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.     

A randomized study on the effect of modified behavioral activation treatment for depressive symptoms in rural left-behind elderly

Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of a modified behavioral activation treatment (MBAT) intervention on reducing depressive symptoms in rural left-behind elderly.

Method: This is a randomized study registered in Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR-IOR-17011289). Eighty rural left-behind elderly people who had a Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS) score between 11 and 25 were randomly assigned to the intervention (n?=?40) and control group (n?=?40). The intervention group received both MBAT and regular treatment for 8 weeks while the control group received regular treatment. Both groups were assessed with the GDS, Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI), and Oxford Happiness Questionnaire (OHQ) at baseline, immediately post-intervention, and at 3 months post-intervention.

Results: There were a total of 73 participants that completed the intervention. The scores of GDS and BAI decreased significantly, but the scores of OHQ increased significantly in the intervention group after 8 sessions of MBAT (P?<?.01). The reduction in depression symptoms after the intervention was maintained at the 3-month follow-up. Significant differences in GDS, BAI, and OHQ scores were observed between the intervention group and the control group (P?<?.01).

Conclusion: MBAT produced a significantly greater reduction in depressive symptoms than regular care in rural left-behind elderly.

Clinical or methodological significance of this article: A modified behavioral activation (BA) psychotherapy can significantly reduce the recurrence and seriousness of depression symptoms in the left-behind elderly with mild to moderate depression. This study also suggests that further study of the MBAT as an intervention will provide a direction for the management of mental health in rural left-behind elders.     

A Phase I Trial of Trametinib in Combination with Sorafenib in Patients with Advanced Hepatocellular Cancer

Lessons Learned

• The combination of trametinib and sorafenib has an acceptable safety profile, albeit at doses lower than approved for monotherapy.
• Maximum tolerated dose is trametinib 1.5 mg daily and sorafenib 200 mg twice daily.
• The limited anticancer activity observed in this unselected patient population does not support further exploration of trametinib plus sorafenib in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.

BackgroundThe RAS/RAF/MEK/ERK signaling pathway is associated with proliferation and progression of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Preclinical data suggest that paradoxical activation of the MAPK pathway may be one of the resistance mechanisms of sorafenib; therefore, we evaluated trametinib plus sorafenib in HCC.MethodsThis was a phase I study with a 3+3 design in patients with treatment‐naïve advanced HCC. The primary objective was safety and tolerability. The secondary objective was clinical efficacy.ResultsA total of 17 patients were treated with three different doses of trametinib and sorafenib. Two patients experienced dose‐limiting toxicity, including grade 4 hypertension and grade 3 elevation of aspartate aminotransferase (AST)/alanine aminotransferase (ALT)/bilirubin over 7 days. Maximum tolerated dose was trametinib 1.5 mg daily and sorafenib 200 mg twice a day. The most common grade 3/4 treatment‐related adverse events were elevated AST (37%) and hypertension (24%). Among 11 evaluable patients, 7 (63.6%) had stable disease with no objective response. The median progression‐free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 3.7 and 7.8 months, respectively. Phosphorylated‐ERK was evaluated as a pharmacodynamic marker, and sorafenib plus trametinib inhibited phosphorylated‐ERK up to 98.1% (median: 81.2%) in peripheral blood mononuclear cells.ConclusionTrametinib and sorafenib can be safely administered up to trametinib 1.5 mg daily and sorafenib 200 mg twice a day with limited anticancer activity in advanced HCC.     

Evaluation of neurobehavioral abnormalities and immunotoxicity in response to oral imidacloprid exposure in domestic chickens (Gallus gallus domesticus)

ABSTRACT

Domestic chickens (Gallus gallus domesticus) were exposed to imidacloprid by gavage once daily for 7 consecutive days at 0, 0.03, 0.34, 3.42, 10.25, and 15.5 mg/kg/day (n = 20 per group; 5 6-week-old males, 5 6-week-old females, 5 9-week-old males, and 5 9-week-old females). The severity and duration of neurobehavioral abnormalities were recorded. Components of the innate and adaptive immune system were assessed with 7 standard functional assays. Temporary neurobehavioral abnormalities were observed in a dose-dependent manner, including muscle tremors, ataxia, and depressed mentation. Based upon mean clinical severity scores, the no observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) was 3.42 mg/kg/day, and the lowest observed adverse effect level (LOAEL) was 10.25 mg/kg/day. The effective dose value for the presence of any neurobehavioral abnormalities in 50% of the test group (ED₅₀) was 4.62 ± 0.98 mg/kg/day. The ED₅₀ for an adjusted score that included both severity and duration of neurobehavioral abnormalities was 11.24 ± 9.33 mg/kg/day. These ED₅₀ values are equivalent to a 1 kg bird ingesting 29 or 70 imidacloprid treated soybean seeds respectively. Immunotoxicity was not documented, possible causes include the assays were insensitive, relevant immune functions were not examined, or imidacloprid is not immunotoxic at this dosing schedule in this species. Neurobehavioral abnormalities were a more sensitive indicator of the sublethal effects of imidacloprid than immunotoxicity.     

Population Genetics Identifies Challenges in Analyzing Rare Variants

Geneticists have, for years, understood the nature of genome‐wide association studies using common genomic variants. Recently, however, focus has shifted to the analysis of rare variants. This presents potential problems for researchers, as rare variants do not always behave in the same way common variants do, sometimes rendering decades of solid intuition moot. In this paper, we present examples of the differences between common and rare variants. We show why one must be significantly more careful about the origin of rare variants, and how failing to do so can lead to highly inflated type I error. We then explain how to best avoid such concerns with careful understanding and study design. Additionally, we demonstrate that a seemingly low error rate in next‐generation sequencing can dramatically impact the false‐positive rate for rare variants. This is due to the fact that rare variants are, by definition, seen infrequently, making it hard to distinguish between errors and real variants. Compounding this problem is the fact that the proportion of errors is likely to get worse, not better, with increasing sample size. One cannot simply scale their way up in order to solve this problem. Understanding these potential pitfalls is a key step in successfully identifying true associations between rare variants and diseases.