The impacts of COVID-19 on China insurance industry-An empirical analysis based on event study.

Introduction: At the end of 2019, the sudden outbreak of COVID-19 pneumonia has developed from a mass health event to a global epidemic disaster. Its impact extends from human health to social, economic, political, international relations and global governance. In the process of fighting against the epidemic in China, almost all economic sectors were affected, and the insurance industry with epidemic sensitive characteristics was particularly affected. Methods: In order to identify the impacts of COVID-19 on China's insurance industry, this paper uses the event study method to calculate the changes in the cumulative abnormal return rate and the cumulative excess return of Chinese listed insurance companies before and after the outbreak of COVID-19. In the empirical analysis, five different typical events are examined, including the first outbreak of COVID-19 in China, the closure of Wuhan, the dredging of Wuhan, and the listing of vaccines in China. Results: The results show that the return rate of listed companies in the insurance industry showed an "inverted N" curve with the "decreasing, rising and then decreasing." The epidemic mainly has negative effects on the insurance industry in terms of premium income and indemnity expenditure. According to the supply shock theory of the new supply economics, the epidemic has a negative impact on the insurance industry in the short term and a positive impact in the long term. Discussion: In this context, insurance enterprises should attach importance to the change of business model, strengthen the development model of public-private joint venture insurance, promote product innovation and the application of insurance technology, and the experience and practice of the insurance industry in responding to the impact of the epidemic are of great significance to the transformation of China's insurance industry.

Human dietary exposure to bisphenol-diglycidyl ethers in China: Comprehensive assessment through a total diet study.

Despite the widespread use of bisphenol A diglycidyl ether (BADGE) and bisphenol F diglycidyl ether (BFDGE) in various consumer products as protective plasticizer, studies on human dietary exposure to these compounds are scare. In this study, nine bisphenol diglycidyl ethers (BDGEs) including BADGE, BFDGE, and seven of their derivatives were determined in the Chinese adult population based on composite dietary samples collected from the sixth (2016-2019) China total diet study (TDS). Contamination level of nine BDGEs was determined in 288 composite dietary samples from 24 provinces in China. BADGE·2H2O and BADGE are the most frequently detected and BADGE·2H2O presented the highest mean concentration (2.402 µg/kg). The most contaminated food composite is meats, with a mean ∑9BDGEs of 8.203 µg/kg, followed by aquatic products (4.255 µg/kg), eggs (4.045 µg/kg), and dairy products (3.256 µg/kg). The estimated daily intake (EDI) of ∑9BDGEs based on the mean and 95th percentile concentrations are 121.27 ng/kg bw/day and 249.71 ng/kg bw/day. Meats, eggs, and aquatic products are the main source of dietary exposure. Notably, beverages and water, alcohols were the main contributors of dietary exposure to BADGE and BADGE·2H2O, followed by animal-derived foods. Dietary exposure assessment demonstrated that human dietary BDGEs do not pose risks to general population based on the mean and 95th percentile hazard index with < 1. This is the first comprehensive national dietary exposure assessment of BDGEs in Chinese general population.

Network meta-analysis of erlotinib, gefitinib, afatinib and icotinib in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer harboring EGFR mutations.

BACKGROUND: Several EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs) including erlotinib, gefitinib, afatinib and icotinib are currently available as treatment for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who harbor EGFR mutations. However, no head to head trials between these TKIs in mutated populations have been reported, which provides room for indirect and integrated comparisons. METHODS: We searched electronic databases for eligible literatures. Pooled data on objective response rate (ORR), progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) were calculated. Appropriate networks for different outcomes were established to incorporate all evidences. Multiple-treatments comparisons (MTCs) based on Bayesian network integrated the efficacy and specific toxicities of all included treatments. RESULTS: Twelve phase III RCTs that investigated EGFR-TKIs involving 1821 participants with EGFR mutation were included. For mutant patients, the weighted pooled ORR and 1-year PFS of EGFR-TKIs were significant superior to that of standard chemotherapy (ORR: 66.6% vs. 30.9%, OR 5.46, 95%CI 3.59 to 8.30, P<0.00001; 1-year PFS: 42.9% vs. 9.7%, OR 7.83, 95%CI 4.50 to 13.61; P<0.00001) through direct meta-analysis. In the network meta-analyses, no statistically significant differences in efficacy were found between these four TKIs with respect to all outcome measures. Trend analyses of rank probabilities revealed that the cumulative probabilities of being the most efficacious treatments were (ORR, 1-year PFS, 1-year OS, 2-year OS): erlotinib (51%, 38%, 14%, 19%), gefitinib (1%, 6%, 5%, 16%), afatinib (29%, 27%, 30%, 27%) and icotinib (19%, 29%, NA, NA), respectively. However, afatinib and erlotinib showed significant severer rash and diarrhea compared with gefitinib and icotinib. CONCLUSIONS: The current study indicated that erlotinib, gefitinib, afatinib and icotinib shared equivalent efficacy but presented different efficacy-toxicity pattern for EGFR-mutated patients. Erlotinib and afatinib revealed potentially better efficacy but significant higher toxicities compared with gefitinib and icotinib.