Accuracy of MRI-guided Versus Systematic Prostate Biopsy in Patients Under Active Surveillance: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

This meta-analysis focuses on the accuracy of upgrading to clinically significant prostate cancer (PCa) by multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy (MRI-TB) versus systematic biopsy (SB). We searched the Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, Scopus, and Literatura Latino Americana em Ciências da Saúde databases through January 2020 for comparative, retrospective/prospective, paired-cohort, and randomized clinical trials with paired comparisons. The population consisted of patients with low-risk PCa in active surveillance with at least 1 index lesion on imaging. We evaluated the quality of evidence by using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 score. Group comparisons considered the differences between the area under the curve summary receiver operating characteristic curve in a 2-tailed method. We also compared the positive predictive value of the best single method (MRI-TB or SB) and the referral study test (combined biopsy, a combination of MRI-TB and SB). The meta-analysis included 6 studies enrolling 741 patients. The pooled sensitivity for the 2 groups was 0.79 (95% confidence interval, 0.74-0.83; I² = 75%) and 0.67 (95% confidence interval, 0.63-0.74; I² = 55.4%), respectively. The area under the curve for the MRI-TB and SB groups were 0.99 and 0.92 (P < .001), respectively. The positive predictive value for the MRI-TB and combined biopsy groups were similar. The accumulated evidence suggests better results for MRI-TB compared with SB. Therefore, use of MRI-TB alone may be preferable in patients in active surveillance harboring low-risk PCa.     

Challenges with Forecasting Budget Impact: A Case Study of Six ICER Reports

Background

Payers frequently rely on budget impact model (BIM) results to help determine drug coverage policy and its effect on their bottom line. It is unclear whether BIMs typically overestimate or underestimate real-world budget impact.

Novel vaccination strategies and approaches against human tuberculosis

Tuberculosis (TB) remains one of a major health problem worldwide. Tuberculosis vaccine research has made an extraordinary progress over the past few years. However, there is still no replacement for the Bacillus Calmette‐Guérin vaccine, the only TB vaccine licensed for human use. Therefore, the discovery and development of new TB vaccines remains a priority. This article discusses current strategies used to diversify TB vaccines and includes discussion of the status of efforts to improve protection against Mycobacterium tuberculosis (M tb) infection or TB disease by developing new and safe TB vaccines. This article also highlights the current research efforts in immune‐enhancing approaches to improve vaccination efficacy. The development of more effective TB vaccines might have significant impact on global TB control.     

Detection of recombinant and endogenous mouse melatonin receptors by monoclonal antibodies targeting the C‐terminal domain

Melatonin receptors play important roles in the regulation of circadian and seasonal rhythms, sleep, retinal functions, the immune system, depression, and type 2 diabetes development. Melatonin receptors are approved drug targets for insomnia, non‐24‐hour sleep‐wake disorders, and major depressive disorders. In mammals, two melatonin receptors (MTRs) exist, MT₁ and MT₂, belonging to the G protein‐coupled receptor (GPCR) superfamily. Similar to most other GPCRs, reliable antibodies recognizing melatonin receptors proved to be difficult to obtain. Here, we describe the development of the first monoclonal antibodies (mABs) for mouse MT₁ and MT₂. Purified antibodies were extensively characterized for specific reactivity with mouse, rat, and human MT₁ and MT₂ by Western blot, immunoprecipitation, immunofluorescence, and proximity ligation assay. Several mABs were specific for either mouse MT₁ or MT₂. None of the mABs cross‐reacted with rat MTRs, and some were able to react with human MTRs. The specificity of the selected mABs was validated by immunofluorescence microscopy in three established locations (retina, suprachiasmatic nuclei, pituitary gland) for MTR expression in mice using MTR‐KO mice as control. MT₂ expression was not detected in mouse insulinoma MIN6 cells or pancreatic beta‐cells. Collectively, we report the first monoclonal antibodies recognizing recombinant and native mouse melatonin receptors that will be valuable tools for future studies.