The influence of socioeconomic deprivation on outcomes in transplant patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 in Wales.

INTRODUCTION: SARS-CoV-2 infection has had a significant impact on vulnerable individuals including transplant patients. Socioeconomic deprivation negatively affects outcomes of many health conditions. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of socioeconomic deprivation on the incidence and severity of SARS-CoV-2 infection among Welsh transplant patients. METHODS: This study is a retrospective, cross-sectional study on the transplant population of Wales. The Welsh Index of Multiple Deprivation (WIMD) was used to assess the influence of socioeconomic deprivation on outcomes of Welsh transplant patients who developed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Outcome measures were the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection, rates of hospital and ICU admission, development of acute kidney injury (AKI) and mortality. A logistic binomial regression analysis was used to correlate the various risk factors with the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection. RESULTS: Two hundred and sixty-six (25%) of regular follow up patients had SARS-CoV-2 infection; of these 55 (20.7%) were admitted, 15 (5.6%) to ICU, 37 (13.9%) developed AKI, and 23 (8.6%) died. In a regression analysis, patients of younger age were associated with more (p = .001) and those with SPK (simultaneous pancreas kidney) transplant less chance of infection (p = .038), whereas social deprivation was not associated with the chance of infection (p = .14). In regression analysis increased social deprivation was associated with higher chance of AKI post SARS-CoV-2 (p = .049). CONCLUSIONS: Socioeconomic deprivation did not affect the rates or severity of SARS-CoV-2 infection apart from the degree of AKI in Welsh Transplant patients. Adherence to the preventive measures for this high-risk population must continue to remain a priority.

The Role of Carbon Nanoparticles as Lymph Node Tracers in Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Colorectal malignancies are the third-most common malignancies worldwide, with a rising incidence. Surgery remains the treatment of choice and adequate lymph node dissection is required for accurate staging. The objective of this study is to assess the use of carbon nanoparticles in lymph node tracing and resection in cases of colorectal cancer. For that purpose, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies included in Medline, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar databases. In the end, ten studies with a total number of 1418 patients were included in the final statistical analysis. The meta-analysis carried out showed that the use of carbon nanoparticles results in an increased number of lymph nodes harvested (WMD 6.15, 95% CI 4.14 to 8.16, p < 0.001) and a higher rate of cases with more than 12 lymph nodes harvested (OR 9.57, 95% CI 2.87 to 31.96, p = 0.0002). As a consequence, we suggest that carbon nanoparticles are used on a wider scale and that future research focuses on assessing the association between their use and overall patient survival. This study is limited by the fact that all included studies originate from China and by the fact that certain oncologic parameters and long-term outcomes have not been taken into account in the analysis.

May EPH/Ephrin Targeting Revolutionize Lung Cancer Treatment?

Lung cancer (LC) is the leading cause of cancer death in the United States. Erythropoietin-producing hepatocellular receptors (EPHs) comprise the largest receptor tyrosine kinases (RTKs) family in mammals. EPHs along with their ligands, EPH-family receptor-interacting proteins (ephrins), have been found to be either up- or downregulated in LC cells, hence exhibiting a defining role in LC carcinogenesis and tumor progression. In their capacity as membrane-bound molecules, EPHs/ephrins may represent feasible targets in the context of precision cancer treatment. In order to investigate available therapeutics targeting the EPH/ephrin system in LC, a literature review was conducted, using the MEDLINE, LIVIVO, and Google Scholar databases. EPHA2 is the most well-studied EPH/ephrin target in LC treatment. The targeting of EPHA2, EPHA3, EPHA5, EPHA7, EPHB4, EPHB6, ephrin-A1, ephrin-A2, ephrin-B2, and ephrin-B3 in LC cells or xenograft models not only directly correlates with a profound LC suppression but also enriches the effects of well-established therapeutic regimens. However, the sole clinical trial incorporating a NSCLC patient could not describe objective anti-cancer effects after anti-EPHA2 antibody administration. Collectively, EPHs/ephrins seem to represent promising treatment targets in LC. However, large clinical trials still need to be performed, with a view to examining the effects of EPH/ephrin targeting in the clinical setting.

Mesh Rectopexy or Resection Rectopexy for Rectal Prolapse; Is There a Gold Standard Method: A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis.

(1) Background: Rectal prolapse is a benign condition that mainly affects females and the elderly. The most common symptoms are constipation and incontinence. The treatment of choice is surgical, but so far, there has been no gold standard method. The aim of this study is to compare the two most common intrabdominal procedures utilized for treating rectal prolapse: the resection rectopexy and the mesh rectopexy. (2) Methods: In this study, we conducted a thorough systematic review and meta-analysis of the available literature and compared the two different approaches regarding their complication rate, recurrence rate, and improvement of symptoms rate. (3) Results: No statistically significant difference between the two methods was found regarding the operating time, the length of stay, the overall complication rate, the surgical site infection rate, the cardiopulmonary complication rate, the improvement in constipation and incontinence rates, and the recurrence rate. (4) Conclusions: Our study revealed that mesh rectopexy and resection rectopexy for rectal prolapse have similar short- and long-term outcomes. As a result, the decision for the procedure used should be individualized and based on the surgeon's preference and expertise.

Rapid and reliable testing for clinically actionable EGFR mutations in non-small cell lung cancer using the IdyllaTM platform: a real-world two-center experience in Greece.

BACKGROUND: Limited information exists on epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) molecular epidemiology in Greece. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) is the recommended method for EGFR genotyping in NSCLC. The Idylla Biocartis platform is a fully automated system for actionable EGFR mutation detection. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We describe the prevalence of EGFR mutations in NSCLC patients in two high-volume clinical centers in Greece and compare key methods used for their determination. Eight hundred and fifty-seven FFPE samples from NSCLC patients were tested for EGFR mutations at University of Crete (UoC; n = 324) and at Evangelismos Hospital, Athens (Evangelismos; n = 503). RESULTS: The prevalence of EGFR mutations was 11.1% in the whole cohort (11.5% in non-squamous). The detection rate was 11.0% by NGS, 9.8% by Sanger and 11.3% by Idylla for the whole cohort (12.0% in non-squamous). The agreement between Idylla and Sanger was 93.2%. A targetable EGFR mutation was detected in 10.0% using tissue NGS alone, and in 16.0% using concurrent Idylla ctEGFR testing. CONCLUSION: The frequency of EGFR mutations was as expected for a Caucasian population. The Idylla EGFR test performance is comparable to reference methods and with a shorter TAT. Adding a concurrent plasma Idylla test to tissue NGS testing increases the detection rate of EGFR mutations in NSCLC.

Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors and Infection: What Is the Interplay?

Immune checkpoint molecules are receptors expressed on immune cells, especially T-cells, which activate immunosuppressive pathways and lead them to a state known as T-cell exhaustion. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) constitute a group of specific antibodies that target these molecules, restoring T-cell effector function. Several ICIs have already been approved by the FDA as therapeutic options for certain malignancies. However, evidence in the literature remains unclear regarding the possible risk of infection in patients receiving this treatment. A thorough examination of existing literature was carried out to investigate whether the use of ICIs increases the likelihood of specific infections and to explore the potential beneficial effects of ICIs on the treatment of infections. Our review found most infectious complications are related to immunosuppressive therapy for immune-related adverse events caused by checkpoint blockade. Current evidence shows that ICIs per se do not seem to generally increase the risk of infection, yet they might increase susceptibility to certain infections, such as tuberculosis. On the other hand, reinvigoration of immune responses triggered by ICIs might play a significant role in pathogen clearance, establishing a possible positive impact of ICIs, especially on chronic infectious diseases, such as HIV infection. Data from preclinical models are limited and larger clinical trials are warranted to shed more light on the effect of immune checkpoint blockade on specific pathogens.

Oral Molnupiravir and Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir for the Treatment of COVID-19: A Literature Review with a Focus on Real-World Evidence.

Vaccines remain the cornerstone of medical prevention and are highly effective in reducing the risk of severe disease and death due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). In the context of expanding the therapeutic armamentarium against COVID-19, molnupiravir (Lagevrio) and ritonavir-boosted nirmatrelvir (Paxlovid) were developed, constituting the first effective oral treatments against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). In this narrative review, we retrospectively inquired into the clinical trials and real-world studies investigating the efficacy of these agents. Overall, clinical trials and real-world studies have demonstrated the efficacy of both agents in reducing hospitalization and death rates in COVID-19 patients. As per current recommendations, their use is suggested in patients with mild to moderate symptoms who are at high risk of developing severe disease. Nevertheless, limited data exist regarding their efficacy in specific subpopulations, such as immunocompromised patients, those with severe kidney disease, pregnant women, and children.