Search

The purpose of this study was to assess the dietary consumption patterns of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) among the population in Guangdong province. Employing a cross‐sectional design, the survey was conducted from 2019 to 2021 to examine the inclusion of TCM in the diet of participants in Guangdong province. Information regarding consumption of TCM during the preceding 12 months was collected using a food frequency questionnaire. The participant cohort comprised a total of 3031 participants, consisting of 1081 Cantonese, 967 Hakka, and 983 Teochew individuals. The survey included 42 TCM, with consumption rates ranging from 2.6% to 47.3%. The top five TCM comprised Citri Reticulatae Pericarpium (47.3%), Lonicerae Japonicae Flos (47.0%), Codonopsis Radix (46.4%), Polygonati Odorati Rhizoma (43.1%), and Siraitiae Fructus (41.5%), along with Panacis Quinquefolii Radix (41.5%). These TCM possess recognized therapeutic properties within TCM for clearing heat, drying dampness, and detoxification. Within the top decile of 10 TCM, only Lonicerae Japonicae Flos was ubiquitous across all three sub‐populations. Nonetheless, 11 TCM from the top 20 and 17 TCM from the top 30 overlapped among the three sub‐populations. The study revealed substantial variability in the consumption rates of different TCM. Notably, those with traditional Chinese medicine effects of clearing heat, drying dampness, and detoxification exhibited higher consumption rates. Disparities in the consumption rates of these TCM were noted among the Cantonese, Hakka, and Teochew populations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A 60‐year‐old man was hospitalized because of numbness and weakness in the right upper limb. Magnetic resonance imaging revealed a large mass in the right upper lobe invading the right eighth cervical and first thoracic nerve root. Biopsy pathology confirmed primary lung adenocarcinoma with a clinical stage of cT4N0M0 IIIA, negative for anaplastic lymphoma kinase fusion gene and epidermal growth factor receptor mutations but positive for programmed death ligand 1 (3%). Neoadjuvant tislelizumab and chemotherapy were offered to this patient with Pancoast tumor, and tumor shrinkage of 71% was achieved. After the operation, surgical pathology indicated pathologic complete response (pCR). Circulating tumor cells testing was negative after the first adjuvant treatment. In this case, we provide real‐world evidence of encouraging pCR with neoadjuvant tislelizumab and chemotherapy for a patient with Pancoast tumor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Monosialotetrahexosylganglioside (GM1) is a neuroprotective glycosphingolipid that repairs nerves. Oxaliplatin‐based chemotherapy is neurotoxic. This study assessed the efficacy of GM1 for preventing oxaliplatin‐induced peripheral neurotoxicity (OIPN) in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients receiving oxaliplatin‐based chemotherapy. Methods: In total, 196 patients with stage II/III CRC undergoing adjuvant chemotherapy with mFOLFOX6 were randomly assigned to intravenous GM1 or a placebo. The primary endpoint was the rate of grade 2 or worse cumulative neurotoxicity (NCI‐CTCAE). The secondary endpoints were chronic cumulative neurotoxicity (EORTCQLQ‐CIPN20), time to grade 2 neurotoxicity (NCI‐CTCAE or the oxaliplatin‐specific neuropathy scale), acute neurotoxicity (analog scale), rates of dose reduction or withdrawal due to OIPN, 3‐year disease‐free survival (DFS) and adverse events. Results: There were no significant differences between the arms in the rate of NCI‐CTCAE grade 2 or worse neurotoxicity (GM1: 33.7% vs placebo: 31.6%; P =.76) or neuropathy measured by the EORTCQLQ‐CIPN20 or time to grade 2 neurotoxicity using NCI‐CTCAE and the oxaliplatin‐specific neuropathy scale. GM1 substantially decreased participant‐reported acute neurotoxicity (sensitivity to cold items [P <.01], discomfort swallowing cold liquids [P <.01], throat discomfort [P <.01], muscle cramps [P <.01]). The rates of dose reduction or withdrawal were not significantly different between the arms (P =.08). The 3‐year DFS rates were 85% and 83% in the GM1 and placebo arms, respectively (P =.19). There were no differences in toxicity between the arms. Conclusion: Patients receiving GM1 were less troubled by the symptoms of acute neuropathy. However, we do not support the use of GM1 to prevent cumulative neurotoxicity. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02251977). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It was highlighted that in the original article [1] the data on categorical variables was wrongly arranged in Table 1 and there was an incorrect statement in the fourth paragraph of the Discussion section. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]