Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials: Efficacy and Safety of UDCA-Based Therapies in Primary Biliary Cirrhosis

Major ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA)-based therapies for primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC) include UDCA only, or combined with either methotrexate (MTX), corticosteroids (COT), colchicine (COC), or bezafibrate (BEF). As the optimum treatment regimen is unclear and warrants exploration, we aimed to compare these therapies in terms of patient mortality or liver transplantation (MOLT) and adverse events (AE).PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Scopus were searched for randomized controlled trials up to August 31, 2014. We estimated the hazard ratios (HRs) for MOLT and odds ratios (ORs) for AE. A sensitivity analysis based on the dose of UDCA was also executed.Thirty-one eligible articles were included. Compared with COT plus UDCA, UDCA (HR 0.38, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.09–1.39), BEF plus UDCA (HR 0.29, 95% CI 0.02–4.83), COC plus UDCA (HR 0.39, 95% CI 0.07–2.25), MTX plus UDCA (HR 0.28, 95% CI 0.05–1.63), or OBS (HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.11–2.01) all provided an increased risk of MOLT. With respect to drug AE profile, although not differing appreciably, BEF plus UDCA was associated with more AEs compared with UDCA (OR 3.16, 95% CI 0.59–20.67), COT plus UDCA (OR 2.27, 95% CI 0.15–33.36), COC plus UDCA (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.09–12.16), MTX plus UDCA (OR 2.03, 95% CI 0.23–17.82), or OBS (OR 3.00, 95% CI 0.53–20.75). The results of sensitivity analyses were highly consistent with previous analyses.COT plus UDCA was the optimal UDCA-based regimen for both MOLT and AEs. BEF plus UDCA was most likely to cause AEs, whereas monotherapy with UDCA and coadministriation of COT plus UDCA appeared to be associated with the fewest AEs for PBC treatment.     

Clinical Diagnostic Implications of Body Fluid MiRNA in Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Meta-Analysis

Oral cancer, predominantly oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC), is one of the most leading causes of cancers worldwide. Due to a low 5-year survival rate, highly effective methods for the early detection of OSCC are totally needed. MicroRNAs (miRNAs), as promising biomarkers, can bring insights into tumorigenesis of oral cancers. However, studies on the accuracy of miRNAs detection in OSCC have inconsistent conclusions, leading us to conduct this meta-analysis. The aim of this study was to systematically review the articles investigating the diagnostic value of miRNAs in OSCC.The PubMed, Embase, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Web of Science were searched (updated to June 11th, 2015) to identify all articles evaluating the diagnostic yield of miRNAs for OSCC. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and other diagnostic parameters were used to assess the performance of miRNAs assays on OSCC detection. Statistical analysis was conducted by employing the R software.The present meta-analysis comprised 23 studies from 10 articles, including 598 OSCC patients and 320 healthy individuals, available for analysis. The summary receiver operator characteristic (SROC) curve was plotted. Meanwhile, the pooled diagnostic parameters and the area under curve (AUC) were calculated based on all included studies. The pooled diagnostic parameters calculated from all 23 studies were as follows: pooled sensitivity of 0.759 (95% CI: 0.701–0.809), pooled specificity of 0.773 (95% CI: 0.713–0.823) and AUC of 0.832, which indicates a relatively high diagnostic accuracy of miRNAs in differentiating OSCC patients from healthy controls. Meanwhile, In addition, subgroup analyses were conducted to access the heterogeneity between studies, which is based on specimen (serum/plasma/blood/saliva/ tissue) and ethnicity (Asian/Caucasian).In summary, our meta-analysis suggests that miRNAs might be used in noninvasive screening tests for OSCC, which needs further large-scale studies to be validated.     

Animal Models of Barrett's Esophagus and Esophageal Adenocarcinoma–Past,Present, and Future

Esophageal adenocarcinoma is the fastest rising cancer in the United States. It develops from long‐standing gastroesophageal reflux disease which affects >20% of the general population. It carries a very poor prognosis with 5‐year survival <20%. The disease is known to sequentially progress from reflux esophagitis to a metaplastic precursor, Barrett''s esophagus and then onto dysplasia and esophageal adenocarcinoma. However, only few patients with reflux develop Barrett''s esophagus and only a minority of these turn malignant. The reason for this heterogeneity in clinical progression is unknown. To improve patient management, molecular changes which facilitate disease progression must be identified. Animal models can provide a comprehensive functional and anatomic platform for such a study. Rats and mice have been the most widely studied but disease homology with humans has been questioned. No animal model naturally simulates the inflammation to adenocarcinoma progression as in humans, with all models requiring surgical bypass or destruction of existing antireflux mechanisms. Valuable properties of individual models could be utilized to holistically evaluate disease progression. In this review paper, we critically examined the current animal models of Barrett''s esophagus, their differences and homologies with human disease and how they have shaped our current understanding of Barrett''s carcinogenesis.