Nanotechnology for colorectal cancer detection and treatment

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most diagnosed cancer and the second leading cause of cancer-related mortality in the United States. Across the globe, people in the age group older than 50 are at a higher risk of CRC. Genetic and environmental risk factors play a significant role in the development of CRC. If detected early, CRC is preventable and treatable. Currently, available screening methods and therapies for CRC treatment reduce the incidence rate among the population, but the micrometastasis of cancer may lead to recurrence. Therefore, the challenge is to develop an alternative therapy to overcome this complication. Nanotechnology plays a vital role in cancer treatment and offers targeted chemotherapies directly and selectively to cancer cells, with enhanced therapeutic efficacy. Additionally, nanotechnology elevates the chances of patient survival in comparison to traditional chemotherapies. The potential of nanoparticles includes that they may be used simultaneously for diagnosis and treatment. These exciting properties of nanoparticles have enticed researchers worldwide to unveil their use in early CRC detection and as effective treatment. This review discusses contemporary methods of CRC screening and therapies for CRC treatment, while the primary focus is on the theranostic approach of nanotechnology in CRC treatment and its prospects. In addition, this review aims to provide knowledge on the advancement of nanotechnology in CRC and as a starting point for researchers to think about new therapeutic approaches using nanotechnology.     

Education Outcomes of Children Born Late Preterm: A Retrospective Whole-Population Cohort Study

Maternal and Child Health Journal - Early life exposures can have an impact on a child’s developmental trajectory and children born late preterm (34–36 weeks gestational age)...     

Dry eye in chronic stroke patients with hemiplegia: A cross-sectional study

ABSTRACT

Objective: Dry eye is reported to be associated with several neurological diseases. The aim of this study is to evaluate the patients with hemiplegia after stroke for dry eye and compare their results with a control group.

Materials and methods: Forty-five patients with hemiplegia and 45 individuals as the control group were included in the study. Tear function tests (Schirmer and tear breakup time) and a dry eye questionnaire for dry eye symptoms (ocular surface disease index) were performed and the results of the two groups were compared.

Results: Schirmer test results were significantly lower in the post-stroke hemiplegia group compared to the control group (11.3 ± 8.2 mm and 20.6 ± 11.6 mm, respectively, p < .001). Tear breakup time results were significantly lower in the post-stroke hemiplegia group compared to the control group (7.9 ± 3.1 s and 12.1 ± 4.3 s, respectively, p < .001). Ocular surface disease index scores were not significantly different between hemiplegia and control groups (21.6 ± 20.0 and 19.8 ± 13.9, respectively, p = .635). Schirmer scores lower than 10 mm (60% and 30%, p < .001) and tear breakup time results lower than 10 s (65.6% and 28.9%, p < .001) were also higher in the hemiplegia group compared to control group.

Conclusion: We found lower Schirmer test and tear breakup time results and similar OSDI scores in hemiplegia patients compared to controls. Hemiplegia patients may have dry eye without typical symptoms. This should be taken into consideration in the follow-up and rehabilitation of post-stroke hemiplegia patients.