Regular Glucosamine Use May Have Different Roles in the Risk of Site-Specific Cancers: Findings from a Large Prospective Cohort.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies indicated that glucosamine supplements may have a general anticancer effect. This study aimed to assess whether the potential effect differs across different types of cancers in a large prospective cohort study. METHODS: All participants from the UK Biobank who were free of cancers and had complete information on glucosamine use at baseline were included and followed up from 2006 until 2021. Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess the associations between regular glucosamine use and different site-specific cancers. Subgroup analyses were performed to explore potential interactions. Several sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the robustness of the main findings. RESULTS: A total of 450,207 eligible participants (mean age: 56.2 years; females: 53.3%) were included, of whom 84,895 (18.9%) reported regular glucosamine use at baseline. During a median of 12.5 years follow-up, glucosamine use was significantly associated with an increased risk of overall cancer [HR, 1.04; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.01-1.06], skin cancer (HR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.07-1.15), and prostate cancer (HR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.01-1.13), and with a reduced risk of lung cancer (HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.79-0.97) after adjusting for potential confounders. Statistical interaction was observed for gender, age, and education for the association of glucosamine use with overall cancer risk (all Pinteraction < 0.027). These results remained unchanged in the sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Regular glucosamine use was associated with lower risk of lung cancer but higher risk of skin cancer, prostate cancer, and overall cancer. IMPACT: The roles of glucosamine use potentially differ in the development of different site-specific cancers.

Moxibustion for alleviating side effects of chemotherapy or radiotherapy in people with cancer.

BACKGROUND: Moxibustion, a common treatment in traditional Chinese medicine, involves burning herbal preparations containing Artemisia vulgaris on or above the skin at acupuncture points. Its intended effect is to enhance body function, and it could reduce the side effects of chemotherapy or radiotherapy and improve quality of life (QoL) in people with cancer. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of moxibustion for alleviating side effects associated with chemotherapy, radiotherapy or both in people with cancer. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE via Ovid, Embase via Ovid and AMED (Allied and Complementary Medicine Database) from their inception to February 2018. We also searched databases in China including the Chinese BioMedical Literature Database (CBM), Chinese Medical Current Contents (CMCC), TCMonline, Chinese Dissertation Database (CDDB), China Medical Academic Conference (CMAC) and Index to Chinese Periodical Literature from inception to August 2017. Registries for clinical trials and other resources were also searched. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing moxibustion treatment, including moxa cone and moxa stick, versus sham, no treatment or conventional treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors (HWZ and FC) independently extracted data on study design, participants, treatment and control intervention, and outcome measures, and they also assessed risk of bias in the included studies. We performed meta-analyses, expressing dichotomous outcomes as risk ratios (RR) and continuous outcomes as mean differences (MD), with 95% confidence intervals (CI). MAIN RESULTS: We included 29 RCTs involving 2569 participants. Five RCTs compared moxibustion versus no treatment, 15 compared moxibustion plus conventional treatment versus conventional treatment, one compared moxibustion versus sham moxibustion, and eight compared moxibustion versus conventional medicine. The overall risk of bias was high in 18 studies and unclear in 11 studies. Studies measured outcomes in various ways, and we could rarely pool data.Moxibustion versus no treatment: low-certainty evidence from single small studies suggested that moxibustion was associated with higher white blood cell counts (MD 1.77 × 109/L; 95% CI 0.76 to 2.78; 80 participants, low-certainty evidence) and higher serum haemoglobin concentrations (MD 1.33 g/L; 95% CI 0.59 to 2.07; 66 participants, low-certainty evidence) in people with cancer, during or after chemotherapy/radiotherapy, compared with no treatment. There was no evidence of an effect on leukopenia (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.10 to 2.56; 72 participants, low-certainty evidence) between study groups. The effects on immune function (CD3, CD4, and CD8 counts) were inconsistent.Moxibustion versus sham moxibustion: low-certainty evidence from one study (50 participants) suggested that moxibustion improved QoL (measured as the score on the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-C30 (EORTC QLQ-C30)) compared with sham treatment (MD 14.88 points; 95% CI 4.83 to 24.93). Low-certainty evidence from this study also showed reductions in symptom scores for nausea and vomiting (MD -38.57 points, 95% CI -48.67 to -28.47) and diarrhoea (MD -13.81, 95% CI -27.52 to -0.10), and higher mean white blood cell count (MD 1.72 × 109/L, 95% CI 0.97 to 2.47), serum haemoglobin (MD 2.06 g/L, 95% CI 1.26 to 2.86) and platelets (MD 210.79 × 109/L, 95% CI 167.02 to 254.56) when compared with sham moxibustion.Moxibustion versus conventional medicines: low-certainty evidence from one study (90 participants) suggested that moxibustion improved WBC count eight days after treatment ended compared with conventional medicines (MD 0.40 × 109/L; 95% CI 0.15 to 0.65). Low-certainty evidence from two studies (235 participants) suggested moxibustion improved serum haemoglobin concentrations compared with conventional medicines (MD 10.28 g/L; 95% CI 4.51 to 16.05).Moxibustion plus conventional treatment versus conventional treatment alone: low-certainty evidence showed that moxibustion plus conventional treatment was associated with lower incidence and severity of leukopenia (WHO grade 3 to 4) (RR 0.14, 95% CI 0.01 to 2.64; 1 study, 56 participants), higher QoL scores on the EORTC QLQ-C30 (MD 8.85 points, 95% CI 4.25 to 13.46; 3 studies, 134 participants, I² = 26%), lower symptom scores for nausea and vomiting (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.74; 7 studies, 801participants; I² = 19%), higher white blood cell counts (data not pooled due to heterogeneity), higher serum haemoglobin (MD 3.97 g/L, 95% CI 1.40 to 6.53; 2 studies, 142 participants, I² = 0%). There was no difference in platelet counts between the two groups (MD 13.48 × 109/L; 95% CI -16.00 to 42.95; 2 studies, 142 participants; I² = 34%).Most included studies did not report related adverse events, such as burning or allergic reactions. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Limited, low-certainty evidence suggests that moxibustion treatment may help to reduce the haematological and gastrointestinal toxicities of chemotherapy or radiotherapy, improving QoL in people with cancer; however, the evidence is not conclusive, and we cannot rule out benefits or risks with this treatment. High-quality studies that report adverse effects are needed.

Low cigarette consumption and risk of coronary heart disease and stroke: meta-analysis of 141 cohort studies in 55 study reports.

OBJECTIVE: To use the relation between cigarette consumption and cardiovascular disease to quantify the risk of coronary heart disease and stroke for light smoking (one to five cigarettes/day). DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Medline 1946 to May 2015, with manual searches of references. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Prospective cohort studies with at least 50 events, reporting hazard ratios or relative risks (both hereafter referred to as relative risk) compared with never smokers or age specific incidence in relation to risk of coronary heart disease or stroke. DATA EXTRACTION/SYNTHESIS: MOOSE guidelines were followed. For each study, the relative risk was estimated for smoking one, five, or 20 cigarettes per day by using regression modelling between risk and cigarette consumption. Relative risks were adjusted for at least age and often additional confounders. The main measure was the excess relative risk for smoking one cigarette per day (RR1_per_day-1) expressed as a proportion of that for smoking 20 cigarettes per day (RR20_per_day-1), expected to be about 5% assuming a linear relation between risk and consumption (as seen with lung cancer). The relative risks for one, five, and 20 cigarettes per day were also pooled across all studies in a random effects meta-analysis. Separate analyses were done for each combination of sex and disorder. RESULTS: The meta-analysis included 55 publications containing 141 cohort studies. Among men, the pooled relative risk for coronary heart disease was 1.48 for smoking one cigarette per day and 2.04 for 20 cigarettes per day, using all studies, but 1.74 and 2.27 among studies in which the relative risk had been adjusted for multiple confounders. Among women, the pooled relative risks were 1.57 and 2.84 for one and 20 cigarettes per day (or 2.19 and 3.95 using relative risks adjusted for multiple factors). Men who smoked one cigarette per day had 46% of the excess relative risk for smoking 20 cigarettes per day (53% using relative risks adjusted for multiple factors), and women had 31% of the excess risk (38% using relative risks adjusted for multiple factors). For stroke, the pooled relative risks for men were 1.25 and 1.64 for smoking one or 20 cigarettes per day (1.30 and 1.56 using relative risks adjusted for multiple factors). In women, the pooled relative risks were 1.31 and 2.16 for smoking one or 20 cigarettes per day (1.46 and 2.42 using relative risks adjusted for multiple factors). The excess risk for stroke associated with one cigarette per day (in relation to 20 cigarettes per day) was 41% for men and 34% for women (or 64% and 36% using relative risks adjusted for multiple factors). Relative risks were generally higher among women than men. CONCLUSIONS: Smoking only about one cigarette per day carries a risk of developing coronary heart disease and stroke much greater than expected: around half that for people who smoke 20 per day. No safe level of smoking exists for cardiovascular disease. Smokers should aim to quit instead of cutting down to significantly reduce their risk of these two common major disorders.

The dengue preface to endemic in mainland China: the historical largest outbreak by Aedes albopictus in Guangzhou, 2014.

BACKGROUND: Dengue was regarded as a mild epidemic in mainland China transmitted by Aedes albopictus. However, the 2014 record-breaking outbreak in Guangzhou could change the situation. In order to provide an early warning of epidemic trends and provide evidence for prevention and control strategies, we seek to characterize the 2014 outbreak through application of detailed cases and entomological data, as well as phylogenetic analysis of viral envelope (E) gene. METHODS: We used case survey data identified through the Notifiable Infectious Disease Report System, entomological surveillance and population serosurvey, along with laboratory testing for IgM/IgG, NS1, and isolation of viral samples followed by E gene sequencing and phylogenetic analysis to examine the epidemiological and molecular characteristics of the outbreak. RESULTS: The 2014 dengue outbreak in Guangzhou accounted for nearly 80% of total reported cases that year in mainland China; a total of 37,376 cases including 37,340 indigenous cases with incidence rate 2908.3 per million and 36 imported cases were reported in Guangzhou, with 14,055 hospitalized and 5 deaths. The epidemic lasted for 193 days from June 11 to December 21, with the highest incidence observed in domestic workers, the unemployed and retirees. The inapparent infection rate was 18.00% (135/750). In total, 96 dengue virus 1 (DENV-1) and 11 dengue virus 2 (DENV-2) strains were isolated. Phylogenetic analysis indicated that the DENV-1 strains were divided into genotype I and V, similar to the strains isolated in Guangzhou and Dongguan in 2013. The DENV-2 strains isolated were similar to those imported from Thailand on May 11 in 2014 and that imported from Indonesia in 2012. CONCLUSIONS: The 2014 dengue epidemic was confirmed to be the first co-circulation of DENV-1 and DENV-2 in Guangzhou. The DENV-1 strain was endemic, while the DENV-2 strain was imported, being efficiently transmitted by the Aedes albopictus vector species at levels as high as Aedes aegypti.

Comparison of direct sequencing and amplification refractory mutation system for detecting epidermal growth factor receptor mutation in non-small-cell lung cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Direct sequencing and amplification refractory mutation system (ARMS) are commonly used to detect epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation status in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer to inform the decision-making on tyrosine kinase inhibitors treatment. This study aimed to systematically compare the two methods in terms of the rate of detected mutations and the association of detected mutations with clinical outcomes. MATERIAL AND METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (in Chinese) and Wanfang database (in Chinese) were searched to identify relevant studies. Meta-analyses of EGFR mutation rates, rate differences, and the associations of EGFR mutations with clinical outcomes of tyrosine kinase inhibitors treatment were conducted. RESULTS: Eight hundred and sixty-six records were retrieved and 26 studies with 3282 patients were included. The pooled rate of mutations detected by ARMS (41%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 35% to 47%) was significantly higher than that by direct sequencing (28%, 95%CI 22% to 34%), with a weighted rate difference of 11% (95%CI 8% to 13%). There was a consistent trend that the associations between ARMS-detected mutations and clinical outcomes were stronger than those between direct-sequencing-detected mutations and clinical outcomes (pooled risk ratio for objective response: 5.18 vs. 2.25; hazard ratio for progression-free survival: 0.30 vs. 0.42; hazard ratio for overall survival: 0.46 vs. 0.54). CONCLUSIONS: More patients with EGFR mutations can be identified by ARMS than by direct sequencing, and those identified by ARMS seems to be able to benefit more from tyrosine kinase inhibitors than those identified by direct sequencing.

The prevalence of EGFR mutation in patients with non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Estimate the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation prevalence in all non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients and patient subgroups. RESULTS: A total of 456 studies were included, reporting 30,466 patients with EGFR mutation among 115,815 NSCLC patients. The overall pooled prevalence for EGFR mutations was 32.3% (95% CI 30.9% to 33.7%), ranging from 38.4% (95% CI: 36.5% to 40.3%) in China to 14.1% (95% CI: 12.7% to 15.5%) in Europe. The pooled prevalence of EGFR mutation was higher in females (females vs. males: 43.7% vs. 24.0%; OR: 2.7, 95% CI: 2.5 to 2.9), non-smokers (non-smokers vs. past or current smokers: 49.3% vs. 21.5%; OR: 3.7, 95% CI: 3.4 to 4.0), and patients with adenocarcinoma (adenocarcinoma vs. non-adenocarcinoma: 38.0% vs. 11.7%; OR: 4.1, 95% CI: 3.6 to 4.8). MATERIALS AND METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched to June 2013. Eligible studies reported EGFR mutation prevalence and the association with at least one of the following factors: gender, smoking status and histology. Random-effects models were used to pool EGFR mutation prevalence data. CONCLUSION: This study provides the exact prevalence of EGFR mutations in different countries and NSCLC patient subgroups.

The prognostic value of phosphatase and tensin homolog negativity in breast cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 32 studies with 4393 patients.

The prognostic value of phosphatase and tensin homolog (PTEN) negativity in breast cancer has been evaluated by many studies but remains controversial. We conducted a meta-analysis to assess the association of PTEN negativity with overall survival and disease-free survival. Thirty-two studies with 4393 patients were identified. PTEN negativity was significantly associated with unfavorable overall survival in breast cancer (hazard ratio=1.89, 95% confidence interval 1.58-2.26), with low heterogeneity among the studies (I(2)=25%, P=0.160) and no evidence for publication bias. Meta-analysis of multivariate hazard ratios and sensitivity analyses did not materially change the results. The data on disease-free survival was heterogeneous (I(2)=61.9%, P<0.001), with a summary hazard ratio of 1.57 (95% confidence interval 1.31-1.89). The exact source of heterogeneity remains unclear. We thus concluded that PTEN negativity was significantly associated with unfavorable prognosis in terms of overall survival in breast cancer.

Interleukin-2 as maintenance therapy for children and adults with acute myeloid leukaemia in first complete remission.

BACKGROUND: Acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) is a malignant cancer of hematopoietic stem cells. The treatment of AML consists of two treatment phases: the remission induction phase to achieve a rapid, complete remission (CR) and the consolidation phase to achieve a durable molecular remission. People in CR are at risk of AML relapse, and people with relapsed AML have poor survival prospects. Thus, there is a continuous need for treatments to further improve prognosis. Interleukin-2 (IL-2), an immune-stimulatory cytokine, is an alternative to standard treatment for people with AML to maintain the efficacy after consolidation therapy. Maintenance therapy is not an integral part of the standard treatment for AML. Studies have been conducted to evaluate the efficacy of IL-2 as maintenance therapy for people with AML in first CR, but the effect of IL-2 is not yet fully established. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of IL-2 as maintenance therapy for children and adults with AML who have achieved first CR and have not relapsed. SEARCH METHODS: We systematically searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Cochrane Library 2015, Issue 8), MEDLINE (1950 to August 2015), EMBASE (1950 to August 2015), LILACS (1982 to August 2015), CBM (1978 to August 2015), relevant conference proceedings (2000 to 2015), and metaRegister of Controlled Trials (since inception to August 2015) of ongoing and unpublished trials. In addition, we screened the reference lists of relevant trials and reviews. SELECTION CRITERIA: Eligible studies were randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing IL-2 with no treatment in people with AML who had achieved first CR and had not relapsed. We did not identify studies comparing IL-2 versus best supportive care or maintenance chemotherapy or studies comparing IL-2 plus maintenance chemotherapy versus maintenance chemotherapy alone. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened studies, extracted data with a predefined extraction form, and assessed risk of bias of included studies. We extracted data on the following outcomes: disease-free survival, overall survival, event-free survival, treatment-related mortality, adverse events, and quality of life. We measured the treatment effect on time-to-event outcomes and dichotomous outcomes with hazard ratio (HR) and risk ratio, respectively. We used inverse-variance method to combine HRs with fixed-effect model unless there was significant between-study heterogeneity. MAIN RESULTS: We included nine RCTs with a total of 1665 participants, comparing IL-2 with no treatment. Six studies included adult participants, and three studies included both adults and children. However, the latter three studies did not report data for children, thus we were unable to conduct subgroup analysis of children. One Chinese study did not report any outcomes of interest for this review. We included six trials involving 1426 participants in the meta-analysis on disease-free survival, and included five trials involving 1355 participants in the meta-analysis on overall survival. There is no evidence for difference between IL-2 group and no-treatment group regarding disease-free survival (HR 0.95; 95% CI 0.86 to 1.06, P = 0.37; quality of evidence: low) or overall survival (HR 1.05; 95% CI 0.95 to 1.16, P = 0.35; quality of evidence: moderate). Based on one trial of 161 participants, IL-2 exerted no effect on event-free survival (HR 1.02; 95% CI 0.79 to 1.32, P = 0.88; quality of evidence: low). Adverse events (including thrombocytopenia, neutropenia, malaise/fatigue, and infection/fever) were more frequent in participants receiving IL-2, according to one trial of 308 participants. No mortality due to adverse events was reported. None of the included studies reported treatment-related mortality or quality of life. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence for a difference between IL-2 maintenance therapy and no treatment with respect to disease-free survival or overall survival of people with AML in first CR; however, the quality of the evidence is moderate or low, and further research is likely or very likely to have an important impact on the estimate or our confidence in the estimate. Adverse events seem to be more frequent in participants treated with IL-2, but the quality of the evidence is very low and our confidence in the estimates is very uncertain. Thus, further prospective randomised trials are needed before definitive conclusions can be drawn on these issues.

Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of Monodrug Therapies for Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Associated With Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: A Network Meta-analysis.

A wide array of drugs are available for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), but the evidence for the comparative effectiveness is controversial.The objective of this study is to evaluate the comparative effectiveness and safety of monodrug therapies for BPH.Data sources are MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library.We included randomized controlled trials that compared α-blockers, 5-alpha reductase inhibitors (5ARIs), muscarinic receptor antagonists (MRAs), phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitor (PDE5-Is), or placebo for the treatment of BPH.Comparative effectiveness and safety were pooled by both traditional meta-analysis and network meta-analysis. Summary effect size was calculated as mean difference (MD) and relative risk (RR), together with the 95% confidence intervals (CIs).This study included 58,548 participants from 124 trials in total. When compared with placebo, α-blockers, 5ARIs, and PDE5-Is reduced International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) by -1.35 to -3.67 points and increased peak urinary flow rate (PUF) by -0.02 to 1.95 mL/s, with doxazosin (IPSS: MD, -3.67[-4.33 to -3.02]; PUF: MD, 1.95[1.61 to 2.30]) and terazosin (IPSS: MD, -3.37 [-4.24 to -2.50]; PUF: MD, 1.21[0.74 to 1.66]) showing the greatest improvement. The improvement in the IPSS was comparable among tamsulosin, alfuzosin, naftopidil, silodosin, dutasteride, sildenafil, vardenafil, and tadalafil. The incidence of total adverse events and withdraws due to adverse events were generally comparable among various agents.In conclusion, α-blockers, 5ARIs, and PDE5-Is are effective for BPH, with doxazosin and terazosin appearing to be the most effective agents. Drug therapies for BPH are generally safe and well-tolerated, with no major difference regarding the overall safety profile.

Colorectal cancer: using blood samples and tumor tissue to detect K-ras mutations.

We performed a meta-analysis to assess whether blood can be substituted for tumor tissue in K-ras mutation testing. PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and BIOSIS databases were searched. Twenty-three studies including 1261 patients were included. The pooled overall sensitivity, specificity, and concordance rate were 0.69 (95% CI: 0.59-0.78), 0.96 (95% CI: 0.93-0.97), and 0.86 (95% CI: 0.82-0.89), respectively. Subgroup analysis indicated that plasma (sensitivity: 0.74; mutation rate: 0.34) exhibited superior sensitivity compared with serum (sensitivity: 0.45; mutation rate: 0.24). We conclude that blood is a suitable substitute for tumor tissue in K-ras mutation testing. K-ras mutation positivity in blood can be used to identify patients who should not receive EGFR monoclonal antibody therapy, but the absence of blood positivity does not necessarily imply negativity.

Blood as a Substitute for Tumor Tissue in Detecting EGFR Mutations for Guiding EGFR TKIs Treatment of Nonsmall Cell Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Tumor tissues are often absent or insufficient for testing epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations to guide EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) treatment of patients with nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to assess whether blood can be used as a substitute for tumor tissue in detecting EGFR mutations. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched for studies that provided data to estimate the accuracy of blood testing against tissue testing in NSCLC patients and/or those directly compared the efficacy of EGFR TKIs in EGFR mutant and wild-type patients according to sources of specimens. Sensitivity, specificity, and concordance rate were used as measures of the accuracy. Risk ratio (RR) for objective response and hazard ratio (HR) for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were used as measures for treatment efficacy. We combined the effects by using the fixed-effects model unless there was evidence of heterogeneity, in which case a random-effects mode was used. This systematic review included 25 studies with 2605 patients. The pooled overall sensitivity, specificity, and concordance rate were 0.61, 0.90, and 0.79, respectively. Serum showed lower sensitivity (0.56 vs 0.65) but higher specificity (0.95 vs 0.85) and higher concordance (0.86 vs 0.74) than plasma. EGFR mutations (exon 19 or 21) in blood were significantly associated with objective response (RR: 4.08; 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.48-6.70), PFS (HR: 0.72; 95% CI 0.64-0.80), and OS (HR: 0.71; 95% CI 0.50-0.99). Importantly, the association of the mutations with the 3 clinical outcomes for serum was similar to that for tumor tissue and higher than that for plasma. Blood, in particular serum, is a good substitute when tumor tissue is absent or insufficient for testing EGFR mutations to guide EGFR TKIs treatment in patients with NSCLC. EGFR mutation positivity in blood could be used to recommend EGFR TKIs treatment, but the absence of blood positivity should not necessarily be construed with confirmed negativity.

Concordant analysis of KRAS, BRAF, PIK3CA mutations, and PTEN expression between primary colorectal cancer and matched metastases.

Current data on the concordance of KRAS, BRAF, PIK3CA mutation status or PTEN expression status between primary tumors and metastases in colorectal cancer (CRC) are conflicting. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine concordance and discordance of the status of these four biomarkers between primary tumors and corresponding metastases in CRC patients. The biomarker status in primary tumors was used as the reference standard. Concordance data for KRAS, BRAF, PIK3CA and PTEN were provided by 43, 16, 9 and 7 studies, respectively. The pooled concordance rate was 92.0% (95% CI: 89.7%-93.9%) for KRAS, 96.8% (95% CI: 94.8%-98.0%) for BRAF, 93.9% (95% CI: 89.7%-96.5%) for PIK3CA and 71.7% (95% CI: 57.6%-82.5%) for PTEN. The pooled false positive and false negative rates for KRAS were 9.0% (95% CI: 6.5%-12.4%) and 11.3% (95% CI: 8.0%-15.8%), respectively. KRAS, BRAF and PIK3CA mutations are highly concordant between primary tumors and corresponding metastases in CRC, but PTEN loss is not. Nine percent of patients with wild-type KRAS in primary tumors who received anti-EGFR treatment had mutant KRAS in metastases, while 11.3% patients with mutant KRAS primary tumors had wild-type KRAS in the metastases. These 11.3% patients currently do not receive potentially beneficial anti-EGFR treatment.

The prognostic value of phosphorylated Akt in breast cancer: a systematic review.

The prognostic value of phosphorylated Akt (pAkt) overexpression in breast cancer has been investigated by many studies with inconsistent results. This systematic review was conducted to evaluate the association of pAkt overexpression with breast cancer prognosis in terms of overall survival and disease-free survival. Three electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE and Chinese Biomedical Literature Database) were comprehensively searched. Hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) from different studies were combined using the random-effects model. In total, 33 studies with 9,836 patients were included for final analysis. The summary HR for overall survival and disease-free survival was 1.52 (95% CI: 1.29-1.78) and 1.28 (95% CI: 1.13-1.45), respectively, indicating higher risk of death and disease recurrence associated with pAkt overexpression. The results were robust in sensitivity analyses by omitting one study each time and by using the fixed-effects model instead. Subgroup and meta-regression analyses did not show that the prognostic effect of pAkt overexpression would change materially with such factors as population, status of hormone receptors, hormonal or trastuzumab treatment given, analyzing method (univariate versus multivariate) and methodological quality of the original studies. In conclusion, the available evidence suggests that pAkt overexpression is an adverse prognostic factor for breast cancer.

Chemotherapy with cetuximab versus chemotherapy alone for chemotherapy-naive advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: In advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), the effectiveness of standard cytotoxic chemotherapy seems to have reached a 'plateau', and there is a continuous need for new treatments to further improve the prognosis. Cetuximab is a monoclonal antibody targeted at the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) signalling pathway. Basically, it is designed to inhibit the growth and metastasis among other biological processes of cancer. In combination with chemotherapy, it has been evaluated as a first-line treatment for advanced NSCLC in some randomised controlled trials (RCTs), with inconsistent results. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of chemotherapy plus cetuximab, compared with chemotherapy alone, for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) previously untreated with chemotherapy or epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-targeted drugs. SEARCH METHODS: We systematically searched the Cochrane Lung Cancer Review Group's Specialized Register (from inception to 17 December 2013), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 12), MEDLINE (accessed through PubMed, 1966 to 17 December 2013), EMBASE (1980 to 17 December 2013), ClinicalTrials.gov (from inception to 17 December 2013), and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (from inception to 17 December 2013). We also handsearched the proceedings related to lung cancer from the American Society of Clinical Oncology and European Society of Medical Oncology (2000 to 17 December 2013). We checked the reference lists of all eligible primary studies and review articles for additional potentially eligible studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Eligible studies were RCTs that compared chemotherapy plus cetuximab with the same chemotherapy alone, in advanced NSCLC, previously untreated with chemotherapy or EGFR-targeted drugs, and measured at least one of the following: overall survival, progression-free survival, one-year survival rate, objective response rate, quality of life, or serious adverse events. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration. We extracted the following data from each study: publication details, participant characteristics, regimens for intervention and control arms, outcome measures and effect size, and information related to the methodological quality of the study. We measured the treatment effects on dichotomous and time-to-event outcomes by risk ratio (RR) and hazard ratio (HR), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), respectively. We conducted meta-analyses with Review Manager 5 using the random-effects model. We employed the Mantel-Haenszel method to combine RRs and the inverse-variance method to combine HRs. MAIN RESULTS: We included four trials, containing 2018 patients. The subjects were mostly white people (female: 26% to 56%), with a median age of 58 to 66 years. About half of them had histologically proven adenocarcinoma. Of the 2018 patients, 83% to 99% had their status measured using the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, and had a score of 0 to 1 (which is usually considered as physically "fit").All four studies provided data on overall survival, progression-free survival, one-year survival rate, objective response rate, and serious adverse events, with two studies (1901 patients) investigating the effect of cetuximab on quality of life as well. The risk of bias was low for the data on overall survival and one-year survival rate, and high for the data on all other outcomes, mainly due to lack of blinding. Compared with chemotherapy alone, chemotherapy plus cetuximab improved overall survival (10.5 months versus 8.9 months; HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.96), one-year survival rate (45% versus 40%; RR 1.13, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.25), and objective response rate (30% versus 23%; RR 1.31, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.51). The difference in progression-free survival was at the limit of the statistical significance (4.9 months versus 4.4 months; HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.00). No significant difference in quality of life between the two treatment arms was reported by the two relevant studies. Patients in the cetuximab group experienced more acneiform rash (11.2% versus 0.3%; RR 37.36, 95% CI 10.66 to 130.95), hypomagnesemia (5.3% versus 0.8%; RR 6.57, 95% CI 1.13 to 38.12), infusion reaction (3.9% versus 1.1%; RR 3.50, 95% CI 1.76 to 6.94), diarrhoea (4.8% versus 2.3%; RR 2.10, 95% CI 1.26 to 3.48), hypokalaemia (6.3% versus 3.6%; RR 1.74, 95% CI 1.02 to 2.99), febrile neutropenia (10.6% versus 7.6%; RR 1.40, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.77), and leukopenia (58.1% versus 42.7%; RR 1.36, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.58) than did those in the control group. The difference in other adverse events did not reach statistical significance. According to the reports of original studies, the adverse events were generally manageable. There were no cetuximab-related deaths.The quality of the evidence is high for overall survival and one-year survival rate, but low for most secondary outcomes. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The combination of chemotherapy plus cetuximab is better than chemotherapy alone as the first-line treatment of advanced NSCLC in improving overall survival, while inducing higher rates of some reportedly manageable adverse events.

Observational studies on evaluating the safety and adverse effects of traditional chinese medicine.

Background. This study aims to share our experiences when carrying out observational studies of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM). Methods. We have proactively monitored the safety profiles of Duhuo Jisheng Tang (DJT), Suan Zao Ren Tang (SZRT), and TMN-1. A list of adverse events (AEs), complete blood counts, and liver and kidney function tests were obtained from the participants during their scheduled hospital visits. Retrospective observational studies were conducted based on the reimbursement database of the National Health Insurance system, Taiwan, to explore the relationship between the use of TCM that have been adulterated by aristolochic acid and the risk from both nephrotoxins and carcinogens. Results. A total of 221, 287, and 203 AEs were detected after SZRT, DJT, and TMN-1 had been taken, respectively. Dizziness, headache, stomach ache, and diarrhea were judged to be probably related to SZRT treatment. Retrospective observational studies found an association between the consumption of aristolochic acid-containing Chinese formulae such as Mu Tong and an increased risk of CKD, ESRD, and urinary tract cancer. Conclusion. Prospective and retrospective observational studies seem to have specific advantages when investigating the safety and adverse effects of TCM therapies, as well as possibly other alternative/complementary therapies.

Gemcitabine plus erlotinib for advanced pancreatic cancer: a systematic review with meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: This study aims to comprehensively summarize the currently available evidences on the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine plus erlotinib for treating advanced pancreatic cancer. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: PubMed, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library and abstracts of recent major conferences were systematically searched to identify relevant publications. Studies that were conducted in advanced pancreatic cancer patients treated with gemcitabine plus erlotinib (with or without comparison with gemcitabine alone) and reporting objective response rate, disease control rate, progression-free survival, time-to-progression, overall survival, 1-year survival rate and/or adverse events were included. Data on objective response rate, disease control rate, 1-year survival rate and adverse events rate, respectively, were combined mainly by using Meta-Analyst software with a random-effects model. Data on progression-free survival, time-to-progression and overall survival were summarized descriptively. Sixteen studies containing 1,308 advanced pancreatic cancer patients treated with gemcitabine plus erlotinib were included. The reported median progression-free survival (or time-to-progression), median overall survival, 1-year survival rates, objective response rates and disease control rates were 2-9.6 months, 5-12.5 months, 20%-51%, 0%-28.6% and 25.0%-83.3%, respectively. The weighted 1-year survival rate, objective response rate and disease control rate based on studies reporting robust results were 27.9%, 9.1% and 57.0%, respectively. According to the studies with relevant data, the incidences of total and severe adverse events were 96.3% and 62.9%, respectively. The most frequently reported adverse events were leucopenia, rash, diarrhea, vomitting, neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, anaemia, stomatitis, drug-induced liver injury, fatigue and fever. Compared with gemcitabine alone, the progression-free survival and overall survival with gemcitabine plus erlotinib were significantly longer, but there were also more deaths and interstitial lung disease-like syndrome related to this treatment. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Gemcitabine plus erlotinib represent a new option for the treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer, with mild but clinically meaningful additive efficacy compared with gemcitabine alone. Its safety profile is generally acceptable, although careful management is needed for some specific adverse events.

Promising biomarkers for predicting the outcomes of patients with KRAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer treated with anti-epidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibodies: a systematic review with meta-analysis.

KRAS mutations have been established as a major predictive biomarker for resistance to the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) with anti-epidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibodies (anti-EGFR MoAbs). However, many patients with KRAS wild-type tumors still do not respond to the treatment. We conducted a systematic review with meta-analysis to assess whether BRAF mutations, PIK3CA mutations and PTEN loss can predict the outcomes of patients with KRAS wild-type mCRC treated with anti-EGFR MoAbs. Studies that explored the association of one or more of the three biomarkers with progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and/or objective response rate (ORR) were identified through August 2012. Summary hazard ratios (HRs) and rate differences (RDs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated by using the random-effects model. BRAF mutations, PIK3CA exon 20 mutations and PTEN loss were all associated with shorter PFS (HR = 2.59, 95% CI 1.67-4.03; HR = 2.52, 95% CI 1.33-4.78 and HR = 1.75, 95% CI 1.19-2.56, respectively), shorter OS (HR = 2.74, 95% CI 1.79-4.19; HR = 3.29, 95% CI 1.60-6.75 and HR = 1.85, 95% CI 1.30-2.64, respectively) and lower ORR (RD = -36%, 95% CI -44 to -28%; RD = -38%, 95% CI -51 to -24% and RD = -41%, 95% CI -68 to -14%, respectively). PIK3CA exon 9 mutations were associated with none of the outcomes. Studies with relevant data consistently demonstrated a stronger predictive power of combined multiple biomarkers as compared to one alteration alone. These results suggest that BRAF mutations, PIK3CA exon 20 mutations and PTEN loss are predictive of worseoutcomes in KRAS wild-type mCRC treated with anti-EGFR MoAbs [corrected]. However, the quality of included studies varied, and some of the meta-analyses were limited by significant between-study heterogeneity. In the future, well-designed large randomized controlled trials conducted in KRAS wild-type mCRC patients with subgroup analysis according to BRAF, PIK3CA exon 20 and PTEN status are essential to fully assess the clinical relevance of these biomarkers.

KRAS p.G13D mutation and codon 12 mutations are not created equal in predicting clinical outcomes of cetuximab in metastatic colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The authors conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine whether patients who had metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) with the v-Ki-ras2 Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene homolog (KRAS) p.G13D mutation (an amino acid substitution at position 13 in KRAS from a glycine to an aspartic acid) and received cetuximab treatment had better clinical outcomes than patients who had mCRC tumors with KRAS codon 12 mutations. METHODS: Relevant studies were identified by a search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Chinese Biomedical Database, and Wan Fang Digital Journals from inception to October 2011. The primary clinical outcomes included the objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). The pooled relative risk (RR) or hazard ratio (HR) was estimated by using fixed-effects or random-effects models according to heterogeneity between studies. RESULTS: Ten studies were considered eligible that included 1487 patients with mCRC. Patients who had tumors with the KRAS p.G13D mutation had a significantly higher ORR (10 studies; RR, 1.642; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.131-2.384), longer PFS (1 study; HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.36-0.81), and longer OS (1 study; HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.33-0.80) than patients who had tumors with KRAS codon 12 mutations. Compared with patients who had KRAS wild-type tumors, patients with the p.G13D mutation had a significantly lower ORR (9 studies; RR, 0.540; 95% CI, 0.381-0.765) and nonsignificantly shorter PFS (1 study; HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.68-1.45) and OS (1 study; HR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.66-1.54). CONCLUSIONS: Patients who had mCRC with the KRAS p.G13D mutation appeared to benefit more from cetuximab than patients who had tumors with KRAS codon 12 mutations. However, because of the limited sample sizes in the current meta-analysis, these results should be interpreted with caution.

EGFR gene copy number as a predictive biomarker for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer with anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies: a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Epidermal growth factor receptor gene copy number (EGFR GCN) has been heavily investigated as a potential predictive biomarker for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) with anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies (MAbs). The objective of this study was to systematically review current evidences on this issue. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, Wanfang Data, and the conference abstracts of American Society of Clinical Oncology and European Society of Medical Oncology were comprehensively searched. Studies that reported the objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival, and/or overall survival of mCRC patients treated with anti-EGFR MAbs, stratified by EGFR GCN status, were included. The effect measures for binary outcome (response) and time-to-event outcomes (progression-free survival and overall survival) were risk difference and hazard ratio, respectively. Statistical heterogeneity among the studies was assessed by the Cochran's Q-test and the I2 statistic. If appropriate, a quantitative synthesis of data from different studies would be conducted with a random-effects model. RESULTS: Nineteen eligible studies were identified. The criteria for increased EGFR GCN (GCN+) were highly inconsistent across different studies. The prevalence of GCN + ranged from 6.9% to 88.9%, and the difference in ORR between patients with GCN + and those with non-increased EGFR GCN (GCN-) varied from -28% to 84%. Because of the significant heterogeneity, no quantitative synthesis of data was performed. There was a general trend towards higher ORR in patients with GCN+. The difference in ORRs between patients with GCN + and those with GCN- was even greater in KRAS wild-type patients, while in KRAS mutated patients the difference often did not exist. Almost all patients with EGFR amplification responded to the treatment. However, the prevalence of EGFR amplification was generally low. Incomplete data on progression-free survival and overall survival seemingly supported the findings on ORR. CONCLUSIONS: Although increased EGFR GCN is generally associated with a better outcome of anti-EGFR MAbs treatment, especially among patients with wild-type KRAS, the clinical utility of this biomarker for selecting recipients of anti-EGFR MAbs would be severely limited by the heterogeneous scoring system and the poor reproducibility of EGFR GCN enumeration due to technical reasons.