Search

Background: Patients with coronavirus disease‐2019 (COVID‐19) are characterized by hyperinflammation. Calprotectin (S100A8/S100A9) is a calcium‐ and zinc‐binding protein mainly secreted by neutrophilic granulocytes or macrophages and has been suggested to be correlated with the severity and prognosis of COVID‐19. Aim: To thoroughly evaluate the diagnostic and prognostic utility of calprotectin in patients with COVID‐19 by analyzing relevant studies. Methods: PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were comprehensively searched from inception to August 1, 2023 to retrieve studies about the application of calprotectin in COVID‐19. Useful data such as the level of calprotectin in different groups and the diagnostic efficacy of this biomarker for severe COVID‐19 were extracted and aggregated by using Stata 16.0 software. Results: Fifteen studies were brought into this meta‐analysis. First, the pooled standardized mean differences (SMDs) were used to estimate the differences in the levels of circulating calprotectin between patients with severe and non‐severe COVID‐19. The results showed an overall estimate of 1.84 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.09–2.60). Diagnostic information was extracted from 11 studies, and the pooled sensitivity and specificity of calprotectin for diagnosing severe COVID‐19 were 0.75 (95% CI: 0.64–0.84) and 0.88 (95% CI: 0.79–0.94), respectively. The AUC was 0.89 and the pooled DOR was 18.44 (95% CI: 9.07–37.51). Furthermore, there was a strong correlation between elevated levels of circulating calprotectin and a higher risk of mortality outcomes in COVID‐19 patients (odds ratio: 8.60, 95% CI: 2.17–34.12; p < 0.1). Conclusion: This meta‐analysis showed that calprotectin was elevated in patients with severe COVID‐19, and this atypical inflammatory cytokine might serve as a useful biomarker to distinguish the severity of COVID‐19 and predict the prognosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is a need to identify alternative biomarkers to predict tuberculosis (TB) preventive treatment response because observing the incidence decline renders a long follow-up period. Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase and Web of Science up to 9 February 2023. The biomarker levels during preventive treatment were quantitatively summarized by means of meta-analysis using the random-effect model. Results: Eleven eligible studies, published during 2006–2022, were included in the meta-analysis, with frequently heterogeneous results. Twenty-six biomarkers or testing methods were identified regarding TB preventive treatment monitoring. The summarized standard mean differences of interferon-γ (INF-γ) were −1.44 (95% CI: −1.85, −1.03) among those who completed preventive treatment (τ2 = 0.21; I2 = 95.2%, p < 0.001) and −0.49 (95% CI: −1.05, 0.06) for those without preventive treatment (τ2 = 0.13; I2 = 82.0%, p < 0.001), respectively. Subgroup analysis showed that the INF-γ level after treatment decreased significantly from baseline among studies with high TB burden (−0.98, 95% CI: −1.21, −0.75) and among those with a history of Bacillus Calmette–Guérin vaccination (−0.87, 95% CI: −1.10, −0.63). Conclusions: Our results suggested that decreased INF-γ was observed among those who completed preventive treatment but not in those without preventive treatment. Further studies are warranted to explore its value in preventive treatment monitoring due to limited available data and extensive between-study heterogeneity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: To evaluate the immune checkpoint inhibitors (CPI) for the treatment of patients with advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (CSCC). Materials and methods: A meta‐analysis was conducted, and the efficacy and safety of CPI were assessed. Results: A total of 13 studies with 980 patients were included. The pooled objective response rate (ORR) and disease control rate were 47.2% and 64.4%, separately. In addition, patients with primary tumor located in head and neck (odds ratio [OR]: 0.374, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.219–0.640, p < 0.001) and positive expression of programmed death ligand 1 (OR: 0.364, 95% CI: 0.158–0.842, P = 0.018) had superior ORR during CPI treatment. The incidence of progression free survival at 6 and 12 months was 59.3% and 52.8%, and 80.6% and 76.4% for overall survival. As for safety, the overall incidence of adverse events with all grades and 3–4 grade was 76.9% and 20.2%. Conclusions: Our systematic review confirmed the satisfying efficacy and acceptable toxicity of CPI for advanced CSCC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The optimal treatment for patients with high-risk prostate cancer (PCa) remains a debate and selection of patients to receive proper therapy is still an unsettled question. This systematic review was conducted to compare the effectiveness of prostatectomy (RP) and radiotherapy (RT) in patients with high-risk PCa and to select candidates for optimal treatment. Methods: PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for eligible studies. We extracted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of all included studies. The primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS); the secondary outcomes were biochemical recurrence-free survival (BRFS), metastasis-free survival (MFS) and clinical recurrence-free survival (CRFS). The meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.3. Subgroup analyses were conducted according to Gleason score (GS), T stage and RT types. Quality of life (QoL) was compared with these two treatments. Results: A total of 25 studies were included in this meta-analysis. Overall, RP showed more survival benefits than RT on CSS (P = 0.003) and OS (P = 0.002); while RT was associated with better BRFS (P = 0.002) and MFS (P = 0.004). Subgroup analyses showed RT was associated with similar or even better survival outcomes compared to RP in patients with high GS, high T stage or received external beam radiotherapy plus brachytherapy (EBRT + BT). As for QoL, RP was associated with poorer urinary and sexual function but better performance in the bowel domain. Conclusion: RP could prolong the survival time of patients with high-risk PCa; however, RT could delay the disease progression, and combined RT (EBRT + BT) even brought preferable CSS and similar OS compared to RP. RT might be the prior choice for patients with high T stage or high GS. RP could lead to poorer urinary and sexual function, while bringing better performance in the bowel domain. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The aim of the study was to systematically review the relevant studies to evaluate the prognosis of primary and progressive muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) after radical cystectomy (RC) and provide a clue for the timing of RC in patients with progressive MIBC early at the time of high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC).Material and Methods: PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for eligible studies. We extracted hazard ratios (HRs) of overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) and deaths at 5 and 10 years for each study and performed the meta-analysis using Review Manager 5.3.Results: A total of 11 retrospective studies with 4102 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled analysis suggested a similar CSS (HR: 1.18; 95% CI, 0.74, 1.87; p = 0.50) and OS (HR: 1.15; 95% CI, 0.82, 1.61; p = 0.43) between primary and progressive MIBC patients treated with RC. The results further indicated no significant differences between the two populations in terms of 5-year CSS rate (OR: 1.32; 95% CI, 0.90, 1.95; p = 0.16), 10-year CSS rate (OR: 0.83; 95% CI, 0.37, 1.83; p = 0.64) as well as 5-year OS rate (OR: 1.02; 95% CI, 0.66, 1.56; p = 0.94). Subgroup analysis according to the starting point of follow-up showed similar outcomes.Conclusion: The meta-analysis demonstrates comparable CSS and OS in patients with primary and progressive MIBC following RC. Novel risk stratifications and prospective trials are urgently needed to investigate the prognosis after RC of these two groups of patients, which could finally aid clinician decision making and select patients who would actually benefit from early RC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Umbilical cord blood has emerged as an alternative stem cell source to bone marrow or peripheral blood stem cells. Umbilical cord blood transplantation (UCBT) is also potentially curative for acute leukemia. However, the effect of unrelated donor bone marrow transplantation (UBMT) and UCBT on the outcome of patients with acute leukemia has not been systematically reviewed. In the present meta-analysis, we systematically searched Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CNKI up to May 2011. Two reviewers extracted data independently. Seven studies totaling 3389 patients have been assessed. Pooled results found that the incidence of engraftment failure and transplantation-related mortality were higher in UCBT than in UBMT, and relative risks (RRs) were 4.27 (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.94-6.21) and 1.27 (95% CI, 1.01-1.59), respectively. The rates of acute and chronic graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) in the UCBT group were significantly lower than that in the UBMT group, and RRs were 0.71 (95% CI, 0.65-0.79) and 0.69 (95% CI, 0.52-0.91), respectively. The relapse rate was similar between the UCBT and UBMT group. The leukemia-free survival (LFS) and overall survival (OS) were significantly lower in the UCBT group than in the UBMT group; RRs were 1.14 (95% CI, 1.07-1.22) and hazard ratios (HRs) were 1.31 (95% CI, 1.16-1.48), respectively. Subgroup analysis showed that in patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), the survival was similar between UCBT and UBMT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]