Search

Background In recent years, the incidence of spinal metastasis (SM) has been increasing steadily. In response to this serious public health problem, researchers have made progress by using the integration of traditional Chinese and Western medicine. However, considerable heterogeneity in the definition and measurement of outcomes across clinical research studies, along with the lack of uniform measurement standards for study data, makes it difficult for researchers to compare different treatments. Therefore, it is crucial to accurately evaluate clinical research on the integration of traditional Chinese and Western medicine for SM.Methods This study protocol outlines a comprehensive research programme based on the Core Outcome Set Standards Protocol Items. The study consists of four phases: a literature review, semistructured interviews, a two-round modified Delphi survey, a consensus meeting. Phase 1 involves a comprehensive literature review to extract outcomes used in current clinical studies of integrated traditional Chinese and Western medicine or Western medicine for the treatment of SM. A semistructured interview format will be used to survey patients and caregivers in phase 2 to collect suggestions from the patient perspective. Phase 3 involves a two-round modified Delphi survey to complete a prioritisation evaluation of outcomes to generate a candidate list for core outcome set (COS). Finally, phase 4 involves a face-to-face consensus meeting to review and establish the COS.Ethics and dissemination Conducted in response to the current dilemma of SM, the study was endorsed by the Spine Oncology Group of the Orthopaedic Surgeons Branch of the Chinese Physicians’ Association. It will be developed and reported through a rigorous process, with the results of the study to be published in a peer-reviewed journal.Registration: COMET Registry: COMET 2938; https://www.comet-initiative.org/Studies/Details/2938.

Chemotherapy is the most common treatment for acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). However, many ALL patients eventually develop relapse and treating relapsed ALL has always been challenging. Therefore, exploring the resistance mechanism of chemotherapeutic drugs and proposing feasible intervention strategies are of great significance for ALL treatment. Here, we show that SENP8, whose coding protein is an important deNEDDylase targeting the substrate for deNEDDylation, is highly expressed in relapsed ALL specimens. Interestingly, overexpressing SENP8 specifically reduces the chemosensitivity of ALL cells to etoposide (VP-16) and significantly alleviates the proapoptotic effect of VP-16 on ALL cells. By contrast, NEDDylation inhibition reduces the chemosensitivity of ALL cells to VP-16. Furthermore, VP-16 induces SENP8 accumulation and the instability of MDM2 as well as the stabilization of p53 in ALL cells, and SENP8 knockdown can sensitize ALL cells to VP-16. Our study reveals a novel function of SENP8 in ALL and that VP-16-induced SENP8 confers a feed-back drug resistance on ALL cells, suggesting a possibility of overcoming the chemotherapeutic resistance to VP-16 via targeting SENP8.

Study DesignBibliometric analysis.ObjectiveOver the last several decades, the field of thoracic ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament (T-OPLL) has evolved unprecedentedly, and the literature on T-OPLL has increased significantly. The purpose of this study is to identify and review the top 50 most cited publications related to T-OPLL.MethodsThe most frequently cited 50 articles in this field until 30 October 2021 were identified by searching Web of Science. We ranked the articles based on the citation number. Through the bibliometric method, we evaluated the following information: article title, first author, year of publication, journal of publication, total number of citations, country, and study topic.ResultsThe number of citations of included studies ranged from 20 to 108, with a mean number of 45.4. The journal Spine published most articles (20), followed by Spinal Cord (5), and European Spine (5). All of these articles were contributed by 38 first authors, Yamazaki (4), Fujimura (3), and Aizawa (3) who published more than 2 articles. In the respect of productive countries, Japan (39) contributed most papers. Tomita contributed the most cited article in 1990 on Spine, which was the first-ever report of circumferential decompression for thoracic myelopathy due to T-OPLL.ConclusionThe top 50 influential articles on T-OPLL were identified and analyzed in this study. It will undoubtedly provide a comprehensive and detailed basis for the orthopedic and neurosurgery physicians to make a clinical decision and assimilate the research focus of spine surgery.

Purpose: Patients with spinal metastases (SM) suffer from a significant quality of life (QoL) deterioration. The measurement of QoL has garnered significant attention. In this study, the authors aimed to investigate the frequency of QoL measurement, systematically appraise the measurement properties of identified instruments, and facilitate the effective selection of an appropriate QoL instrument for patients with SM. Methods: This systematic review adhered to the newly revised Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Metaanalyses (PRISMA) statement guidelines. The methodological quality of the studies was assessed using the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) checklist. Measurement property results were assessed using the adapted criteria. Each measurement property was allocated a separate rating (excellent, good, fair, or poor). 'Best evidence synthesis' was performed using COSMIN outcomes and the quality of findings. Result: Two hundred and nine publications were included, and 18 instruments were identified. ECOG, EuroQol-5D, SF-36, SOSGOQ, and EORTC-QLQ-C30 were the top five instruments used for patients with SM in published literature. The measurement properties evaluated included internal consistency (four instruments), reliability (three instruments), validity (five instruments), validity (nine measures), floor and ceiling effects (four instruments), responsiveness (four instruments), and interpretability (three measures). Based on the limited evidence, the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) had the best methodological quality. Conclusions: Owing to the limitations of BPI in assessment domains, we cannot fully support the use of BPI. For the lack of highquality research, it is challenging to nominate a single appropriate measure. Additional studies are needed to explore the evidence before a confirmatory decision is made. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]