Mechanisms and Application of Gas-Based Anticancer Therapies.

Cancer is still one of the major factors threatening public health, with morbidity and mortality rates at the forefront of the world. Clinical drawbacks, such as high toxicity and side effects of drug therapy, and easy recurrence after surgery affect its therapeutic effect. Gas signaling molecules are essential in maintaining biological homeostasis and physiological functions as specific chemical substances for biological information transfer. In recent years, the physiological regulatory functions of gas molecules in the cancer process have been gradually revealed and have shown broad application prospects in tumor therapy. In this paper, standard gas therapies are classified and introduced. Taking H2, CO2, NO, CO, H2S, and SO2 gases as examples, the research progress and application of gas therapies in malignant tumors are mainly introduced in terms of biological characteristics, anticancer mechanisms, and treatment strategies. Finally, the problems and prospects for developing gases as anticancer drugs are outlined.

Developmental Cardiotoxicity and Hepatotoxicity of Flurbiprofen Axetil to Zebrafish Embryo.

Flurbiprofen axetil (FA) is a nonsteroidal targeted analgesic and widely used for postoperative analgesia and cancer analgesia. Extensive works have been done in the evaluation of FA's clinical analgesic effect on adults. Along with the increase of FA usage, the potential toxicity and molecular mechanism in embryo development need to be better understood. In this article, multiple embryonic development indexes of zebrafish were introduced to evaluate the FA toxicity to provide clinical guidance for gravidas medicine. We performed a zebrafish embryo toxicity (ZFET) test by exposing embryos to a series of concentration gradients of FA medium starting from 24 hours postfertilization (hpf). The mortality rate, hatching rate, and malformation rate of drug-treated zebrafish were assessed at 72, 96, and 120 hpf. Effects of ≤10% lethal concentration (LC10) of FA on embryogenesis were evaluated by eye area, body length, and yolk sac area. A 0.5 µg/mL or fewer FA treatment did not show any adverse effects, but the LC10 FA significantly caused zebrafish malformation. Organ disorders, including slow heart rate, enlarged pericardium, and liver atrophy, were found in the dysplasia individuals when compared with control. TUNEL assay suggested that apoptotic cells in malformation embryos were produced by FA and the increasing dosage exacerbated apoptosis. Quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction revealed that expressions of cardiac development-associated transcription factors, liver development-related genes, and apoptosis regulating genes were aberrant. These results indicate that the ZFET can be applied in the FA toxicity test, and a low lethal dose of FA is harmful to zebrafish embryogenesis, especially in embryo carcinogenesis and hepatogenesis.

Use of intravenous lidocaine for dose reduction of propofol in paediatric colonoscopy patients: a randomised placebo-controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Propofol, a widely used sedative in endoscopic procedures, sometimes causes cardiopulmonary complications. Intravenous lidocaine can diminish visceral pain and decrease the dose of propofol. The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of intravenous lidocaine in reducing propofol dosage during paediatric colonoscopy. METHODS: Forty children who underwent colonoscopy were divided into two groups. Lidocaine hydrochloride (1.5 mg/kg induction and 2 mg/kg/h maintenance) was given intravenously to the lidocaine group, and the same amount of saline was given to the control group after they received lidocaine induction. Propofol initial plasma concentration of 5 µg/mL was targeted, and the procedure was performed after the bispectral index value reached 55. The primary outcome was propofol requirement. RESULTS: The propofol requirement in the lidocaine group was decreased by 35.5% (128.6 ± 30.4 mg vs. 199.4 ± 57.6 mg; p < 0.001; 95%CI: - 100.60, - 41.02). The incidence of involuntary body movements was significantly lower in the lidocaine group (p = 0.028; OR = 0.17; 95%CI: 0.03, 0.92). The awakening time (p < 0.001; 95%CI: - 7.67, - 5.13) and recovery times (p < 0.001; 95%CI: - 7.45, - 4.35) were significantly lower in the lidocaine group. Pain was significantly less at 30 min and 60 min after the procedure in the lidocaine group (0 [0-4] vs. 3 [0-5], p < 0. 001; 0 [0-2] vs. 1 [0-3], p = 0.001). There was no difference in the incidence of bradycardia, hypotension, or hypoxia between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: For colonoscopy procedures in paediatric patients, intravenous lidocaine reduces the amount of propofol needed, provides better sedation and postprocedural pain management, as well as a reduction in recovery time. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered on November 6, 2020 at China Clinical Trials Registration Center ( www.chictr.org.cn ) ref.: ChiCTR 2,000,039,706.

Remifentanil patient-controlled versus epidural analgesia on intrapartum maternal fever: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Intravenous remifentanil patient-controlled analgesia (RPCA) is an alternative for epidural analgesia (EA) in labor pain relief. However, it remains unknown whether RPCA is superior to EA in decreasing the risk of intrapartum maternal fever during labor. METHODS: According to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, a systematic review and meta-analysis was performed by searching PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception to April 2019. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the risk of intrapartum maternal fever with RPCA compared with EA alone or EA in combination with spinal analgesia during labor were included. RESULTS: A total of 825 studies were screened, and 6 RCTs including 3341 patients were identified. Compared with EA, RPCA was associated with a significantly lower incidence of intrapartum maternal fever (risk ratio [RR] 0.48, P = 0.02, I2 = 49%) during labor analgesia. After excluding 2 trials via the heterogeneity analysis, there was no difference in the incidence of intrapartum fever between patients receiving RPCA and those receiving EA. Satisfaction with pain relief during labor was lower in the RPCA group than that in the EA group (- 10.6 [13.87, - 7.44], P < 0.00001, I2 = 0%). The incidence of respiratory depression was significantly greater in the RPCA group than that in the EA group (risk ratio 2.86 [1.65, 4.96], P = 0.0002, I2 = 58%). The incidence of Apgar scores < 7 at 5 min in the RPCA group was equivalent to that in the EA group. CONCLUSION: There is no solid evidence to illustrate that the incidence of intrapartum maternal fever is lower in patients receiving intravenous RPCA than in patients receiving EA.