-
Medicine Dec 2021SARS-CoV-2 is the virus responsible for coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) disease, which has been shown to trigger multiple affectations. One of the first tissue areas...
BACKGROUND
SARS-CoV-2 is the virus responsible for coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) disease, which has been shown to trigger multiple affectations. One of the first tissue areas to come into contact with the virus is the oral cavity, which develops various alterations. Hence, the objective of this systematic review was to identify the main signs and symptoms of this disease in the oral cavity, and the following research question was established: What are the main oral signs and symptoms in COVID-19-positive persons?
METHODS
The electronic databases of PUBMED, SCOPUS, and SCIENCE DIRECT were analyzed, the keywords "ORAL DISEASES," "ORAL MANIFESTACTIONS," and "COVID-19" were used taking into account the following inclusion criteria: studies whose main objective was oral manifestations secondary to the confirmation of COVID-19, plus clinical cases, case series, and retrospective or prospective studies. For the assessment of the risk of bias the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Case Series tool was used.
RESULTS
A total of 18 studies were included, the most common initial signs/symptoms after contagion of SARS-CoV-2 were dysgeusia, dry mouth, and burning mouth, and the main signs/symptoms were the presence of ulcerative lesions, dysgeusia, and Candida albicans infections.
CONCLUSIONS
It is very important to detect any alteration in the mucosa in patients with COVID-19 and to provide assertive treatment to avoid complications, and try to maintain adequate oral hygiene throughout the course of the disease to avoid the colonization of opportunistic microorganisms and to avoid complications both orally and systemically.
Topics: COVID-19; Candidiasis, Oral; Dysgeusia; Humans; Mouth; Mouth Diseases; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 34941133
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000028327 -
Chemotherapy 2022Crizotinib and alectinib are the 2 most commonly used anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) inhibitors for ALK-positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We compared their... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Crizotinib and alectinib are the 2 most commonly used anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) inhibitors for ALK-positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We compared their antitumor efficacies and adverse effects based on a pooled analysis of the ALEX, ALESIA, and J-ALEX clinical trials.
METHODS
Seven databases were searched for eligible articles. The primary endpoints included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), central nervous system (CNS)-PFS, drug responses, and adverse effects (AEs).
RESULTS
Seven articles on 3 randomized controlled clinical trials (ALEX, ALESIA, and J-ALEX) that included 697 patients were included. Compared with crizotinib, alectinib exhibited superior efficacy in PFS (HR [hazard ratio]: 0.35 [0.25-0.49], p < 0.00001), OS (HR: 0.66 [0.47-0.92], p = 0.02), CNS-PFS (HR: 0.17 [0.11-0.24], p < 0.00001), duration of response (HR: 0.31 [0.23-0.42], p < 0.00001), objective response rate (risk ratio [RR]: 0.87 [0.80-0.94], p = 0.0003), partial response (RR: 0.88 [0.81-0.96], p = 0.004), and grade 3-5 AEs (RR: 1.43 [1.09-1.87], p = 0.009). Additionally, compared with crizotinib, alectinib exhibited a survival advantage that increased with its prolongation of survival time. The disease control rate, complete response, and total AEs were comparable between the 2 groups. The crizotinib group reported higher rates of constipation, nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, peripheral edema, dysgeusia, visual impairment, and levels of alanine aminotransferase and aspartate aminotransferase as well as greater decreases in appetite and neutrophil count.
CONCLUSIONS
In both antitumor efficacy and safety, alectinib appears to be superior to crizotinib for the treatment of ALK-positive NSCLC.
Topics: Anaplastic Lymphoma Kinase; Carbazoles; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung; Crizotinib; Humans; Lung Neoplasms; Piperidines; Protein Kinase Inhibitors; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 34915469
DOI: 10.1159/000521452 -
Frontiers in Oncology 2021Lung cancer (LC) is highly prevalent worldwide, with elevated mortality. In this population, taste and smell alterations (TSAs) are frequent but overlooked symptoms. The...
INTRODUCTION
Lung cancer (LC) is highly prevalent worldwide, with elevated mortality. In this population, taste and smell alterations (TSAs) are frequent but overlooked symptoms. The absence of effective therapeutic strategies and evidence-based guidelines constrain TSAs' early recognition, prevention and treatment (Tx), promoting cancer-related malnutrition and jeopardizing survival outcomes and quality of life.
OBJECTIVES
To systematically review the literature on TSAs in LC patients, understand the physiopathology, identify potential preventive and Tx strategies and to further encourage research in this area.
METHODS
Literature search on English language articles indexed to PubMed, CINALH, SCOPUS and Web of Science using MeSH terms "Lung neoplasms","Dysgeusia", "Olfaction Disorders", "Carcinoma, Small Cell","Carcinoma, Non- Small-Cell Lung "Adenocarcinoma of Lung","Carcinoma, Large Cell", and non-MeSH terms "Parageusia", "Altered Taste", "Smell Disorder", "Paraosmia", "Dysosmia","Lung Cancer" and "Oat Cell Carcinoma".
RESULTS
Thirty-four articles were reviewed. TSAs may follow the diagnosis of LC or develop during cancer Tx. The estimated prevalence of self-reported dysgeusia is 35-38% in treatment-naïve LC patients, and 35-69% in those undergoing Tx, based on studies involving LC patients only.One prospective pilot trial and 1 RCT demonstrated a clinically significant benefit in combining flavor enhancement, smell and taste training and individualized nutritional counselling; a systematic review, 1 RCT and 1 retrospective study favored using intravenous or oral zinc-based solutions (150mg 2-3 times a day) for the prevention and Tx of chemotherapy (CT) and radiotherapy (RT) -induced mucositis and subsequent dysgeusia.
CONCLUSIONS
This is the first review on dysgeusia and dysosmia in LC patients to our knowledge. We propose combining taste and smell training, personalized dietary counselling and flavor enhancement with oral zinc-based solutions (150mg, 2-3 times a day) during CT and/or RT in this population, in order to prevent and help ameliorate Tx-induced dysgeusia and mucositis. However due to study heterogeneity, the results should be interpreted with caution. Developing standardized TSA measurement tools and performing prospective randomized controlled trials to evaluate their effect are warranted.
PubMed: 34881185
DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2021.774081 -
Frontiers in Oncology 2021Although immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) combined with vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR)-targeted therapy and sunitinib monotherapy have been...
BACKGROUND
Although immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) combined with vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR)-targeted therapy and sunitinib monotherapy have been widely applied to metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), effectiveness and safety data are still lacking. To optimize clinical decision-making, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of published randomized clinical trials to characterize the efficacy and the risk of adverse events (AEs) in patients treated with ICIs plus anti-VEGF therapy.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
We used PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library to retrieve randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published before March 27, 2021. The efficacy outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and objective response rate (ORR). The pooled risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of AEs were calculated in the safety analysis.
RESULTS
Six RCTs involving 4,227 patients were identified after a systematic search. For OS, ICI and anti-VEGF combination therapy decreased mortality approximately 30% in the intention-to-treat population (ITT) (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.70, 95% CI: 0.57-0.87), but there was no statistical difference in patients evaluated as "favorable" by the International Metastatic Renal-Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) criteria compared with monotherapy (HR = 0.90, 95% CI: 0.55-1.46, = 0.66). In terms of PFS, the progression risk for all participants declined 35% (HR = 0.65, 95% CI: 0.50-0.83) and patients evaluated as "poor" by IMDC benefited further (HR = 0.46, 95% CI: 0.36-0.58). No evident divergence was found in age and sex subgroups. The RRs of all-grade hypertension, arthralgia, rash, proteinuria, high-grade (grades 3-5) arthralgia, and proteinuria developed after combination therapy were increased compared with sunitinib. The risk of high-grade hypertension and rash showed no statistical difference. However, the risk of hand-foot skin reaction (HFSR), stomatitis, and dysgeusia decreased in combination therapy groups.
CONCLUSIONS
Compared with sunitinib, OS, PFS, and ORR were significantly improved in patients receiving ICI and anti-VEGF combination therapy at the expense of increased specific AEs. More attention should be paid to individualized application of these combination therapies to achieve the best benefit-risk ratio in the clinic.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
[https://inplasy.com/] INPLASY: 202130104.
PubMed: 34722290
DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2021.739263 -
Journal of Oral & Facial Pain and...To assess the efficacy of nonpharmacologic treatments for burning mouth syndrome (BMS).
AIMS
To assess the efficacy of nonpharmacologic treatments for burning mouth syndrome (BMS).
METHODS
PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were systematically searched. Reference lists from the latest systematic reviews (2015 to 2020) on BMS treatment in the PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases were also scrutinized. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or clinical controlled trials (CCTs) in English were considered eligible. Trials on photobiomodulation were excluded to avoid redundancy with recent publications. Risk of bias was established through the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for RCTs and the Risk of Bias in Nonrandomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool for CCTs.
RESULTS
This review included 27 RCTs and 6 open clinical trials (OCTs) describing 14 different nonpharmacologic interventions. Eleven trials experimented with 600 to 800 mg/day of alpha-lipoic acid for 30 to 120 days, with 7 placebo-controlled studies showing significant pain relief. Four trials tested topical and systemic capsaicin for 7 to 30 days, with 2 placebo-controlled studies revealing significant efficacy. Four of the 5 trials testing acupuncture offered favorable evidence of pain relief. Two trials reported significant pain relief after a 2- to 3-month regimen with tongue protectors and showed no difference after aloe vera addition. Short-term pain relief was reported in anecdotal placebo-controlled trials deploying tocopherol, catuama, ultramicronized palmitoylethanolamide, group psychotherapy, cognitive therapy, and repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation of the prefrontal cortex. Most therapies were safe.
CONCLUSION
Evidence was collected from highly biased, short-term, heterogenous studies mainly focused on BMS-related pain, with scarce data on quality of life, psychologic status, dysgeusia, and xerostomia. Long-term effectiveness of nonpharmacologic treatments should be further investigated, with a more rigorous, bias-proof study design.
Topics: Acupuncture Therapy; Burning Mouth Syndrome; Capsaicin; Humans; Pain; Quality of Life
PubMed: 34609377
DOI: 10.11607/ofph.2868 -
Cureus Aug 2021Intranasal form of esketamine, the S-enantiomer of racemic ketamine, was approved by the US FDA in 2019 for treatment-resistant depression (TRD) in adults. Since... (Review)
Review
Intranasal form of esketamine, the S-enantiomer of racemic ketamine, was approved by the US FDA in 2019 for treatment-resistant depression (TRD) in adults. Since intranasal esketamine is a newly approved drug with a novel mechanism of action, much still remains unknown in regard to its use in TRD. The objective of this study is to systematically review the latest existing evidence on intranasal esketamine, and provide a better insight into its safety and efficacy in TRD in adults. PubMed, MEDLINE (through PubMed), and Google Scholar were systematically searched from 2016 to 2021, using automation tools. After removal of duplicates and screening on the basis of title/abstract, eligibility criteria were applied and quality appraisal was done independently by two reviewers. A total of 10 studies were selected for the final review which included five clinical trials (three short-term trials, one withdrawal design relapse prevention study, and one long-term study), three post hoc studies, one case/non-case study, and one review article. Out of three short-term clinical trials, only one demonstrated a statistically significant difference between treatment with esketamine plus oral antidepressant (OAD) vs placebo plus OAD. The result of the relapse prevention study showed significantly delayed relapse of depressive symptoms in esketamine plus OAD arm when compared to placebo plus OAD arm. Similarly, the result of the long-term clinical trial showed that the improvement in depressive symptoms was found to be sustained in those using esketamine. The most common adverse effects of esketamine included nausea, dizziness, dissociation, headache, vertigo, somnolence, and dysgeusia (altered sense of taste); most were mild-moderate in severity. One case/non-case study reported rare adverse effects including panic attacks, mania, ataxia, akathisia, self-harm ideation, increased loquacity (talkativeness), and autoscopy. Intranasal esketamine has shown efficacy in reducing depressive symptoms in clinical trials, but the clinical meaningfulness of the treatment effect in the real-world population still needs to be explored. Although the safety profile of esketamine appears to be favorable in most clinical trials, some serious side effects are being reported to the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System, and therefore requires further investigation. More robust clinical trials, especially long-term randomized controlled trials are needed which can help provide a better assessment on the efficacy and safety of intranasal esketamine in the treatment of TRD.
PubMed: 34447651
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.17352 -
Revista Cientifica Odontologica... 2021To assess the prevalence of taste disorders in children and adolescents diagnosed with coronavirus infection according to the evidence reported in the scientific...
AIM
To assess the prevalence of taste disorders in children and adolescents diagnosed with coronavirus infection according to the evidence reported in the scientific literature.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A systematic review of articles published between December 19, 2019, and December 20, 2020 in the Medline, Lilacs, BVS, Cochrane, SCOPUS and ScienceDirect databases. The information search strategy was based on the classic PRISMA flow diagram. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used to assess the risk of bias.
RESULTS
443 articles were found in six databases, and a total of 7 articles were included after evaluation according to the selection criteria. The articles addressed the variable of taste disorders in three ways: ageusia, dysgeusia and hypogeusia; finding that this clinical manifestation was present from the beginning of the infection.
CONCLUSIONS
The prevalence of taste disorders in children and adolescents diagnosed with coronavirus infection is from 3.3% to 26.9%.
PubMed: 38465279
DOI: 10.21142/2523-2754-0902-2021-061 -
F1000Research 2021This study aimed to determine the cumulative prevalence of prolonged gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms, including nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, lack of appetite,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
This study aimed to determine the cumulative prevalence of prolonged gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms, including nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, lack of appetite, abdominal pain, and dysgeusia, in survivors of both mild and severe COVID-19 worldwide and to discuss the potential pathogenesis. Three databases (PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science) were searched for relevant articles up to January 30, 2021. Data on study characteristics, clinical characteristics during follow-up, the number of patients with prolonged GI symptoms, and total number of COVID-19 survivors were retrieved according to PRISMA guidelines. The quality of eligible studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. The pooled prevalence of specific prolonged GI symptoms was calculated and the association between COVID-19 severity and the occurrence of prolonged GI symptoms was assessed if appropriate. The global prevalence of prolonged nausea was 3.23% (95% CI: 0.54%-16.53%) among 527 COVID-19 survivors. Vomiting persisted in 93 of 2,238 COVID-19 survivors (3.19%, 95% CI: 1.62%-6.17%) and prolonged diarrhea was found in 34 of 1,073 survivors (4.12%, 95% CI: 1.07%-14.64%). A total of 156 patients among 2,238 COVID-19 survivors (4.41%, 95% CI: 1.91%-9.94%) complained of persistent decreased or loss of appetite. The cumulative prevalence of prolonged abdominal pain was 1.68% (95% CI: 0.84%-3.32%), whereas persistent dysgeusia was identified in 130 cases among 1,887 COVID-19 survivors (7.04%, 95% CI: 5.96%-8.30%). Data was insufficient to assess the relationship between COVID-19 severity and the occurrence of all prolonged GI symptoms. Persistent GI symptoms among COVID-19 survivors after discharge or recovery raises a concern regarding the long-term impact of the COVID-19 infection on the quality of life of the survivors. Despite several potential explanations proposed, studies that aim to follow patients after recovery from COVID-19 and determine the pathogenesis of the prolonged symptoms of COVID-19 survivors are warranted. PROSPERO registration: CRD42021239187.
Topics: COVID-19; Humans; Prevalence; Quality of Life; SARS-CoV-2; Survivors
PubMed: 34131481
DOI: 10.12688/f1000research.52216.1 -
Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and... Sep 2021There is accumulating evidence of the neurological and neuropsychiatric features of infection with SARS-CoV-2. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
There is accumulating evidence of the neurological and neuropsychiatric features of infection with SARS-CoV-2. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to describe the characteristics of the early literature and estimate point prevalences for neurological and neuropsychiatric manifestations.We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and CINAHL up to 18 July 2020 for randomised controlled trials, cohort studies, case-control studies, cross-sectional studies and case series. Studies reporting prevalences of neurological or neuropsychiatric symptoms were synthesised into meta-analyses to estimate pooled prevalence.13 292 records were screened by at least two authors to identify 215 included studies, of which there were 37 cohort studies, 15 case-control studies, 80 cross-sectional studies and 83 case series from 30 countries. 147 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The symptoms with the highest prevalence were anosmia (43.1% (95% CI 35.2% to 51.3%), n=15 975, 63 studies), weakness (40.0% (95% CI 27.9% to 53.5%), n=221, 3 studies), fatigue (37.8% (95% CI 31.6% to 44.4%), n=21 101, 67 studies), dysgeusia (37.2% (95% CI 29.8% to 45.3%), n=13 686, 52 studies), myalgia (25.1% (95% CI 19.8% to 31.3%), n=66 268, 76 studies), depression (23.0% (95% CI 11.8% to 40.2%), n=43 128, 10 studies), headache (20.7% (95% CI 16.1% to 26.1%), n=64 613, 84 studies), anxiety (15.9% (5.6% to 37.7%), n=42 566, 9 studies) and altered mental status (8.2% (95% CI 4.4% to 14.8%), n=49 326, 19 studies). Heterogeneity for most clinical manifestations was high.Neurological and neuropsychiatric symptoms of COVID-19 in the pandemic's early phase are varied and common. The neurological and psychiatric academic communities should develop systems to facilitate high-quality methodologies, including more rapid examination of the longitudinal course of neuropsychiatric complications of newly emerging diseases and their relationship to neuroimaging and inflammatory biomarkers.
Topics: Biomarkers; COVID-19; Humans; Nervous System Diseases; Neurology; Neuropsychiatry; Pandemics
PubMed: 34083395
DOI: 10.1136/jnnp-2021-326405 -
Systematic Reviews Apr 2021Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are valuable tools in assessing the quality of health care from a patient perspective and are increasingly used by otologists.... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are valuable tools in assessing the quality of health care from a patient perspective and are increasingly used by otologists. However, selecting the right questionnaire has proven to be a difficult and time-consuming task. To facilitate this process, we will provide a comprehensive overview of existing questionnaires.
METHODS
A systematic literature search has been conducted on August 26, 2019, using the EMBASE and PubMed medical databases. 13,345 unique records were extracted. Questionnaires addressing any otologic complaint (tinnitus, hearing loss, earache, otorrhoea, and ear-related pressure sensation, vertigo, itch, or dysgeusia) were identified. All questionnaires were evaluated for eligibility by two independent researchers. Inclusion criteria were adult population, closed-ended questions, English language of the questionnaire, and the availability of the original article describing the development of the instrument or a validation paper describing the validation process written in English.
OBJECTIVE
Create a comprehensive overview of all validated closed-ended otology questionnaires for adults and demonstrate their basic characteristics.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE
The number of questionnaires in English literature for the adult population, subdivided per symptom and target population.
RESULTS
A total of 155 unique questionnaires were selected: 33 tinnitus questionnaires, 23 vertigo questionnaires, 84 hearing loss questionnaires, and 15 multiple complaint questionnaires. A protocol for further questionnaire comparison is presented.
DISCUSSION
Two separate sequential searches were needed to identify unique questionnaires and to identify their development/validation paper. Although many ear diseases create multiple symptoms, the majority of the questionnaires were symptom specific.
CONCLUSION
Many questionnaires concerning ear-related symptoms exist and predominantly concern hearing loss, vertigo, or tinnitus. Only a few questionnaires cover the multiple complaints that ear diseases can create. The presented overview is the most comprehensive overview of otology questionnaires in literature to date. It will serve as a basis for questionnaire selection by professionals and could serve as a protocol for questionnaire selection in other fields.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO CRD42017058155.
Topics: Adult; Hearing Loss; Humans; Otolaryngology; Patient Reported Outcome Measures; Surveys and Questionnaires; Tinnitus
PubMed: 33879248
DOI: 10.1186/s13643-021-01659-9