-
Patient Education and Counseling Jul 2022Practice guidelines emphasize the importance of investigating psychosocial distress in mesothelioma patients and family caregivers. We aimed to synthesize research on... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
Practice guidelines emphasize the importance of investigating psychosocial distress in mesothelioma patients and family caregivers. We aimed to synthesize research on the psychosocial support needs of mesothelioma patients and their family caregivers.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review with a narrative synthesis and quality assessment. The review process adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.
RESULTS
MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, PsychArticles, and PsycINFO were searched until December 2020 and 37 studies in English met inclusion criteria. Most (n = 24) included mesothelioma patients as a very small proportion of their cancer samples. A narrative synthesis was conducted on the 13 studies including only mesothelioma patients (n = 297) and/or caregivers (n = 82). Patients and caregivers want improvements in the diagnosis delivery and access to palliative care. Patients want emotional support, patient-centered treatment, improved information about illness progression and death, and to meet others with mesothelioma. Caregivers want one-on-one practical and emotional support. Study quality varied.
CONCLUSIONS
Few studies focus on the psychosocial support needs relevant to mesothelioma. Mesothelioma patients and family caregivers highlight targeted psychosocial care as an unmet need.
PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS
Efforts are required to design and test psychosocial interventions for this vulnerable and overlooked group.
PROTOCOL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO (registration number CRD42020167852).
Topics: Caregivers; Humans; Mesothelioma; Palliative Care; Psychosocial Support Systems; Quality of Life
PubMed: 35260259
DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2022.02.017 -
Anti-cancer Drugs Jan 2022To date, there are no standardized systemic treatment options for patients with metastatic pituitary carcinoma progressed to chemo and radiation therapy....
To date, there are no standardized systemic treatment options for patients with metastatic pituitary carcinoma progressed to chemo and radiation therapy. Immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have been successfully assessed in other solid malignancies and could be a concrete hope for these patients. We performed a critical review of the literature aimed to evaluate studies assessing ICIs in pituitary malignancies. We also conducted research about published translational data assessing immune-contexture in these malignancies. Some preliminary reports reported a successful administration of pembrolizumab or the combination between nivolumab and ipilimumab in patients with metastatic ACTH-secreting pituitary carcinomas. Translational data suggest that adenomas secreting growth hormone and ACTH have a suppressed immune-microenvironment, which could be more likely to benefit from ICIs. Immune-checkpoint inhibitors can be an effective treatment in patients with pituitary carcinoma and maybe also recurrent adenoma. Tumors secreting growth hormone and ACTH are more likely to benefit from ICIs due to a different immune-microenvironment.
Topics: Adrenocorticotropic Hormone; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Growth Hormone; Humans; Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors; Ipilimumab; Neoplasm Metastasis; Nivolumab; Pituitary Neoplasms; Tumor Microenvironment
PubMed: 34348358
DOI: 10.1097/CAD.0000000000001157 -
Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer... Nov 2023Colonoscopy may detect colorectal polyp and facilitate its removal in order to prevent colorectal cancer. However, substantial miss rate for colorectal adenomas... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Colonoscopy may detect colorectal polyp and facilitate its removal in order to prevent colorectal cancer. However, substantial miss rate for colorectal adenomas detection still occurred during screening colonoscopy procedure. Nowadays, artificial intelligence (AI) have been employed in trials to improve polyp detection rate (PDR) and adenoma detection rate (ADR). Therefore, we would like to determine the impact of AI in increasing PDR and ADR.
METHODS
The present study adhered to the guidelines outlined in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses 2020 (PRISMA 2020) statement. To identify relevant literature, comprehensive searches were conducted on major scientific databases, including Pubmed, EBSCO-host, and Proquest. The search was limited to articles published up to November 30, 2022. Inclusion criteria for the study encompassed full-text accessibility, articles written in the English language, and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that reported both ADR and PDR values, comparing conventional diagnostic methods with AI-aided approaches. To synthesize the data, we computed the combined pooled odds ratio (OR) using a random-effects model. This model was chosen due to the expectation of considerable heterogeneity among the selected studies. To evaluate potential publication bias, the Begg's funnel diagram was employed.
RESULTS
A total of 13 studies were included in this study. Colonoscopy with AI had significantly higher PDR compared to without AI (pooled OR 1.46, 95% CI 1.13-1.89, p = 0.003) and higher ADR (pooled OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.37-1.82, p < 0.00001). PDR analysis showed moderate heterogeneity between included studies (p = 0.004; I2=63%). Furthermore, ADR analysis showed moderate heterogeneity (p < 0.007; I2 = 57%). Additionally, the funnels plot of ADR and PDR analysis showed an asymmetry plot and low publication bias.
CONCLUSION
AI may improve colonoscopy result quality through improving PDR and ADR.
Topics: Humans; Adenoma; Artificial Intelligence; Colonoscopy; Colorectal Neoplasms; Databases, Factual
PubMed: 38019222
DOI: 10.31557/APJCP.2023.24.11.3655 -
Clinical Gastroenterology and... Sep 2022Colonoscopy quality indicators provide measurable assessments of performance, but significant provider-level variations exist. We performed a systematic review and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND & AIMS
Colonoscopy quality indicators provide measurable assessments of performance, but significant provider-level variations exist. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess whether endoscopist specialty is associated with adenoma detection rate (ADR) - the primary outcome - or cecal intubation rate, adverse event rates, and post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer rates.
METHODS
We searched EMBASE, Google Scholar, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials from inception to December 14, 2020. Two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts. Citations underwent duplicate full-text review, with disagreements resolved by a third reviewer. Data were abstracted in duplicate. The DerSimonian and Laird random effects model was used to calculate pooled odds ratios (ORs) with respective 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Risk of bias was assessed using Risk of Bias in Non-randomised Studies of Interventions.
RESULTS
Of 11,314 citations, 36 studies representing 3,500,832 colonoscopies were included. Compared with colonoscopies performed by gastroenterologists, those by surgeons were associated with lower ADRs (OR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.74-0.88) and lower cecal intubation rates (OR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.63-0.92). Compared with colonoscopies performed by gastroenterologists, those by other (non-gastroenterologist, non-surgeon) endoscopists were associated with lower ADRs (OR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.87-0.96), higher perforation rates (OR, 3.02; 95% CI, 1.65-5.51), and higher post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer rates (OR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.14-1.33). Substantial to considerable heterogeneity existed for most analyses, and overall certainty in the evidence was low according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations framework.
CONCLUSION
Colonoscopies performed by surgeons or other endoscopists were associated with poorer quality metrics and outcomes compared with those performed by gastroenterologists. Targeted quality improvement efforts may be warranted.
Topics: Adenoma; Cecum; Colonoscopy; Colorectal Neoplasms; Gastroenterologists; Humans
PubMed: 34450297
DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2021.08.029 -
Pituitary Oct 2023Pituitary carcinomas are a rare entity that respond poorly to multimodal therapy. Patients follow a variable disease course that remains ill-defined.
PURPOSE
Pituitary carcinomas are a rare entity that respond poorly to multimodal therapy. Patients follow a variable disease course that remains ill-defined.
METHODS
We present an institutional case series of patients treated for pituitary carcinomas over a 30-year period from 1992 to 2022. A systematic review was conducted to identify prior case series of patients with pituitary carcinomas.
RESULTS
Fourteen patients with a mean age at pituitary carcinoma diagnosis of 52.5 years (standard deviation [SD] 19.4) met inclusion criteria. All 14 patients had tumor subtypes confirmed by immunohistochemistry and hormone testing, with the most common being ACTH-producing pituitary adenomas (n = 12). Patients had a median progression-free survival (PFS) of 1.4 years (range 0.7-10.0) and a median overall survival (OS) of 8.4 years (range 2.3-24.0) from pituitary adenoma diagnosis. Median PFS and OS were 0.6 years (range 0.0-2.2) and 1.5 years (range 0.1-9.6) respectively upon development of metastases. Most patients (n = 12) had locally invasive disease to the cavernous sinus, dorsum sellae dura, or sphenoid sinus prior to metastasis. Common sites of metastasis included the central nervous system, liver, lung, and bone. In a pooled analysis including additional cases from the literature, treatment of metastases with chemotherapy or a combination of radiation therapy and chemotherapy significantly prolonged PFS (p = 0.02), while failing to significantly improve OS (p = 0.14).
CONCLUSION
Pituitary carcinomas are highly recurrent, heterogenous tumors with variable responses to treatment. Multidisciplinary management with an experienced neuro-endocrine and neuro-oncology team is needed given the unrelenting nature of this disease.
Topics: Humans; Pituitary Neoplasms; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Adenoma; ACTH-Secreting Pituitary Adenoma; Pituitary Gland
PubMed: 37523025
DOI: 10.1007/s11102-023-01341-4 -
Digestive Surgery 2021The management of the pancreas in patients with duodenal trauma or duodenal tumors remains a controversial issue. Pancreas-preserving total duodenectomy (PPTD) requires...
BACKGROUND
The management of the pancreas in patients with duodenal trauma or duodenal tumors remains a controversial issue. Pancreas-preserving total duodenectomy (PPTD) requires a meticulous surgical technique. The most common indication is familial duodenal adenomatous polyposis (FAP). The aims of this study are to carry out a systematic review of the literature on the indications for PPTD and to highlight the risks and benefits compared with other more aggressive procedures.
SUMMARY
A systematic literature review was performed following PRISMA recommendations of studies published in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library until May 2019. Thirty articles describing 211 patients were chosen. The mean age was 48 years. The surgical indication in 75% of patients was FAP. The mean operating time was 329 min and mean intraoperative bleeding 412 mL. Postoperative morbidity rate was 49.7% (76% Clavien-Dindo
97.8%. Key Messages: PPTD is indicated for patients with benign and premalignant duodenal lesions without involvement of the pancreatic head. It is a feasible procedure offering an alternative to other more aggressive procedures in selected patients. Mortality is below 1.5%. Topics: Adenomatous Polyposis Coli; Digestive System Surgical Procedures; Duodenal Neoplasms; Duodenum; Humans; Pancreas; Postoperative Complications
PubMed: 34000717
DOI: 10.1159/000515718 -
Clinical Gastroenterology and... Dec 2023Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is inversely correlated with the risk of interval colon cancer and is a key target for quality improvement in endoscopy units. We conducted... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND & AIMS
Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is inversely correlated with the risk of interval colon cancer and is a key target for quality improvement in endoscopy units. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify and evaluate the effectiveness of interventions that can be implemented at the endoscopy unit level to improve ADRs.
METHODS
Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, a systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases between January 1990 and December 2022 to identify relevant studies. Both randomized controlled trials and observational studies were eligible. Data for the primary outcome of ADR were analyzed and reported on the log-odds scale with 95% CIs using a random-effects meta-analysis model using the empiric Bayes estimator.
RESULTS
From 10,778 initial citations, 34 studies were included in the meta-analysis comprising 371,041 procedures and 1501 endoscopists. The provision of report cards (odds ratio [OR], 1.28; 95% CI, 1.13-1.45; P < .001) and the presence of an additional observer to identify polyps (OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.09-1.43; P = .002) were associated with significant increases in ADRs whereas multimodal interventions were borderline significant (OR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.00-1.40; P = .05) and withdrawal time monitoring was not associated significantly with an increase in ADRs (OR, 1.35; 95% CI, 0.93-1.96; P = .11).
CONCLUSIONS
The provision of report cards and the presence of an additional observer to identify polyps are associated with improved ADRs and should be considered for implementation in endoscopy facilities.
Topics: Humans; Colonoscopy; Bayes Theorem; Colonic Neoplasms; Adenoma; Quality Improvement; Polyps
PubMed: 37080261
DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2023.03.049 -
Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers &... Apr 2022The influence of anthropometric characteristics on colorectal neoplasia biology is unclear. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine if... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The influence of anthropometric characteristics on colorectal neoplasia biology is unclear. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine if adult-attained height is independently associated with the risk of colorectal cancer or adenoma.
METHODS
We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science from inception to August 2020 for studies on the association between adult-attained height and colorectal cancer or adenoma. The original data from the Johns Hopkins (Baltimore, MD) Colon Biofilm study was also included. The overall HR/OR of colorectal cancer/adenoma with increased height was estimated using random-effects meta-analysis.
RESULTS
We included 47 observational studies involving 280,644 colorectal cancer and 14,139 colorectal adenoma cases. Thirty-three studies reported data for colorectal cancer incidence per 10-cm increase in height; 19 yielded an HR of 1.14 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.11-1.17; P < 0.001), and 14 engendered an OR of 1.09 (95% CI, 1.05-1.13; P < 0.001). Twenty-six studies compared colorectal cancer incidence between individuals within the highest versus the lowest height percentile; 19 indicated an HR of 1.24 (95% CI, 1.19-1.30; P < 0.001), and seven resulting in an OR of 1.07 (95% CI, 0.92-1.25; P = 0.39). Four studies reported data for assessing colorectal adenoma incidence per 10-cm increase in height, showing an overall OR of 1.06 (95% CI, 1.00-1.12; P = 0.03).
CONCLUSIONS
Greater adult attained height is associated with an increased risk of colorectal cancer and adenoma.
IMPACT
Height should be considered as a risk factor for colorectal cancer screening.
Topics: Adenoma; Adult; Cohort Studies; Colorectal Neoplasms; Humans; Incidence; Risk Factors
PubMed: 35247904
DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-21-0398 -
Cephalalgia : An International Journal... Feb 2023To systemically review clinical studies investigating the role of prolactin and its receptors in headache and migraine. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To systemically review clinical studies investigating the role of prolactin and its receptors in headache and migraine.
BACKGROUND
Migraine prevalence is more common in women compared to men. As prolactin is a crucial regulator of the hypothalamus-pituitary-gonadal axis, prolactin and its receptors might contribute to signaling mechanisms underlying migraine.
METHODS
In this systematic review, we searched PubMed and EMBASE with the terms: prolactin, hyperprolactinemia, macroprolactinemia, hypoprolactinemia, migraine, headache, head pain and trigeminal pain pathway for clinical studies investigating prolactin signaling in headache and migraine. Two reviewers independently screened 841 articles for population, intervention, comparison, outcome, and study design. Studies were restricted to the English language and were excluded if they had a nonexperimental methodology.
RESULTS
Nineteen clinical studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the qualitative and quantitative analysis. The main findings were that serum prolactin levels were found to be higher in individuals with migraine compared to healthy controls, and prolactinomas (prolactin-secreting pituitary adenomas) were correlated with higher incidence of headache in otherwise healthy individuals and migraine attacks in individuals with migraine.
CONCLUSION
Considerable evidence suggests a key role of prolactin and its receptors in migraine pathophysiology. Further randomized and placebo-controlled clinical studies targeting prolactin signaling are needed to further clarify influences of prolactin in migraine attack initiation.
Topics: Male; Humans; Female; Prolactin; Headache; Prolactinoma; Migraine Disorders; Hyperprolactinemia; Pituitary Neoplasms
PubMed: 36718026
DOI: 10.1177/03331024221136286 -
European Respiratory Review : An... Dec 2022Thoracentesis and thoracoscopy are used to diagnose malignant pleural effusions (MPE). Data on how sensitivity varies with tumour type is limited. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Thoracentesis and thoracoscopy are used to diagnose malignant pleural effusions (MPE). Data on how sensitivity varies with tumour type is limited.
METHODS
Systematic review using PubMed was performed through August 2020 to determine the sensitivity of thoracentesis and thoracoscopy for MPE secondary to malignancy, by cancer type, and complication rates. Tests to identify sources of heterogeneity were performed. Study quality was assessed using Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS)-2 and National Institutes of Health quality assessment tools. Publication bias was tested using funnel plots.
RESULTS
Meta-analyses for sensitivity of thoracentesis for MPE secondary to malignancy, mesothelioma and lung and breast cancer included 29, eight, 12 and nine studies, respectively. Pooled sensitivities were 0.643 (95% CI 0.592-0.692), 0.451 (95% CI 0.249-0.661), 0.738 (95% CI 0.659-0.836) and 0.820 (95% CI 0.700-0.917), respectively. For sensitivity of thoracoscopy for MPE secondary to malignancy and mesothelioma, 41 and 15 studies were included, respectively. Pooled sensitivities were 0.929 (95% CI 0.905-0.95) and 0.915 (95% CI 0.871-0.952), respectively. Pooled complication rates of thoracentesis and thoracoscopy were 0.041 (95% CI 0.025-0.051) and 0.040 (95% CI 0.029-0.052), respectively. Heterogeneity was significant for all meta-analyses. Funnel plots were asymmetric.
INTERPRETATION
Sensitivity of thoracentesis varied significantly per cancer type. Pooled complication rates were low. Awareness of how sensitivity of thoracentesis changes across cancers can improve decision-making when MPE is suspected.
Topics: Humans; Thoracentesis; Retrospective Studies; Pleural Effusion, Malignant; Mesothelioma; Mesothelioma, Malignant; Thoracoscopy
PubMed: 36543349
DOI: 10.1183/16000617.0053-2022