Duration of orthodontic treatment with clear aligners versus fixed appliances in crowding cases: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To critically appraise and assess the currently observed evidence about the difference in orthodontic treatment duration between clear aligners and fixed appliances in crowding cases. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An electronic search without limitations was conducted from inception to June 2023 covering nine databases: The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar, Trip, CINAHL via EBSCO, EMBASE via OVID and ProQuest. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and matched non-randomized studies were included in this systematic review. Risk of Bias was assessed via Cochrane's tool (RoB 2) for RCTs and ROBINS-I tool for non-randomized studies. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework was employed to evaluate the overall quality of evidence. RESULTS: Out of the 3537 articles initially identified, ten eligible studies were included in this systematic review; six were RCTs. Only one study offered extraction-based treatment, while the other nine adopted non-extraction treatments. According to the GRADE, there is low evidence that treatment duration in mild to moderate crowding cases with clear aligners is similar to that in fixed orthodontic appliances. Meta-analysis was not administered due to high inconsistency. CONCLUSIONS: Based on currently available information, there was no significant difference in the treatment duration between the CA and FA groups in mild to moderate crowding cases. Further well-performed RCTs, especially in severe cases, are required. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Time efficiency is an essential outcome measure for clinical orthodontic practice. While the type of appliance used is a critical determinant of treatment duration, orthodontists should be aware of other factors that can significantly impact treatment time, such as patient and treatment-related factors.

Associations of Valproate Doses With Weight Gain in Adult Psychiatric Patients: A 1-Year Prospective Cohort Study.

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate valproate dose association with weight change, blood glucose, lipid levels, and blood pressure in a psychiatric population.Methods: Data from 215 patients taking valproate for up to 1 year were collected from 2 longitudinal studies that monitored metabolic variables between 2007 and 2022. Linear mixed-effect models and logistic regressions were used to analyze the associations between valproate doses and metabolic outcomes.Results: An increase in valproate dose of 500 mg was associated with a weight change of +0.52% per month over a year (P < .001). The association between valproate dose and weight change was evident both before and after 3 months of treatment. Weight increase was greater for treatment durations of < 3 months compared to ≥ 3 months (+0.56%, P < .001 and +0.12%, P = .02 per month, respectively). Using piecewise regression, a significant association between dose and weight gain was observed in patients receiving doses equal to or above the median dose (1,300 mg/d), with a +0.50% increase in weight for each dose increment of 500 mg (P = .004). Among men, each 500 mg dose increment was associated with weight increases of +0.59% per month (P = .004), whereas a trend was observed for women (+0.40%, P = .09). No associations were found between valproate doses and blood glucose, lipid levels, or blood pressure over a 6-month treatment period.Conclusions: This study provides evidence that valproate dose, mainly for doses at or above 1,300 mg/d, is associated with weight gain in psychiatric patients, suggesting that the lowest effective doses should be prescribed to minimize weight gain.

Clinical outcomes of narrow- and regular-diameter implants with bone augmentation in the anterior maxilla: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the clinical outcomes of narrow-diameter implants (NDIs) and regular-diameter implants (RDIs) with bone augmentation in the anterior maxilla, with implant survival rate (ISR) as the primary outcome. Additionally, secondary outcomes such as peri-implant marginal bone loss (MBL), pocket probing depth (PPD), mechanical complications, and biological complications were also considered. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A thorough literature search was performed to identify randomized controlled trials and cohort studies comparing outcomes of NDIs and RDIs with bone augmentation in the anterior maxilla published up to February 2024. Only studies with a minimum follow-up period of 12 months were selected for analysis. Meta-analysis was performed if at least two articles with similar characteristics were available. RESULTS: Of the 288 articles initially considered, 5 were included in the analysis, involving 282 NDIs and 100 RDIs. At the 36-month follow-up, no statistically significant differences in ISR, which ranged 93.8-100% for NDIs and were 100% for RDIs, were observed between the two groups (relative risk, 0.989; 95% confidence interval, 0.839-1.165; p = 0.896). Similarly, MBL and PPD did not differ significantly between the two groups. Soft tissue dehiscence was the most common complication found in RDIs. CONCLUSION: The results indicate that NDIs yield clinical outcomes similar to those of RDIs with bone augmentation in the anterior maxilla over a 36-month follow-up period. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Considering the similar clinical outcomes, the shortened treatment duration and more rapid esthetic improvement associated with NDIs may render them preferrable to RDIs with bone augmentation, particularly in this esthetic zone.

Is there a prospective association between psychological distress as measured by the CORE-OM and treatment attendance and treatment duration? A follow-up study at a Norwegian Community Mental Health Centre.

BACKGROUND: Feasible and reliable methods for identifying factors associated with treatment duration and treatment attendance in mental health services are needed. This study examined to what degree the Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation-Outcome Measure (CORE-OM) at the start of treatment is associated with treatment attendance and treatment duration. METHODS: Outpatients (N = 124) at a community mental health centre in Norway completed the 34-item CORE-OM questionnaire addressing the domains of subjective well-being, problems and symptoms, functioning and risk at the start of treatment. The CORE-OM subscales and the 'all' items total scale were used as predictor variables in regression models, with treatment duration, number of consultations attended, treatment attendance (number of therapy sessions attended divided by number of sessions offered) and termination of treatment (planned versus unplanned) as outcome variables. RESULTS: Higher CORE-OM subscale scores and the 'all' scale were associated with longer treatment duration. No association was found between CORE-OM scales and number of therapy sessions, treatment attendance (sessions attended/offered) or whether the patients unexpectedly ended treatment. CONCLUSION: Higher patient-reported psychological distress as measured by the CORE-OM at the start of treatment was prospectively associated with treatment duration but not with treatment attendance or drop-out of treatment. The findings imply that patients with higher initial psychological distress need longer treatment but that treatment attendance may be related to factors other than the severity of distress.

Efficacy and safety of alcohol reduction pharmacotherapy according to treatment duration in patients with alcohol dependence or alcohol use disorder: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Relapse is common in alcohol dependence (AD) and alcohol use disorder (AUD), so alcohol reduction therapy should be measured over as long a period as possible; however, existing reviews do not consider the duration of treatment and therefore alcohol reduction therapy may not have been appropriately evaluated. This review evaluated the efficacy and safety of alcohol reduction pharmacotherapy in patients with AD or AUD according to the duration of treatment. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed 15 pharmacological agents. MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the ClinicalTrials.gov and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched for eligible trials through to May 2021. Outcomes were heavy drinking days (HDD), total alcohol consumption (TAC), any adverse event and days without drinking. RESULTS: Fifty-five RCTs (n = 8891) were included. Nalmefene was superior to placebo for reducing HDD (standard mean difference [SMD] -0.28, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.37, -0.18) and TAC (SMD -0.25, 95% CI -0.35, -0.16) in the long-term, but not in the short-term. Topiramate was superior to placebo for reducing HDD (SMD -0.35, 95% CI -0.59, -0.12) and days without drinking (SMD 0.46, 95% CI 0.11, 0.82), and baclofen was superior for reducing TAC (SMD -0.70, 95% CI -1.29, -0.11), in the short-term. The frequency of adverse events was higher with nalmefene and topiramate than with placebo. CONCLUSION: Nalmefene, topiramate and baclofen may be effective as alcohol reduction pharmacotherapy; however, only nalmefene has demonstrated long-term efficacy, and nalmefene and topiramate have a significantly higher frequency of adverse events compared with placebo.

Impact of Opioid Use on Duration of Therapy and Overall Survival for Patients with Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Treated with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have significantly improved outcomes in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We evaluated the effect of opioid use on outcomes in patients receiving ICI either alone or with chemotherapy. We conducted a retrospective review of 209 patients with advanced NSCLC who received an ICI at the University of Virginia between 1 February 2015 and 1 January 2020. We performed univariate and multivariate analyses to evaluate the impact of opioid use on duration of therapy (DOT) and overall survival (OS). Patients with no or low opioid use (n = 172) had a median DOT of 12.2 months (95% CI: 6.9-17.4) compared to 1.9 months (95% CI: 1.8-2.0) for those with high opioid use (n = 37, HR 0.26 95% CI: 0.17-0.40, p < 0.001). Patients with no or low opioid use had a median OS of 22.6 months (95% CI: 14.8-30.4) compared to 3.8 months (95% CI: 2.7-4.9) for those with high opioid use (HR 0.26 95% CI: 0.17-0.40 p < 0.001). High opioid use was associated with a shorter DOT and worse OS. This difference remained significant when accounting for possible confounding variables. These data warrant investigation of possible mechanistic interactions between opioids, tumor progression, and ICIs, as well as prospective evaluation of opioid-sparing pain management strategies, where possible.

Impact of a Best Practices Program in Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma Receiving Selinexor.

Best practice (BP) in cancer care consists of a multifaceted approach comprising individualized treatment plans, evidence-based medicine, the optimal use of supportive care and patient education. We investigated the impact of a BP program in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) receiving selinexor. Features of the BP program that were specific to selinexor were initiating selinexor at doses ≤80 mg once weekly and the upfront use of standardized antiemetics. Study endpoints included time to treatment failure (TTF), duration of therapy, dose limiting toxicities and overall survival. Comparative analysis on TTF and duration of therapy was conducted using a log-rank test and multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression. Over the ensuing 12-month post-BP period, 41 patients received selinexor-based therapy compared to 68 patients who received selinexor-based therapy pre-BP implementation. Patients treated in the post-BP period had reductions in TTF (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.50; 95% CI: 0.27 to 0.92). Patients in the pre-BP period were four times more likely to stop therapy than those in the post-period (odds ratio [OR] = 4.0, 95% CI: 1.75 to 9.3). The findings suggest a BP program tailored to selinexor could increase the time to treatment failure, increase treatment duration and lower the incidence of drug limiting toxicities.

Comparison of positional distraction with stabilisation exercises versus stabilisation exercises alone in the management of lumbar radiculopathy: A randomized controlled-trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of positional distraction with stabilisation exercises versus stabilisation exercises alone in the management of lumbar radiculopathy. METHODS: The randomised controlled trial was conducted from July to December 2020 at the Institute of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Dow University of Health Sciences, and the Neurosurgery ward of Civil Hospital, Karachi, and comprised individuals of either gender with lumbar radiculopathy pain who were randomised into positional distraction with stabilisation exercises group A and stabilisation exercise group B. The treatment duration was 3 sessions per week for 8 weeks. Intensity of pain and disability were assessed using the Visual Analogue Scale and the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire, respectively. Data was analysed using SPSS 21. RESULTS: Of the 100 patients, 63(63%) were males and 37(37%) were females. Overall, 89(89%) were married. There were 50(50%) subjects in group A with mean age 39.42±6.36 years and 50(%) in group B with mean age 38.80±6.69 years. There was no significant difference in terms of age, gender and marital status between the groups (p>0.05). The study was completed by 96(96%) patients; 48(50%) in each of the 2 groups. Intragroup improvement post-intervention compared to baseline was significant (p<0.001) in both groups. Outcomes in group A were significantly better than in group B (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Addition of positional distraction to stabilisation exercises was found to have superior effects compared to stabilisation exercise alone on pain and functional disability among patients with lumbar radiculopathy. Clinical Trial Number: NCT04427423 dated 27th April 2020.

Baseline characteristics may impact treatment duration of cabazitaxel in patients with mCRPC: a subanalysis of data from a post-marketing surveillance.

OBJECTIVE: Cabazitaxel has demonstrated improvements in overall survival among patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) in the pivotal comparison clinical trials TROPIC, PROSELICA and CARD. However, these trials include mCRPC patients with similar characteristics, and there are limited data on how baseline characteristics affect treatment discontinuation in the patient population. METHODS: To assess individual factors that may impact the discontinuation rate of cabazitaxel treatment, we conducted a post hoc analysis of data from a nationwide all-case, post-marketing surveillance of cabazitaxel in Japan. Patients were grouped according to the number of cabazitaxel treatment cycles received (1-2 and ≥3 cycles). Predictive factors were identified through multivariate logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Across 660 patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, 70.2% received ≥3 cycles of cabazitaxel treatment. Those receiving 1-2 cycles of cabazitaxel had a greater proportion of patients with poorer Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status, presence of lung and liver metastases, higher prostate-specific antigen level and prior radiation therapy at baseline. Regardless of the number of cabazitaxel cycles received, the primary reason for discontinuation was progression of disease rather than adverse events. Compared with those receiving 1-2 cycles, a lower proportion of patients receiving 3-10 and ≥11 cycles of cabazitaxel treatment experienced adverse events. Multivariate analysis showed a significant association between early discontinuation and presence of liver lesions, poorer Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status and higher prostate-specific antigen level at baseline. CONCLUSIONS: Post-marketing surveillance data suggest physicians should individualize cabazitaxel treatment based on certain patient characteristics at baseline.

Questioning the 14-day dogma in candidemia treatment duration.

The growing threat of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a global concern. With AMR directly causing 1.27 million deaths in 2019 and projections of up to 10 million annual deaths by 2050, optimising infectious disease treatments is imperative. Prudent antimicrobial use, including treatment duration, can mitigate AMR emergence. This is particularly critical in candidemia, a severe condition with a 45% crude mortality rate, as the 14-day minimum treatment period has not been challenged in randomised comparison. A comprehensive literature search was conducted in August 2023, revealing seven original articles and two case series discussing treatment durations of less than 14 days for candidemia. No interventional trials or prospective observational studies assessing shorter durations were found. Historical studies showed varying candidemia treatment durations, questioning the current 14-day minimum recommendation. Recent research observed no significant survival differences between patients receiving shorter or longer treatment, emphasising the need for evidence-based guidance. Treatment duration reduction post-blood culture clearance could decrease exposure to antifungal drugs, limiting selection pressure, especially in the context of emerging multiresistant Candida species. Candidemia's complexity, emerging resistance and potential for shorter in-hospital stays underscore the urgency of refining treatment strategies. Evidence-driven candidemia treatment durations are imperative to balance efficacy with resistance prevention and ensure the longevity of antifungal therapies. Further research and clinical trials are needed to establish evidence-based guidelines for candidemia treatment duration.

Stem cell-derived conditioned medium for alopecia: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Alopecia is a common and distressing medical condition that has been related to psychiatric disorders. Stem cell-derived conditioned medium (CM), a novel therapy for hair regeneration, has shown effectiveness in several trials. METHODS: This meta-analysis aims to explore the effectiveness of stem cell-derived CM in improving hair growth for patients of alopecia. We prospectively registered this systematic review and meta-analysis in PROSPERO (CRD42023410249). Clinical trials that the enrolled participants suffering from alopecia applied stem cell-derived CM were included. We calculated the mean and standard deviation for the hair density and thickness. RESULTS: Ten clinical trials were included in our analysis. On the basis of eight clinical trials (n = 221), our pooled results indicate that stem cell-derived CM is effective in increasing hair density (mean difference [MD]: 14.93, confidence interval [95% CI]: 10.20-19.67, p < 0.0001) and thickness (MD: 18.67, 95% CI: 2.75-34.59, p < 0.0001) (µm) in patients with alopecia. Moreover, our findings suggest that longer treatment duration is associated with significantly greater improvement than shorter treatment duration (p = 0.02). Three of the included studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and when we specifically analyzed these RCTs; statistical significance could also be observed in terms of hair density (MD: 9.23, 95% CI: 1.79-16.68, p < 0.00001). KEY MESSAGES: Stem cell-derived conditioned medium can effectively increase hair density and thickness for alopecia, and there is no difference between each method (topical application, microneedling, or injection).

Emulating a Target Trial of Shorter Compared to Longer Course of Antibiotic Therapy for Gram-Negative Bacteremia.

BACKGROUND: Despite the availability of antimicrobial therapies, gram-negative bacteremia remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality on a global level. Recent randomized controlled trials support shorter antibiotic treatment duration for individuals with uncomplicated gram-negative bacteremia. The target trial framework using the cloning approach utilizes real-world data but eliminates the issue of immortal time bias seen in observational studies by emulating the analysis of randomized trials with full adherence. METHOD: A hypothetical target trial allocating individuals with gram-negative bacteremia to either short antibiotic treatment duration (5-7 days) or longer antibiotic treatment duration (8-14 days) was specified and emulated using the cloning, censoring, and weighting approach. The primary outcome was 90-day all-cause mortality. Secondary outcome was a composite endpoint of clinical and microbiological relapse. The emulated trial included individuals from four hospitals in Copenhagen from 2018 through 2021. RESULTS: In sum, 1040 individuals were included. The median age of the cohort was 76 years, the majority were male (54%), had community-acquired gram-negative bacteremia (86%), urinary tract infection as the source of the infection (78%), and Escherichia coli as the pathogen of the infection (73%). The adjusted 90-day risk difference in all-cause mortality was 1.3% (95% confidence interval [CI]: -.7, 3.3), and the risk ratio was 1.12 (95% CI: .89, 1.37). The adjusted 90-day risk difference in relapse was 0.7% (95% CI: -2.3, 3.8), and the risk ratio was 1.07 (95% CI: .71, 1.45). CONCLUSIONS: We found comparative outcomes for shorter treatment duration compared to longer treatment duration in patients with gram-negative bacteremia.

Prognosis of prosthetic valve infective endocarditis due to Streptococcus spp., a retrospective multi-site study to assess the impact of antibiotic treatment duration.

PURPOSE: The duration of antibiotic treatment for prosthetic valve endocarditis caused by Streptococcus spp. is largely based on clinical observations and expert opinion rather than empirical studies. Here we assess the impact of a shorter antibiotic duration. OBJECTIVES: To assess the impact of antibiotic treatment duration for streptococcal prosthetic valve endocarditis on 12-month mortality as well as subsequent morbidity resulting in additional cardiac surgical interventions, and rates of relapse and reinfection. METHODS: This retrospective multisite (N= 3) study examines two decades of data on patients with streptococcal prosthetic valve endocarditis receiving either 4 or 6 weeks of antibiotics. Overall mortality, relapse, and reinfection rates were also assessed for the entire available follow-up period. RESULTS: The sample includes 121 patients (median age 72 years, IQR [53; 81]). The majority (74%, 89/121) received a ß-lactam antibiotic combined with aminoglycoside in 74% (89/121, median bi-therapy 5 days [1; 14]). Twenty-eight patients underwent surgery guided by ESC-guidelines (23%). The 12-month mortality rate was not significantly affected by antibiotic duration (4/40, 10% in the 4-week group vs 3/81, 3.7% in the 6-week group, p=0.34) or aminoglycoside usage (p=0.1). Similarly, there were no significant differences between the 2 treatment groups for secondary surgical procedures (7/40 vs 21/81, p=0.42), relapse or reinfection (1/40 vs 2/81 and 2/40 vs 5/81 respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Our study found no increased adverse outcomes associated with a 4-week antibiotic duration compared to the recommended 6-week regimen. Further randomized trials are needed to ascertain the optimal duration of treatment for streptococcal endocarditis.

Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Therapy Guided by Measurable Residual Disease.

BACKGROUND: The combination of ibrutinib and venetoclax has been shown to improve outcomes in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) as compared with chemoimmunotherapy. Whether ibrutinib-venetoclax and personalization of treatment duration according to measurable residual disease (MRD) is more effective than fludarabine-cyclophosphamide-rituximab (FCR) is unclear. METHODS: In this phase 3, multicenter, randomized, controlled, open-label platform trial involving patients with untreated CLL, we compared ibrutinib-venetoclax and ibrutinib monotherapy with FCR. In the ibrutinib-venetoclax group, after 2 months of ibrutinib, venetoclax was added for up to 6 years of therapy. The duration of ibrutinib-venetoclax therapy was defined by MRD assessed in peripheral blood and bone marrow and was double the time taken to achieve undetectable MRD. The primary end point was progression-free survival in the ibrutinib-venetoclax group as compared with the FCR group, results that are reported here. Key secondary end points were overall survival, response, MRD, and safety. RESULTS: A total of 523 patients were randomly assigned to the ibrutinib-venetoclax group or the FCR group. At a median of 43.7 months, disease progression or death had occurred in 12 patients in the ibrutinib-venetoclax group and 75 patients in the FCR group (hazard ratio, 0.13; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.07 to 0.24; P<0.001). Death occurred in 9 patients in the ibrutinib-venetoclax group and 25 patients in the FCR group (hazard ratio, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.15 to 0.67). At 3 years, 58.0% of the patients in the ibrutinib-venetoclax group had stopped therapy owing to undetectable MRD. After 5 years of ibrutinib-venetoclax therapy, 65.9% of the patients had undetectable MRD in the bone marrow and 92.7% had undetectable MRD in the peripheral blood. The risk of infection was similar in the ibrutinib-venetoclax group and the FCR group. The percentage of patients with cardiac serious adverse events was higher in the ibrutinib-venetoclax group than in the FCR group (10.7% vs. 0.4%). CONCLUSIONS: MRD-directed ibrutinib-venetoclax improved progression-free survival as compared with FCR, and results for overall survival also favored ibrutinib-venetoclax. (Funded by Cancer Research UK and others; FLAIR ISRCTN Registry number, ISRCTN01844152; EudraCT number, 2013-001944-76.).

Association of Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index With Adverse Event and Treatment Duration in Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Patients With Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND/AIM: In recent years, the Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI) has been reported as a predictor of prognosis in many patients with cancer. This study investigated the association of preoperative GNRI with the occurrence of adverse events and duration of treatment with capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (CAPOX), a postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy, in 59 patients with colorectal cancer from September 2019 to April 2022. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A cut-off value of 100.9 was used to categorize patients into high and low GNRI groups. RESULTS: The incidence of grade ≥2 leukopenia (p=0.03), and all grades peripheral neuropathy (p=0.04) were significantly more frequent in the low GNRI group. Analysis of factors influencing treatment duration by univariate and multivariate Cox regression proportional hazards models showed a significant difference in GNRI (p=0.0097). CONCLUSION: GNRI, a nutritional indicator assessed before the start of treatment, influences the occurrence of adverse events and duration of treatment with CAPOX as adjuvant chemotherapy. To complete CAPOX therapy, preoperatively, it is important to assess the patients' nutritional status using the GNRI and to actively intervene in nutritional therapy.