An anoikis-related lncRNA signature is a useful tool for predicting the prognosis of patients with lung adenocarcinoma.

Background: Anoikis-related long non-coding RNAs (ARLs) play a critical role in tumor metastasis and progression, suggesting that they may serve as risk markers for cancer. This study aimed to investigate the prognostic value of ARLs in patients with lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD). Methods: Clinical data, RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) data, and mutation data from the LUAD project were obtained from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) database. The Molecular Signatures Database (MSigDB) and the GeneCard database were used to collect an anoikis-related gene (ARG) set. Pearson correlation analysis was performed to identify ARLs. LASSO and Cox regression were then used to establish a prognostic risk signature for ARLs. The median risk score served as the basis for categorizing patients into high and low-risk groups. Kaplan-Meier analysis was utilized to compare the prognosis between these two groups. The study also examined the associations between risk scores and prognosis, clinicopathological characteristics, immune status, tumor mutation burden (TMB), and chemotherapeutic agents. LncRNA expression was assessed using quantitative real-time PCR (qRT-PCR). Results: A total of 480 RNA expression profiles, 501 ARGs, and 2698 ARLs were obtained from the database. A prognostic ARL signature for LUAD was established, consisting of 9 lncRNAs. Patients in the low-risk group exhibited significantly better prognosis compared to those in the high-risk group (P < 0.001). The 9 lncRNAs from the ARL signature were identified as independent prognostic factors (P < 0.001). The signature demonstrated high accuracy in predicting LUAD prognosis, with area under the curve values exceeding 0.7. The risk scores for ARLs showed strong negative correlations with stroma score (P = 5.9E-07, R = -0.23), immune score (P = 9.7E-09, R = -0.26), and microenvironment score (P = 8E-11, R = -0.29). Additionally, the low-risk group exhibited significantly higher TMB compared to the high-risk group (P = 4.6E-05). High-risk status was significantly associated with lower half-maximal inhibitory concentrations for most chemotherapeutic drugs. Conclusion: This newly constructed signature based on nine ARLs is a useful instrument for the risk stratification of LUAD patients. The signature has potential clinical significance for predicting the prognosis of LUAD patients and guiding personalized immunotherapy.

Diagnostic performance of microRNAs in testicular germ cell tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

The sensitivity (Sen) of classic biomarkers for the diagnosis of testicular germ cell tumors (TGCTs) is currently low. Previous studies have shown the diagnostic potential of microRNAs (miRNAs) for TGCTs; however, the results of these studies are inconsistent. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate their diagnostic value. PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were systematically searched until September 30, 2020 and 18 trials from 11 studies involving 2,068 participants were included in this meta-analysis. Using a bivariate mixed-effects meta-analysis model, the pooled Sen, specificity (Spe), positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and area under the curve (AUC) with 95% confidence interval values of total miRNAs were 0.83 (0.73-0.90), 0.95 (0.89-0.98), 15.79 (7.41-33.66), 0.18 (0.11-0.29), 87.13 (41.99-180.82), and 0.95 (0.93-0.97), respectively; however, the observed values of single miR-371a-3p were 0.84 (0.76-0.90), 0.95 (0.91-0.98), 18.41 (9.69-34.97), 0.17 (0.11-0.26), 111.56 (47.72-260.80), and 0.97 (0.95-0.98), respectively. Subgroup analysis revealed that miRNAs that included miR-371a-3p showed higher predictive performance than those that did not (P < 0.05). This research identified that miR-371a-3p has a high diagnostic value for TGCTs, except teratoma.

Value of Xpert MTB/RIF Using Bronchoalveolar Lavage Fluid for the Diagnosis of Pulmonary Tuberculosis: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

The performance of Xpert MTB/RIF using bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BAL) for the diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis (PTB) remains unclear. Therefore, a systematic review/meta-analysis was conducted. Studies published before 31 December 2019 were retrieved from the PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases using the keywords "pulmonary tuberculosis," "Xpert MTB/RIF," and "BAL." Two independent evaluators extracted the data and assessed the bias risk of the included studies. A random-effects model was used to calculate the overall sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratios (PLR and NLR, respectively), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and the area under the curve (AUC), as well as the respective 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Nineteen trials involving 3,019 participants met the inclusion criteria. Compared to the culture method, the pooled sensitivity, specificity, PLR, NLR, DOR, and the AUC with 95% CIs of Xpert MTB/RIF were 0.87 (0.84 to 0.90), 0.92 (0.91 to 0.93), 10.21 (5.78 to 18.02), 0.16 (0.12 to 0.22), 78.95 (38.59 to 161.53), and 0.9467 (0.9462 to 0.9472), respectively. Relative to the composite reference standard, the observed values were 0.69 (0.65 to 0.72), 0.98 (0.98 to 0.99), 37.50 (18.59 to 75.62), 0.30 (0.21 to 0.43), 171.98 (80.82 to 365.96), and 0.9691 (0.9683 to 0.9699), respectively. All subgroups, except children, showed high sensitivity and specificity. In conclusion, the use of Xpert MTB/RIF in the context of BAL samples has a high diagnostic performance for PTB (except for children) and may serve as an alternative rapid diagnostic tool.

Systematic review of the registered clinical trials for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

BACKGROUND: Since the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), many researchers in China have performed related clinical research. However, systematic reviews of the registered clinical trials are still lacking. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review of clinical trials for COVID-19 to summarize their characteristics. METHODS: This study is based on the PRISMA recommendations in the Cochrane handbook. The Chinese Clinical Registration Center and the ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched to identify registered clinical trials related to COVID-19. The retrieval inception date was February 9, 2020. Two researchers independently selected the literature based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria, extracted data, and evaluated the risk of bias. RESULTS: A total of 75 registered clinical trials (63 interventional studies and 12 observational studies) for COVID-19 were identified. The majority of clinical trials were sponsored by Chinese hospitals. Only 11 trials have begun to recruit patients, and none of the registered clinical trials have been completed; 34 trials were early clinical exploratory trials or in the pre-experiment stage, 13 trials were phase III, and four trials were phase IV. The intervention methods included traditional Chinese medicine in 26 trials, Western medicine in 30 trials, and integrated traditional Chinese medicine and Western medicine in 19 trials. The subjects were primarily non-critical adult patients (≥ 18 years old). The median sample size of the trials was 100 (IQR: 60-200), and the median length of the trial periods was 179 d (IQR: 94-366 d). The main outcomes were clinical observation and examinations. Overall, the methodological quality of both the interventional trials and observational studies was low. CONCLUSIONS: Intensive clinical trials on the treatment of COVID-19 using traditional Chinese medicine and Western medicine are ongoing or will be performed in China. However, based on the uncertain methodological quality, small sample size, and long trial duration, we will not be able to obtain reliable, high-quality clinical evidence regarding the treatment of COVID-19 in the near future. Improving the quality of study design, prioritizing promising drugs, and using different designs and statistical methods are worth advocating and recommending for clinical trials of COVID-19 in the future.

Use of thiazide diuretics for the prevention of recurrent kidney calculi: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Thiazide diuretics reduce the risk of recurrent kidney calculi in patients with kidney calculi or hypercalciuria. However, whether thiazide diuretics can definitely prevent recurrent kidney calculi remains unclear. We aimed to evaluate the effect and safety of thiazide diuretics on recurrent kidney calculi. METHODS: The PubMed, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE databases were systematically searched using the keywords thiazide diuretics and kidney calculi to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The primary outcome was the incidence of recurrent kidney calculi, and the secondary outcome was the 24-h urinary calcium level. The pooled risk ratio (RR), risk difference (RD), standardized mean difference (SMD), and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated. The evidence quality was graded using the GRADE criteria, and recommendations for recurrent kidney calculus prevention using thiazide diuretics were reassessed. RESULTS: Eight RCTs involving 571 patients were included. The pooled RR for the incidence of kidney calculi in the thiazide diuretic groups was 0.44 (95% CI 0.33-0.58, P < 0.0001) compared to that in the placebo and untreated groups; the pooled RD was - 0.23 (95% CI - 0.30 to - 0.16, P < 0.0001). The pooled SMD for the 24-h urinary calcium level was - 18.59 (95% CI - 25.11 to - 12.08, P < 0.0001). The thiazide diuretic groups had a high incidence of adverse reactions and low tolerance. The evidence quality for decrease in kidney calculus incidence using thiazide diuretics was low, while that for the 24-h urinary calcium level decrease among those with recurrent kidney calculi was moderate, and that for the decrease in kidney calculus incidence using short-acting and long-acting thiazide diuretics was low. The overall strength of recommendation for prevention of recurrent renal calculi using thiazide diuretics was not recommended. The subgroup and sensitivity analysis findings were robust. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term use of thiazide diuretics reduces the incidence of recurrent renal calculi and 24-h urinary calcium level. However, the benefits are insufficient, and the evidence quality is low. Considering the adverse effects, poor patient compliance, and economic burden of long-term medication, their use in preventing recurrent kidney calculi is not recommended.