pathological responses. However, its elevated adverse event (AE) rate warrants careful consideration.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/#recordDetails, identifier CRD42023487475.
PubMed: 38454928
DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2024.1351359 -
Annals of Surgery Open : Perspectives... Dec 2023In this review, we aim to provide an overview of literature on lymph node (LN) histomorphological features and their relationship with the prognosis in colorectal cancer... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
In this review, we aim to provide an overview of literature on lymph node (LN) histomorphological features and their relationship with the prognosis in colorectal cancer (CRC).
BACKGROUND
Lymph nodes play a crucial role in the treatment and prognosis of CRC. The presence of LN metastases considerably worsens the prognosis in CRC patients. Literature has shown that the total number of LNs and the number negative LNs (LNnegs) has prognostic value in CRC patients. In esophageal carcinoma, LN size seems to be surrogate of the host antitumor response and a potentially clinically useful new prognostic biomarker for (y)pN0 esophageal carcinoma.
METHODS
A comprehensive search was performed in Pubmed, Embase, Medline, CINAHL, and the Cochrane library in March 2021. The PRISMA guidelines were followed. Only studies focusing on histomorphological features and LN size and their relation to overall survival were selected.
RESULTS
A total of 9 unique articles met all inclusion criteria and were therefore included in this systematic review. Six of these studies investigated HMF (eg, paracortical hyperplasia, germinal center predominance, and sinus histiocytosis) and 4 studies LNneg size and their relationship with overall survival. The presence of paracortical hyperplasia and an increased number of large LNnegs is related to a more favorable prognosis in CRC.
CONCLUSION
The results of this systematic review seem to support the hypothesis that there is a relationship between the host antitumor response reflected in different histomorphological reaction patterns visible in LNnegs and LNneg size related to survival in CRC patients.
PubMed: 38144501
DOI: 10.1097/AS9.0000000000000336 -
Lupus Science & Medicine Oct 2023SLE is a common multisystem autoimmune disease with chronic inflammation. Many efficacy evaluation indicators of randomised clinical trials (RCTs) for SLE have been...
OBJECTIVE
SLE is a common multisystem autoimmune disease with chronic inflammation. Many efficacy evaluation indicators of randomised clinical trials (RCTs) for SLE have been proposed but the comparability remains unknown. We aim to explore the preference and comparability of indicators reporting response rate and provide basis for primary outcome selection when evaluating the efficacy of SLE pharmaceutical treatment.
METHODS
We systematically searched three databases and three registries to identify pharmacological intervention-controlled SLE RCTs. Relative discriminations between indicators were assessed by the Bayesian hierarchical linear mixed model.
RESULTS
33 RCTs met our inclusion criteria and we compared eight of the most commonly used indicators reporting response rate. SLE Disease Activity Index 4 (SLEDAI-4) and SLE Responder Index 4 were considered the best recommended indicators reporting response rate to discriminate the pharmacological efficacy. Indicator preference was altered by disease severity, classification of drugs and outcome of trials, but SLEDAI-4 had robust efficacy in discriminating ability for most interventions. Of note, BILAG Index-based Combined Lupus Assessment showed efficacy in trials covering all-severity patients, as well as non-biologics RCTs. The British Isles Lupus Assessment Group response and Physician's Global Assessment response were more cautious in evaluating disease changes. Serious adverse event was often applied to evaluate the safety and tolerability of treatments rather than efficacy.
CONCLUSIONS
The impressionable efficacy discrimination ability of indicators highlights the importance of flexibility and comprehensiveness when choosing primary outcome(s). As for trials that are only evaluated by SLEDAI-4, attention should be paid to outcome interpretation to avoid the exaggeration of treatment efficacy. Further subgroup analyses are limited by the number of included RCTs.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42022334517.
Topics: Humans; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Lupus Erythematosus, Systemic; Treatment Outcome; Severity of Illness Index; Pharmaceutical Preparations
PubMed: 37798046
DOI: 10.1136/lupus-2023-000942