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.     

基于VOSviewer的2019新型冠状病毒病中医临床诊疗可视化分析＊

目的 通过对公开发表在网络和数据库的有关中医药治疗2019新型冠状病毒肺炎（corona virus disease 2019，COVID-19）的文献进行方、药、证的可视化分析，客观全面的对COVID-19的中医药治疗进行探讨，为现代中医临床诊疗提供参考。方法 本文选用运用文献计量学方法和VOSviewer可视化软件对纳入文献中的用药情况进行数据拆分、整理和分析。结果 本研究高质量数据的主要期刊来源是核心期刊《中医杂志》；新冠临床用方以解表清热剂、开窍补益剂、辟秽祛湿剂为主；临床用药以解表药、清热解毒药、化湿祛痰药以及补益药为主；临床治病思路以六经辨证、三焦辨证和卫气营血辨证理论为指导；临床常见证型为湿、热、寒、毒相关证型；重视新冠前期预防以及后期恢复调养；治疗过程用药考究，注重养阴与祛邪并进。结论 新冠的中医临床诊治考病全面，并注重养阴与祛邪并进，可为官方制定治疗方案提供参考。     

miR-26b通过调节Notch1信号通路参与原发性肝细胞肝癌侵袭的机制研究

目的:探讨miR-26b参与原发性肝细胞肝癌（HCC）侵袭的机制。方法:在细胞培养液中培养人肝细胞系HL-7702和HCC细胞各系Hepb-3、HuH-7、MHCC97-L、MHCC97-H。实时荧光定量PCR法（qRT-PCR）检测miR-26b的表达水平；用miR-26b mimics、miR-26b inhibitors和Notch1-siRNA分别转染HCC细胞；MTT实验检测转染后HCC细胞的活力；采用Western blot检测Notch1受体蛋白表达水平的变化；Transwell小室测定不同处理后的HCC细胞的侵袭能力。结果:人正常肝细胞系HL-7702和HCC细胞系Hepb-3、HuH-7、MHCC97-L、MHCC97-H中的miR-26b相对表达含量随其侵袭和迁移能力的升高而依次下降；抑制miR-26b的表达，Notch1受体蛋白表达明显增高，而此时HCC细胞的侵袭性显著增强；相反，上调miR-26b的表达，Notch1受体蛋白表达明显降低，而HCC细胞侵袭性显著下降；miR-26b可能通过调控Notch1信号通路调节HCC细胞侵袭性。结论:miR-26b通过负调控Notch1信号通路抑制HCC细胞侵袭能力，为HCC侵袭的机制奠定了理论基础，miR-26b可能成为HCC治疗的新靶点。     

Mimengosides J and K: two new neuroprotective triterpenoids from the fruits of Buddleja lindleyana

Two new 11-methoxyl substituted triterpenoids, named as mimengosides J (1) and K (2), along with seven known compounds, were isolated from the fruits of Buddleja lindleyana. Their structures were elucidated on the basis of spectroscopic analysis. In addition, the new ones were evaluated for protective effects against damage of SH-SY5Y cells induced by 1-methyl-4-phenylpyridinium ion (MPP⁺) and the results indicated that those may be one of the candidate compositions of Buddleja lindleyana for the treatment of neurodegenerative disease.

     

Growth of the Social #RadOnc Network on Twitter

PurposeTwitter is an increasingly popular social media platform within the health care community. The objective of this analysis is to characterize the profile of radiation oncology–related tweets and Twitter users over the past 6 years.Methods and MaterialsUsing the web-based social media analytics platform Symplur Signals, we filtered tweets containing at least 1 of the following hashtags or key words: #radonc, #radiationoncology, "rad onc," or "radiation oncology." We evaluated radiation oncology–related Twitter activity between October 2014 and March 2020 for tweet frequency, tweet content, and individuals or groups posting tweets. We identified the most influential Twitter users contributing to radiation oncology–related tweets.ResultsFrom 2014 to 2020, the quarterly volume of radiation oncology–related tweets increased from 5027 to 29,763. Physicians contributed the largest growth in tweet volume. Academic radiation oncologists comprise 60% of the most influential Twitter accounts responsible for radiation oncology–related content. The number of radiation-oncology resident physicians on Twitter increased from 25 to 328 over the past 6 years, and 20% of radiation-oncology residency programs have a Twitter account. Seventy-one percent of radiation oncology–related tweets generated direct communication via mentions, and 59% of tweets contain links to external sources, including scientific articles.ConclusionsThe number of physicians contributing radiation oncology–related Twitter content has increased significantly in recent years. Academic radiation oncologists are the primary influencers of radiation oncology–related Twitter activity. Twitter is used by radiation oncologists to both professionally network and discuss findings related to the field. There remains the opportunity for radiation oncologists to broaden their audience on Twitter to encompass a more diverse community, including patients.