Glycaemic control for patients with severe acute brain injury: Protocol for a systematic review

Background

Hyperglycaemia is common in patients with acute brain injury admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU). Many studies have found associations between development of hyperglycaemia and increased mortality in hospitalised patients. However, the optimal target for blood glucose control is unknown. We want to conduct a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis to explore the beneficial and harmful effects of restrictive versus liberal glucose control on patient outcomes in adults with severe acute brain injury.

Methods

We will systematically search medical databases including CENTRAL, Embase, MEDLINE and trial registries. We will search the following websites for ongoing or unpublished trials: http://www.controlled-trials.com/ , http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ , www.eudraCT.com , http://centerwatch.com/ , The Cochrane Library's CENTRAL, PubMed, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded and CINAHL. Two authors will independently review and select trials and extract data. We will include randomised trials comparing levels of glucose control in our analyses and observational studies will be included to address potential harms. The primary outcomes are defined as all-cause mortality, functional outcome and health-related quality of life. Secondary outcomes include serious adverse events including hypoglycaemia, length of ICU stay and duration of mechanical ventilation, and explorative outcomes including intracranial pressure and infection. Trial Sequential Analysis will be used to investigate the risk of type I error due to repetitive testing and to further explore imprecision. Quality of trials will be evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool, and quality of evidence will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach.

Discussion

The results of the systematic review will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication. With the review, we hope to inform future randomised clinical trials and improve clinical practice.     

Association between hereditary predisposition to common cancers and congenital multimalformations

In a previous article we reported that mutations favoring cancer at adulthood seemed to improve fertility and limit miscarriages. Because spontaneous abortion may result from anomalies in embryo, we questioned if an increased frequency of congenital malformation could be evidenced among cancer-prone families. Oncogenetics database (≈193 000 members) of the comprehensive cancer center Jean Perrin was crossed with regional registry of congenital malformations (≈10 000). Among children born between 1986 and 2011, 176 children with malformation matched in both databases. In breast/ovaries cancer-prone families, the risk for malformations was multiplied by 2.4 [1.2-4.5] in case of a BRCA1 mutation. Frequencies of malformation in BRCA2 and MMR mutated families were similar to families without a cancer syndrome. In comparison to malformations concerning a unique anatomical system, multimalformations were significantly more frequent in case of BRCA or MMR mutations: compared to families without cancer syndrome, the risk of multimalformations was multiplied by 4.1 [0.8-21.7] for cancer-prone families but with no known deleterious mutation, by 6.9 [1.2-38.6] in families with a known mutation but an unknown parental mutational status and by 10.4 [2.3-46.0] when one parent carried the familial mutation. No association with the type of anatomical system was found, nor with multiple births. These results suggest that BRCA and MMR genes play an important role in human embryogenesis and that if their function is lowered because of heterozygote mutations, congenital malformations are either more likely (BRCA1 mutations) and/or more susceptible to concern several anatomical systems.     

Can EGFR mutation status be reliably determined in pre‐operative needle biopsies from adenocarcinomas of the lung?

The identification of EGFR mutations in non‐small‐cell lung cancer is important for selecting patients, who may benefit from treatment with EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors. The analysis is usually performed on cytological aspirates and/or histological needle biopsies, representing a small fraction of the tumour volume. The aim of the present investigation was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of this molecular test. We retrospectively included 201 patients with primary adenocarcinoma of the lung. EGFR mutation status (exon 19 deletions and exon 21 L858R point mutation) was evaluated on both pre‐operative biopsies (131 histological and 70 cytological) and on the surgical specimens, using PCR. Samples with low tumour cell fraction were assigned to laser micro‐dissection (LMD). We found nine (4.5%) patients with EGFR mutation in the lung tumour resections, but failed to identify mutation in one of the corresponding pre‐operative, cytological specimens. Several (18.4%) analyses of the pre‐operative biopsies were inconclusive, especially in case of biopsies undergoing LMD and regarding exon 21 analysis. Discrepancy of mutation status in one patient may reflect intra‐tumoural heterogeneity or technical issues. Moreover, several inconclusive results in the diagnostic biopsies reveal that attention must be paid on the suitability of pre‐operative biopsies for EGFR mutation analysis.