The effect of erythropoiesis­stimulating agents on lung cancer patients: a meta­analysis.

Previous studies have demonstrated that erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) can reduce anemia and improve quality of life in cancer patients, but ESAs may increase mortality. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing the effect and risk of ESAs about the prevention or treatment of anemia in cancer patients. Four databases including PubMed, Embase, Web of science and Cochrane Library were searched for published RCTS on ESAs in the treatment of anemia in lung cancer patients from 2000 to 2023. Endpoints including mortality, incidence of thrombotic vascular events, blood transfusion requirement, and incidence of adverse events. Our meta-analysis included 8 studies, with a sample size of 4240 patients, including 2548 patients in the ESAs group and 1692 patients in the control group. The risk of mortality was lower in patients using ESAs than control group (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.92-0.99, P = 0.02). But there was no significant difference in the risk of mortality between the patients using ESAs and controls (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.92-1.06, P = 0.69) after removing Pere 2020. Subgroup analysis found that patients diagnosed with small cell lung cancer (SCLC) (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.92-1.08, P = 0.16) or non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.87-1.17, P = 0.13) were no significant difference in mortality rate. The thrombotic vascular events increase in patients using ESAs than control group (RR 1.40, 95% CI 1.13-1.72, P = 0.002). The blood transfusion requirement of ESAs group was lower than control group (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.44-0.72, P < 0.00001). And the subgroups of Darbepoetin alfa (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.41-0.79, P = 0.003) and Epoetin alfa (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.47-0.99, P = 0.01) had lower transfusion requirements than the control group. In the SCLC subgroup (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.40-0.65, P = 0.34), blood transfusion requirements were lower in the ESAs group, but there was no significant difference between the subgroup of patients with NSCLC (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.36-1.04, P = 0.009). There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in the incidence of adverse reactions (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.95-1.00, P = 0.10). In conclusion, ESAs does not increase the mortality of lung cancer patients or may reduce the risk of death, and can reduce the need for blood transfusion, although ESA can increase the incidence of thrombotic vascular adverse events.Registration PROSPERO CRD42023463582.

Association between hiatal hernia and Barrett's esophagus: an updated meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis.

Background: Barrett's esophagus (BE) is a precursor of esophageal adenocarcinoma. It is critical to recognize the risk factors associated with BE. Objectives: The present meta-analysis aims to systematically estimate the association of hiatal hernia with the risk of BE. Design: A meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis. Data sources and methods: The PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched. The pooled odds ratios (ORs) and adjusted ORs (aORs) with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for the combined estimation of unadjusted data and data adjusted for confounders, respectively. Heterogeneity was quantified using the Cochrane Q test and I² statistics. Subgroup, meta-regression, and leave-one-out sensitivity analyses were employed to explore the sources of heterogeneity. Results: Forty-seven studies with 131,517 participants were included. Based on the unadjusted data from 47 studies, hiatal hernia was significantly associated with an increased risk of any length BE (OR = 3.91, 95% CI = 3.31-4.62, p < 0.001). The heterogeneity was significant (I² = 77%; p < 0.001) and the definition of controls (p = 0.014) might be a potential contributor to heterogeneity. Based on the adjusted data from 14 studies, this positive association remained (aOR = 3.26, 95% CI = 2.44-4.35, p < 0.001). The heterogeneity was also significant (I² = 65%; p < 0.001). Meta-analysis of seven studies demonstrated that hiatal hernia was significantly associated with an increased risk of long-segment BE (LSBE) (OR = 10.01, 95% CI = 4.16-24.06, p < 0.001). The heterogeneity was significant (I² = 78%; p < 0.001). Meta-analysis of seven studies also demonstrated that hiatal hernia was significantly associated with an increased risk of short-segment BE (OR = 2.76, 95% CI = 2.05-3.71, p < 0.001). The heterogeneity was not significant (I² = 30%; p = 0.201). Conclusion: Hiatal hernia should be a significant risk factor for BE, especially LSBE. Registration: PROSPERO registration number CRD42022367376.

Effect of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents on breast cancer patients: a meta-analysis.

Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) have been reported to increase the risk of death in cancer patients. In this study, we selected breast cancer, which is currently the most prevalent cancer worldwide, for a meta-analysis to re-examine the advantages and disadvantages of using ESAs. All relevant studies were searched by PubMed, Embase, Web of science, and Cochrane Library. Endpoints including mortality, incidence of thrombo-vascular events, hemoglobin, and transfusion requirements were meta-analyzed based on random-effects model or fixed-effect model. 10 studies were finally included, with a total sample size of 6785 patients. The risk of mortality was higher in patients using ESA than in controls (RR 1.07, 95% CI 1.01-1.13, P = 0.03); subgroup analysis found that the mortality rate was higher in patients treating with ESA for > 6 months (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.05-1.55, P = 0.01) and epoetin α (RR 1.07, 95% CI 1.01-1.14, P = 0.03). The incidence of thrombo-vascular adverse events was higher in patients using ESA than in controls (RR 1.53, 95% CI 1.27-1.86, P < 0.0001). The ESA group was more effective in improving anemia in cancer patients (MD 1.20, 95% CI 0.77-1.63, P < 0.00001). The blood transfusion needs of patients in the ESA group were significantly lower (RR 0.52, 95%CI 0.44-0.60, P < 0.00001). There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in disease progression-related conditions (HR 1.03, 95%CI 0.95-1.12, P = 0.52). ESAs increase the risk of mortality and the incidence of thrombo-vascular adverse events in breast cancer patients, while reducing their anemia symptoms and transfusion requirements. Registration PROSPERO CRD42022330450.

Impact of proton pump inhibitors on the in-hospital outcome of COVID-19 patients: a retrospective study.

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has triggered a global public health crisis. Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are one of the most commonly prescribed drugs. However, the effect of PPIs on the clinical outcomes of COVID-19 patients remains unclear. Methods: All COVID-19 patients admitted to the Wuhan Huoshenshan Hospital from February 2020 to April 2020 were retrospectively collected. Patients were divided into PPIs and non-PPIs groups. Logistic regression analyses were performed to explore the effects of PPIs on the outcomes of COVID-19 patients, including transfer to intensive care unit, mechanical ventilation, and death. Subgroup analyses were performed according to the presence of upper gastrointestinal symptoms potentially associated with acid and the routes, types, median total dosage, and duration of PPIs. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Results: Of the 3024 COVID-19 patients included, 694 and 2330 were in PPIs and non-PPIs groups, respectively. Univariate logistic regression analysis showed that PPIs significantly increased the risk of reaching the composite endpoint in COVID-19 patients (OR = 10.23, 95% CI = 6.90-15.16, p < 0.001). After adjusting for age, sex, comorbidities, other medications, and severe/critical COVID-19, PPIs were independently associated with an increased risk of reaching the composite endpoint (OR = 7.00, 95% CI = 4.57-10.71, p < 0.001). This association remained significant in patients with upper gastrointestinal symptoms and those who received an intravenous omeprazole alone, but not those who received oral lansoprazole or rabeprazole alone. It was not influenced by dosage or duration of PPIs. Conclusion: The use of intravenous PPIs alone during hospitalization may be associated with worse clinical outcome in COVID-19 patients.

Oleanolic acid exerts neuroprotective effects in subarachnoid hemorrhage rats through SIRT1-mediated HMGB1 deacetylation.

Anti-inflammatory therapy for early brain injury after subarachnoid hemorrhage is a promising treatment for improving the prognosis. HMGB1 is the initiator of early inflammation after subarachnoid hemorrhage. Oleanolic acid is a natural pentacyclic triterpenoid compound with strong anti-inflammatory activity. It can relieve early brain injury in subarachnoid hemorrhage rats, but its mechanism is not very clear. Here, we study the potential mechanism of Oleanolic acid in the treatment of subarachnoid hemorrhage. First, we demonstrated that oleanolic acid alleviated early brain injury after subarachnoid hemorrhage, including improvement of grading score, neurological score, brain edema and permeability of brain blood barrier. Then we found that oleanolic acid could inhibit the transfer of HMGB1 from nucleus to cytoplasm and reduce the level of serum HMGB1. Furthermore, we found that oleanolic acid decreased the acetylation level of HMGB1 by increasing SIRT1 expression rather than by inhibiting JAK/STAT3 pathway. SIRT1 inhibitor sirtinol eliminated all beneficial effects of oleanolic acid on subarachnoid hemorrhage, which indicated that oleanolic acid inhibited the acetylation of HMGB1 by up regulating SIRT1. In addition, oleanolic acid treatment also reduced the levels of TLR4 and apoptosis related factors and reduced neuronal apoptosis after subarachnoid hemorrhage. In summary, our findings suggest that oleanolic acid may activate SIRT1 by acting as an activator of SIRT1, thereby reducing the acetylation of HMGB1, thus playing an anti-inflammatory role to alleviate early brain injury after subarachnoid hemorrhage.

Diagnostic utility of CT for abdominal injury in the military setting: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: It is critical to accurately identify patients with abdominal injury who truly need to undergo laparotomy during the war in timely fashion. The diagnostic utility of computed tomography (CT) for evaluating abdominal injury in the military setting remains uncertain. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched. Meta-analyses were performed by using a random-effect model. We pooled the area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curves with standard errors, the Q indexes with standard errors, the sensitivities with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), the specificities with 95% CIs, the positive likelihood ratios with 95% CIs, the negative likelihood ratios with 95% CIs, and the diagnostic odds ratios with 95% CIs. The heterogeneity among studies were evaluated by the I2 and P value. RESULTS: Overall, 5 retrospective studies were included. The area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.9761 ±â€Š0.0215 and the Q index was 0.9302 ±â€Š0.0378. The pooled sensitivity was 0.97 (95% CI = 0.92-0.99) without a significant heterogeneity among studies (I2 = 0%, P = .4538). The pooled specificity was 0.95 (95% CI = 0.93-0.97) with a significant heterogeneity among studies (I2 = 90.6%, P < .0001). The pooled positive likelihood ratio was 10.71 (95% CI: 2.91-39.43) with a significant heterogeneity among studies (I2 = 89.2%, P < .0001). The pooled negative likelihood ratio was 0.07 (95% CI = 0.02-0.27) with a significant heterogeneity among studies (I2 = 57.5%, P = .0516). The pooled diagnostic odds ratio was 177.48 (95% CI = 18.09-1741.31) with a significant heterogeneity among studies (I2 = 75.9%, P = .0023). CONCLUSION: Diagnostic accuracy of CT for abdominal injury is excellent in the military setting. Further work should explore how to shrink CT equipment for a wider use in wartime.

Diffusion- and Susceptibility Weighted Imaging Mismatch Correlates With Collateral Circulation and Prognosis After Middle Cerebral Artery M1-Segment Occlusion.

Objective: To explore the relation between diffusion-weighted and susceptibility weighted imaging (DWI-SWI) mismatch and collateral circulation or prognosis in patients with occluded M1 segments of middle cerebral artery (MCA). Methods: We enrolled 59 patients with MCA M1-segment occlusion for a retrospective review of baseline clinical and imaging data. As markers of circulatory collaterals, prominent laterality of posterior (PLPCA) and anterior (PLACA) cerebral arteries on magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) studies and a hyperintense vessel sign (HVS) on T2 fluid-attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) images were collectively scored. The extent of acute cerebral infarction was then quantified on DWI, using the Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score (DWI-ASPECTS). Hypointensity vessel sign prominence (PVS) was also evaluated by SWI and similarly scored (SWI-ASPECT) to calculate DWI-SWI mismatch [(DWI-ASPECTS) - (SWI-ASPECTS)], ranging from -10 to 10 points. Results: DWI-SWI mismatch showed significant associations with PLPCA, PLACA, HVS prominence, and collective collateral scores (all, p < 0.05). National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS), DWI-SWI mismatch, and DWI-ASPECTS also differed significantly according to patient prognosis (good vs. poor) after MCA M1-segment occlusion (p < 0.05). In binary logistic regression analyses, NIHSS and DWI-SWI mismatch emerged as independent prognostic factors (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Collateral circulation may be an important aspect of DWI-SWI mismatch, which in this study correlated with prognostic outcomes of MCA M1-segment occlusion.

Efficacy of Xuebijing Injection for Acute Pancreatitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

METHODS: PubMed Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, China Biology Medicine disc, VIP, and Wanfang databases were searched. The primary outcome was treatment response. The secondary outcomes included changes in clinical and laboratory indicators and incidence of AP-related complications. Meta-analyses were performed by using a random-effect model. Risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) or weighted mean differences (WMDs) with 95% CIs were calculated. RESULTS: Overall, 23 RCTs were included. The rates of overall (RR = 1.16; 95% CI = 1.12 to 1.20; P < 0.00001) and complete (RR = 1.40; 95% CI = 1.30 to 1.50; P < 0.00001) responses were significantly higher in the Xuebijing injection group. After treatment, the levels of interleukin-6 (WMD = -18.22; 95% CI = -23.36 to -13.08; P < 0.00001), tumor necrosis factor-α (WMD = -16.44; 95% CI = -20.49 to -12.40; P < 0.00001), serum amylase (WMD = -105.61; 95% CI = -173.77 to -37.46; P=0.002), white blood cell (WMD = -1.51; 95% CI = -1.66 to -1.36; P < 0.00001), and C-reactive protein (WMD = -11.05; 95% CI = -14.32 to -7.78; P < 0.00001) were significantly lower in the Xuebijing injection group. Abdominal pain (WMD = -1.74; 95% CI = -1.96 to -1.52; P < 0.00001), abdominal distension (WMD = -1.56; 95% CI = -2.07 to -1.04; P < 0.00001), gastrointestinal function (WMD = -2.60; 95% CI = -3.07 to -2.13; P < 0.00001), body temperature (WMD = -2.16; 95% CI = -2.83 to -1.49; P < 0.00001), serum amylase level (WMD = -1.81; 95% CI = -2.66 to -0.96; P < 0.0001), and white blood cell (WMD = -2.16; 95% CI = -2.99 to -1.32; P < 0.00001) recovered more rapidly in the Xuebijing injection group. The incidence of multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (RR = 0.18; 95% CI = 0.05 to 0.62; P=0.006), pancreatic pseudocyst (RR = 0.17; 95% CI = 0.04 to 0.77; P=0.02), and renal failure (RR = 0.16; 95% CI = 0.05 to 0.60; P=0.006) was significantly lower in the Xuebijing injection group. CONCLUSIONS: Xuebijing injection added on the basis of conventional treatment has a potential benefit for improving the outcomes of AP.

Adherence to Non-Selective Beta Blockers for Prevention of Variceal Bleeding in Cirrhotic Patients.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Long-term use of non-selective beta blockers (NSBBs) is essential for the prevention of esophageal variceal bleeding in liver cirrhosis but may impair the patient's adherence. The present study aimed to investigate the adherence to NSBBs to prevent variceal bleeding in cirrhotic patients. METHODS: All patients who had an indication of NSBBs for the prophylaxis of variceal bleeding between February 2018 and June 2019 were screened. Clinical pharmacists gave pre-medication education and recorded the adherence to NSBBs during the patients' hospitalizations. Factors associated with poor adherence were evaluated by univariate logistic regression analysis. Odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. The relationship between poor adherence during follow-up and variceal bleeding after discharge was also evaluated. RESULTS: Overall, 108 patients were screened, of whom 12 were intolerant to NSBBs. Among the 96 remaining patients who could take NSBBs, the average change of heart rate after NSBBs was -10.49 b.p.m. Twenty-two (22.9%) patients had poor adherence to NSBBs due to their refusal to take NSBBs (n = 2), complete forgetfulness to take NSBBs (n = 10), and refusal or forgetfulness to monitor heart rate (n = 10). Univariate logistic regression analysis demonstrated that only older age was significantly associated with poor adherence (OR: 1.065, 95% CI: 1.019-1.114, P = 0.005). Patients with poor adherence during follow-up were more likely to develop variceal bleeding after discharge. CONCLUSION: A significant proportion of cirrhotic patients had poor adherence to NSBBs during their hospitalizations. Further studies should explore how to improve the patient's adherence to NSBBs.

Risk factors for mortality of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients during the early outbreak of COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Identification of risk factors for poor prognosis of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is necessary to enable the risk stratification and modify the patient's management. Thus, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the in-hospital mortality and risk factors of death in COVID-19 patients. METHODS: All studies were searched via the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), VIP, and Wanfang databases. The in-hospital mortality of COVID-19 patients was pooled. Odds ratios (ORs) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for evaluation of risk factors. RESULTS: A total of 80 studies were included with a pooled in-hospital mortality of 14% (95% CI: 12.2-15.9%). Older age (MD =13.32, 95% CI: 10.87-15.77; P<0.00001), male (OR =1.66, 95% CI: 1.37-2.01; P<0.00001), hypertension (OR =2.67, 95% CI: 2.08-3.43; P<0.00001), diabetes (OR =2.14, 95% CI: 1.76-2.6; P<0.00001), chronic respiratory disease (OR =3.55, 95% CI: 2.65-4.76; P<0.00001), chronic heart disease/cardiovascular disease (OR =3.15, 95% CI: 2.43-4.09; P<0.00001), elevated levels of high-sensitive cardiac troponin I (MD =66.65, 95% CI: 16.94-116.36; P=0.009), D-dimer (MD =4.33, 95% CI: 2.97-5.68; P<0.00001), C-reactive protein (MD =48.03, 95% CI: 27.79-68.27; P<0.00001), and a decreased level of albumin at admission (MD =-3.98, 95% CI: -5.75 to -2.22; P<0.0001) are associated with higher risk of death. Patients who developed acute respiratory distress syndrome (OR =62.85, 95% CI: 29.45-134.15; P<0.00001), acute cardiac injury (OR =25.16, 95% CI: 6.56-96.44; P<0.00001), acute kidney injury (OR =22.86, 95% CI: 4.60-113.66; P=0.0001), and septic shock (OR =24.09, 95% CI: 4.26-136.35; P=0.0003) might have a higher in-hospital mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Advanced age, male, comorbidities, increased levels of acute inflammation or organ damage indicators, and complications are associated with the risk of mortality in COVID-19 patients, and should be integrated into the risk stratification system.

Comparison of liver biochemical abnormality between COVID-19 patients with liver cirrhosis versus COVID-19 alone and liver cirrhosis alone: A STROBE observational study.

ABSTRACT: Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) patients frequently develop liver biochemical abnormality. However, liver biochemical abnormality in COVID-19 patients with liver cirrhosis is under-recognized.Patients hospitalized during COVID-19 pandemic in China (ie, from February to April 2020) were screened. All of 17 COVID-19 patients with liver cirrhosis consecutively admitted to the Wuhan Huoshenshan Hospital were identified. Meanwhile, 17 age-, sex-, and severity-matched COVID-19 patients without liver cirrhosis admitted to this hospital were selected as a control group; all of 14 cirrhotic patients without COVID-19 consecutively admitted to the Department of Gastroenterology of the General Hospital of Northern Theater Command were selected as another control group. Incidence of liver biochemical abnormality and decompensated events were primarily compared.Among the COVID-19 patients with liver cirrhosis, the incidence of liver biochemical abnormality at admission and during hospitalization were 76.50% and 84.60%, respectively; 7 (41.20%) had decompensated events at admission; 1 was transferred to intensive care unit due to gastrointestinal bleeding. Among the COVID-19 patients without liver cirrhosis, the incidence of liver biochemical abnormality at admission and during hospitalization were 58.80% (P = .271) and 60.00% (P = .150), respectively. Among the cirrhotic patients without COVID-19, the incidence of liver biochemical abnormality at admission and during hospitalization were 69.20% (P = .657) and 81.80% (P = .855), respectively; 11 (78.60%) had decompensated events at admission (P = .036). None died during hospitalization among the three groups.Liver biochemical abnormality is common in COVID-19 patients with liver cirrhosis. Management of decompensated events in cirrhotic patients without COVID-19 should not be neglected during COVID-19 pandemic.

Gastrointestinal Bleeding, but Not Other Gastrointestinal Symptoms, Is Associated With Worse Outcomes in COVID-19 Patients.

Background: Patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can present with gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms. However, the prevalence of GI symptoms and their association with outcomes remain controversial in COVID-19 patients. Methods: All COVID-19 patients consecutively admitted to the Wuhan Huoshenshan hospital from February 2020 to April 2020 were collected. Disease severity and outcomes were compared between COVID-19 patients with and without GI symptoms. Logistic regression analyses were performed to evaluate the association of GI symptoms with the composite endpoint and death in COVID-19 patients. A composite endpoint was defined as transfer to intensive care unit, requirement of mechanical ventilation, and death. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Results: Overall, 2,552 COVID-19 patients were included. The prevalence of GI symptoms was 21.0% (537/2,552). Diarrhea (8.9%, 226/2,552) was the most common GI symptom. Patients with GI symptoms had significantly higher proportions of severe COVID-19 and worse outcomes than those without. Univariate logistic regression analyses demonstrated that GI symptoms were significantly associated with the composite endpoint (OR = 2.426, 95% CI = 1.608-3.661; P < 0.001) and death (OR = 2.137, 95% CI = 1.209-3.778; P = 0.009). After adjusting for age, sex, and severe/critical COVID-19, GI symptoms were still independently associated with the composite endpoint (OR = 2.029, 95% CI = 1.294-3.182; P = 0.002), but not death (OR = 1.726, 95% CI = 0.946-3.150; P = 0.075). According to the type of GI symptoms, GI bleeding was an independent predictor of the composite endpoint (OR = 8.416, 95% CI = 3.465-20.438, P < 0.001) and death (OR = 6.640, 95% CI = 2.567-17.179, P < 0.001), but not other GI symptoms (i.e., diarrhea, abdominal discomfort, nausea and/or vomiting, constipation, acid reflux and/or heartburn, or abdominal pain). Conclusion: GI symptoms are common in COVID-19 patients and may be associated with their worse outcomes. Notably, such a negative impact of GI symptoms on the outcomes should be attributed to GI bleeding.