-
The British Journal of Surgery May 2024Systemic inflammatory response markers have been found to have a prognostic role in several cancers, but their value in predicting the response to neoadjuvant... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Systemic inflammatory response markers have been found to have a prognostic role in several cancers, but their value in predicting the response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer is uncertain. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature was carried out to investigate this.
METHODS
A systematic search of electronic databases was conducted to identify studies that explored the predictive value of circulating systemic inflammatory response markers in patients with breast cancer before commencing neoadjuvant therapy. A meta-analysis was undertaken for each inflammatory marker where three or more studies reported pCR rates in relation to the inflammatory marker. Outcome data are reported as ORs and 95% confidence intervals.
RESULTS
A total of 49 studies were included, of which 42 were suitable for meta-analysis. A lower pretreatment neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio was associated with an increased pCR rate (pooled OR 1.66 (95% c.i. 1.32 to 2.09); P < 0.001). A lower white cell count (OR 1.96 (95% c.i. 1.29 to 2.97); P = 0.002) and a lower monocyte count (OR 3.20 (95% c.i. 1.71 to 5.97); P < 0.001) were also associated with a pCR. A higher lymphocyte count was associated with an increased pCR rate (OR 0.44 (95% c.i. 0.30 to 0.64); P < 0.001).
CONCLUSION
The present study found the pretreatment neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, white cell count, lymphocyte count, and monocyte count of value in the prediction of a pCR in the neoadjuvant treatment of breast cancer. Further research is required to determine their value in specific breast cancer subtypes and to establish optimal cut-off values, before their adoption in clinical practice.
Topics: Female; Humans; Biomarkers, Tumor; Breast Neoplasms; Chemotherapy, Adjuvant; Leukocyte Count; Lymphocyte Count; Neoadjuvant Therapy; Neutrophils; Predictive Value of Tests; Prognosis
PubMed: 38801441
DOI: 10.1093/bjs/znae132 -
Vaccines Apr 2024This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the immunogenicity and safety of an additional heterologous (viral vector) versus homologous (mRNA) COVID-19... (Review)
Review
A Comparison of the Immunogenicity and Safety of an Additional Heterologous versus Homologous COVID-19 Vaccination among Non-Seroconverted Immunocompromised Patients after a Two-Dose Primary Series of mRNA Vaccination: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the immunogenicity and safety of an additional heterologous (viral vector) versus homologous (mRNA) COVID-19 vaccine dose among non-seroconverted immunocompromised patients after a two-dose primary series of mRNA vaccine. We searched studies published up to 21 June 2023 in PubMed, Scopus, and Embase. The meta-analysis was conducted to compare the seropositivity rates based on anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein IgG (anti-S IgG) and SARS-CoV-2-specific T-cell immune response rates, assessed by interferon-γ release assay at 4 weeks, and the incidences of serious adverse events (SAEs) within 28 days between the two vaccine regimens. In four included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), there were no statistically significant differences in the seropositive rate of anti-S IgG (risk ratio [RR]: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.48-1.29) and the concentration of SARS-CoV-2 interferon-γ (RR: 1.19, 95% CI: 0.96-1.48) between heterologous and homologous regimens. The heterologous regimen exhibited a significantly lower incidence of injection pain (RR: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.45-0.69), but a higher incidence of headache (RR: 1.44, 95% CI: 1.02-2.02) compared with the homologous regimen. No vaccine-related SAEs were reported within 28 days following vaccination. An additional heterologous or homologous COVID-19 vaccine dose was well tolerated and demonstrated a comparable vaccine immunogenicity among non-seroconverted immunocompromised patients who were initially vaccinated with a two-dose COVID-19 mRNA vaccine. This finding supports the recommendations of an extended primary series of COVID-19 vaccination in immunocompromised persons.
PubMed: 38793719
DOI: 10.3390/vaccines12050468 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine May 2024: Although osteoarthritis (OA) development is epidemiologically multifactorial, a primary underlying mechanism is still under debate. Understanding the pathophysiology... (Review)
Review
: Although osteoarthritis (OA) development is epidemiologically multifactorial, a primary underlying mechanism is still under debate. Understanding the pathophysiology of OA remains challenging. Recently, experts have focused on autophagy as a contributor to OA development. : To better understand the pathogenesis of OA, we survey the literature on the role of autophagy and the molecular mechanisms of OA development. To identify relevant studies, we used controlled vocabulary and free text keywords to search the MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and SCOPUS database. Thirty-one studies were included for data extraction and systematic review. Among these studies, twenty-five studies investigated the effects of autophagy in aging and OA chondrocytes, six studies examined the effects of autophagy in normal human chondrocytes, and only one study investigated the effects of mechanical stress-induced autophagy on the development of OA in normal chondrocytes. : The studies suggest that autophagy activation prevents OA by exerting cell-protective effects in normal human chondrocytes. However, in aging and osteoarthritis (OA) chondrocytes, the role of autophagy is intricate, as certain studies indicate that stimulating autophagy in these cells can have a cytotoxic effect, while others propose that it may have a protective (cytoprotective) effect against damage or degeneration. : Mechanical stress-induced autophagy is also thought to be involved in the development of OA, but further research is required to identify the precise mechanism. Thus, autophagy contributions should be interpreted with caution in aging and the types of OA cartilage.
PubMed: 38792546
DOI: 10.3390/jcm13103005 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine May 2024We conducted a comprehensive investigation to explore the pathological expression of the CXCR4 receptor in lymphoproliferative disorders (LPDs) using [Ga]Ga-Pentixafor... (Review)
Review
We conducted a comprehensive investigation to explore the pathological expression of the CXCR4 receptor in lymphoproliferative disorders (LPDs) using [Ga]Ga-Pentixafor PET/CT or PET/MRI technology. The PICO question was as follows: What is the diagnostic role (outcome) of [Ga]Ga-Pentixafor PET (intervention) in patients with LPDs (problem/population)? The study was written based on the reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines, and it was registered on the prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) website (CRD42024506866). A comprehensive computer literature search of Scopus, MEDLINE, Scholar, and Embase databases was conducted, including articles indexed up to February 2024. To the methodological evaluation of the studies used the quality assessment of diagnosis accuracy studies-2 (QUADAS-2) tool. Of the 8380 records discovered, 23 were suitable for systematic review. Fifteen studies (on 571 LPD patients) focused on diagnosis and staging, and eight trials (194 LPD patients) assessed treatment response. The main conclusions that can be inferred from the published studies are as follows: (a) [Ga]Ga-Pentixafor PET may have excellent diagnostic performance in the study of several LPDs; (b) [Ga]Ga-Pentixafor PET may be superior to [F]FDG or complementary in some LPDs variants and settings; (c) multiple myeloma seems to have a high uptake of [Ga]Ga-Pentixafor. Overall, this technique is probably suitable for imaging, staging, and follow-up on patients with LPD. Due to limited data, further studies are warranted to confirm the promising role of [Ga]Ga-Pantixafor in this context.
PubMed: 38792485
DOI: 10.3390/jcm13102945 -
Cancers May 2024Modern advanced radiotherapy techniques have improved the precision and accuracy of radiotherapy delivery, with resulting plans being highly personalised based on... (Review)
Review
Modern advanced radiotherapy techniques have improved the precision and accuracy of radiotherapy delivery, with resulting plans being highly personalised based on individual anatomy. Adaptation for individual tumour biology remains elusive. There is an unmet need for biomarkers of intrinsic radiosensitivity that can predict tumour response to radiation to facilitate individualised decision-making, dosing and treatment planning. Over the last few decades, the use of high throughput molecular biology technologies has led to an explosion of newly discovered cancer biomarkers. Gene expression signatures are now used routinely in clinic to aid decision-making regarding adjuvant systemic therapy. They have great potential as radiotherapy biomarkers. A previous systematic review published in 2015 reported only five studies of signatures evaluated for their ability to predict radiotherapy benefits in clinical cohorts. This updated systematic review encompasses the expanded number of studies reported in the last decade. An additional 27 studies were identified. In total, 22 distinct signatures were recognised (5 pre-2015, 17 post-2015). Seventeen signatures were 'radiosensitivity' signatures and five were breast cancer prognostic signatures aiming to identify patients at an increased risk of local recurrence and therefore were more likely to benefit from adjuvant radiation. Most signatures (15/22) had not progressed beyond the discovery phase of development, with no suitable validated clinical-grade assay for application. Very few signatures (4/17 'radiosensitivity' signatures) had undergone any laboratory-based biological validation of their ability to predict tumour radiosensitivity. No signatures have been assessed prospectively in a phase III biomarker-led trial to date and none are recommended for routine use in clinical guidelines. A phase III prospective evaluation is ongoing for two breast cancer prognostic signatures. The most promising radiosensitivity signature remains the radiosensitivity index (RSI), which is used to calculate a genomic adjusted radiation dose (GARD). There is an ongoing phase II prospective biomarker-led study of RSI/GARD in triple negative breast cancer. The results of these trials are eagerly anticipated over the coming years. Future work in this area should focus on (1) robust biological validation; (2) building biobanks alongside large radiotherapy randomised controlled trials with dose variance (to demonstrate an interaction between radiosensitivity signature and dose); (3) a validation of clinical-grade cost-effective assays that are deliverable within current healthcare infrastructure; and (4) an integration with biomarkers of other determinants of radiation response.
PubMed: 38792019
DOI: 10.3390/cancers16101942 -
Biomedicines May 2024This systematic review evaluates the clinical outcomes and molecular predictors of response to pembrolizumab in patients with advanced and metastatic cervical cancer. We... (Review)
Review
Clinical Outcomes and Molecular Predictors of Pembrolizumab (Keytruda) as a PD-1 Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor in Advanced and Metastatic Cervical Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
This systematic review evaluates the clinical outcomes and molecular predictors of response to pembrolizumab in patients with advanced and metastatic cervical cancer. We adhered to the PRISMA guidelines for systematic reviews, conducting a database search in PubMed, Scopus, and Embase. The eligibility criteria centered on clinical outcomes, including the overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and immune-related biomarkers post-pembrolizumab therapy. We included both prospective and retrospective studies that detailed clinical outcomes and molecular characteristics predictive of therapeutic response. Our search yielded six studies involving 846 patients treated with pembrolizumab from 2017 to 2022. The meta-analysis of these studies showed that pembrolizumab, used as monotherapy or in combination with chemotherapy, extended the OS by a weighted median of 10.35 months and the PFS by 8.50 months. The treatment demonstrated a pooled objective response rate (ORR) of 22.39%, although the I test result of 67.49% showed a high heterogeneity among the studies. Notably, patients with high PD-L1 expression (CPS ≥ 10) experienced improved outcomes in terms of the PFS and OS. The most common complications were fatigue, diarrhea, and immune-related adverse events. Pembrolizumab significantly enhances clinical outcomes in metastatic cervical cancer, particularly among patients with high PD-L1 expression. The drug maintains a good safety profile, reinforcing its treatment potential for patients with advanced and metastatic cervical cancer. Future studies should explore long-term effects and strategies to integrate pembrolizumab optimally into current treatment regimens, aiming to maximize patient benefits and effectively manage side effects.
PubMed: 38791070
DOI: 10.3390/biomedicines12051109 -
Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and... Jun 2024Regulatory agencies require evidence that endpoints correlate with clinical benefit before they can be used to approve drugs. Biomarkers are often considered surrogate... (Review)
Review
Regulatory agencies require evidence that endpoints correlate with clinical benefit before they can be used to approve drugs. Biomarkers are often considered surrogate endpoints. In cancer cachexia trials, the measurement of biomarkers features frequently. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the frequency and diversity of biomarker endpoints in cancer cachexia trials. A comprehensive electronic literature search of MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane (1990-2023) was completed. Eligible trials met the following criteria: adults (≥18 years), prospective design, more than 40 participants, use of a cachexia intervention for more than 14 days and use of a biomarker(s) as an endpoint. Biomarkers were defined as any objective measure that was assayed from a body fluid, including scoring systems based on these assays. Routine haematology and biochemistry to monitor intervention toxicity were not considered. Data extraction was performed using Covidence, and reporting followed PRISMA guidance (PROSPERO: CRD42022276710). A total of 5975 studies were assessed, of which 52 trials (total participants = 6522) included biomarkers as endpoints. Most studies (n = 29, 55.7%) included a variety of cancer types. Pharmacological interventions (n = 27, 51.9%) were most evaluated, followed by nutritional interventions (n = 20, 38.4%). Ninety-nine different biomarkers were used across the trials, and of these, 96 were assayed from blood. Albumin (n = 29, 55.8%) was assessed most often, followed by C-reactive protein (n = 22, 42.3%), interleukin-6 (n = 16, 30.8%) and tumour necrosis factor-α (n = 14, 26.9%), the latter being the only biomarker that was used to guide sample size calculations. Biomarkers were explicitly listed as a primary outcome in six trials. In total, 12 biomarkers (12.1% of 99) were used in six trials or more. Insulin-like growth factor binding protein 3 (IGFBP-3) and insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1) levels both increased significantly in all three trials in which they were both used. This corresponded with a primary outcome, lean body mass, and was related to the pharmacological mechanism. Biomarkers were predominately used as exploratory rather than primary endpoints. The most commonly used biomarker, albumin, was limited by its lack of responsiveness to nutritional intervention. For a biomarker to be responsive to change, it must be related to the mechanism of action of the intervention and/or the underlying cachexia process that is modified by the intervention, as seen with IGFBP-3, IGF-1 and anamorelin. To reach regulatory approval as an endpoint, the relationship between the biomarker and clinical benefit must be clarified.
Topics: Cachexia; Humans; Neoplasms; Biomarkers; Clinical Trials as Topic
PubMed: 38783477
DOI: 10.1002/jcsm.13491 -
BMC Infectious Diseases May 2024Human papillomavirus (HPV) is increasingly recognized as a significant risk factor in the development of head and neck cancers (HNCs), with varying prevalence and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Human papillomavirus (HPV) is increasingly recognized as a significant risk factor in the development of head and neck cancers (HNCs), with varying prevalence and impact. This study aims to systematically review and analyze the prevalence of HPV in HNCs in India, providing insights into regional variations.
METHODS
A comprehensive literature search was carried out using PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science up to November 10, 2023. Inclusion criteria focused on original research reporting HPV-positive cases among HNC patients in India. We used Nested-Knowledge software, for screening, and data extraction. The modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used for quality assessment of included studies. We pooled the prevalence of HPV among HNC patients and performed a random-effects model meta-analysis using R software (version 4.3).
RESULTS
The search yielded 33 studies, encompassing 4654 HNC patients. The pooled prevalence of HPV infection was found to be 33% (95% CI: 25.8-42.6), with notable heterogeneity (I² = 95%). Analysis of subgroups according to geographical location indicated varying prevalence rates. Specifically, the prevalence was 47% (95% CI: 32.2-62.4) in the eastern regions and 19.8% (95% CI: 10.8-33.4) in the western regions. No evidence of publication bias was detected.
CONCLUSION
The observed considerable regional disparities on the prevalence of HPV in HNC patients in India emphasizes the need for integrated HPV vaccination and screening programs in public health strategies. The findings underline the necessity for further research to explore regional variations and treatment responses in HPV-associated HNCs, considering the impact of factors such as tobacco use and the potential benefits of HPV vaccination.
Topics: Female; Humans; Male; Head and Neck Neoplasms; Human Papillomavirus Viruses; India; Papillomavirus Infections; Prevalence; Risk Factors
PubMed: 38783184
DOI: 10.1186/s12879-024-09357-2 -
Environmental Epigenetics 2024In recent decades, the use of pesticides in agriculture has increased dramatically. This has resulted in these substances being widely dispersed in the environment,... (Review)
Review
In recent decades, the use of pesticides in agriculture has increased dramatically. This has resulted in these substances being widely dispersed in the environment, contaminating both exposed workers and communities living near agricultural areas and via contaminated foodstuffs. In addition to acute poisoning, chronic exposure to pesticides can lead to molecular changes that are becoming better understood. Therefore, the aim of this study was to assess, through a systematic review of the literature, what epigenetic alterations are associated with pesticide exposure. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis including case-control, cohort and cross-sectional observational epidemiological studies to verify the epigenetic changes, such as DNA methylation, histone modification and differential microRNA expression, in humans who had been exposed to any type of pesticide. Articles published between the years 2005 and 2020 were collected. Two different reviewers performed a blind selection of the studies using the Rayyan QCRI software. Post-completion, the data of selected articles were extracted and analyzed. Most of the 28 articles included evaluated global DNA methylation levels, and the most commonly reported epigenetic modification in response to pesticide exposure was global DNA hypomethylation. Meta-analysis revealed a significant negative correlation between Alu methylation levels and β-hexachlorocyclohexane, ,-dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane and -dichlorodiphenylethylene levels. In addition, some specific genes were reported to be hypermethylated in promoter regions, such as and , while and were hypomethylated due to pesticide exposure. The expression of microRNAs was also altered in response to pesticides, as miR-223, miR-518d-3p, miR-597, miR-517b and miR-133b that are associated with many human diseases. Therefore, this study provides evidence that pesticide exposure could lead to epigenetic modifications, possibly altering global and gene-specific methylation levels, epigenome-wide methylation and microRNA differential expression.
PubMed: 38779494
DOI: 10.1093/eep/dvae005 -
Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases May 2024To analyse the new evidence (2018-2022) for the management of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) to inform the 2023 update of the European League Against Rheumatism...
OBJECTIVES
To analyse the new evidence (2018-2022) for the management of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) to inform the 2023 update of the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) recommendations.
METHODS
Systematic literature reviews were performed in the Medline and the Cochrane Library databases capturing publications from 1 January 2018 through 31 December 2022, according to the EULAR standardised operating procedures. The research questions focused on five different domains, namely the benefit/harm of SLE treatments, the benefits from the attainment of remission/low disease activity, the risk/benefit from treatment tapering/withdrawal, the management of SLE with antiphospholipid syndrome and the safety of immunisations against varicella zoster virus and SARS-CoV2 infection. A Population, Intervention, Comparison and Outcome framework was used to develop search strings for each research topic.
RESULTS
We identified 439 relevant articles, the majority being observational studies of low or moderate quality. High-quality randomised controlled trials (RCTs) documented the efficacy of the type 1 interferon receptor inhibitor, anifrolumab, in non-renal SLE, and belimumab and voclosporin, a novel calcineurin inhibitor, in lupus nephritis (LN), when compared with standard of care. For the treatment of specific organ manifestations outside LN, a lack of high-quality data was documented. Multiple observational studies confirmed the beneficial effects of attaining clinical remission or low disease activity, reducing the risk for multiple adverse outcomes. Two randomised trials with some concerns regarding risk of bias found higher rates of relapse in patients who discontinued glucocorticoids (GC) or immunosuppressants in SLE and LN, respectively, yet observational cohort studies suggest that treatment withdrawal might be feasible in a subset of patients.
CONCLUSION
Anifrolumab and belimumab achieve better disease control than standard of care in extrarenal SLE, while combination therapies with belimumab and voclosporin attained higher response rates in high-quality RCTs in LN. Remission and low disease activity are associated with favourable long-term outcomes. In patients achieving these targets, GC and immunosuppressive therapy may gradually be tapered. Cite Now.
PubMed: 38777375
DOI: 10.1136/ard-2023-225319