Effect of voluntary breathing exercises on stable coronary artery disease in heart rate variability and rate-pressure product: a study protocol for a single-blind, prospective, randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: At present, China has more than 11 million patients with stable coronary heart disease and this is becoming a major public health problem. The pathological changes of coronary heart disease can lead to dysfunction of the cardiac autonomic nervous system, which increases the risk of complications such as malignant arrhythmia (ventricular flutter, ventricular fibrillation, etc.), heart rate, systolic blood pressure, and rate-pressure product (RPP), which is highly correlated with myocardial oxygen consumption and indirectly reflects myocardial blood supply and oxygen consumption. Although the guidelines recommend that such patients take drugs to reduce heart rate and myocardial oxygen consumption, the clinical control of heart rate is still not ideal. Thus, in this trial, we will use voluntary breathing exercises as the strategy of exercise rehabilitation for patients with stable coronary artery disease (SCAD), in order to increase the vagus nerve activity and/or reduce the sympathetic nervous activity, help maintain or rebuild the balance of plant nerve system, improve the time-domain index of heart rate variability, reduce the burden on the heart, and relieve patients' anxiety and other negative emotions. METHODS: This is a 6-month single-blind, randomized controlled clinical trial that will be conducted in the First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University. A total of 140 patients who fill out the Informed Consent Form are registered and randomized 1:1 into the Voluntary Breathing Exercises (VBE)-based clinical trial monitoring group (n = 70) or the Routine follow-up group (n = 70). The VBE-based clinical trial monitoring group is given VBE training on the basis of conventional treatment and health education, while the control group received conventional health education and follow-up. The primary outcomes will be measured heart rate variability and RPP. Secondary outcomes will include changes in Self-rating Anxiety Scale, total cholesterol, triglyceride, high-density lipoprotein, low-density lipoprotein, weight, and body mass index. DISCUSSION: This trial will carry out scientific respiratory exercise for patients with SCAD, which belongs to the category of active secondary prevention for patients, and changes from remedial to pre-protective. VBE is easy to operate and is not limited by time and place. It is important and meaningful to carry out VBE for patients with SCAD. This study will provide considerable evidence for further large-scale trials and alternative strategies for the rehabilitation nursing of patients with SCAD. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trials Registry, 1900024043 . Registered on 23 June 2019.

Sorafenib versus sunitinib as first-line treatment agents in Chinese patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma: the largest multicenter retrospective analysis of survival and prognostic factors.

BACKGROUND: To compare the efficacy of sorafenib and sunitinib with regard to overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS) in Chinese patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). METHODS: A multicenter, retrospective study was performed to elucidate the relationship between clinical variables and prognosis comparing sorafenib and sunitinib as first-line treatment agents in Chinese patients with mRCC. Between September 2006 and December 2014, 845 patients received either sorafenib (400 mg bid; n = 483) or sunitinib (50 mg q.d; n = 362). The primary end point was OS and PFS. RESULTS: The percentage of patients with low and moderate risk according to Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Centre (MSKCC) score was significantly higher in sunitinib group, and that with high risk was significantly higher in sorafenib group (15.1 vs. 5.2%; p < 0.001). Median OS was similar in sorafenib and sunitinib group (24 vs. 24 months; p = 0.298). Sorafenib group exhibited higher mPFS compared to sunitinib group (11.1 vs. 10.0 months; p = 0.028). Treatment (sorafenib vs sunitinib), pathology, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status, MSKCC scores, Heng's criteria of risk, and number of metastases were identified as significant predictors for OS and along with liver metastasis for PFS. Clinical outcomes in terms of mOS was significantly better with sorafenib in patients ≥65 years of age (p = .041), ECOG 0 (p = 0.0001), and median MSKCC risk score (p = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: Sorafenib and sunitinib are both effective in treating mRCC. However, sorafenib might be more effective in elderly patients (≥65 years) and in patients with an ECOG status of 0, classified under MSKCC moderate risk.