-
Surgical Endoscopy Jan 2022Robot-assisted surgery is increasingly adopted in colorectal surgery. However, evidence for the implementation of robot-assisted surgery for colon cancer is sparse. This... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Robot-assisted surgery is increasingly adopted in colorectal surgery. However, evidence for the implementation of robot-assisted surgery for colon cancer is sparse. This study aims to evaluate the short-term outcomes of robot-assisted colon surgery (RCS) for cancer compared to laparoscopic colon surgery (LCS).
METHODS
Embase, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Library were searched between January 1, 2005 and October 2, 2020. Randomized clinical trials and observational studies were included. Non-original literature was excluded. Primary endpoints were anastomotic leakage rate, conversion to open surgery, operative time, and length of hospital stay. Secondary endpoints were surgical efficacy and postoperative morbidity. We evaluated risk of bias using RoB2 and ROBINS-I quality assessment tools. We performed a pooled analysis of primary and secondary endpoints. Heterogeneity was assessed by I, and possible causes were explored by sensitivity- and meta-regression analyses. Publication bias was evaluated by Funnel plots and Eggers linear regression test. The level of evidence was assessed by GRADE.
RESULTS
Twenty studies enrolling 13,799 patients (RCS 1740 (12.6%) and LCS 12,059 (87.4%) were included in the meta-analysis that demonstrated RCS was superior regarding: anastomotic leakage (odds ratio (OR) = 0.54, 95% CI [0.32, 0.94]), conversion (OR = 0.31, 95% CI [0.23, 0.41]), overall complication rate (OR = 0.85, 95% CI [0.73, 1.00]) and time to regular diet (MD = - 0.29, 95% CI [- 0.56, 0.02]). LCS proved to have a shortened operative time compared to RCS (MD = 42.99, 95% CI [28.37, 57.60]). Level of evidence was very low according to GRADE.
CONCLUSION
RCS showed advantages in colonic cancer surgery regarding surgical efficacy and morbidity compared to LCS despite a predominant inclusion of non-RCT with serious risk of bias assessment and a very low level of evidence.
Topics: Colonic Neoplasms; Humans; Laparoscopy; Length of Stay; Operative Time; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Robotics; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34724576
DOI: 10.1007/s00464-021-08782-7 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2022Antipsychotic-induced weight gain is an extremely common problem in people with schizophrenia and is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Adjunctive... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Antipsychotic-induced weight gain is an extremely common problem in people with schizophrenia and is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Adjunctive pharmacological interventions may be necessary to help manage antipsychotic-induced weight gain. This review splits and updates a previous Cochrane Review that focused on both pharmacological and behavioural approaches to this problem.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the effectiveness of pharmacological interventions for preventing antipsychotic-induced weight gain in people with schizophrenia.
SEARCH METHODS
The Cochrane Schizophrenia Information Specialist searched Cochrane Schizophrenia's Register of Trials on 10 February 2021. There are no language, date, document type, or publication status limitations for inclusion of records in the register.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that examined any adjunctive pharmacological intervention for preventing weight gain in people with schizophrenia or schizophrenia-like illnesses who use antipsychotic medications.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
At least two review authors independently extracted data and assessed the quality of included studies. For continuous outcomes, we combined mean differences (MD) in endpoint and change data in the analysis. For dichotomous outcomes, we calculated risk ratios (RR). We assessed risk of bias for included studies and used GRADE to judge certainty of evidence and create summary of findings tables. The primary outcomes for this review were clinically important change in weight, clinically important change in body mass index (BMI), leaving the study early, compliance with treatment, and frequency of nausea. The included studies rarely reported these outcomes, so, post hoc, we added two new outcomes, average endpoint/change in weight and average endpoint/change in BMI.
MAIN RESULTS
Seventeen RCTs, with a total of 1388 participants, met the inclusion criteria for the review. Five studies investigated metformin, three topiramate, three H2 antagonists, three monoamine modulators, and one each investigated monoamine modulators plus betahistine, melatonin and samidorphan. The comparator in all studies was placebo or no treatment (i.e. standard care alone). We synthesised all studies in a quantitative meta-analysis. Most studies inadequately reported their methods of allocation concealment and blinding of participants and personnel. The resulting risk of bias and often small sample sizes limited the overall certainty of the evidence. Only one reboxetine study reported the primary outcome, number of participants with clinically important change in weight. Fewer people in the treatment condition experienced weight gains of more than 5% and more than 7% of their bodyweight than those in the placebo group (> 5% weight gain RR 0.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.11 to 0.65; 1 study, 43 participants; > 7% weight gain RR 0.24, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.83; 1 study, 43 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No studies reported the primary outcomes, 'clinically important change in BMI', or 'compliance with treatment'. However, several studies reported 'average endpoint/change in body weight' or 'average endpoint/change in BMI'. Metformin may be effective in preventing weight gain (MD -4.03 kg, 95% CI -5.78 to -2.28; 4 studies, 131 participants; low-certainty evidence); and BMI increase (MD -1.63 kg/m2, 95% CI -2.96 to -0.29; 5 studies, 227 participants; low-certainty evidence). Other agents that may be slightly effective in preventing weight gain include H2 antagonists such as nizatidine, famotidine and ranitidine (MD -1.32 kg, 95% CI -2.09 to -0.56; 3 studies, 248 participants; low-certainty evidence) and monoamine modulators such as reboxetine and fluoxetine (weight: MD -1.89 kg, 95% CI -3.31 to -0.47; 3 studies, 103 participants; low-certainty evidence; BMI: MD -0.66 kg/m2, 95% CI -1.05 to -0.26; 3 studies, 103 participants; low-certainty evidence). Topiramate did not appear effective in preventing weight gain (MD -4.82 kg, 95% CI -9.99 to 0.35; 3 studies, 168 participants; very low-certainty evidence). For all agents, there was no difference between groups in terms of individuals leaving the study or reports of nausea. However, the results of these outcomes are uncertain given the very low-certainty evidence.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is low-certainty evidence to suggest that metformin may be effective in preventing weight gain. Interpretation of this result and those for other agents, is limited by the small number of studies, small sample size, and short study duration. In future, we need studies that are adequately powered and with longer treatment durations to further evaluate the efficacy and safety of interventions for managing weight gain.
Topics: Antipsychotic Agents; Betahistine; Famotidine; Fluoxetine; Humans; Melatonin; Metformin; Nausea; Nizatidine; Ranitidine; Reboxetine; Schizophrenia; Topiramate; Weight Gain
PubMed: 36190739
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013337.pub2 -
Pharmaceutics Apr 2023Treatment of hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) is difficult and current guidelines are based mainly on expert opinion and non-randomized controlled trials. Recently, there... (Review)
Review
Treatment of hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) is difficult and current guidelines are based mainly on expert opinion and non-randomized controlled trials. Recently, there have been some targeted therapies using uniform primary endpoints for outcome assessment. Recommendations can be provided on selecting biologics and targeted synthetic small molecules for refractory HS by comparing the efficacy and safety of these medications. Databases including ClinicalTrial.gov, Cochrane Library, and PubMed were searched. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for moderate-to-severe HS were eligible. We performed random-effect network meta-analysis and ranking probability. The primary outcome was Hidradenitis Suppurativa Clinical Response (HiSCR) at 12-16 weeks. Secondary outcome included Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) 0/1, mean change of DLQI from baseline, and adverse effects. A total of 12 RCTs involving 2915 patients were identified. Adalimumab, bimekizumab, secukinumab 300 mg q4w and secukinumab 300 mg q2w showed superiority to placebo in HiSCR at weeks 12 to 16. In addition, there was no significant difference between bimekizumab and adalimumab as measured by HiSCR (RR = 1.00; 95% CI: 0.66-1.52) and DLQI 0/1 (RR = 2.40, 95% CI: 0.88-6.50). In terms of ranking probability for achieving HiSCR at 12-16 weeks, adalimumab ranked first, followed by bimekizumab, secukinumab 300 mg q4w, and secukinumab 300 mg q2w. All biologics and small molecules did not differ in the development of adverse effects compared to placebo. Adalimumab, bimekizumab, secukinumab 300 mg q4w and secukinumab 300 mg q2w represent four regimens that produce better outcomes than placebo without increased risk of adverse events. Adalimumab and bimekizumab exhibited best HiSCR and DLQI 0/1 between weeks 12-16.
PubMed: 37242593
DOI: 10.3390/pharmaceutics15051351 -
Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine Jun 2023Patellar tendinopathy (PT) mainly affects athletes who use the tendon for repeated energy storage and release activities. It can have a striking impact on athletes'...
BACKGROUND
Patellar tendinopathy (PT) mainly affects athletes who use the tendon for repeated energy storage and release activities. It can have a striking impact on athletes' careers, although data on its real prevalence and incidence are sparse. Research efforts should start from the results of reliable and updated epidemiological research to help better understand the impact of PT and underpin preventative measures.
PURPOSE
To determine the prevalence and incidence of PT in athletes and the general population.
DESIGN
Systematic review; Level of evidence, 3.
METHODS
A systematic review of the literature was performed on January 17, 2022, and conducted according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. The PubMed, Web of Science, and Wiley Cochrane Library databases were searched for epidemiological reports of any evidence level and clinical studies reporting data on the incidence or prevalence of PT for the 11,488 retrieved records. The primary endpoint was the prevalence and incidence of PT in sport-active patients. The secondary endpoints were PT prevalence and incidence in subgroups of athletes based on sex, age, sport type, and sport level played, as well as the same epidemiological measures in the general population.
RESULTS
A total of 28 studies, with 28,171 participants, were selected and used for the qualitative and quantitative analysis. The general and athletes' populations reported an overall PT prevalence of 0.1% and 18.3%, respectively. In athletes, the prevalence of PT was 11.2% in women and 17% in men ( = .070). The prevalence of PT in athletes <18 years was 10.1%, while it was 21.3% in athletes ≥18 years ( = .004). The prevalence of PT was 6.1% in soccer players, 20.8% in basketball players, and 24.8% in volleyball players. Heterogeneous PT diagnostic approaches were observed. Higher prevalence values were found when PT diagnoses were made using patient-reported outcomes versus clinical evaluations ( = .004).
CONCLUSION
This review demonstrated that PT is a common problem in the male and female sport-active populations. There are twice as many athletes aged ≥18 years than there are <18 years. Volleyball and basketball players are most affected by PT.
PubMed: 37347023
DOI: 10.1177/23259671231173659 -
Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine Dec 2021Veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) is used as mechanical circulatory support in cardiogenic shock (CS). It restores peripheral perfusion, at the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) is used as mechanical circulatory support in cardiogenic shock (CS). It restores peripheral perfusion, at the expense of increased left ventricle (LV) afterload. In this setting, Impella can be used as direct unloading strategy. Aim of this meta-analysis was to investigate efficacy and safety of LV unloading with Impella during ECMO in CS. A systematic search on Medline, Scopus and Cochrane Library was performed using as combination of keywords: extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, Impella, percutaneous micro axial pump, ECPELLA, cardiogenic shock. We aimed to include studies, which compared the use of ECMO with and without Impella (ECPELLA vs. ECMO). Primary endpoint was short-term all-cause mortality; secondary endpoints included major bleeding, haemolysis, need for renal replacement therapy (RRT) and cerebrovascular accident (CVA). Five studies met the inclusion criteria, with a total population of 972 patients. The ECPELLA cohort showed improved survival compared to the control group (RR (Risk Ratio): 0.86; 95% CI (Confidence Interval): 0.76, 0.96; = 0.009). When including in the analysis only studies with homogeneous comparator groups, LV unloading with Impella remained associated with significant reduction in mortality (RR: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.75, 0.97; = 0.01). Haemolysis (RR: 1.70; 95% CI: 1.35, 2.15; < 0.00001) and RRT (RR: 1.86; 95% CI: 1.07, 3.21; = 0.03) occurred at a higher rate in the ECPELLA group. There was no difference between the two groups in terms of major bleeding (RR: 1.37; 95% CI: 0.88, 2.13; = 0.16) and CVA (RR: 0.91; 95% CI: 0.61, 1.38; = 0.66). In conclusion, LV unloading with Impella during ECMO was associated with improved survival, despite increased haemolysis and need for RRT, without additional risk of major bleeding and CVA.
Topics: Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation; Heart Ventricles; Heart-Assist Devices; Humans; Shock, Cardiogenic; Stroke
PubMed: 34957789
DOI: 10.31083/j.rcm2204154 -
BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) Dec 2021To evaluate pathological complete response as a surrogate endpoint for disease-free survival and overall survival in regulatory neoadjuvant trials of early stage breast... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Evaluation of pathological complete response as surrogate endpoint in neoadjuvant randomised clinical trials of early stage breast cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate pathological complete response as a surrogate endpoint for disease-free survival and overall survival in regulatory neoadjuvant trials of early stage breast cancer.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
DATA SOURCES
Medline, Embase, and Scopus to 1 December 2020.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR STUDY SELECTION
Randomised clinical trials that tested neoadjuvant chemotherapy given alone or combined with other treatments, including anti-human epidermal growth factor 2 (anti-HER2) drugs, targeted treatments, antivascular agents, bisphosphonates, and immune checkpoint inhibitors.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Trial level associations between the surrogate endpoint pathological complete response and disease-free survival and overall survival.
METHODS
A weighted regression analysis was performed on log transformed treatment effect estimates (hazard ratio for disease-free survival and overall survival and relative risk for pathological complete response), and the coefficient of determination (R) was used to quantify the association. The secondary objective was to explore heterogeneity of results in preplanned subgroups analysis, stratifying trials according treatment type in the experimental arm, definition used for pathological complete response (breast and lymph nodes breast only), and biological features of the disease (HER2 positive or triple negative breast cancer). The surrogate threshold effect was also evaluated, indicating the minimum value of the relative risk for pathological complete response necessary to confidently predict a non-null effect on hazard ratio for disease-free survival or overall survival.
RESULTS
54 randomised clinical trials comprising a total of 32 611 patients were included in the analysis. A weak association was observed between the log(relative risk) for pathological complete response and log(hazard ratio) for both disease-free survival (R=0.14, 95% confidence interval 0.00 to 0.29) and overall survival (R =0.08, 0.00 to 0.22). Similar results were found across all subgroups evaluated, independently of the definition used for pathological complete response, treatment type in the experimental arm, and biological features of the disease. The surrogate threshold effect was 5.19 for disease-free survival but was not estimable for overall survival. Consistent results were confirmed in three sensitivity analyses: excluding small trials (<200 patients enrolled), excluding trials with short median follow-up (<24 months), and replacing the relative risk for pathological complete response with the absolute difference of pathological complete response rates between treatment arms.
CONCLUSION
A lack of surrogacy of pathological complete response was identified at trial level for both disease-free survival and overall survival. The findings suggest that pathological complete response should not be used as primary endpoint in regulatory neoadjuvant trials of early stage breast cancer.
Topics: Biomarkers; Breast Neoplasms; Chemotherapy, Adjuvant; Disease-Free Survival; Female; Humans; Neoadjuvant Therapy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 34933868
DOI: 10.1136/bmj-2021-066381 -
Dermatology and Therapy May 2022The comparative efficacy of targeted systemic therapies for moderate to severe atopic dermatitis (AD) has not been systematically assessed using recent phase 3 data....
INTRODUCTION
The comparative efficacy of targeted systemic therapies for moderate to severe atopic dermatitis (AD) has not been systematically assessed using recent phase 3 data. This network meta-analysis assesses the comparative efficacy of targeted systemic therapies without the addition of topical corticosteroids (TCS) and/or topical calcineurin inhibitors (TCI) in adults with moderate to severe AD.
METHODS
The systematic literature review searched through 17 May 2021 for phase 3/4 trials with upadacitinib, interleukin-4 (IL-4), interleukin-13 (IL-13), or JAK inhibitors compared with placebo or active intervention for adults and adolescents with moderate to severe AD with inadequate response to TCS/TCI or for whom TCS/TCI was medically inadvisable, without restrictions on year or region. Researchers assessed data using PRISMA guidelines. The proportion of patients achieving trial co-primary endpoints [Investigator Global Assessment (IGA) score of 0 or 1 (clear or almost clear) and reduction of ≥ 2 points from baseline; proportion of patients achieving Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) improvement ≥ 75% from baseline (EASI-75)]; EASI improvement ≥ 90% from baseline (EASI-90); and ≥ 4-point improvement on Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale from baseline (ΔNRS ≥ 4) were evaluated using Bayesian network meta-analysis.
RESULTS
Of 3415 initially identified records, network meta-analysis (NMA) ultimately included 6 records representing 9 unique studies. Two upadacitinib trials were also included. Eleven clinical trials including 6254 patients were analyzed. Upadacitinib 30 mg daily was the most efficacious therapy across all endpoints at the primary endpoint (week 12 or 16) and at earlier timepoints, followed by upadacitinib 15 mg daily and abrocitinib 200 mg daily.
DISCUSSION
Many factors need to be considered for treatment selection for AD. These findings can help healthcare providers when personalizing a patient's treatment.
CONCLUSION
Upadacitinib 30 mg daily, upadacitinib 15 mg daily, and abrocitinib 200 mg daily may be the most efficacious targeted systemic therapies over 12-16 weeks of therapy in AD.
PubMed: 35435637
DOI: 10.1007/s13555-022-00721-1 -
International Journal of Colorectal... Oct 2021Over the last years, laparoscopic appendectomy has progressively replaced open appendectomy and become the current gold standard treatment for suspected, uncomplicated...
BACKGROUND
Over the last years, laparoscopic appendectomy has progressively replaced open appendectomy and become the current gold standard treatment for suspected, uncomplicated appendicitis. At the same time, though, it is an ongoing discussion that antibiotic therapy can be an equivalent treatment for patients with uncomplicated appendicitis. The aim of this systematic review was to determine the safety and efficacy of antibiotic therapy and compare it to the laparoscopic appendectomy for acute, uncomplicated appendicitis.
METHODS
The PubMed database, Embase database, and Cochrane library were scanned for studies comparing laparoscopic appendectomy with antibiotic treatment. Two independent reviewers performed the study selection and data extraction. The primary endpoint was defined as successful treatment of appendicitis. Secondary endpoints were pain intensity, duration of hospitalization, absence from work, and incidence of complications.
RESULTS
No studies were found that exclusively compared laparoscopic appendectomy with antibiotic treatment for acute, uncomplicated appendicitis.
CONCLUSIONS
To date, there are no studies comparing antibiotic treatment to laparoscopic appendectomy for patients with acute uncomplicated appendicitis, thus emphasizing the lack of evidence and need for further investigation.
Topics: Acute Disease; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Appendectomy; Appendicitis; Humans; Laparoscopy; Length of Stay; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33852068
DOI: 10.1007/s00384-021-03927-5 -
European Journal of Medical Research Dec 2022Heart failure with mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF) or heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) are associated with significant morbidity... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
Heart failure with mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF) or heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) are associated with significant morbidity and mortality, as well as growing health and economic burden. Sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors are very promising for the outcome improvement of patients with HFpEF or HFmrEF. The meta-analysis was performed to investigate the effects of SGLT2 inhibitors in HFpEF or HFmrEF, by pooling data from all clinically randomized controlled trials (RCTs) available to increase power to testify.
METHODS
Studies were searched in electronic databases from inception to November, 2022. We performed a meta-analysis to estimate the effect of SGLT2 inhibitors on clinical endpoints in patients with HFpEF or HFmrEF, using trial-level data with consistent endpoint definitions. The primary outcome was the composite of heart failure (HF) hospitalization or cardiovascular death. Hazard ratio (HR) was pooled with 95% confidence interval (CI) for dichotomous data. This study was registered with INPLASY 2022110095.
RESULTS
Six studies involving 15,989 participants were included into the final analysis. Pooled analyses revealed that SGLT2 inhibitors significantly reduced the composite of HF hospitalization or cardiovascular death [HR: 0.79 (0.72-0.85); I = 0%; P < 0.00001] and HF hospitalizations [HR: 0.74 (0.67-0.82); I = 0%; P < 0.00001]. This finding was seen in both HFmrEF trials [HR: 0.76 (0.67-0.87); I = 49%; P < 0.0001] and HFpEF subgroup studies [HR: 0.70 (0.53-0.93); I = 0%; P = 0.01]. The incidence of any serious adverse events [OR: 0.89 (0.83-0.96); I = 0%; P = 0.002] was significantly lower in the SGLT2 inhibitor arm. No significant differences were observed between the two groups with regard to cardiovascular death and all-cause death.
CONCLUSIONS
This meta-analysis of patients with heart failure of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) > 40% showed that SGLT2 inhibitors significantly reduce the risk of the composite of cardiovascular death and hospitalization for heart failure, but not cardiovascular death and all-cause death. Nevertheless, given that SGLT2 inhibitors may reduce the risk of hospitalization for heart failure, they should be considered the fundamental treatment for all patients with HFpEF or HFmrEF.
Topics: Humans; Heart Failure; Prognosis; Sodium-Glucose Transporter 2 Inhibitors
PubMed: 36581880
DOI: 10.1186/s40001-022-00945-z -
EBioMedicine Apr 2023The cytokine interleukin-2 (IL-2) can stimulate both effector immune cells and regulatory T (Treg) cells. The ability of selectively engaging either of these effects has...
BACKGROUND
The cytokine interleukin-2 (IL-2) can stimulate both effector immune cells and regulatory T (Treg) cells. The ability of selectively engaging either of these effects has spurred interest in using IL-2 for immunotherapy of cancer and autoimmune diseases. Thus, numerous IL-2-based biologic agents with improved bias or delivery towards effector immune cells or Treg cells have been developed. This study systematically reviews clinical results of improved IL-2-based compounds.
METHODS
We searched the ClinicalTrials.gov database for registered trials using improved IL-2-based agents and different databases for available results of these studies.
FINDINGS
From 576 registered clinical trials we extracted 36 studies on different improved IL-2-based compounds. Adding another nine agents reported in recent literature reviews and based on our knowledge totalled in 45 compounds. A secondary search for registered clinical trials of each of these 45 compounds resulted in 141 clinical trials included in this review, with 41 trials reporting results.
INTERPRETATION
So far, none of the improved IL-2-based compounds has gained regulatory approval for the treatment of cancer or autoimmune diseases. NKTR-214 is the only compound completing phase 3 studies. The PIVOT IO-001 trial testing the combination of NKTR-214 plus Pembrolizumab compared to Pembrolizumab monotherapy in metastatic melanoma missed its primary endpoints. Also the PIVOT-09 study, combining NKTR-214 with Nivolumab compared to Sunitinib or Cabozantinib in advanced renal cell carcinoma, missed its primary endpoint. Trials in autoimmune diseases are currently in early stages, thus not allowing definite conclusions on efficacy.
FUNDING
This work was supported by public funding agencies.
Topics: Humans; Antineoplastic Agents; Interleukin-2; Carcinoma, Renal Cell; Kidney Neoplasms; Immunotherapy; Autoimmune Diseases
PubMed: 37004361
DOI: 10.1016/j.ebiom.2023.104539