-
Supportive Care in Cancer : Official... Aug 2022Emerging evidence highlights the roles the gut microbiome and the immune system, integral parts of the gut-brain axis, play in developing various symptoms in cancer... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Emerging evidence highlights the roles the gut microbiome and the immune system, integral parts of the gut-brain axis, play in developing various symptoms in cancer patients. The purpose of this systematic review was to describe the roles of inflammatory markers and the gut microbiome, as well as to describe their associations with psychoneurological symptoms and gastrointestinal toxicities in women with gynecologic cancers.
METHODS
A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science from January 2000 to February 2021. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines were utilized to screen the found articles. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Mixed Method Assessment Tool. In the included studies, various inflammatory markers and gut microbiome diversity and patterns were measured.
RESULTS
Sixteen studies met the eligibility criteria and were included in this systematic review. While there were discrepancies in the associations between various inflammatory markers and symptoms, most of the studies showed positive correlations between interleukin-6 (IL-6) and tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) and cancer-related psychoneurological symptoms and gastrointestinal toxicities in gynecologic cancer patients. Although there was no consensus in alpha diversity, studies showed significant dissimilarity in the microbial communities (beta diversity) in patients with gastrointestinal toxicities compared with patients without symptoms or healthy controls. Studies also reported inconsistent findings in the abundance of bacteria at different taxonomic levels. Radiation enteritis-derived microbiota could stimulate TNF-α and interleukin 1 beta (IL-1β) secretion.
CONCLUSIONS
Alteration of inflammatory markers, the gut microbiome, and their associations show emerging evidence in the development of psychoneurological symptoms and gastrointestinal toxicities in women with gynecologic cancers. More studies on the interactions between the immune system and the gut microbiome, two integral parts of the gut-brain axis, are required to shed light on the roles they play in symptom development.
Topics: Female; Gastrointestinal Diseases; Gastrointestinal Microbiome; Genital Neoplasms, Female; Humans; Inflammation; Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha
PubMed: 35396962
DOI: 10.1007/s00520-022-07027-0 -
Frontiers in Immunology 2022CD47-SIRPα interaction acts as a "don't eat me" signal and is exploited by cancer to downregulate innate and adaptive immune surveillance. There has been intense... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
CD47-SIRPα interaction acts as a "don't eat me" signal and is exploited by cancer to downregulate innate and adaptive immune surveillance. There has been intense interest to develop a mechanism of blockade, and we aimed to analyze the emerging data from early clinical trials. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of relevant databases and conference abstracts including clinical trials using CD47 and/or SIRPα inhibitors in cancer treatment. Nonlinear mixed models were applied for comparison of response and toxicity. We retrieved 317 articles, 24 of which were eligible. These included 771 response-evaluable patients with hematologic (47.1%) and solid tumors (52.9%). Of these, 6.4% experienced complete response, 10.4% partial response, and 26.1% stable disease for a 16.7% objective response rate (ORR), 42.8% disease control rate, and 4.8-month median duration of response. ORR was significantly higher for hematologic cancers (25.3%) than solid cancers (9.1%, p=0.042). Comparing by mechanism, seven CD47 monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and six selective SIRPα blockers were given alone or combined with checkpoint inhibitors, targeted therapy, and/or chemotherapy. In solid cancers, selective SIRPα blockade showed a higher ORR (16.2%) than anti-CD47 mAbs (2.8%, p=0.079), which was significant for combination therapies (ORR 28.3% vs 3.0%, respectively, p=0.010). Responses were seen in head and neck, colorectal, endometrial, ovarian, hepatocellular, non-small cell lung, and HER2+gastroesophageal cancers. Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was seen in 3.3% of patients (5.4% anti-CD47 mAbs, 1.4% selective SIRPα blockers; p=0.01). The frequency of treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) ≥grade 3 was 18.0%, similar between the two groups (p=0.082), and mostly laboratory abnormalities. For anti-CD47 mAbs, the most common toxicities included grade 1-2 fatigue (27.2%), headache (21.0%), and anemia (20.5%). For selective SIRPα blockers, these included grade 1-2 infusion reaction (23.1%) and fatigue (15.8%). Anti-CD47 mAbs were significantly more likely than selective SIRPα blockers to cause grade 1-2 fever, chills, nausea/vomiting, headache, and anemia. In conclusion, combination therapies using selective SIRPα blockade had higher response rates in solid tumors than anti-CD47 mAb combinations. Hematologic changes were the main TRAEs, and selective SIRPα blockers seemed to have a better grade 1-2 toxicity profile. Treatment was well-tolerated with minimal DLTs.
Topics: Humans; Protein Binding; Antibodies, Monoclonal; Fatigue; Headache; Neoplasms; CD47 Antigen
PubMed: 36439116
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2022.1027235 -
Biomedicines Feb 2023(1) Background: Epilepsy is a frequent comorbidity in patients with brain tumors, in whom seizures are often drug-resistant. Current evidence suggests that excess of... (Review)
Review
(1) Background: Epilepsy is a frequent comorbidity in patients with brain tumors, in whom seizures are often drug-resistant. Current evidence suggests that excess of glutamatergic activity in the tumor microenvironment may favor epileptogenesis, but also tumor growth and invasiveness. The selective non-competitive α-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionic acid (AMPA) receptor antagonist perampanel (PER) was demonstrated to be efficacious and well-tolerated in patients with focal seizures. Moreover, preclinical in vitro studies suggested a potential anti-tumor activity of this drug. In this systematic review, the clinical evidence on the efficacy and tolerability of PER in brain tumor-related epilepsy (BTRE) is summarized. (2) Methods: Five databases and two clinical trial registries were searched from inception to December 2022. (3) Results: Seven studies and six clinical trials were included. Sample size ranged from 8 to 36 patients, who received add-on PER (mean dosage from 4 to 7 mg/day) for BTRE. After a 6-12 month follow-up, the responder rate (% of patients achieving seizure freedom or reduction ≥ 50% of seizure frequency) ranged from 75% to 95%, with a seizure freedom rate of up to 94%. Regarding tolerability, 11-52% of patients experienced non-severe adverse effects (most frequent: dizziness, vertigo, anxiety, irritability). The retention rate ranged from 56% to 83%. However, only up to 12.5% of patients discontinued the drug because of the adverse events. (4) Conclusions: PER seems to be efficacious, safe, and well-tolerated in patients with BTRE. Further randomized studies should be conducted in more homogeneous and larger populations, also evaluating the effect of PER on tumor progression, overall survival, and progression-free survival.
PubMed: 36979629
DOI: 10.3390/biomedicines11030651 -
Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics Jul 2023The prevalence of liver fibrosis detected by non-invasive imaging in alpha-1-antitrypsin (AAT) deficiency has not been systematically assessed. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The prevalence of liver fibrosis detected by non-invasive imaging in alpha-1-antitrypsin (AAT) deficiency has not been systematically assessed.
AIMS
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the prevalence of significant fibrosis and advanced fibrosis in AAT deficiency based on non-invasive imaging.
METHODS
Medline and Embase electronic databases were searched for studies from inception to 13 November 2022 that provided data for the prevalence of fibrosis in adults with AAT deficiency. A generalised linear mixed model with Clopper-Pearson intervals was used to pool single-arm outcomes.
RESULTS
Of the 214 records identified, 8 studies were included. Five studies assessed fibrosis using vibration-controlled transient elastography. The prevalence of significant fibrosis (defined as ≥7.1 kPA) in Z homozygosity, Z heterozygosity and non-carrier status was 22.10% (five studies, 95% CI: 17.07-28.12), 9.24% (three studies, 95% CI: 4.68-17.45) and 5.38% (one study, 95% CI: 3.27-8.73), respectively, p < 0.0001, and the prevalence of advanced fibrosis (defined as ≥9.5 kPa) was 8.13% (five studies, 95% CI: 4.60-13.96), 2.96% (three studies, 95% CI: 1.49-5.81) and 1.08% (one study, 95% CI: 0.35-3.28), respectively, p = 0.003. There were limited data regarding the use of magnetic resonance elastography or acoustic radiation force impulse to assess for fibrosis.
CONCLUSION
More than one in five adult individuals with AAT deficiency and Z homozygosity harbour significant fibrosis, and nearly 1 in 10 harbours advanced fibrosis. The risk of fibrosis increases incrementally with the frequency of Pi*Z mutations.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Prevalence; alpha 1-Antitrypsin Deficiency; Liver Cirrhosis
PubMed: 37089038
DOI: 10.1111/apt.17516 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2016Burning mouth syndrome (BMS) is a term used for oral mucosal pain (burning pain or discomfort in the tongue, lips or entire oral cavity) without identifiable cause.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Burning mouth syndrome (BMS) is a term used for oral mucosal pain (burning pain or discomfort in the tongue, lips or entire oral cavity) without identifiable cause. General population prevalence varies from 0.1% to 3.9%. Many BMS patients indicate anxiety, depression, personality disorders and impaired quality of life (QoL). This review updates the previous versions published in 2000 and 2005.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the effectiveness and safety of any intervention versus placebo for symptom relief and changes in QoL, taste, and feeling of dryness in people with BMS.
SEARCH METHODS
Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 31 December 2015), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2015, Issue 11) in the Cochrane Library (searched 31 December 2015), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 31 December 2015), and Embase Ovid (1980 to 31 December 2015). We searched ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for ongoing trials. We placed no restrictions on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any treatment against placebo in people with BMS. The primary outcomes were symptom relief (pain/burning) and change in QoL. Secondary outcomes included change in taste, feeling of dryness, and adverse effects.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Outcome data were analysed as short-term (up to three months) or long-term (three to six months).
MAIN RESULTS
We included 23 RCTs (1121 analysed participants; 83% female). Interventions were categorised as: antidepressants and antipsychotics, anticonvulsants, benzodiazepines, cholinergics, dietary supplements, electromagnetic radiation, physical barriers, psychological therapies, and topical treatments.Only one RCT was assessed at low risk of bias overall, four RCTs' risk of bias was unclear, and 18 studies were at high risk of bias. Overall quality of the evidence for effectiveness was very low for all interventions and all outcomes.Twenty-one RCTs assessed short-term symptom relief. There is very low-quality evidence of benefit from electromagnetic radiation (one RCT, 58 participants), topical benzodiazepines (two RCTs, 111 participants), physical barriers (one RCT, 50 participants), and anticonvulsants (one RCT, 100 participants). We found insufficient/contradictory evidence regarding the effectiveness of antidepressants, cholinergics, systemic benzodiazepines, dietary supplements or topical treatments. No RCT assessing psychological therapies evaluated short-term symptom relief.Four studies assessed long-term symptom relief. There is very low-quality evidence of a benefit from psychological therapies (one RCT, 30 participants), capsaicin oral rinse (topical treatment) (one RCT, 18 participants), and topical benzodiazepines (one RCT, 66 participants). We found no evidence of a difference for dietary supplements or lactoperoxidase oral rinse. No studies assessing antidepressants, anticonvulsants, cholinergics, electromagnetic radiation or physical barriers evaluated long-term symptom relief.Short-term change in QoL was assessed by seven studies (none long-term).The quality of evidence was very low. A benefit was found for electromagnetic radiation (one RCT, 58 participants), however findings were inconclusive for antidepressants, benzodiazepines, dietary supplements and physical barriers.Secondary outcomes (change in taste and feeling of dryness) were only assessed short-term, and the findings for both were also inconclusive.With regard to adverse effects, there is very low-quality evidence that antidepressants increase dizziness and drowsiness (one RCT, 37 participants), and that alpha lipoic acid increased headache (two RCTs, 118 participants) and gastrointestinal complaints (3 RCTs, 138 participants). We found insufficient/contradictory evidence regarding adverse events for anticonvulsants or benzodiazepines. Adverse events were poorly reported or unreported for cholinergics, electromagnetic radiation, and psychological therapies. No adverse events occurred from physical barriers or topical therapy use.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Given BMS' potentially disabling nature, the need to identify effective modes of treatment for sufferers is vital. Due to the limited number of clinical trials at low risk of bias, there is insufficient evidence to support or refute the use of any interventions in managing BMS. Further clinical trials, with improved methodology and standardised outcome sets are required in order to establish which treatments are effective. Future studies are encouraged to assess the role of treatments used in other neuropathic pain conditions and psychological therapies in the treatment of BMS.
Topics: Analgesics; Anticonvulsants; Antidepressive Agents; Benzodiazepines; Burning Mouth Syndrome; Clinical Trials as Topic; Cognitive Behavioral Therapy; Electromagnetic Radiation; Female; Hormone Replacement Therapy; Humans; Male; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Vitamins
PubMed: 27855478
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002779.pub3 -
The Lancet. Oncology Aug 2014Malignant tumours arising within the nasal cavity and paranasal sinuses are rare and composed of several histological types, rendering controlled clinical trials to... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Malignant tumours arising within the nasal cavity and paranasal sinuses are rare and composed of several histological types, rendering controlled clinical trials to establish the best treatment impractical. We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the clinical outcomes of patients treated with charged particle therapy with those of individuals receiving photon therapy.
METHODS
We identified studies of nasal cavity and paranasal sinus tumours through searches of databases including Embase, Medline, Scopus, and the Cochrane Collaboration. We included treatment-naive cohorts (both primary and adjuvant radiation therapy) and those with recurrent disease. Primary outcomes of interest were overall survival, disease-free survival, and locoregional control, at 5 years and at longest follow-up. We used random-effect models to pool outcomes across studies and compared event rates of combined outcomes for charged particle therapy and photon therapy using an interaction test.
FINDINGS
43 cohorts from 41 non-comparative observational studies were included. Median follow-up for the charged particle therapy group was 38 months (range 5-73) and for the photon therapy group was 40 months (14-97). Pooled overall survival was significantly higher at 5 years for charged particle therapy than for photon therapy (relative risk 1·51, 95% CI 1·14-1·99; p=0·0038) and at longest follow-up (1·27, 1·01-1·59; p=0·037). At 5 years, disease-free survival was significantly higher for charged particle therapy than for photon therapy (1·93, 1·36-2·75, p=0·0003) but, at longest follow-up, this event rate did not differ between groups (1·51, 1·00-2·30; p=0·052). Locoregional control did not differ between treatment groups at 5 years (1·06, 0·68-1·67; p=0·79) but it was higher for charged particle therapy than for photon therapy at longest follow-up (1·18, 1·01-1·37; p=0·031). A subgroup analysis comparing proton beam therapy with intensity-modulated radiation therapy showed significantly higher disease-free survival at 5 years (relative risk 1·44, 95% CI 1·01-2·05; p=0·045) and locoregional control at longest follow-up (1·26, 1·05-1·51; p=0·011).
INTERPRETATION
Compared with photon therapy, charged particle therapy could be associated with better outcomes for patients with malignant diseases of the nasal cavity and paranasal sinuses. Prospective studies emphasising collection of patient-reported and functional outcomes are strongly encouraged.
FUNDING
Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Alpha Particles; Brachytherapy; Cohort Studies; Disease-Free Survival; Dose-Response Relationship, Radiation; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Nose Neoplasms; Paranasal Sinus Neoplasms; Photons; Prognosis; Radiation Dosage; Risk Assessment; Survival Rate; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 24980873
DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(14)70268-2 -
Hypoxia and hypoxia response-associated molecular markers in esophageal cancer: A systematic review.Methods (San Diego, Calif.) Nov 2017In this systematic review, the existing evidence of available hypoxia-associated molecular response biomarkers in esophageal cancer (EC) patients is summarized and set... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
In this systematic review, the existing evidence of available hypoxia-associated molecular response biomarkers in esophageal cancer (EC) patients is summarized and set into the context of the role of hypoxia in the prediction of esophageal cancer, treatment response and treatment outcome.
METHODS
A systematic literature search was performed in Web of Science, MEDLINE, and PubMed databases using the keywords: hypoxia, esophagus, cancer, treatment outcome and treatment response. Eligible publications were independently evaluated by two reviewers. In total, 22 out of 419 records were included for systematic review. The described search strategy was applied weekly, with the last update being performed on April 3rd, 2017.
RESULTS
In esophageal cancer, several (non-)invasive biomarkers for hypoxia could be identified. Independent prognostic factors for treatment response include HIF-1α, CA IX, GLUT-1 overexpression and elevated uptake of the PET-tracer F-fluoroerythronitroimidazole (F-FETNIM). Hypoxia-associated molecular responses represents a clinically relevant phenomenon in esophageal cancer and detection of elevated levels of hypoxia-associated biomarkers and tends to be associated with poor treatment outcome (i.e., overall survival, disease-free survival, complete response and local control).
CONCLUSION
Evaluation of tumor micro-environmental conditions, such as intratumoral hypoxia, is important to predict treatment outcome and efficacy. Promising non-invasive imaging-techniques have been suggested to assess tumor hypoxia and hypoxia-associated molecular responses. However, extensive validation in EC is lacking. Hypoxia-associated markers that are independent prognostic factors could potentially provide targets for novel treatment strategies to improve treatment outcome. For personalized hypoxia-guided treatment, safe and reliable makers for tumor hypoxia are needed to select suitable patients.
Topics: Animals; Biomarkers, Tumor; Carbonic Anhydrase IX; Esophageal Neoplasms; Humans; Hypoxia; Hypoxia-Inducible Factor 1, alpha Subunit
PubMed: 28705470
DOI: 10.1016/j.ymeth.2017.07.002 -
International Journal of Molecular... Aug 2022Inflammation is a comprehensive set of physiological processes that an organism undertakes in response to a wide variety of foreign stimuli, such as viruses, bacteria,... (Review)
Review
Inflammation is a comprehensive set of physiological processes that an organism undertakes in response to a wide variety of foreign stimuli, such as viruses, bacteria, and inorganic particles. A key role is played by cytokines, protein-based chemical mediators produced by a broad range of cells, including the immune cells recruited in the inflammation site. The aim of this systematic review is to compare baseline values of pro/anti-inflammatory biomarkers measured in Exhaled Breath Condensate (EBC) in healthy, non-smoking adults to provide a summary of the concentrations reported in the literature. We focused on: interleukin (IL)-1β, IL-4, IL-6, IL-8, IL-10, tumour necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α), and C reactive protein (CRP). Eligible articles were identified in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL. Due to the wide differences in methodologies employed in the included articles concerning EBC sampling, storage, and analyses, research protocols were assessed specifically to test their adherence to the ATS/ERS Task Force guidelines on EBC. The development of reference intervals for these biomarkers can result in their introduction and use in both research and clinical settings, not only for monitoring purposes but also, in the perspective of future longitudinal studies, as predictive parameters for the onset and development of chronic diseases with inflammatory aetiology.
Topics: Adult; Biomarkers; Breath Tests; C-Reactive Protein; Cytokines; Exhalation; Humans; Inflammation
PubMed: 36077213
DOI: 10.3390/ijms23179820 -
Supportive Care in Cancer : Official... Feb 2016Olanzapine is an atypical antipsychotic drug that inhibits serotonergic, dopaminergic, alpha-1 adrenergic, histaminic, and muscarinic receptors. Several phase I and II... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Olanzapine is an atypical antipsychotic drug that inhibits serotonergic, dopaminergic, alpha-1 adrenergic, histaminic, and muscarinic receptors. Several phase I and II trials have been published documenting the use of olanzapine in controlling chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). This review aims to summarize all phase I and II trials that reported on olanzapine for the prophylaxis of CINV.
METHODS
A literature search was conducted in Ovid MEDLINE from 1946 to July week 1 2015, Embase Classic and Embase from 1947 to 2015 week 28, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials up until June 2015. Phase I and II trials reporting on olanzapine for the prophylaxis for CINV were included if they reported on at least one of four primary endpoints: complete response (CR), complete control (CC), no nausea, and no emesis. Other endpoints of interest included the safety of olanzapine as measured by the M.D. Anderson Symptom Inventory.
RESULTS
Across the seven included studies, there were a total of 201 patients. The CR across four studies was 97.2, 83.1, and 82.8 % for the acute, delayed, and overall phases, respectively. The CC for acute, delayed, and overall phases was 92.5, 87.5, and 82.5 %, respectively. The overall no nausea rate was 92.7, 71.8, and 70.6 % for the acute, delayed, and overall phases, respectively. The overall no emesis rates for the acute, delayed, and overall phases were 100, 94.5, and 90.4 %, respectively. Fatigue, drowsiness, and disturbed sleep were common side effects.
CONCLUSION
Olanzapine is efficacious and safe when used as a prophylaxis for CINV.
Topics: Antiemetics; Antineoplastic Agents; Antipsychotic Agents; Benzodiazepines; Dyssomnias; Fatigue; Humans; Induction Chemotherapy; Male; Middle Aged; Nausea; Olanzapine; Remission Induction; Sleep Wake Disorders; Vomiting
PubMed: 26530228
DOI: 10.1007/s00520-015-3000-6 -
Supportive Care in Cancer : Official... Sep 2017The aim of this study was to evaluate the capability of biomarkers to predict the risk of oral mucositis in head and neck cancer patients, as well as to assess the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
The aim of this study was to evaluate the capability of biomarkers to predict the risk of oral mucositis in head and neck cancer patients, as well as to assess the correlation between these biomarkers and the severity of mucositis.
METHODS
The search was performed at LILACS, PubMed, Science Direct, Scopus, and Web of Science. A search of the gray literature was performed on Google Scholar, OpenGrey, and ProQuest. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the Meta-Analysis of Statistics Assessment and Review Instrument (MAStARI) tool, and the evidence quality was assessed by the Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system.
RESULTS
After a two-step selection process, 26 studies met the eligibility criteria. In total, 27 biomarkers were evaluated, and the most frequent were the epidermal growth factor (EGF), C-reactive protein (CRP), genetic polymorphisms, tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α), and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR). The meta-analysis showed an expression of polymorphisms in XRCC1 (32.66%), XRCC3 (31.00%), and RAD51 (39.16%) genes, as well as an expression of protein biomarkers (39.57%), in patients with an increased risk of developing oral mucositis.
CONCLUSIONS
Dosing biomarkers before starting radiation therapy may be a promising method to predict the risk of developing mucositis and allow radiosensitive patients to have a customized treatment. Although there is currently limited evidence to confirm the putative implementation of serum and salivary biomarkers to assess the correlation between them and the severity of mucositis, this current review provides new research directions.
Topics: Biomarkers; Female; Head and Neck Neoplasms; Humans; Stomatitis
PubMed: 28623401
DOI: 10.1007/s00520-017-3783-8