The Optimal Primary Treatment for Pediatric Perianal Abscess and Anal Fistula: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis

BackgroundPerianal abscesses and anal fistulas are common. The principle of intention-to-treat has not been considered in previous systemic reviews. Thus, the comparison between primary and post-recurrence management was confused, and the recommendation of primary treatment is obscure. The current study aims to identify the optimal initial treatment for pediatric patients.MethodsUsing PRISMA guidelines, studies were identified from MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar without any language or study design restriction. The inclusion criteria include original articles or articles with original data, studies of management for a perianal abscess with or without anal fistula, and patient age of <18 years. Patients with local malignancy, Crohn's disease, or other underlying predisposing conditions were excluded. Studies without analyzing recurrence, case series of <5, and irrelevant articles were excluded in the screening stage. Of the 124 screened articles, 14 articles had no full texts or detailed information. Articles written in a language other than English or Mandarin were translated by Google Translation first and confirmed with native speakers. After the eligibility process, studies that compared identified primary managements were then included in the qualitative synthesis.ResultsThirty-one studies involving 2507 pediatric patients met the inclusion criteria. The study design consisted of two prospective case series of 47 patients and retrospective cohort studies. No randomized control trials were identified. Meta-analyses for recurrence after initial management were performed with a random-effects model. Conservative treatment and drainage revealed no difference (Odds ratio [OR], 1.222; 95% Confidential interval [CI]: 0.615–2.427, p = 0.567). Conservative management had a higher risk of recurrence than surgery without statistical significance (OR 0.278, 95% CI: 0.109–0.707, p = 0.007). Compared with incision/drainage, surgery can prevent recurrence remarkably (OR 4.360, 95% CI: 1.761–10.792, p = 0.001). Subgroup analysis of different approaches within conservative treatment and operation was not performed for lacking information.ConclusionStrong recommendations cannot be made due to the lack of prospective or randomized controlled studies. However, the current study based on real primary management supports initial surgical intervention for pediatric patients with perianal abscesses and anal fistula to prevent recurrence.Level of evidenceType of study: Systemic review; Evidence level: Level II.     

Out of the boxes,out of the silos: The need of interdisciplinary collaboration to reduce poor-quality medical products in the supply chain

In this paper, we argue that understanding and addressing the problem of poor-quality medical products requires a more interdisciplinary approach than has been evident to date. While prospective studies based on rigorous standardized methodologies are the gold standard for measuring the prevalence of poor-quality medical products and understanding their distribution nationally and internationally, they should be complemented by social science research to unpack the complex set of social, economic, and governance factors that underlie these patterns. In the following sections, we discuss specific examples of prospective quality surveys and of social science studies, highlighting the value of cross-sector partnerships in driving high-quality, policy-relevant research in this area.     

Predicting Survival for Chimeric Antigen Receptor T-Cell Therapy: A Validation of Survival Models Using Follow-Up Data From ZUMA-1

ObjectivesSurvival extrapolation for chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapies is challenging, owing to their unique mechanistic properties that translate to complex hazard functions. Axicabtagene ciloleucel is indicated for the treatment of relapse or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma after 2 or more lines of therapy based on the ZUMA-1 trial. Four data snapshots are available, with minimum follow-up of 12, 24, 36, and 48 months. This analysis explores how survival extrapolations for axicabtagene ciloleucel using ZUMA-1 data can be validated and compared.MethodsThree different parametric modeling approaches were applied: standard parametric, spline-based, and cure-based models. Models were compared using a range of metrics, across the 4 data snapshot, including visual fit, plausibility of long-term estimates, statistical goodness of fit, inspection of hazard plots, point-estimate accuracy, and conditional survival estimates.ResultsStandard and spline-based parametric extrapolations were generally incapable of fitting the ZUMA-1 data well. Cure-based models provided the best fit based on the earliest data snapshot, with extrapolations remaining consistent as data matured. At 48 months, the maximum survival overestimate was 8.3% (Gompertz mixture-cure model) versus the maximum underestimate of 33.5% (Weibull standard parametric model).ConclusionsWhere a plateau in the survival curve is clinically plausible, cure-based models may be helpful in making accurate predictions based on immature data. The ability to reliably extrapolate from maturing data may reduce delays in patient access to potentially lifesaving treatments. Additional research is required to understand how models compare in broader contexts, including different treatments and therapeutic areas.     

中低度近视FS-LASIK、SMILE及ICL植入术的效果比较

目的比较飞秒激光制瓣准分子激光原位角膜磨镶术(FS-LASIK)、全飞秒激光小切口角膜基质透镜取出术(SMILE)和有晶状体眼后房型人工晶状体(ICL V4c)植入术三者矫正中低度近视的效果。方法采用回顾性研究。以惠州爱尔眼科医院2019年6月至2020年4月矫正中低度近视120例(120眼)作为研究对象,受术者分为FS-LASIK组、SMILE组及ICL组,每组40例(40眼),各组分别接受相应的手术,术后随访3个月比较其矫正效果。结果术后1个月及3个月,3组间视力及有效性指数对比差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);ICL组安全性指数高于SMILE组及FS-LASIK组(P<0.05)。术后3个月FS-LASIK组的三叶草像差、彗差和球差出现明显变化,而SMILE组的变化较小,ICL组变化最小(P<0.05)。结论对中低度近视FS-LASK、SMILE及ICL植入术三者均有确切疗效,而ICL V4c植入术的安全性最高,患者的视觉质量最好。     

Immunotherapy: A new standard in the treatment of metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma

Renal cell cancer (RCC) represents 2%-3% of all adulthood cancers and is the most common malignant neoplasm of the kidney (90%). In the mid-nineties of the last century, the standard of treatment for patients with metastatic RCC was cytokines. Sunititib and pazopanib were registered in 2007 and 2009, respectively, and have since been the standard first-line treatment for metastatic clear cell RCC (mccRCC). Renal cell cancer is a highly immunogenic tumor with tumor infiltrating cells, including CD8+ T lymphocytes, dendritic cells, natural killer cells (NK) and macrophages. This observation led to the design of new clinical trials in which patients were treated with immunotherapy. With the growing evidence that proangiogenic factors can have immunomodulatory effects on the host’s immune system, the idea of combining angiogenic drugs with immunotherapy has emerged, and new clinical trials have been designed. In the last few years, several therapeutic options have been approved [immunotherapy and immunotherapy/tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI)] for the first-line treatment of mccRCC. Nivolumab/ipilimumab is approved for the treatment of patients with intermediate and poor prognoses. Several checkpoint inhibitors (pembrolizumab, nivolumab, avelumab) in combination with TKI (axitinib, lenvatinib, cabozantinib) are approved for the treatment of patients regardless of their International mRCC Database Consortium prognostic group and PD-L1 expression. There is no specific and ideal biomarker that could help in selecting the ideal patient for the appropriate first-line treatment.