Predicting the Risk of Psychological Distress among Lung Cancer Patients: Development and Validation of a Predictive Algorithm Based on Sociodemographic and Clinical Factors.

OBJECTIVE: Lung cancer patients reported the highest incidence of psychological distress. It is extremely important to identify which patients at high risk for psychological distress. The study aims to develop and validate a predictive algorithm to identify lung cancer patients at high risk for psychological distress. METHODS: This cross-sectional study identified the risk factors of psychological distress in lung cancer patients. Data on sociodemographic and clinical variables were collected from September 2018 to August 2019. Structural equation model (SEM) was conducted to determine the associations between all factors and psychological distress, and then construct a predictive algorithm. Coincidence rate was also calculated to validate this predictive algorithm. RESULTS: Total 441 participants sent back validated questionnaires. After performing SEM analysis, educational level (ß = 0.151, P = 0.004), residence (ß = 0.146, P = 0.016), metastasis (ß = 0.136, P = 0.023), pain degree (ß = 0.133, P = 0.005), family history (ß = -0.107, P = 0.021), and tumor, node, and metastasis stage (ß = -0.236, P < 0.001) were independent predictors for psychological distress. The model built with these predictors showed an area under the curve of 0.693. A cutoff of 66 predicted clinically significant psychological distress with a sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of 65.41%, 66.90%, 28.33%, and 89.67%, respectively. The coincidence rate between predictive algorithm and distress thermometer was 64.63%. CONCLUSIONS: A validated, easy-to-use predictive algorithm was developed in this study, which can be used to identify patients at high risk of psychological distress with moderate accuracy.

Oral Glutamine May Have No Clinical Benefits to Prevent Radiation-Induced Oral Mucositis in Adult Patients With Head and Neck Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Objectives: The role of oral glutamine for the management of oral mucositis (OM) has not yet been confirmed. The objective of the present study is to further investigate whether oral glutamine is effective in preventing and treating OM among patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) receiving radiotherapy alone or concurrent with chemotherapy. Methods: A systematic search was performed in PubMed, EMBASE, EBSCO, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) to capture all potential citations from the inception to June 2019. Then data extraction and assessment of risk of bias were carried out after selecting the eligible citations. RevMan 5.3 software was used to perform all statistical analyses. Results: Six randomized controlled trials (RCTs) including 441 patients were included in the final analysis. The meta-analysis showed that oral glutamine couldn't significantly decrease the incidence of OM (risk ratio [RR] = 0.98, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.94-1.02) and alleviate the development of moderate or severe grade of OM (Moderate-to-severe OM: RR = 0.81, 95% CI = 0.59-1.12; Severe OM: RR = 0.45, 95% CI = 0.13-1.52). But oral glutamine may have the potential to reduce the opioid use (RR = 0.84, 95% CI = 0.71-0.99). The role of oral glutamine in delaying the onset of OM remains uncertain due to conflicting results between quantitative (mean difference [MD] = 4.11 days, 95% CI = 3.49-4.73) and qualitative results. Conclusions: Oral glutamine may have no clinical benefits to prevent or reduce the incidence and severity of radiation-induced OM in patients with HNC receiving radiotherapy alone or concurrent with chemotherapy. It is also uncertain whether oral glutamine can delay the onset of OM. But it may have the potential to relieve the degree of oral pain. Nevertheless, we must cautiously interpret the results because the observed effect size for delay in mucositis start or reduction in opioid use is marginal. Moreover, further RCTs with more rigorous methodology and large-scale are required to enhance the quality of evidence.

Progressive muscle relaxation is effective in preventing and alleviating of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting among cancer patients: a systematic review of six randomized controlled trials.

PURPOSE: Previous systematic review suggested a beneficial effect of progressive muscle relaxation (PMR) for cancer patients receiving chemotherapy. However, poor quality of eligible studies which included in previous systematic review impaired the reliability and validity of findings. The aim of the present systematic review was to further assess the value of PMR in chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. METHODS: We assigned two independent investigators to search potential studies in PubMed, Cochrane Controlled Register of Trial (CENTRAL), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), China Biomedical Literature database (CBM), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and Wanfang Data database. We used data extraction sheet to extract essential information, and used the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool to appraise the quality of eligible studies. Finally, we qualitatively summarized the results of all included studies. RESULTS: Six studies enrolling 288 patients were included finally. Of these 6 studies, three were labeled as moderate quality and the remaining studies were low quality. All included studies consistently suggested that PMR has a positive effect on chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, especially on the incidence, frequency, and degree of delayed nausea and vomiting. CONCLUSION: Independent studies indicated that PMR was a beneficial approach of preventing and alleviating chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting among cancer patients. However, further studies enrolling other types of primary tumors should be designed in order to increase the generality of PMR because studies which were included in the present systematic review mainly considered patients with lung cancer and breast cancer. Moreover, future studies with high quality and large-scale are also warranted in order to address the limitations in the present systematic review such as poor quality and limited data of eligible studies.

Comparative Efficacy of 2 L Polyethylene Glycol Alone or With Ascorbic Acid vs. 4 L Polyethylene Glycol for Colonoscopy: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of 12 Randomized Controlled Trials.

Background: Colonoscopy remains an optimal approach for early detection and treatment of gastrointestinal lesions, however adequate bowel preparation is the critical contributor to effective and safe colonoscopy. Polyethylene glycol (PEG)-based bowel cleansing regime has been the first recommendation before colonoscopy, however it remains unknown which regime is the optimal option. Aim: The aim of our study is to determine the comparative efficacy of 2 L PEG alone or plus ascorbic acid (Asc) vs. 4 L PEG alone for bowel cleansing prior to colonoscopy. Methods: We assigned two independent investigators to search and screen potential records, extract essential information, and appraise the risk of bias of individual study accordingly. Then, we adopted RevMan 5.3, Stata 14.0, and WinBUGS 1.4 software to perform all statistical analyses. We also calculated the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SCURA) in order to rank all regimes. Results: Twelve studies involving 4,106 patients were analyzed finally. Pooled results indicated an improved bowel preparation efficacy in 2 L PEG plus ascorbic acid with split-dose regime rather than in 2 L PEG plus ascorbic acid (OR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.18-0.36), 4 L PEG with split dose (OR, 3.18; 95% CI, 2.17-4.66), and 4 L PEG (OR, 4.53; 95% CI, 3.07-6.67) regimes, which was confirmed by network meta-analyses; a better compliance in 2 L PEG plus Asc with split dose (OR, 3.08; 95% CI, 1.51-6.30) and 4 L PEG with split dose (OR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.22-0.82) regime rather than in 4 L PEG regime, but network meta-analyses generated inconsistency results; a higher preference in 2 L PEG plus Asc with split dose regime rather than in 4 L PEG split dose (OR, 2.24; 95% CI, 1.02-4.90), which were not supported by network meta-analyses; no statistically significant difference when all regimes compared with each other in terms of adverse events. Conclusions: As for bowel preparation before colonoscopy, 2 L PEG ascorbic acid with split dose should be optimally prescribed. Further studies investigating the comparative efficacy of 2 L PEG related to 4 L PEG, 4 L PEG with split dose, and 2 L PEG plus ascorbic acid with split dose, respectively are needed.

Low-Volume Polyethylene Glycol Improved Patient Attendance in Bowel Preparation Before Colonoscopy: A Meta-Analysis With Trial Sequential Analysis.

Background: Polyethylene glycol (PEG) has been regarded as the primary recommendation for bowel preparation before colonoscopy. However, a conclusive conclusion has not yet been generated. Aim: We performed this updated meta-analysis to further investigate the comparative efficacy and safety of low volume preparation based on PEG plus ascorbic acid related to 4L PEG. Methods: A systematic search was conducted to retrieve potential randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) from January 2000 to April 2018. Two independent searchers critically searched all potential citations, extracted data, and appraised risk of bias accordingly. Moreover, we used the STATA 12.0 and trial sequential analysis (TSA) 0.9 to complete all analyses. Results: A total of 13 RCTs enrolling 3,910 patients met inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis based on PP analysis indicated that compared to standard volume PEG regime, low volume regime improved patient compliance RR = 1.01; 95% CIs = 1.00, 1.03; P = 0.143 (≥75% intake); RR = 1.07; 95% CIs = 1.00, 1.14; P = 0.046 (100% intake), the willingness to repeat the same regime (RR = 1.30; 95% CIs = 1.07, 157; P = 0.007), and patient acceptability (RR = 1.18; 95% CIs = 1.07, 1.29; P = 0.001), and decreased the overall adverse events (RR = 0.86; 95% CIs = 0.77, 0.96; P = 0.009). However, no difference was observed between these two different solutions for bowel preparation efficacy (RR = 0.98; 95% CIs = 0.95, 1.02; P = 0.340). These all results were further confirmed by TSA. Conclusions: The effect of low volume regime was not inferior to the standard volume PEG regime, and low volume regime was associated with better compliance when subjects ingested all the solution, willingness to repeat the same regime, higher acceptability, and lower nausea in non-selected population.

Early enteral nutrition supplemented with probiotics improved the clinical outcomes in severe head injury: Some promising findings from Chinese patients.

BACKGROUND: The role of early enteral nutrition (ENN) supplemented with probiotics (<48 hours) in improving clinical outcomes of patients with severe head injury (SHI) remains controversial. We performed this meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy of EEN supplemented with probiotics on clinical outcomes in these patients. METHODS: Systematic searches were performed in PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang database, and Chinese Biomedical Literature to identify potential studies. Two investigators checked citations, extracted data, appraised risk of bias, and then STATA 12.0 was used to perform statistical analysis. RESULTS: A total of 18 trials were eventually included in the present study. Meta-analysis indicated that EEN supplemented with probiotics was associated with decreased risk of infection (risk ratio [RR], 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.44-0.65), decreased risk of mortality (RR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.38-0.82), decreased risk of gastrointestinal complications (RR, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.13-0.25), and shortened stays in intensive care unit (ICU) (mean difference [MD], -4.55; 96% CI, -5.91 to -3.19). CONCLUSION: EEN supplemented with probiotics may be a promising alternative for patients with SHI because it effectively decreased the risk of infection, mortality, and gastrointestinal complications, as well as shortened the stays in ICU.

Oral Zinc Sulfate for Prevention and Treatment of Chemotherapy-Induced Oral Mucositis: A Meta-Analysis of Five Randomized Controlled Trials.

Chemotherapy-induced oral mucositis is an extremely serious complication faced by cancer patients. The role of oral zinc sulfate in preventing and treating chemotherapy-induced oral mucositis remains a subject of debate. The aim of this systematic review is to assess the potential of oral zinc sulfate to alleviate this morbid condition. A systematic search was conducted electronically in PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) to capture all potential randomized controlled trials investigating efficacy and safety of oral zinc sulfate in prevention and treatment of chemotherapy-induced oral mucositis, and the retrieval time was limited from their inception to April 2018. We assigned two independent investigators to perform a search, screen citations, extract information, and evaluate the risk of bias in all included trials. Subsequently, the RevMan 5.3 software was utilized to perform all statistical analyses. We included five eligible studies involving 352 patients. Meta-analysis based on limited data revealed that oral zinc sulfate failed to decrease the incidence of chemotherapy-induced oral mucositis (RR [relative risk] = 0.52, 95% CI [confidence interval] = 0.17-1.64) as well as relieve chemotherapy-induced oral mucositits grade (RR = 0.62, 95% CI = 0.11-3.56; RR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.29-1.71). Moreover, qualitative analyses also suggested that oral zinc sulfate was not associated with reduced oral pain intensity, delayed onset of chemotherapy-induced oral mucositis, decreased adverse events, or improved quality of life compared with control regimes. Oral zinc sulfate may not provide clinical benefits in preventing or reducing incidence, severity, or pain intensity of chemotherapy-induced oral mucositis in cancer patients. However, more studies with large-scale and rigorous methods are warranted for the purpose of further investigating efficacy and safety of oral zinc sulfate for this pathologic condition due to the presence of limitations.

Supplemented Use of Pre-, Pro-, and Synbiotics in Severe Acute Pancreatitis: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 13 Randomized Controlled Trials.

Introduction: The role of pre-, pro-, and synbiotics supplemented to standard enteral nutrition in severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) remains unclear. We performed this updated meta-analysis to determine the value of pre-, pro- and synbiotics supplemented to standard enteral nutrition in predicted SAP. Methods: A systematic search in PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases was performed. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the effects of pre-, pro-, and synbiotics supplemented to standard enteral nutrition with control regime in predicted SAP patients. Risk ratio (RR) and mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were used to express the estimates of dichotomous and continuous data respectively. Results: 13 RCTs comprising an aggregate total of 950 patients were eventually enrolled. Pooled results suggested that supplemented use of pre-, pro- and synbiotics effectively shorten the length of hospital stay in Chinese SAP cohorts (6 RCTs, MD = -5.57, 95% CI = -8.21 to -2.93, P < 0.001); however significant differences with regard to remaining clinical outcomes were not detected for all patients. Further analysis based on category of interventions including pre-, pro- and synbiotics also confirmed the findings to be reliable. Conclusions: Supplemented use of pre-, pro and synbiotics reduced the length of hospital stay in Chinese SAP cohorts. And thus, we concluded that pre-, pro- and synbiotics supplemented to standard enteral nutrition may be a potential option for the treatment of SAP patients. However, we also suggest designing further studies with large-scale and rigorous methods of addressing data to establish the effects and safety of supplemented use of pre-, pro- and synbiotics for SAP patients due to the presence of limitations.

Efficacy and safety of oral zinc sulfate in the prevention of chemotherapy-induced oral mucositis: Protocol for a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Oral mucositis has been an extremely serious complication resulted from cytotoxic effects of the chemotherapy among cancer patients. Several randomized controlled trials investigated the efficacy of zinc sulfate in prevention of this morbid condition among cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy, however conclusive findings has not yet been generated. This systematic review will assess the efficacy and safety of oral zinc sulfate for chemotherapy-induced oral mucositis. METHODS: We will electronically search all potential citations in PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) from their inception to April 2018. The randomized controlled trials, which investigated the efficacy of oral zinc sulfate for chemotherapy-induced oral mucositis will be considered. We will assign 2 independent investigators to perform search, screen citations, extract data, and appraise risk of bias. And then, the primary investigator will adopt RevMan 5.3 software to complete all statistical analyses. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The findings from this systematic review and meta-analysis will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal for publication. Moreover, we will disseminate all results in any topic-related conference. REGISTRATION NUMBER: This protocol has been registered with a number of CRD42018093605.

Comparative efficacy of combination of 1 L polyethylene glycol, castor oil and ascorbic acid versus 2 L polyethylene glycol plus castor oil versus 3 L polyethylene glycol for colon cleansing before colonoscopy: Study protocol of a randomized, double-blind, single-center study.

Colonoscopy has been regarded as an important method of early diagnosing and treating gastrointestinal lesions; however adequate bowel preparation is critical one of many factors needed for successful colonoscopy. Although several modified or novel regimes have been developed, desired quality of bowel preparation has not yet been generated. Scattered evidences revealed that castor oil may have potential of effectively cleansing colon. It is noted that, however, prospective trial of exploring the value of castor oil in preparing bowel before colonoscopy is lacking. The aims of this study are to test the hypotheses that low dose castor oil (30 mL) may enhance potential of polyethylene glycol (PEG) and combination of low castor oil and ascorbic acid may halve the volume of PEG.This is a randomized, double-blind (endoscopist and assessor), single center trial with three-arm design. We will randomly assign 282 adult patients (≥18 years but < 75 years), who are scheduled to undergo colonoscopy, to receive either 3 L PEG alone, 2 L PEG plus 30 mL castor oil or combination of 1 L PEG, 30 mL castor oil and 5 g ascorbic acid. The bowel preparation quality based on Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) is the primary outcome. The secondary outcomes include the first defecation time, total number of defecation, time of cecal intubation, detection rate of polyp and adenoma, willing to repeat the same regime, tolerance to regime, and adverse events.The study protocol has been approved by the Clinical Research Ethics Committees of Chongqing University Cancer Hospital & Chongqing Cancer Institute & Chongqing Cancer Hospital & Chongqing Cancer Center (2017[107]). The results from this trial will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals, and will be presented at national and international conferences.

Comparative efficacy of low volume versus traditional standard volume PEG on bowel preparation before colonoscopy: Protocol for an updated meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Polyethylene glycol (PEG) has been considered as the first recommendation for bowel preparation prior to colonoscopy. A previous meta-analysis suggested that low volume PEG may improve the acceptability of ingesting bowel preparation solution. However, several limitations impaired the power of findings from this published meta-analysis, such as the variation in study design of included trials and adjuvant prescriptions. Moreover, some studies related to this topic have been published recently. And thus, the aim of this updated meta-analysis is to further assess the comparative efficacy of low volume versus standard volume of PEG on bowel preparation before colonoscopy with trial sequential analysis (TSA). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Systematic searches will be performed to capture any potential randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigated the comparative efficacy of low volume versus traditional standard volume PEG on bowel preparation prior to colonoscopy in PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Moreover, we will also manually check the bibliographies of related studies and reviews so as to get additional studies. Two reviewers will independently screen the citation records, extract essential information, and appraise the risk of bias of each RCT in sequence. Finally, we will used the STATA software version 12.0 and TSA software version beta 0.9 to statistically analyze all data and test the robust of each pooled result, respectively. RESULTS: We will submit the full-text of systematic review to a peer-review journal for publication. CONCLUSION: This updated systematic review and meta-analysis with TSA will further assess the comparative efficacy and safety of low-volume versus traditional standard volume PEG for bowel preparation prior to colonoscopy. And then, a more comprehensive evidence body on low-volume compared to standard volume PEG in bowel preparation will be constructed.