基于文献的老年人群常见证候分布特征研究＊

目的 了解我国老年人中医证候分布特征，为中医药辨治老年人提供参考依据。方法 系统检索中国知识基础设施（CNKI）、中文科技期刊数据库（CCD）、万方数据资源系统数据库（CSPD），纳入研究对象为老年人的临床流行病学调查研究文献，对其调查目的、调查疾病及调查结果等进行描述统计。结果 ①最终纳入168篇文献，其中2010至2020年之间发表138篇（82.14%）；调查地区涵盖全国28个省市自治区，共纳入43948例老年人，累计覆盖340个研究中心；②主要研究结果显示，老年人中医证候阴虚阳亢证（10.05%）>血瘀证（9.5%）>痰浊（湿）证（8.91%）>阴阳两虚证（4.98%）>痰瘀互结证（4.96%）；单元证分布阴虚证（14.70%）>痰证（11.22%）>气虚证（7.15%）>肾虚证（4.72%）>血瘀证（4.18%）；涉及病变脏腑肾>肝>脾>肺>心。结论 根据统计结果，可以看出老年人证候分布虚证多于实证，虚证中又以阴虚证、气虚证最为多见，实证常见血瘀证、痰浊（湿）证等，且多见痰瘀互结证；老年人五脏皆损，其中又以肾、肝、脾功能失调最为突出。     

血清IL-6和胃蛋白酶原Ⅰ/Ⅱ比值对老年胃癌患者预后评估的价值

目的探究老年胃癌患者术前血清白细胞介素6 (IL-6)、胃蛋白酶原(PG)Ⅰ、Ⅱ及PG-Ⅰ/Ⅱ比值在患者预后评估中的意义。方法选择2016年1月—2017年1月南通大学附属海安医院收治的101例外科手术治疗的老年胃癌患者为研究对象。收集患者的临床病理资料,检测血清IL-6和PG-Ⅰ/Ⅱ水平。以全因死亡为随访终点,使用Kaplan-Meier曲线明确患者预后与各指标间的关系。结果受试者工作特征曲线提示,IL-6、PG-Ⅰ和PG-Ⅰ/Ⅱ比值在最佳切割值为10.23pg/mL、30.65μg/L和2.44时,可评估患者的预后,而PG-Ⅱ则无法评估患者的预后。与IL-6≤10.23pg/mL组相比,IL-6> 10.23pg/mL组的肿瘤细胞分化更差、TNM分期Ⅲ期比例明显升高。Kaplan-Meier曲线结果表明,IL-6> 10.23pg/mL组的中位生存期显著短于IL-6≤10.23pg/mL组(28个月vs47个月,P<0.001);PG-Ⅰ≤30.65μg/L组的中位生存期显著短于PG-Ⅰ>30.65μg/L组(34个月vs49个月,P=0.008);PG-Ⅰ/Ⅱ≤2.44组的中位生存期显著短于PG-Ⅰ/Ⅱ> 2.44组(29个月vs56个月,P=0.02)。多因素Cox回归分析表明,肿瘤分化程度、TNM分期、IL-6及PG-Ⅰ/Ⅱ比值是影响患者生存率的独立危险因素。结论术前检测IL-6及PG-Ⅰ/Ⅱ比值有助于评估老年胃癌患者的预后。     

China special issue on gastrointestinal tumors-Radiological features of pathological complete response in mismatch repair deficient colorectal cancer after neoadjuvant PD-1 blockade: A post hoc analysis of the PICC phase II trial

Neoadjuvant programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) blockade exhibits promising efficacy in patients with mismatch repair deficient (dMMR) colorectal cancer (CRC). However, discrepancies between radiological and histological findings have been reported in the PICC phase II trial (NCT 03926338). Therefore, we strived to discern radiological features associated with pathological complete response (pCR) based on computed tomography (CT) images. Data were obtained from the PICC trial that included 36 tumors from 34 locally advanced dMMR CRC patients, who received neoadjuvant PD-1 blockade for 3 months. Among the 36 tumors, 28 (77.8%) tumors achieved pCR. There were no statistically significant differences in tumor longitudinal diameter, the percentage change in tumor longitudinal diameter from baseline, primary tumor sidedness, clinical stage, extramural venous invasion status, intratumoral calcification, peritumoral fat infiltration, intestinal fistula and tumor necrosis between the pCR and non-pCR tumors. Otherwise, tumors with pCR had smaller posttreatment tumor maximum thickness (median: 10 mm vs 13 mm, P = .004) and higher percentage decrease in tumor maximum thickness from baseline (52.9% vs 21.6%, P = .005) compared to non-pCR tumors. Additionally, a higher proportion of the absence of vascular sign (P = .003, odds ratio [OR] = 25.870 [95% CI, 1.357-493.110]), nodular sign (P < .001, OR = 189.000 [95% CI, 10.464-3413.803]) and extramural enhancement sign (P = .003, OR = 21.667 [2.848-164.830]) was observed in tumors with pCR. In conclusion, these CT-defined radiological features may have the potential to serve as valuable tools for clinicians in identifying patients who have achieved pCR after neoadjuvant PD-1 blockade, particularly in individuals who are willing to adopt a watch-and-wait strategy.