The Role of Systemic Therapy in Resectable Colorectal Liver Metastases: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Despite multiple randomized trials, the role of perioperative chemotherapy in colorectal cancer liver metastasis (CRLM) is still under debate. In this systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA), we aim to evaluate the efficacy of perioperative systemic therapies for patients with CRLM. METHODS: We searched various databases for abstracts and full-text articles published from database inception through May 2021.We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the addition of perioperative (post, pre, or both) systemic therapies to surgery alone in patients with CRLM. The outcomes were compared according to the chemotherapy regimen using a random effects model. Outcomes of interest included disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Seven RCTs with a total of 1504 patients with CRLM were included. Six studies included post-operative treatment and one evaluated perioperative (pre- and postoperative) therapy. Fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy was the most used systemic therapy. NMA showed benefit of adding perioperative therapy to surgery in terms of DFS (HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.84). However, these findings did not translate into a statistically significant OS benefit (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.05). NMA did not show any advantage of one regimen over another including oxaliplatin or irinotecan. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review and NMA of 7 RCTs found that the addition of perioperative systemic treatment for resectable CRLM could improve disease-free survival but not overall survival. Based on the findings, addition of perioperative treatment in resectable CRLM should be individualized weighing the risks and benefits.

Choosing a Reduced-Intensity Conditioning Regimen for Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation, Fludarabine/Busulfan versus Fludarabine Melphalan: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Fludarabine with busulfan (FB) or melphalan (FM) are 2 more commonly used reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) regimens for allogeneic stem cell transplantation (HCT).We present a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing these 2 RIC regimens. We searched electronic databases from inception through November 1, 2017 for literature searches to identify relevant studies. A DerSimonian random effects model was used to measure efficacy outcomes; hazard ratios (HRs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) are reported. Seven studies, including a total of 1955 patients, met criteria for inclusion, of which 6 were included in the overall pooled analysis because of repetition of some patients in 2 studies. Three studies were included in the subgroup analysis of acute myelogenous leukemia (AML)/myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) and 2 in the subgroup analysis of lymphoid malignancies. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival were not statistically significantly different between the 2 RIC regimens in analysis of all studies. However, OS was better with FM in subgroup analysis of AML/MDS studies (HR, .83; 95% CI, .73 to .95). Nonrelapse mortality was lower with FB (HR, .64; 95% CI, .46 to .89), whereas relapse was lower with FM (HR, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.13 to 2.06) in the analysis of all studies. This meta-analysis shows that FB and FM are associated with a similar OS in patients undergoing HCT. Relapse rates are lower with FM but at the cost of higher nonrelapse mortality.

High-Dose Chemotherapy with Early Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation Compared to Standard Dose Chemotherapy or Delayed Transplantation in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Autologous stem cell transplantation (SCT) is the standard of care for all transplantation-eligible patients diagnosed with multiple myeloma (MM). Various studies have compared clinical outcomes with frontline SCT ("early SCT") versus standard-dose therapy (SDT) alone, with or without salvage SCT ("SDT/late SCT"). In this meta-analysis, we compare overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) outcomes between these 2 treatment approaches. Twelve studies were identified, including a total of 3633 patients, of whom 1811 received early SCT and 1822 received SDT/late SCT. In our analysis of all 12 studies, OS was not significantly different between the 2 groups (hazard ratio [HR], .86; 95% confidence interval [CI], .70 to 1.04), but PFS was better with early SCT (HR, .67; 95% CI, .54 to .82). In a subgroup analysis of 3 studies in which novel agents were used for induction, OS again was similar in the 2 groups, and PFS was favorable with early SCT (HR, .50; 95% CI, .36 to .70). This analysis shows that over the years, early SCT has been associated with prolonged PFS, but this did not consequently translate into prolonged OS in patients with newly diagnosed MM. The benefit of early SCT in terms of OS is less clear in the era of novel agents, given the limited follow-up of these studies.

A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Regorafenib and TAS-102 in Refractory Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Regorafenib at different dosing strategies and TAS-102 are treatment options for refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We aimed to evaluate the comparative effectiveness evidence supporting these different strategies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched different databases for randomized controlled trials evaluating TAS-102 or regorafenib in patients with refractory mCRC who failed prior oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and fluoropyrimidine. Outcomes of interest included overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). The overall effect was pooled using the DerSimonian random effects model. We conducted network meta-analysis based on White's multivariate meta-regression to pool evidence from direct and indirect comparisons. RESULTS: Six trials at low risk of bias (2,445 patients) were included. Direct comparisons showed that Rego 160 and TAS-102 as monotherapy were superior to best-supportive care (BSC) in terms of PFS (Rego 160: hazard ratio [HR], 0.4; 95% confidence ratio [CI], 0.26-0.63; TAS-102: HR, 0.46 CI, 0.40-0.52) and OS (Rego 160: HR, 0.67; CI, 0.48-0.93; TAS-102: HR, 0.67; CI, 0.57-0.80). Network analysis showed no statistically difference in PFS or OS between Rego 160 and TAS-102. Rego 80+ was superior to BSC in terms of OS (HR, 0.44; CI, 0.23-0.84) and PFS (HR, 0.37; CI, 0.21-0.66). Rego 80+ was associated with statistically nonsignificant improvement in OS and PFS compared with TAS-102 and Rego 160. CONCLUSION: Regorafenib 160 and TAS-102 appear to have similar efficacy. Rego 80+ is shown to be superior to BSC. A trend for improved OS was observed with Rego 80+ versus Rego 160 or TAS 102. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Regorafenib at a dose of 160 mg and TAS-102 appear to have similar efficacy in patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. Regorafenib with a dose escalation strategy is superior to best-supportive care. Given its tolerability and the observed trend in survival benefit compared with regorafenib 160, dose escalation strategy of regorafenib (80+) may be the preferred option in this setting.

Do checkpoint inhibitors rely on gut microbiota to fight cancer?

The field of gut microbiota is of growing interest, especially in the recent discoveries of its interaction with host immune responses, which when disrupted, can further alter immunity. It also plays a role in cancer development, its microenvironment and response to anticancer therapeutics. Several recently published experimental studies had explored the efficacy of modifying microbiota to enhance the response of checkpoint inhibitors, suggesting its beneficial function in cancer management and potential to be targeted as a therapeutic agent to enhance efficacy of checkpoint inhibitors. Here we review available evidence, mechanisms and hypotheses of its use to enhance cancer response.

Second-line treatment in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: A meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: There are limited therapeutic options for treatment-refractory pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), with a paucity of data to support the best option after progression on gemcitabine-based regimens. The authors performed a meta-analysis to determine the effectiveness of adding oxaliplatin (OX) or various irinotecan formulations to a fluoropyrimidine (FP) after first-line treatment progression in patients with PDAC. METHODS: Different databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane, were searched to identify randomized controlled trials comparing FP monotherapy versus FP combination therapy that included either oxaliplatin (FPOX) or various irinotecan formulations (FPIRI) in patients with PDAC who progressed after first-line treatment. Secondary analyses were planned to assess the effectiveness of FPOX and FPIRI compared with FP. Outcomes of interest included overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: Five studies with 895 patients were identified. Patients randomized to receive FPIRI/FPOX had a significantly improved PFS and a trend toward improved OS compared with those who received FP monotherapy. When comparing FPIRI with FP, there was an improvement in both PFS (hazard ratio, 0.64; 95% confidence interval, 0.47-0.87; P = .005) and OS (hazard ratio, 0.70; 95% confidence interval, 0.55-0.89; P = .004) in patients who received the combination. Conversely, FPOX produced only a modest improvement in PFS with no improvement in OS. CONCLUSIONS: Combination chemotherapy with OX or various IRI formulations appears to improve PFS compared with single-agent FP. FPIRI, but not FPOX, appears to confer an OS advantage. The combination of FP with irinotecan formulations appears to be the appropriate next line of treatment upon progression after gemcitabine-based chemotherapy regimens. Cancer 2017;123:4680-4686. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Hemorrhagic and ischemic outcomes of Heparin vs. Bivalirudin in carotid artery stenting: A meta-analysis of studies.

INTRODUCTION: Bivalirudin, has been shown to have comparable efficacy and better safety profile when compared to unfractionated heparin (UFH) in percutaneous coronary interventions. Bivalirudin's safety in carotid artery stenting (CAS) was associated with better outcomes than heparin in some studies. In this Meta analysis we examine the hemorrhagic and ischemic outcomes associated with Bivalirudin compared to UFH during CAS. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted with the electronic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL. Random-effects meta-analysis method was used to pool risk ratio (RR) for both Heparin and Bivalirudin with 95% confidence interval (CI). Study outcomes included hemorrhagic complications; major/minor bleeding and intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) as well as ischemic complications including ischemic stroke, myocardial infarction, and 30 day mortality. RESULTS: A total of four studies were included enrolling 7,784 patients. Compared to UFH, Bivalirudin was associated with significantly lower major bleeding events with a relative risk (RR) of 0.53 (95% CI: 0.35-0.80; I2 = 0%). Minor bleeding events were significantly lower in the Bivalirudin group with a RR of 0.41 (95% CI: 0.2-0.82; I2 = 0%). Looking into other outcomes, there were no significant differences between anticoagulation strategies in terms of ischemic stroke (RR 0.8, with 95% CI: 0.60-1.06), intracranial hemorrhage (RR 0.73 with 95% CI: 0.27-1.98), myocardial infarction (RR 1.01 with 95% CI: 0.59-1.73) or 30 day mortality (RR 0.83 with 95% CI: 0.47-1.47). CONCLUSION: Compared to UFH, Bivalirudin is associated with lower bleeding risk when used during CAS. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Proximal balloon occlusion versus distal filter protection in carotid artery stenting: A meta-analysis and review of the literature.

INTRODUCTION: Carotid artery stenting (CAS) is typically performed using embolic protection devices (EPDs) as a means to reduce the risk of procedure-related stroke. In this study, we compared procedural morbidity and mortality associated with distal (D-EPD) vs. proximal (P-EPD) protection. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were queried from January 1998 through May 2015. Only studies comparing (D-EPD) and (P-EPD) were included. Two independent reviewers selected and appraised studies and extracted data in duplicate. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool outcomes across studies. Heterogeneity of treatment effect among studies was assessed using the I2 statistics. Publication bias was assessed using inspection of funnel plots. The primary endpoints included 30-day mortality and stroke. Secondary endpoints included new cerebral lesions on diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DW-MRI) and contralateral lesions on DW-MRI. RESULTS: A total of 12,281 patients were included from 18 studies (13 prospective and 5 retrospective) comparing (D-EPD) and (P-EPD) in the setting of CAS. The mean patient age was 69 years and 64% of patients were male. No evidence of publication bias was detected. There was no significant difference between the two modalities in terms of the risk of stroke (risk difference [RD] 0.0, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.01 to 0.01) or mortality (RD 0.0, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.01) nor was there any difference in the incidence of new cerebral lesions on DW-MRI or contralateral DW-MRI lesions. CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing CAS, both D-EPD and P-EPD provide similar levels of protection from peri-procedural stroke and 30 days mortality. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Sarcoidosis-like syndrome and lymphadenopathy due to checkpoint inhibitors.

Immunotherapy with checkpoint inhibitors has revolutionized the management of metastatic melanoma. These checkpoints, namely the cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen 4 and the programmed T cell death 1 receptor, possess an inhibitory effect on the T cell function. Pharmacologic inhibition of cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen 4 with ipilimumab and programmed T cell death 1 with either pembrolizumab or nivolumab has resulted in long-term sustained responses among patients with metastatic melanoma. The adverse events of these medications are predominantly immune related. Sarcoidosis-like syndrome/lymphadenopathy represents a challenging adverse event to the oncologist as it can be mistaken for progressive disease. Hence, awareness of such adverse event and obtaining a biopsy of the enlarged lymph nodes will confirm the diagnosis and avoid the unnecessary change of current therapies for those with stage IV disease or adding new ones for those with stage III disease. We report three cases of immunotherapy-related sarcoidosis-like syndrome/lymphadenopathy; two cases occurred during adjuvant ipilimumab for stage III surgically resected melanoma and one case during pemprolizumab for stage IV metastatic melanoma.

Tyrosine kinase inhibitors as a first-line treatment in patients with newly diagnosed chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase: A mixed-treatment comparison.

Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) are the initial treatment for majority of newly diagnosed patients with chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML) in chronic phase (CP) and are associated with marked improvement in hematological, cytogenetic, molecular response and survival rates compared with other therapies. In this review, we summarize the evidence of TKI efficacy for patients with newly diagnosed CP-CML. Six trials at low risk of bias evaluating TKIs as an initial treatment in adults with newly diagnosed CP-CML and enrolling 2,456 patients were included. Follow-up times ranged from a median of 3 months to 5 years. Direct comparison showed statistically higher rates of major molecular response (MMR ≤ 0.1%(IS)) achievement with second-generation TKIs at 12 months which was sustained throughout treatment period. Bayesian mixed-treatment comparison (MTC) analysis demonstrated superiority of both nilotinib and dasatinib over imatinib in terms of efficacy. Nilotinib was associated with higher deeper molecular responses (MR(4.5) ≤ 0.0032%(IS)) at 60 months than dasatinib but no difference in MMR. The differences between nilotinib and dasatinib are likely clinically trivial. Among TKIs, nilotinib was found to have the best survival profile. Both nilotinib and dasatinib are associated with significantly better MMR compared to imatinib that is sustained over 60 months. This analysis shows that new-generation TKIs are not only showing faster response but also maintaining a more potent one through longer follow-up period. It is important to note out that MTC is not a substitute for well-conducted RCTs investigating direct comparisons.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of tests to predict wound healing in diabetic foot.

BACKGROUND: This systematic review summarized the evidence on noninvasive screening tests for the prediction of wound healing and the risk of amputation in diabetic foot ulcers. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Scopus from database inception to October 2011. We pooled sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) and compared test performance. RESULTS: Thirty-seven studies met the inclusion criteria. Eight tests were used to predict wound healing in this setting, including ankle-brachial index (ABI), ankle peak systolic velocity, transcutaneous oxygen measurement (TcPo2), toe-brachial index, toe systolic blood pressure, microvascular oxygen saturation, skin perfusion pressure, and hyperspectral imaging. For the TcPo2 test, the pooled DOR was 15.81 (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.36-74.45) for wound healing and 4.14 (95% CI, 2.98-5.76) for the risk of amputation. ABI was also predictive but to a lesser degree of the risk of amputations (DOR, 2.89; 95% CI, 1.65-5.05) but not of wound healing (DOR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.40-2.64). It was not feasible to perform meta-analysis comparing the remaining tests. The overall quality of evidence was limited by the risk of bias and imprecision (wide CIs due to small sample size). CONCLUSIONS: Several tests may predict wound healing in the setting of diabetic foot ulcer; however, most of the available evidence evaluates only TcPo2 and ABI. The overall quality of the evidence is low, and further research is needed to provide higher quality comparative effectiveness evidence.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of glycemic control for the prevention of diabetic foot syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this review was to synthesize the available randomized controlled trials (RCTs) estimating the relative efficacy and safety of intensive vs less intensive glycemic control in preventing diabetic foot syndrome. METHODS: We used the umbrella design (systematic review of systematic reviews) to identify eligible RCTs. Two reviewers determined RCT eligibility and extracted descriptive, methodologic, and diabetic foot outcome data. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool outcome data across studies, and the I(2) statistic was used to quantify heterogeneity. RESULTS: Nine RCTs enrolling 10,897 patients with type 2 diabetes were included and deemed to be at moderate risk of bias. Compared with less intensive glycemic control, intensive control (hemoglobin A1c, 6%-7.5%) was associated with a significant decrease in risk of amputation (relative risk [RR], 0.65; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.45-0.94; I(2) = 0%). Intensive control was significantly associated with slower decline in sensory vibration threshold (mean difference, -8.27; 95% CI, -9.75 to -6.79). There was no effect on other neuropathic changes (RR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.75-1.05; I(2) = 32%) or ischemic changes (RR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.67-1.26; I(2) = 0%). The quality of evidence is likely moderate. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with less intensive glycemic control therapy, intensive control may decrease the risk of amputation in patients with diabetic foot syndrome. The reported risk reduction is likely overestimated because the trials were open and the decision to proceed with amputation could be influenced by glycemic control.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of débridement methods for chronic diabetic foot ulcers.

BACKGROUND: Several methods of débridement of diabetic foot ulcers are currently used. The relative efficacy of these methods is not well established. METHODS: This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to find the best available evidence for the effect of débridement on diabetic foot wound outcomes. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and Scopus through October 2011 for randomized controlled studies (RCTs) and observational comparative studies. RESULTS: We identified 11 RCTs and three nonrandomized studies reporting on 800 patients. The risk of bias was moderate overall. Meta-analysis of three RCTs showed that autolytic débridement significantly increased the healing rate (relative risk [RR], 1.89; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.35-2.64). Meta-analysis of four studies (one RCT) showed that larval débridement reduced amputation (RR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.21-0.88) but did not increase complete healing (RR, 1.27; 95% CI, 0.84-1.91). Surgical débridement was associated with shorter healing time compared with conventional wound care (one RCT). Insufficient evidence was found for comparisons between autolytic and larval débridement (one RCT), between ultrasound-guided and surgical débridement, and between hydrosurgical and surgical débridement. CONCLUSIONS: The available literature supports the efficacy of several débridement methods, including surgical, autolytic, and larval débridement. Comparative effectiveness evidence between these methods and supportive evidence for other methods is of low quality due to methodologic limitations and imprecision. Hence, the choice of débridement method at the present time should be based on the available expertise, patient preferences, the clinical context and cost.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of off-loading methods for diabetic foot ulcers.

BACKGROUND: Increased plantar foot pressure is one of several key factors that lead to diabetic foot ulcers. Multiple methods have been proposed to relieve this pressure and thus enhance wound healing and potentially prevent relapse. We aimed in this systematic review to find the best available evidence for off-loading methods. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, Web of Science, and Scopus through October 2011. Pairs of independent reviewers selected studies and extracted data. Predefined outcomes of interest included complete wound healing, time to complete wound healing, amputation, infection, and relapse rates. RESULTS: We identified 19 interventional studies, of which 13 were randomized controlled trials, including data from 1605 patients with diabetic foot ulcers using an off-loading method. The risk of bias in the included studies was moderate. This analysis demonstrated improved wound healing with total contact casting over removable cast walker, therapeutic shoes, and conventional therapy. There was no advantage of irremovable cast walkers over total contact casting. There was improved healing with half-shoe compared with conventional wound care. Therapeutic shoes and insoles reduced relapse rate in comparison with regular footwear. Data were sparse regarding other off-loading methods. CONCLUSIONS: Although based on low-quality evidence (ie, evidence warranting lower certainty), benefits are demonstrated for use of total contact casting and irremovable cast walkers in the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers. Reduced relapse rate is demonstrated with various therapeutic shoes and insoles in comparison with regular footwear.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of adjunctive therapies in diabetic foot ulcers.

BACKGROUND: Multiple adjunctive therapies have been proposed to accelerate wound healing in patients with diabetes and foot ulcers. The aim of this systematic review is to summarize the best available evidence supporting the use of hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT), arterial pump devices, and pharmacologic agents (pentoxifylline, cilostazol, and iloprost) in this setting. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and Scopus through October 2011. Pairs of independent reviewers selected studies and extracted data. Predefined outcomes of interest were complete wound healing and amputation. RESULTS: We identified 18 interventional studies; of which 9 were randomized, enrolling 1526 patients. The risk of bias in the included studies was moderate. In multiple randomized trials, the addition of HBOT to conventional therapy (wound care and offloading) was associated with increased healing rate (Peto odds ratio, 14.25; 95% confidence interval, 7.08-28.68) and reduced major amputation rate (odds ratio, 0.30; 95% confidence interval, 0.10-0.89), compared with conventional therapy alone. In one small trial, arterial pump devices had a favorable effect on complete healing compared with HBOT and in another small trial compared with placebo devices. Neither iloprost nor pentoxifylline had a significant effect on amputation rate compared with conventional therapy. No comparative studies were identified for cilostazol in diabetic foot ulcers. CONCLUSIONS: There is low- to moderate-quality evidence supporting the use of HBOT as an adjunctive therapy to enhance diabetic foot ulcer healing and potentially prevent amputation. However, there are only sparse data regarding the efficacy of arterial pump devices and pharmacologic interventions.

Fingolimod for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis.

BACKGROUND: Fingolimod was approved in 2010 for the treatment of patients with the relapsing-remitting (RR) form of multiple sclerosis (MS). It was designed to reduce the frequency of exacerbations and to delay disability worsening. Issues on its safety and efficacy, mainly as compared to other disease modifying drugs (DMDs), have been raised. OBJECTIVES: To assess the safety and benefit of fingolimod versus placebo, or other disease-modifying drugs (DMDs), in reducing disease activity in people with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Multiple Sclerosis and Rare Diseases of the Central Nervous System (CNS) Group's Specialised Trials Register and US Food and Drug Administration reports (15 February 2016). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the beneficial and harmful effects of fingolimod versus placebo or other approved DMDs in people with RRMS. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures as expected by Cochrane. MAIN RESULTS: Six RCTs met our selection criteria. The overall population included 5152 participants; 1621 controls and 3531 treated with fingolimod at different doses; 2061 with 0.5 mg, 1376 with 1.25 mg, and 94 with 5.0 mg daily. Among the controls, 923 participants were treated with placebo and 698 with others DMDs. The treatment duration was six months in three, 12 months in one, and 24 months in two trials. One study was at high risk of bias for blinding, three studies were at high risk of bias for incomplete outcome reporting, and four studies were at high risk of bias for other reasons (co-authors were affiliated with the pharmaceutical company). We retrieved 10 ongoing trials; four of them have been completed.Comparing fingolimod administered at the approved dose of 0.5 mg to placebo, we found that the drug at 24 months increased the probability of being relapse-free (risk ratio (RR) 1.44, 95% confidence interval (CI) (1.28 to 1.63); moderate quality of evidence), but it might lead to little or no difference in preventing disability progression (RR 1.07, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.11; primary clinical endpoints; low quality evidence). Benefit was observed for other measures of inflammatory disease activity including clinical (annualised relapse rate): rate ratio 0.50, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.62; moderate quality evidence; and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) activity (gadolinium-enhancing lesions): RR of being free from (MRI) gadolinium-enhancing lesions: 1.36, 95% CI 1.27 to 1.45; low quality evidence.The mean change of MRI T2-weighted lesion load favoured fingolimod at 12 and 24 months.No significant increased risk of discontinuation due to adverse events was observed for fingolimod 0.5 mg compared to placebo at six and 24 months. The risk of fingolimod discontinuation was significantly higher compared to placebo for the dose 1.25 mg at 24 months (RR 1.93, 95% CI 1.48 to 2.52).No significant increased risk of discontinuation due to serious adverse events was observed for fingolimod 0.5 mg compared to placebo at six and 24 months. A significant increased risk of discontinuation due to serious adverse events was found for fingolimod 5.0 mg (RR 2.77, 95% CI 1.04 to 7.38) compared to placebo at six months.Comparing fingolimod 0.5 mg to intramuscular interferon beta-1a, we found moderate quality evidence that the drug at one year slightly increased the number of participants free from relapse (RR 1.18, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.27) or from gadolinium-enhancing lesions (RR 1.12, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.19), and decreased the relapse rate (rate ratio 0.48, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.70). We did not detect any advantage for preventing disability progression (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.06; low quality evidence). We did not detect any significant difference for MRI T2-weighted lesion load change.We found a greater likelihood of participants discontinuing fingolimod, as compared to other DMDs, due to adverse events in the short-term (six months) (RR 3.21, 95% CI 1.16 to 8.86), but there was no significant difference versus interferon beta-1a at 12 months (RR 1.51, 95% CI 0.81 to 2.80; moderate quality evidence). A higher incidence of adverse events was suggestive of the lower tolerability rate of fingolimod compared to interferon-beta 1a.Quality of life was improved in participants after switching from a different DMD to fingolimod at six months, but this effect was not found compared to placebo at 24 months.All studies were sponsored by Novartis Pharma. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with fingolimod compared to placebo in RRMS patients is effective in reducing inflammatory disease activity, but it may lead to little or no difference in preventing disability worsening. The risk of withdrawals due to adverse events requires careful monitoring of patients over time. The evidence on the risk/benefit profile of fingolimod compared with intramuscular interferon beta-1a was uncertain, based on a low number of head-to-head RCTs with short follow-up duration. The ongoing trial results will possibly satisfy these issues.

The Effect of a Neutropenic Diet on Infection and Mortality Rates in Cancer Patients: A Meta-Analysis.

Neutropenic diets (ND) are often prescribed to cancer patients aiming to reduce infection risk. The goal of this meta-analysis was to determine if ND indeed reduced the risk of infection and death in cancer patients compared to regular diets (RD). We identified studies in cancer patients that compared the effect of ND vs. RD on the risk of infections and mortality of any cause. The overall effect was calculated by use of a random effects model. Four studies were identified encompassing 918 patients. There was no difference in major infection or mortality rates between ND and RD groups. When analyzing for the overall composite outcome of any infection or fever, the hazard ratio was significantly higher in the ND arm (relative risk = 1.18, confidence interval: 1.05 to 1.34, P= 0.007). When the analysis was restricted to only the randomized trials, both groups had a comparable composite outcome. This meta-analysis shows no superiority with respect to mortality or infection of using a neutropenic diet in cancer patients. Larger studies are needed that study a broader range of nutritional issues, including the microbiome, in this patient population. Until then, it may be time to relax the restrictions of ND.

Preoperative ripening of the cervix before operative hysteroscopy.

BACKGROUND: Hysteroscopy is an operation in which the gynaecologist examines the uterine cavity using a small telescopic instrument (hysteroscope) inserted via the vagina and the cervix. Almost 50% of hysteroscopic complications are related to difficulty with cervical entry. Potential complications include cervical tears, creation of a false passage, perforation, bleeding, or simply difficulty in entering the internal os (between the cervix and the uterus) with the hysteroscope. These complications may possibly be reduced with adequate preparation of the cervix (cervical ripening) prior to hysteroscopy. Cervical ripening agents include oral or vaginal prostaglandin, which can be synthetic (e.g misoprostol) or natural (e.g. dinoprostone) and vaginal osmotic dilators, which can be naturally occurring (e.g. laminaria) or synthetic. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether preoperative cervical preparation facilitates cervical dilatation and reduces the complications of operative hysteroscopy in women undergoing the procedure for any condition. SEARCH METHODS: In August 2014 we searched sources including the Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group (MDSG) Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov and reference lists of relevant articles. We searched for published and unpublished studies in any language. SELECTION CRITERIA: Two review authors independently selected randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of cervical ripening agents used before operative hysteroscopy in pre- and postmenopausal women. Cervical ripening agents could be compared to each other, placebo or no treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data extraction and quality assessment were conducted independently by two review authors. The primary review outcomes were effectiveness of cervical dilatation (defined as the proportion of women requiring mechanical cervical dilatation) and intraoperative complications. Secondary outcomes were mean time required to dilate the cervix, preoperative pain, cervical width, abandonment of the procedure, side effects of dilating agents and duration of surgery. We calculated odds ratios (ORs) for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences (MDs) for continuous outcomes, with 95% confidence intervals ( CIs). Data were statistically pooled where appropriate. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I(2) statistic. The overall quality of the evidence was assessed using GRADE methods. MAIN RESULTS: Nineteen RCTs with a total of 1870 participants were included. They compared misoprostol with no treatment or placebo, dinoprostone or osmotic dilators.Misoprostol was more effective for cervical dilatation than placebo or no intervention, with fewer women requiring mechanical dilatation (OR 0.08, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.16, five RCTs, 441 participants, I(2)=0%, moderate quality evidence). This suggests that in a population in which 80% of women undergoing hysteroscopy require mechanical dilatation without use of preoperative ripening agents, use of misoprostol will reduce the need for mechanical dilatation to between 14% and 39%. Misoprostol was associated with fewer intraoperative complications (OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.77, 12 RCTs, 901 participants, I(2)=0%, moderate quality evidence). This suggests that in a population in which 3% of women undergoing hysteroscopy experience intraoperative complications without use of preoperative ripening agents, use of misoprostol will reduce the risk of complications to 2% or less.When specific complications were considered, the misoprostol group had a lower rate of cervical laceration or tearing (OR 0.25, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.57, nine RCTS, 669 women, I(2)=0%, moderate quality evidence) or false track formation (OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.97, seven RCTs, 560 participants, I(2)=0%, moderate quality evidence). There was no evidence of a difference between the groups in rates of uterine perforation (0.42, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.38, seven RCTs, 455 participants, I(2)=0%, low quality evidence) or uterine bleeding (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.10 to 2.49, four RCTs, 340 participants, I(2)=0%, low quality evidence). Some treatment side effects (mild abdominal pain, vaginal bleeding, and increased body temperature) were more common in the misoprostol group.Compared with dinoprostone, misoprostol was associated with more effective cervical dilatation, with fewer women requiring mechanical dilatation (OR 0.58; 95% CI 0.34 to 0.98; one RCT, 310 participants, low quality evidence) and with fewer intraoperative complications (OR 0.32; 95% CI 0.12 to 0.83, one RCT, 310 participants, low quality evidence). However treatment side effects were more common in the misoprostol arm.Compared to osmotic dilatation (laminaria), misoprostol was associated with less effective cervical dilatation, with more women in the misoprostol group requiring mechanical dilatation (OR 5.96, 95% CI 2.61 to 13.59, one RCT, 110 participants, low quality evidence). There was no evidence of a difference between misoprostol and osmotic dilators in intraoperative complication rates (OR 5.14, 95% CI 0.24 to 109.01, three RCTs, 354 participants, low quality evidence), with only two events reported altogether.The overall quality of the evidence ranged from low to moderate. The main limitations in the evidence were imprecision and poor reporting of study methods. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is moderate quality evidence that use of misoprostol for preoperative ripening of the cervix before operative hysteroscopy is more effective than placebo or no treatment and is associated with fewer intraoperative complications such as lacerations and false tracks. However misoprostol is associated with more side effects, including preoperative pain and vaginal bleeding. There is low quality evidence to suggest that misoprostol has fewer intraoperative complications and is more effective than dinoprostone.There is also low quality evidence to suggest that laminaria may be more effective than misoprostol, with uncertain effects for complication rates. However the possible benefits of laminaria need to be weighed against the inconvenience of its insertion and retention for one to two days.

Patient and service user engagement in research: a systematic review and synthesized framework.

BACKGROUND: There is growing attention towards increasing patient and service user engagement (PSUE) in biomedical and health services research. Existing variations in language and design inhibit reporting and indexing, which are crucial to comparative effectiveness in determining best practices. OBJECTIVE: This paper utilizes a systematic review and environmental scan to derive an evidence-based framework for PSUE. DESIGN: A metanarrative systematic review and environmental scan/manual search using scientific databases and other search engines, along with feedback from a patient advisory group (PAG). ELIGIBLE SOURCES: English-language studies, commentaries, grey literature and other sources (including systematic and non-systematic reviews) pertaining to patient and public involvement in biomedical and health services research. DATA EXTRACTED: Study description (e.g. participant demographics, research setting) and design, if applicable; frameworks, conceptualizations or planning schemes for PSUE-related endeavours; and methods for PSUE initiation and gathering patients'/service users' input or contributions. RESULTS: Overall, 202 sources were included and met eligibility criteria; 41 of these presented some framework or conceptualization of PSUE. Sources were synthesized into a two-part framework for PSUE: (i) integral PSUE components include patient and service user initiation, reciprocal relationships, colearning and re-assessment and feedback, (ii) sources describe PSUE at several research stages, within three larger phases: preparatory, execution and translational. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Efforts at developing a solid evidence base on PSUE are limited by the non-standard and non-empirical nature of much of the literature. Our proposed two-part framework provides a standard structure and language for reporting and indexing to support comparative effectiveness and optimize PSUE.

SSRIs for hot flashes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials.

BACKGROUND: Hot flashes are the most commonly reported vasomotor symptom during the peri- and early post-menopausal period. OBJECTIVES: To systematically review, appraise and summarize the evidence of the impact of different SSRIs on peri-menopausal hot flashes in healthy women in randomized, controlled trials. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted of MEDLINE™, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science and Scopus through March 2013. Two independent reviewers selected studies and extracted data. Random effects meta-analysis was used to pool outcomes across studies, and Bayesian mixed treatment methods were used to rank SSRIs in terms of effectiveness. RESULTS: We included a total of 11 randomized controlled trials with good methodological quality enrolling 2,069 menopausal and post-menopausal women (follow-up 1-9 months, mean age 36-76 years, mean time since menopause 2.3-6.6 years). Compared with placebo, SSRIs were associated with a statistically significant decrease in hot flash frequency (difference in means -0.93; 95 % CI -1.46 to -0.37; I(2) = 21 %) and severity assessed by various scales (standardized difference in means -0.34; 95 % CI -0.59 to -0.10; I(2) = 47 %). Adverse events did not differ from placebo. Mixed treatment comparison analysis demonstrated the superiority of escitalopram compared to other SSRIs in terms of efficacy. CONCLUSION: SSRI use is associated with modest improvement in the severity and frequency of hot flashes but can also be associated with the typical profile of SSRI adverse effects.