Safety and effectiveness of neuraminidase inhibitors in situations of pandemic and/or novel/variant influenza: a systematic review of the literature, 2009-15.

Objectives: To review systematically the published literature evaluating neuraminidase inhibitor (NI) safety and effectiveness in situations of pandemic and novel/variant influenza. Methods: We searched six online databases using comprehensive search criteria for observational studies and randomized controlled trials investigating the effects of NI treatment, prophylaxis or outbreak control in patients of all ages. Results: Overall, 165 studies were included (95% observational), which were generally of low methodological quality due to lack of adjustment for confounding variables. In studies reporting adjusted estimates in general populations, NI treatment appeared likely to be effective against mortality (primarily if administered within 48 h of symptom onset) and potentially effective in reducing pneumonia. NIs appeared effective in reducing secondary transmission when indicated for prophylaxis. Limited, low-quality data suggest NIs are likely safe in general populations and may be safe in pregnant women and children. Data are scarce regarding safety of NIs in adults and high-risk individuals. Conclusions: Most included studies were observational, statistically underpowered and at high risk of reporting biased and/or confounded effect estimates. NI treatment appeared likely effective in reducing mortality (cause unspecified) and pneumonia in general populations, with increasing benefit when administered with 48 h of symptom onset. NI pre- or post-exposure prophylaxis is likely effective in reducing secondary transmission of influenza in a general population. Our evidence suggests NIs are likely safe to use in the general population; however, data for children and pregnant women are limited. Knowledge gaps persist in specific populations such as Aboriginals, high-risk individuals and the elderly.

ERG expression is associated with increased risk of biochemical relapse following radical prostatectomy in early onset prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: ERG expression has been proposed to signify molecular subtype of PCA. However, its significance in early onset prostate cancer (PCA) is not characterized. MATERIALS AND METHODS: ERG protein expression was investigated in a cohort of 121 men diagnosed with localized PCA at <50 years of age with a mean follow-up time of 65.7 months. ERG was correlated to patients' outcome and clinical-pathological parameters using univariate and multivariate analysis. RESULTS: ERG expression was detected in 76/118 (64.4 %) analyzable patients' samples and showed interfocal heterogeneity (differences between foci) in 17/118 (14.4 %) patients. There was significant association between ERG expression and Gleason score (p = 0.022), but not with any other clinical-pathologic parameter, including pre-surgical PSA levels, tumor volume, pathological stage, surgical margin or lymph-vascular invasion. ERG had significant effect on the rate of biochemical relapse following radical prostatectomy, with ERG positive patients showing higher relapse rates vs. ERG negative patients (p = 0.007). However, considering time till biochemical relapse post-radical prostatectomy, ERG expression showed positive insignificant trends (p = 0.071). Notably, and of great significance, in this cohort of early onset disease, none of the ERG negative PCA patients exhibited biochemical relapse. CONCLUSION: The study results suggest that ERG expression may be of added prognostic value in localized prostate cancer in patients with early onset PCA. However, the issue of ERG interfocal heterogeneity observed may require the evaluation of several tumor foci to assess ERG status per case. Incorporating ERG status into existing nomograms may be of added prognostic value in patients with early onset PCA.