Etidronate for the primary and secondary prevention of osteoporotic fractures in postmenopausal women.

BACKGROUND: Osteoporosis is an abnormal reduction in bone mass and bone deterioration, leading to increased fracture risk. Etidronate belongs to the bisphosphonate class of drugs which act to inhibit bone resorption by interfering with the activity of osteoclasts - bone cells that break down bone tissue. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2008. For clinical relevance, we investigated etidronate's effects on postmenopausal women stratified by fracture risk (low versus high). OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of intermittent/cyclic etidronate in the primary and secondary prevention of osteoporotic fractures in postmenopausal women at lower and higher risk of fracture, respectively. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Control Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, two clinical trial registers, the websites of drug approval agencies, and the bibliographies of relevant systematic reviews. We identified eligible trials published between 1966 and February 2023. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials that assessed the benefits and harms of etidronate in the prevention of fractures for postmenopausal women. Women in the experimental arms must have received at least one year of etidronate, with or without other anti-osteoporotic drugs and concurrent calcium/vitamin D. Eligible comparators were placebo (i.e. no treatment; or calcium, vitamin D, or both) or another anti-osteoporotic drug. Major outcomes were clinical vertebral, non-vertebral, hip, and wrist fractures, withdrawals due to adverse events, and serious adverse events. We classified a study as secondary prevention if its population fulfilled one or more of the following hierarchical criteria: a diagnosis of osteoporosis, a history of vertebral fractures, a low bone mineral density T-score (≤ -2.5), or aged 75 years or older. If none of these criteria were met, we considered the study to be primary prevention. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. The review has three main comparisons: (1) etidronate 400 mg/day versus placebo; (2) etidronate 200 mg/day versus placebo; (3) etidronate at any dosage versus another anti-osteoporotic agent. We stratified the analyses for each comparison into primary and secondary prevention studies. For major outcomes in the placebo-controlled studies of etidronate 400 mg/day, we followed our original review by defining a greater than 15% relative change as clinically important. For all outcomes of interest, we extracted outcome measurements at the longest time point in the study. MAIN RESULTS: Thirty studies met the review's eligibility criteria. Of these, 26 studies, with a total of 2770 women, reported data that we could extract and quantitatively synthesize. There were nine primary and 17 secondary prevention studies. We had concerns about at least one risk of bias domain in each study. None of the studies described appropriate methods for allocation concealment, although 27% described adequate methods of random sequence generation. We judged that only 8% of the studies avoided performance bias, and provided adequate descriptions of appropriate blinding methods. One-quarter of studies that reported efficacy outcomes were at high risk of attrition bias, whilst 23% of studies reporting safety outcomes were at high risk in this domain. The 30 included studies compared (1) etidronate 400 mg/day to placebo (13 studies: nine primary and four secondary prevention); (2) etidronate 200 mg/day to placebo (three studies, all secondary prevention); or (3) etidronate (both dosing regimens) to another anti-osteoporotic agent (14 studies: one primary and 13 secondary prevention). We discuss only the etidronate 400 mg/day versus placebo comparison here. For primary prevention, we collected moderate- to very low-certainty evidence from nine studies (one to four years in length) including 740 postmenopausal women at lower risk of fractures. Compared to placebo, etidronate 400 mg/day probably results in little to no difference in non-vertebral fractures (risk ratio (RR) 0.56, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.20 to 1.61); absolute risk reduction (ARR) 4.8% fewer, 95% CI 8.9% fewer to 6.1% more) and serious adverse events (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.54; ARR 1.1% fewer, 95% CI 4.9% fewer to 5.3% more), based on moderate-certainty evidence. Etidronate 400 mg/day may result in little to no difference in clinical vertebral fractures (RR 3.03, 95% CI 0.32 to 28.44; ARR 0.02% more, 95% CI 0% fewer to 0% more) and withdrawals due to adverse events (RR 1.41, 95% CI 0.81 to 2.47; ARR 2.3% more, 95% CI 1.1% fewer to 8.4% more), based on low-certainty evidence. We do not know the effect of etidronate on hip fractures because the evidence is very uncertain (RR not estimable based on very low-certainty evidence). Wrist fractures were not reported in the included studies. For secondary prevention, four studies (two to four years in length) including 667 postmenopausal women at higher risk of fractures provided the evidence. Compared to placebo, etidronate 400 mg/day may make little or no difference to non-vertebral fractures (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.58; ARR 0.9% more, 95% CI 3.8% fewer to 8.1% more), based on low-certainty evidence. The evidence is very uncertain about etidronate's effects on hip fractures (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.17 to 5.19; ARR 0.0% fewer, 95% CI 1.2% fewer to 6.3% more), wrist fractures (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.13 to 6.04; ARR 0.0% fewer, 95% CI 2.5% fewer to 15.9% more), withdrawals due to adverse events (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.54 to 2.18; ARR 0.4% more, 95% CI 1.9% fewer to 4.9% more), and serious adverse events (RR not estimable), compared to placebo. Clinical vertebral fractures were not reported in the included studies. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This update echoes the key findings of our previous review that etidronate probably makes or may make little to no difference to vertebral and non-vertebral fractures for both primary and secondary prevention.

Licochalcone A induces endoplasmic reticulum stress-mediated apoptosis of endometrial cancer cells via upregulation of GRP78 expression.

Licochalcone A (LicA), a natural compound extracted from licorice root, has been shown to exert a variety of anticancer activities. Whether LicA has such effects on endometrial cancer (EMC) is unclear. This study aims to investigate the antitumor effects of LicA on EMC. Our results show that LicA significantly reduced the viability and induced apoptosis of EMC cells and EMC-7 cells from EMC patients. LicA was also found to induce endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stress, leading to increased expression of ER-related proteins (GRP78/PERK/IRE1α/CHOP) in EMC cell lines. Suppression of GRP78 expression in human EMC cells treated with LicA significantly attenuated the effects of LicA, resulting in reduced ER-stress mediated cell apoptosis and decreased expression of ER- and apoptosis-related proteins. Our findings demonstrate that LicA induces apoptosis in EMC cells through the GRP78-mediated ER-stress pathway, emphasizing the potential of LicA as an anticancer therapy for EMC.

Risedronate for the primary and secondary prevention of osteoporotic fractures in postmenopausal women.

BACKGROUND: Osteoporosis is an abnormal reduction in bone mass and bone deterioration leading to increased fracture risk. Risedronate belongs to the bisphosphonate class of drugs which act to inhibit bone resorption by interfering with the activity of osteoclasts. This is an update of a Cochrane Review that was originally published in 2003. OBJECTIVES: We assessed the benefits and harms of risedronate in the primary and secondary prevention of osteoporotic fractures for postmenopausal women at lower and higher risk for fractures, respectively. SEARCH METHODS: With broader and updated strategies, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Control Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and Embase. A grey literature search, including the online databases ClinicalTrials.gov, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), and drug approval agencies, as well as bibliography checks of relevant systematic reviews was also performed. Eligible trials published between 1966 to 24 March 2021 were identified. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials that assessed the benefits and harms of risedronate in the prevention of fractures for postmenopausal women. Participants must have received at least one year of risedronate, placebo or other anti-osteoporotic drugs, with or without concurrent calcium/vitamin D. Major outcomes were clinical vertebral, non-vertebral, hip and wrist fractures, withdrawals due to adverse events, and serious adverse events. In the interest of clinical relevance and applicability, we classified a study as secondary prevention if its population fulfilled more than one of the following hierarchical criteria: a diagnosis of osteoporosis, a history of vertebral fractures, low bone mineral density (BMD)T score ≤ -2.5, and age ≥ 75 years old. If none of these criteria was met, the study was considered to be primary prevention. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodology expected by Cochrane. We pooled the relative risk (RR) of fractures using a fixed-effect model based on the expectation that the clinical and methodological characteristics of the respective primary and secondary prevention studies would be homogeneous, and the experience from the previous review suggesting that there would be a small number of studies. The base case included the data available for the longest treatment period in each placebo-controlled trial and a >15% relative change was considered clinically important. The main findings of the review were presented in summary of findings tables, using the GRADE approach. In addition, we looked at benefit and harm comparisons between different dosage regimens for risedronate and between risedronate and other anti-osteoporotic drugs. MAIN RESULTS: Forty-three trials fulfilled the eligibility criteria, among which 33 studies (27,348 participants) reported data that could be extracted and quantitatively synthesized. We had concerns about particular domains of risk of bias in each trial. Selection bias was the most frequent concern, with only 24% of the studies describing appropriate methods for both sequence generation and allocation concealment. Fifty per cent and 39% of the studies reporting benefit and harm outcomes, respectively, were subject to high risk. None of the studies included in the quantitative syntheses were judged to be at low risk of bias in all seven domains. The results described below pertain to the comparisons for daily risedronate 5 mg versus placebo which reported major outcomes. Other comparisons are described in the full text. For primary prevention, low- to very low-certainty evidence was collected from four studies (one to two years in length) including 989 postmenopausal women at lower risk of fractures. Risedronate 5 mg/day may make little or no difference to wrist fractures [RR 0.48 ( 95% CI 0.03 to 7.50; two studies, 243 participants); absolute risk reduction (ARR) 0.6% fewer (95% CI 1% fewer to 7% more)] and withdrawals due to adverse events [RR 0.67 (95% CI 0.38 to 1.18; three studies, 748 participants); ARR 2% fewer (95% CI 5% fewer to 1% more)], based on low-certainty evidence. However, its preventive effects on non-vertebral fractures and serious adverse events are not known due to the very low-certainty evidence. There were zero clinical vertebral and hip fractures reported therefore the effects of risedronate for these outcomes are not estimable.  For secondary prevention, nine studies (one to three years in length) including 14,354 postmenopausal women at higher risk of fractures provided evidence. Risedronate 5 mg/day probably prevents non-vertebral fractures [RR 0.80 (95% CI 0.72 to 0.90; six studies, 12,173 participants); RRR 20% (95% CI 10% to 28%) and ARR 2% fewer (95% CI 1% fewer to 3% fewer), moderate certainty], and may reduce hip fractures [RR 0.73 (95% CI 0.56 to 0.94); RRR 27% (95% CI 6% to 44%) and ARR 1% fewer (95% CI 0.2% fewer to 1% fewer), low certainty]. Both of these effects are probably clinically important. However, risedronate's effects are not known for wrist fractures [RR 0.64 (95% CI 0.33 to 1.24); three studies,1746 participants); ARR 1% fewer (95% CI 2% fewer to 1% more), very-low certainty] and not estimable for clinical vertebral fractures due to zero events reported (low certainty). Risedronate results in little to no difference in withdrawals due to adverse events [RR 0.98 (95% CI 0.90 to 1.07; eight studies, 9529 participants); ARR 0.3% fewer (95% CI 2% fewer to 1% more); 16.9% in risedronate versus 17.2% in control, high certainty] and probably results in little to no difference in serious adverse events [RR 1.00 (95% CI 0.94 to 1.07; six studies, 9435 participants); ARR 0% fewer (95% CI 2% fewer to 2% more; 29.2% in both groups, moderate certainty). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This update recaps the key findings from our previous review that, for secondary prevention, risedronate 5 mg/day probably prevents non-vertebral fracture, and may reduce the risk of hip fractures. We are uncertain on whether risedronate 5mg/day reduces clinical vertebral and wrist fractures.  Compared to placebo, risedronate probably does not increase the risk of serious adverse events.  For primary prevention, the benefit and harms of risedronate were supported by limited evidence with high uncertainty.

Comparative efficacy and safety of antihyperglycemic drug classes for patients with type 2 diabetes following failure with metformin monotherapy: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

AIMS: To compare the efficacy and safety of antihyperglycemic agents, taken in combination with metformin, for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). METHODS: A previous 2016 comprehensive search of Ovid MEDLINE, PubMed, and Cochrane CENTRAL was updated to October 2018, and a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of patients with T2DM taking an antihyperglycemic agent in combination with metformin were included. Bayesian NMA was performed to assess the relative efficacy and safety of the antihyperglycemic classes. RESULTS: In total, 204 RCTs were included, which assessed the efficacy and safety of eight antihyperglycemic drug classes (i.e., sulfonylureas, meglitinides, alpha-glucosidase inhibitors, thiazolidinediones, basal and biphasic insulin, dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors, glucagon-like-peptide-1 receptor agonists and sodium-glucose cotransport-2 inhibitors). All drug classes significantly reduced haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) compared to metformin monotherapy (mean reduction from 0.50 to 0.92). The drug classes varied in their relative effects on hypoglycemia, body weight, body mass index, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, total cholesterol, high and low density lipoprotein cholesterol, and the classes had differing safety profiles on total adverse events, urogenital adverse events, heart failure, serious adverse events, and withdraw due to adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: All eight antihyperglycemic drug classes, taken in combination with metformin, reduced HbA1c levels; however, the effects of the agents on other outcomes varied among the classes.

Pharmacologic treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder in adults: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) affects approximately 3% of adults globally. Many pharmacologic treatments options exist, yet the comparative benefits and harms of individual treatments are largely unknown. We performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis to assess the relative effects of individual pharmacologic treatments for adults with ADHD. METHODS: We searched English-language published and grey literature sources for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) involving pharmacologic treatment of ADHD in adults (December 2018). The primary outcome was clinical response; secondary outcomes were quality of life, executive function, driving behaviour, withdrawals due to adverse events, treatment discontinuation, serious adverse events, hospitalization, cardiovascular adverse events, and emergency department visits. Data were pooled via pair-wise meta-analyses and Bayesian network meta-analyses. Risk of bias was assessed by use of Cochrane's Risk of Bias tool, and the certainty of the evidence was assessed by use of the GRADE framework. RESULTS: Eighty-one unique trials that reported at least one outcome of interest were included, most of which were at high or unclear risk of at least one important source of bias. Notably, only 5 RCTs were deemed at overall low risk of bias. Included pharmacotherapies were methylphenidate, atomoxetine, dexamfetamine, lisdexamfetamine, guanfacine, bupropion, mixed amphetamine salts, and modafinil. As a class, ADHD pharmacotherapy improved patient- and clinician-reported clinical response compared with placebo (range: 4 to 15 RCTs per outcome); however, these findings were not conserved when the analyses were restricted to studies at low risk of bias, and the certainty of the finding is very low. There were few differences among individual medications, although atomoxetine was associated with improved patient-reported clinical response and quality of life compared with placebo. There was no significant difference in the risk of serious adverse events or treatment discontinuation between ADHD pharmacotherapies and placebo; however, the proportion of participants who withdrew due to adverse events was significantly higher among participants who received any ADHD pharmacotherapy. Few RCTs reported on the occurrence of adverse events over a long treatment duration. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, despite a class effect of improving clinical response relative to placebo, there were few differences among the individual ADHD pharmacotherapies, and most studies were at risk of at least one important source of bias. Furthermore, the certainty of the evidence was very low to low for all outcomes, and there was limited reporting of long-term adverse events. As such, the choice between ADHD pharmacotherapies may depend on individual patient considerations, and future studies should assess the long-term effects of individual pharmacotherapies on patient-important outcomes, including quality of life, in robust blinded RCTs. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO no. CRD 42015026049.

ALK inhibitors for non-small cell lung cancer: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: We sought to assess the relative effects of individual anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) inhibitors for the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, and grey literature (July 23, 2019) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that included participants with ALK- or ROS1-positive NSCLC who received any ALK inhibitor compared with placebo, another ALK inhibitor, or the same ALK inhibitor at a different dose. The primary outcome was treatment-related death. Secondary outcomes were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and serious adverse events. Data were pooled via meta-analysis and network meta-analysis, and risk of bias was assessed. PROSPERO: CRD42017077046. RESULTS: Thirteen RCTs reporting outcomes of interest among participants with ALK-positive NSCLC were identified. Treatment-related deaths were rare, with 10 deaths attributed to crizotinib (risk difference v. chemotherapy: 0.49, 95% credible interval [CrI] -0.16 to 1.46; odds ratio 2.58 (0.76-11.37). All ALK inhibitors improved PSF relative to chemotherapy (hazard ratio [95% CrI]: crizotinib 0.46 [0.39-0.54]; ceritinib 0.52 [0.42-0.64]; alectinib 300 BID 0.16 [0.08-0.33]; alectinib 600 BID 0.23 [0.17-0.30]; brigatinib 0.23 [0.15-0.35]), while alectinib and brigatinib improved PFS over crizotinib and ceritinib (alectinib v. crizotinib 0.34 [0.17-0.70]; alectinib v. ceritinib 0.30 [0.14-0.64]; brigatinib v. crizotinib 0.49 [0.33-0.73]; brigatinib v. ceritinib 0.43 [0.27-0.70]). OS was improved with alectinib compared with chemotherapy (HR 0.57 [95% CrI 0.39-0.83]) and crizotinib (0.68 [0.48-0.96]). Use of crizotinib (odds ratio 2.08 [95% CrI 1.56-2.79]) and alectinib (1.60 [1.00-2.58]) but not ceritinib (1.25 [0.90-1.74), increased the risk of serious adverse events compared with chemotherapy. Results were generally consistent among treatment-experienced or naïve participants. CONCLUSION(S): Treatment-related deaths were infrequent among ALK-positive NSCLC. PFS may be improved by alectinib and brigatinib relative to other ALK inhibitors; however, the assessment of OS is likely confounded by treatment crossover and should be interpreted with caution.

α-Mangostin attenuates stemness and enhances cisplatin-induced cell death in cervical cancer stem-like cells through induction of mitochondrial-mediated apoptosis.

Cancer stem cells (CSCs) exhibit specific characteristics including decontrolled self-renewal, tumor-initiating, promoting, and metastatic potential, abnormal stemness signaling, and chemotherapy resistance. Thus, targeting CSC is becoming an emerging cancer treatment. α-Mangostin has been shown to have potent and multiple anticancer activities. Accordingly, we hypothesized that α-mangostin may diminish the stemness and proliferation of CSC-like cervical cancer cells. In our results, comparing to the parent cells, CSC-like SiHa and HeLa cells highly expressed CSC marker Sox2, Oct4, Nanog, CK-17, and CD49f. α-Mangostin significantly reduced the cell viability, sphere-forming ability, and expression of the CSC stemness makers of CSC-like cervical cancer cells. Further investigation showed that α-mangostin induced mitochondrial depolarization and mitochondrial apoptosis signaling, including upregulation of Bax, downregulation of Mcl-1 and Bcl-2, and activation of caspase-9/3. Moreover, α-mangostin synergically enhanced the cytotoxicity of cisplatin on CSC-like SiHa cells by promoting mitochondrial apoptosis and inhibiting the expression of CSC markers. Consistent with in vitro findings, in vivo tumor growth assay revealed that α-mangostin administration significantly inhibited the growth of inoculated CSC-like SiHa cells and synergically enhanced the antitumor effect of cisplatin. Our findings indicate that α-mangostin can reduce the stemness and proliferation of CSC-like SiHa and HeLa cells and promote the cytotoxicity of cisplatin, which may attribute to the mitochondrial apoptosis activation. Thus, it suggests that α-mangostin may have clinical potential to improve chemotherapy for cervical cancer by targeting cervical CSC.

Licochalcone A-Induced Apoptosis Through the Activation of p38MAPK Pathway Mediated Mitochondrial Pathways of Apoptosis in Human Osteosarcoma Cells In Vitro and In Vivo.

BACKGROUND: Licochalcone A (LicA) is isolated from the roots of Glycyrrhiza glabra and possesses antitumor and anti-invasive activities against several tumor cells. However, the antitumor effects of LicA on human osteosarcoma cells have yet to be demonstrated either in vitro or in vivo. METHODS: Cell viability was measured by MTT assay. Apoptosis and mitochondrial dysfunction were detected with Annexin V/PI staining and JC-1 staining by flow cytometry. The expressions of caspase- or mitochondrial-related proteins were demonstrated by western blotting. Antitumor effect of LicA on 143B xenograft mice in vivo. RESULTS: LicA could inhibit cell proliferation and induce apoptosis in human osteosarcoma cells, as evidenced by a decrease in cell viability, loss of mitochondrial membrane potentials, and activation of caspases. LicA treatment substantially reduced the expression of Bcl-2 and Mcl-1 and increased the expression of cleaved-caspase-3, cleaved-caspase-9, cleaved-PARP, and Bax in HOS and U2OS cells. Moreover, mitochondrial membrane potential and apoptosis suppression mediated by Z-VAD or tauroursodeoxycholic acid significantly reduced LicA-induced mitochondria-dependent apoptosis. The study also determined that LicA treatment induced p38MAPK phosphorylation, but siRNA-p38 or BIRB796 substantially reversed cell viability through the inhibition of mitochondria-dependent apoptosis pathways. Finally, an in vivo study revealed that LicA significantly inhibited 143B xenograft tumor growth. CONCLUSIONS: These findings demonstrate that LicA has antitumor activities against human osteosarcoma cells through p38MAPK regulation of mitochondria-mediated intrinsic apoptotic pathways in vitro and in vivo.

Systematic reviews of clinical practice guidelines: a methodological guide.

OBJECTIVES: Systematic reviews (SRs) of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are unique knowledge syntheses that require tailored approaches to, and greater subjectivity in, design and execution compared with other SRs in clinical epidemiology. We provide review authors structured direction on how to design and conduct methodologically rigorous SRs of CPGs. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: A guidance paper outlining suggested methodology for conducting all stages of an SR of CPGs. We present concrete examples of approaches used by published reviews, including a case exemplar demonstrating how this methodology was applied to our own SR of CPGs. RESULTS: Review context and the unique characteristics of CPGs as research syntheses or clinical guidance statements must be considered in all aspects of review design and conduct. Researchers should develop a "PICAR" statement to help form and focus on the research question(s) and eligibility criteria, assess CPG quality using a validated appraisal tool, and extract, analyze, and summarize data in a way that is cogent and transparent. CONCLUSION: SRs of CPGs can be used to systematically identify, assess, and summarize the current state of guidance on a clinical topic. These types of reviews often require methodological tailoring to ensure that their objectives and timelines are effectively and efficiently addressed; however, they should all meet the criteria for an SR, follow a rigorous methodological approach, and adhere to transparent reporting practices.

A systematic review of clinical practice guidelines on the use of low molecular weight heparin and fondaparinux for the treatment and prevention of venous thromboembolism: Implications for research and policy decision-making.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a major global cause of morbidity and mortality. Low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) and fondaparinux (FDP) are frequently used to treat and prevent VTE and have a variety of safety and practical advantages over other anticoagulants, including use in outpatient settings. These medications are commonly listed on drug formularies, which act as a gateway for health plan prescription coverage by outlining the circumstances under which patients will be covered for specific drugs and drug products. Because patient access to medications is impacted by the nature of their listing on formularies, they must be rigorously reviewed and modernized as new evidence emerges. METHODS: As part of a broader drug class review team, we completed a systematic review of clinical practice guidelines to determine whether the recommendations they reported aligned with the indications listed for the coverage of LMWH and FDP in an outpatient drug formulary. Guideline quality was assessed using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation (AGREE) II tool. Recommendation matrices were used to systematically compare, categorize, and summarize included recommendations. RESULTS: Twenty-seven guidelines were included from which 168 eligible recommendations were identified. Generally, AGREE II domains were adequately addressed; however, domain five (applicability) was poorly addressed. Most recommendations were based on moderate- to low-quality/limited evidence and reported on the use of LMWHs generally; few reported on specific agents. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings contributed to the recommendation that the formulary listing for LMWH and FDP be streamlined to include coverage for specific outpatient indications. The paucity of available evidence on the comparative efficacy of specific LMWH agents against each other and FDP limited agent-specific listing recommendations, highlighting the need for high-quality comparative studies on this topic.

Alpha-Mangostin Suppresses the Metastasis of Human Renal Carcinoma Cells by Targeting MEK/ERK Expression and MMP-9 Transcription Activity.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: α-mangostin has anti-carcinogenic effects against several cancers. We investigated the molecular mechanism of this compound on the metastasis of human renal carcinoma cells. METHODS: Cell viability was measured using the MTT assay, and cell cycle distribution using flow cytometry. A Matrigel-based assay was used to measure in vitro cell migration and invasion. MAPK-related proteins and matrix metalloproteinase (MMP)-9 and MMP-2 expression were measured by western blotting, and MMP2/-9 activities were determined by gelatin zymography. RT-qPCR and a luciferase assay were used to examine the transcriptional activity of MMP-9. RESULTS: α-mangostin inhibited the migration and invasion of RCC cells in a dose-dependent manner, but had no evident cytotoxic effects. Treatment of 786-O cells with α-mangostin inhibited activation of MEK and ERK. Treatment with a specific MEK inhibitor (U0126) enhanced the inhibitory effects of α-mangostin on cell migration and invasion, and the phosphorylation of ERK and MEK. Moreover, α-mangostin inhibited the expression of the MMP-9 mRNA levels as well as the activity of MMP-9 promoter, and these suppressive effects were further enhanced by U0126. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that α-mangostin suppresses cell migration and invasion via MEK/ERK/MMP9 pathway, and might be a promising anti-metastatic agent against human renal cell carcinoma.

Alpha-mangostin induces apoptosis through activation of reactive oxygen species and ASK1/p38 signaling pathway in cervical cancer cells.

Alpha-mangostin, a natural xanthonoid, has been reported to possess the anti-cancer property in various types of human cancer. However, its effects and mechanism of α-mangostin in cervical cancer remain unclear. We found that α-mangostin effectively inhibited cell viability, resulted in loss of mitochondrial membrane potential (MMP), release of cytochrome C, increase of Bax, decrease of Bcl-2, and activation of caspase-9/caspase-3 cascade in cervical cancer cells. Alpha-mangostin elevated the contents of reactive oxygen species (ROS) to activate p38. Disrupting ASK1/p38 signaling pathway by a specific inhibitor of p38, or by the siRNAs against ASK1, MKK3/6, or p38, significantly abolished α-mangostin-induced cell death and apoptotic responses. Moreover, α-mangostin also repressed tumor growth in accordance with increased levels of p-ASK1, p-p38, cleaved-PARP and cleaved-caspase-3 in the tumor mass from the mouse xenograft model of cervical cancer. In the current study, we provided first evidence to demonstrate that dietary antioxidant α-mangostin could inhibit the tumor growth of cervical cancer cells through enhancing ROS amounts to activate ASK1/p38 signaling pathway and damage the integrity of mitochondria and thereby induction of apoptosis in cervical cancer cells.

Loss of endothelial cell-specific molecule 1 promotes the tumorigenicity and metastasis of prostate cancer cells through regulation of the TIMP-1/MMP-9 expression.

The Endothelial cell specific molecule-1 (ESM1) protein has been involved in proliferation and metastatic progression in multiple tumors. However, there are no studies regarding the mechanism of ESM1 in prostate cancer. We found that ESM1 knockdown in prostate cancer cells resulted in increased cell proliferation and colony formation ability response evidenced by decreased expression of p21 and increased expression of cyclin D1 in prostate cancer cells. Moreover, we revealed that knockdown ESM1 also induced the epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT), motility and invasiveness in accordance with the upregulated the MMP-9 expression, while downregulated the TIMP-1 expression. Recombinant human (Rh) TIMP-1 significantly attenuated ESM1-mediated cell migration and invasion. Additionally, ESM1 knockdown increased in vivo tumorigenicity and metastasis of prostate cancer cells. These findings provide the first evidence that the imbalance of MMP-9/TIMP-1, is one of the regulation mechanisms by which ESM1 promotes tumorigenicity and metastasis of prostate cancer cells.

Targeting EMP3 suppresses proliferation and invasion of hepatocellular carcinoma cells through inactivation of PI3K/Akt pathway.

Epithelial membrane protein-3 (EMP3), a typical member of the epithelial membrane protein (EMP) family, is epigenetically silenced in some cancer types, and has been proposed to be a tumor suppressor gene. However, its effects on tumor suppression are controversial and its roles in development and malignancy of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remain unclear. In the present study, we found that EMP3 was highly expressed in the tumorous tissues comparing to the matched normal tissues, and negatively correlated with differentiated degree of HCC patients. Knockdown of EMP3 significantly reduced cell proliferation, arrested cell cycle at G1 phase, and inhibited the motility and invasiveness in accordance with the decreased expression and activity of urokinase plasminogen activator (uPA) and matrix metalloproteinase 9 (MMP-9) in HCC cells. The in vivo tumor growth of HCC was effectively suppressed by knockdown of EMP3 in a xenograft mouse model. The EMP3 knockdown-reduced cell proliferation and invasion were attenuated by inhibition of phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K) or knockdown of Akt, and rescued by overexpression of Akt in HCC cells. Clinical positive correlations of EMP3 with p85 regulatory subunit of PI3K, p-Akt, uPA, as well as MMP-9 were observed in the tissue sections from HCC patients. Here, we elucidated the tumor progressive effects of EMP3 through PI3K/Akt pathway and uPA/MMP-9 cascade in HCC cells. The findings provided a new insight into EMP3, which might be a potential molecular target for diagnosis and treatment of HCC.

Triptans in the Acute Treatment of Migraine: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Although triptans are widely used in the acute management of migraine, there is uncertainty around the comparative efficacy of triptans among each other and vs non-triptan migraine treatments. We conducted systematic reviews and network meta-analyses to compare the relative efficacy of triptans (alone or in combination with other drugs) for acute treatment of migraines compared with other triptan agents, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), acetylsalicylic acid (ASA), acetaminophen, ergots, opioids, or anti-emetics. METHODS: The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, and EMBASE were searched for randomized controlled trials that compared triptans (alone or in combination with other drugs) with placebo-controlled or active migraine treatments. Study selection, data extraction, and quality assessment were completed independently by multiple reviewers. Outcome data were combined and analyzed using a Bayesian network meta-analysis. For each outcome, odds ratios, relative risks, and absolute probability of response were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 133 randomized controlled trials met the inclusion criteria. Standard dose triptans relieved headaches within 2 hours in 42 to 76% of patients, and 2-hour sustained freedom from pain was achieved for 18 to 50% of patients. Standard dose triptans provided sustained headache relief at 24 hours in 29 to 50% of patients, and sustained freedom from pain in 18 to 33% of patients. Use of rescue medications ranged from 20 to 34%. For 2-hour headache relief, standard dose triptan achieved better outcomes (42 to 76% response) than ergots (38%); equal or better outcomes than NSAIDs, ASA, and acetaminophen (46 to 52%); and equal or slightly worse outcomes than combination therapy (62 to 80%). Among individual triptans, sumatriptan subcutaneous injection, rizatriptan ODT, zolmitriptan ODT, and eletriptan tablets were associated with the most favorable outcomes. INTERPRETATION/CONCLUSIONS: Triptans are effective for migraine relief. Standard dose triptans are associated with better outcomes than ergots, and most triptans are associated with equal or better outcomes compared with NSAIDs, ASA, and acetaminophen. Use of triptans in combination with ASA or acetaminophen, or using alternative modes of administration such as injectables, may be associated with slightly better outcomes than standard dose triptan tablets.

Induction of cell cycle arrest, DNA damage, and apoptosis by nimbolide in human renal cell carcinoma cells.

Nimbolide is a tetranortriterpenoid isolated from the leaves and flowers of Azadirachta indica which has been shown to exhibit anticancer, antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, and anti-invasive properties in a variety of cancer cells. However, the anti-tumor effect on human renal cell carcinoma (RCC) cells is unknown. In this study, we found that nimbolide treatment had a cytotoxic effect on 786-O and A-498 RCC cells in a dose-dependent manner. According to flow cytometric analysis, nimbolide treatment resulted in G2/M arrest in 786-O and A-498 cells accompanied with an increase in the phosphorylation status of p53, cdc2, cdc25c, and decreased expressions of cyclin A, cyclin B, cdc2, and cdc25c. Nimbolide also caused DNA damage in a dose-dependent manner as determined by comet assay and measurement of γ-H2AX. In addition, apoptotic cells were observed in an Annexin V-FITC/propidium iodide double-stained assay. The activities of caspase-3, -9, and poly ADP-ribose polymerase (PARP) were increased, and the expression of pro-caspase-8 was decreased in nimbolide-treated 786-O and A-498 cells. Western blot analysis revealed that the levels of intrinsic-related apoptotic proteins Bax and extrinsic-related proteins (DR5, CHOP) were significantly increased in nimbolide-treated 786-O and A-498 cells. In addition, the expressions of Bcl-2 and Mcl-1 were decreased in 786-O and A-498 cells after nimbolide treatment. We conclude that nimbolide can inhibit the growth of human RCC cells by inducing G2/M phase arrest by modulating cell cycle-related proteins and cell apoptosis by regulating intrinsic and extrinsic caspase signaling pathways. Nimbolide may be a promising therapeutic strategy for the treatment of RCC.

Comparative effectiveness of different forms of telemedicine for individuals with heart failure (HF): a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies on telemedicine have either focused on its role in the management of chronic diseases in general or examined its effectiveness in comparison to standard post-discharge care. Little has been done to determine the comparative impact of different telemedicine options for a specific population such as individuals with heart failure (HF). METHODS AND FINDINGS: Systematic reviews (SR) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that examined telephone support, telemonitoring, video monitoring or electrocardiographic monitoring for HF patients were identified using a comprehensive search of the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and The Cochrane Library. Studies were included if they reported the primary outcome of mortality or any of the following secondary outcomes: all-cause hospitalization and heart failure hospitalization. Thirty RCTs (N = 10,193 patients) were included. Compared to usual care, structured telephone support was found to reduce the odds of mortality(Odds Ratio 0.80; 95% Credible Intervals [0.66 to 0.96]) and hospitalizations due to heart failure (0.69; [0.56 to 0.85]). Telemonitoring was also found to reduce the odds of mortality(0.53; [0.36 to 0.80]) and reduce hospitalizations related to heart failure (0.64; [0.39 to 0.95]) compared to usual post-discharge care. Interventions that involved ECG monitoring also reduced the odds of hospitalization due to heart failure (0.71; [0.52 to 0.98]). LIMITATIONS: Much of the evidence currently available has focused on the comparing either telephone support or telemonitoring with usual care. This has therefore limited our current understanding of how some of the less common forms of telemedicine compare to one another. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to usual care, structured telephone support and telemonitoring significantly reduced the odds of deaths and hospitalization due to heart failure. Despite being the most widely studied forms of telemedicine, little has been done to directly compare these two interventions against one another. Further research into their comparative cost-effectiveness is also warranted.

Fisetin suppresses ADAM9 expression and inhibits invasion of glioma cancer cells through increased phosphorylation of ERK1/2.

Fisetin (3,3',4',7-tetrahydroxyflavone) is a naturally occurring flavonoid which is widely distributed in plants. It has been reported to possess some anticancer and anti-invasive capabilities. We set out to explore the effects of fisetin on antimetastatic and its mechanism of action in GBM8401 cells. The results indicated that fisetin exhibited effective inhibition of cell migration and inhibited the invasion of GBM8401 cells under non-cytotoxic concentrations. To identify the potential targets of fisetin, human proteinase antibody array analysis was performed, and the results indicated that the fisetin treatment inhibited the expression of ADAM9 protein and mRNA, which are known to contribute to the progression of glioma cancer. Our results showed that fisetin phosphorylated ERK1/2 in a sustained way that contributed to the inhibited ADAM9 protein and mRNA expression determined by Western blot and RT-PCR. Moreover, inhibition of ERK1/2 by U0126 or transfection with the siERK plasmid significantly abolished the fisetin-inhibited migration and invasion through activation of the ERK1/2 pathway. In summary, our results suggest that fisetin might be a potential therapeutic agent against human glioma cells based on its capacity to activate ERK1/2 and to inhibit ADAM9 expression.

Metformin inhibits the invasion of human hepatocellular carcinoma cells and enhances the chemosensitivity to sorafenib through a downregulation of the ERK/JNK-mediated NF-κB-dependent pathway that reduces uPA and MMP-9 expression.

Metformin has been shown to exert anti-cancer activities in several cancer cells and animal models. However, the molecular mechanisms of its anti-metastatic activities remain poorly understood and warrant further investigation. The aims of this study were to evaluate the ability of metformin to inhibit the migration and invasion of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) cells and identify its effects on signaling pathways. Our data indicate that metformin inhibits the migration and invasion of human HCC cells. Metformin was also found to significantly inhibit the expression and secretion of MMP-9 and uPA in HCC cells, and suppress the phosphorylation of ERK1/2 and JNK1/2. Treatment with an ERK1/2 inhibitor (PD98059) or JNK1/2 inhibitor (SP600125) enhanced the inhibitory effects of metformin on the migration and invasion of HCC cells. Moreover, metformin-induced inhibition of MMP-9 and uPA promoter activity also blocked the nuclear translocation of NF-κB and its binding to the MMP-9 and uPA promoters, and these suppressive effects were further enhanced by PD98059 or SP600125. Moreover, metformin markedly enhanced the anti-metastatic effects of sorafenib. In conclusion, metformin inhibits the migration and invasion of HCC cells by suppressing the ERK/JNK-mediated NF-κB-dependent pathway, and thereby reducing uPA and MMP-9 expression. Additionally, combination treatment with metformin and sorafenib yielded synergistic inhibitory effects in suppressing cell migration and invasion of HCC cells. These findings provide insight into the molecular mechanisms involved in the anti-metastatic effects of metformin, as well as its ability to enhance the chemosensitivity of HCC cells to sorafenib.

Licochalcone A inhibits the migration and invasion of human lung cancer cells via inactivation of the Akt signaling pathway with downregulation of MMP-1/-3 expression.

Licochalcone A (LicA), a major phenolic constituent of Glycyrrhiza inflata, has been reported to exhibit anti-tumor, anti-inflammatory, and anti-metastatic properties in various cancer cells and animal models. The aim of this study was to determine the anti-tumor effects of LicA on lung cancer cells. The results indicated that LicA exhibited effective inhibition of cell migration and invasion of A549 and H460 cells under non-cytotoxic concentrations. Furthermore, LicA was also found to significantly inhibit the proteins and messenger RNA (mRNA) expression of MMP-1 and MMP-3 in A549 cells. Moreover, treatment of A549 cells with LicA-inhibited activation of the phosphorylation of Akt and inhibition of Akt by LY294002 (PI3K inhibitor) or transfection with the constitutive active-Akt (CA-Akt) expression vector significantly abolished the LicA-inhibited migration and invasion through activation of the Akt pathway. Further mechanistic studies revealed that LicA inhibits Akt signaling pathways and downstream transcription factors Sp1 expression. These findings imply a critical role for Akt inhibition in the LicA-inhibited migration and invasion of lung cancer cells. Thus, LicA might be used as an anti-invasive agent in the treatment of lung cancer.