Minimally Invasive Treatments for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

PurposeTo review and to compare indirectly the outcomes of minimally invasive therapies for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia.Materials and MethodsA literature search via Medline and Cochrane Central databases was completed for randomized control studies published between January 2000 to April 2020 for the following therapies: Rezum, Urolift, Aquablation, and prostatic artery embolization (PAE). Data on the following variables were included: International prostate symptom score (IPSS), maximum urinary flow rate, quality of life, and postvoid residual (PVR). Standard mean differences between treatments were compared through a meta-analysis using transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) to assess differences in treatment effect.ResultsThere was no significant difference in outcomes between therapies for IPSS at the 3, 6, and 12-month follow ups. Although outcomes for Rezum were only available out to 3 months, there were no consistently significant differences in outcomes when comparing Aquablation versus PAE versus Rezum. TURP PVR was significantly better than Urolift at 3, 6, and 12 months. No significant differences in minor or major adverse events were noted.ConclusionAlthough significant differences in outcomes were limited, Aquablation and PAE were the most durable at 12 months. PAE has been well studied on multiple randomized control trials with minimal adverse events while Aquablation has limited high quality data and has been associated with bleeding-related complications.     

中医药干预新型冠状病毒肺炎临床研究方案分析

对中医药防治新型冠状病毒肺炎临床研究方案注册情况进行分析,为提高相关研究设计质量提供参考和建议。检索中国临床试验注册中心网站(www.chictr.org.cn)以及美国临床试验注册中心网站(clinicaltrials.gov),以新型冠状病毒肺炎、2019-nCoV等为检索词,检索新型冠状病毒肺炎中医药相关临床研究方案。按照纳入排除标准筛选文献,并提取研究注册时间、研究目的、研究类型、申办单位、研究对象、样本量、干预措施、评价指标等数据,采用描述性分析方法。共纳入新型冠状病毒肺炎中医药相关研究方案49个,研究负责单位以湖北、北京、浙江等地医院或高等院校为主。研究具体实施单位属地集中在湖北、广东、浙江、河南等地医院。研究设计以干预性试验研究为主(共40个),其中随机平行对照研究30个,非随机对照试验7个,单臂研究2个,连续入组1个;观察性研究6个;卫生服务研究2个;预防性研究1个。总样本量30562例,单个研究样本量最大20000例,最小30例。49个方案的研究对象包括健康人群(3个)、隔离观察人群(1个)、疑似病例(10个)、确诊病例(31个)、康复期病例(4个)。31个拟纳入确诊病例的研究方案中,有16个研究未明确病情分级,3个研究明确排除危重症,4个研究纳入普通型,2个研究纳入轻型、普通型或重型,1个研究纳入轻型和普通型,1个研究纳入普通型或重型,3个研究纳入重型,1个研究纳入重症或危重症。评价的干预措施包括中成药(连花清瘟胶囊/颗粒、藿香正气滴丸/口服液、八宝丹、固表解毒灵、金蒿解热颗粒、复方鱼腥草合剂、金叶败毒颗粒、疏风解毒胶囊、双黄连口服液、痰热清注射液、血必净注射液、热毒宁注射液、喜炎平注射液)、汤药、太极拳疗法。主要疗效指标以退热时间、临床症状缓解、新型冠状病毒核酸转阴、重症转化率、胸部CT影像为主。结果表明中医药防治新冠肺炎的临床研究响应快速,当前注册方案涵盖了疾病预防、治疗和康复全过程。但存在人群定义不清,研究目标不明确,干预方案需要细化,疗效评价指标需要优化等问题;另外,需要考虑疫情救治的实际困难和工作负担,在符合医学伦理条件下,优化流程,提高研究方案的可操作性。     

Respecting the circle of life: one year outcomes from a randomized controlled comparison of an HIV risk reduction intervention for American Indian adolescents

Potential for widespread transmission of HIV/AIDS among American Indian (AI) adolescents exists, yet no evidence-based interventions (EBIs) have been adapted and evaluated with this population. Intensive psychoeducation may improve knowledge and decision-making which could potentially translate to reductions in HIV risk behaviors. A peer group randomized controlled comparison of an adapted EBI vs. control was delivered over an eight-day summer basketball camp in one reservation-based tribal community to adolescents ages 13–19. Outcome data were gathered immediately post-camp and at 6 and 12 months follow-up. Self-selected peer groups were randomized to intervention (n = 138) or control (n = 129) conditions for a total sample of 267 participants (56.2% female), mean age 15.1 years (SD = 1.7). Intervention participants had better condom use self-efficacy post-camp (Adjusted Mean Difference [AMD] = ?0.75, p < 0.005) and at 6 (AMD = ?0.44, p < 0.005) and 12 months (AMD = ?0.23, p < 0.05) follow-up. Intervention participants also had higher HIV prevention and transmission knowledge (post-camp: AMD = 0.07, p < 0.01; 6 months: AMD = 0.06, p < 0.01) were more likely to believe condoms prevent sexually transmitted infections (post-camp: RR = 1.41, p < 0.005; 6 months: RR = 1.34, p < 0.05), to talk with an adult about HIV/AIDS (post-camp: RR=1.78, p < 0.005; 6 months: RR = 1.14, p < 0.005), had higher partner negotiation efficacy related to substance use during sex (post-camp: AMD = 0.37, p < 0.01), and were more likely to intend to use a condom (post-camp: RR = 1.39, p < 0.01). The adapted intervention had short- and medium-term impacts on AI adolescent risk for HIV/AIDS, but attenuated at 12 months. Intervention delivery through a community-based camp is feasible and acceptable with strong retention. Additional study is needed to evaluate the adapted intervention's impact on sexual risk behaviors and if booster sessions and parent involvement translate to long-term impacts.     

电针复合TCI靶控输注在单肺通气食管癌开胸手术麻醉中的应用与安全性＊

目的 探讨电针复合靶控输注（Target Controlled Infusion， TCI）在单肺通气食管癌开胸手术麻醉中的应用价值。方法 选取于我院拟行单肺通气食管癌开胸切除手术患者60例作为研究对象。随机将其分为试验组与对照组，对照组30例采取气管插管全麻及TCI靶控输注维持麻醉深度，试验组30例则在对照组方案基础上辅助电针麻醉，记录两组患者手术麻醉时间、药物用量、苏醒时间、并发症；以及术前（T_Ⅰ）、插管前即刻（T_Ⅱ）、插管后1 min（T_Ⅲ）、切皮即刻（T_Ⅳ）、去骨时（T_Ⅴ）、拔管即刻（T_Ⅵ）时平均动脉压（MAP）、平均心率（HR）、BIS值；术前、术后1天、术后3天简易智能精神状态检查量表（MMSE）；并于麻醉诱导前（T₀）、手术开始2 h（T₁）、术后1天（T₂）、术后3天（T₃）时抽取患者外周静脉血检测IL-1β、IL-6、IL-10、TNF-α浓度。结果 试验组手术用时、麻醉时间略低于对照组，但差异无统计学意义（P>0.05），试验组异丙酚、舒芬太尼用量以及苏醒时间均明显低于对照组（P<0.05）；T_Ⅱ时两组平均动脉压（Mean Arterial Pressure， MAP）、心率（Heartrate， HR）较术前明显降低，且试验组MAP明显低于对照组（P<0.05），但两组T_Ⅱ时HR比较无显著差异（P>0.05）；T_Ⅲ、T_Ⅵ时对照组MAP、HR明显高于T_Ⅰ时，而试验组MAP、HR与T_Ⅰ比较无显著差异（P>0.05）。术后1天、3天试验组简易智能精神状态检查量表（Mini-Mental State Examination， MMSE）评分低于对照组，有显著性差异（P<0.05）。T₁、T₂、T₃时试验组白介素-1β（IL-1β）、白介素-6（IL-6）、肿瘤坏死因子（Tumor Necrosis Factor-α， TNF-α）水平明显低于对照组（P<0.05），白介素-10（IL-10）水平明显高于对照组（P<0.05）。结论 采用电针复合TCI靶控输注麻醉方案可有效提升单肺通气食管癌开胸手术麻醉效果，能够降低患者术后认知功能障碍发生风险。     

Safety profile of the adjuvanted recombinant zoster vaccine: Pooled analysis of two large randomised phase 3 trials

Background

The ZOE-50 (NCT01165177) and ZOE-70 (NCT01165229) phase 3 clinical trials showed that the adjuvanted recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV) was ≥90% efficacious in preventing herpes zoster in adults. Here we present a comprehensive overview of the safety data from these studies.

Development and approval of live attenuated influenza vaccines based on Russian master donor viruses: Process challenges and success stories

Influenza is a viral infection that affects much of the global population each year. Vaccination remains the most effective tool for preventing the disease. Live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) has been used since the 1950s to protect humans against seasonal influenza. LAIVs developed by the Institute of Experimental Medicine (IEM), Saint Petersburg, Russia, have been successfully used in Russia since 1987.In 2006, the World Health Organization (WHO) announced a Global action plan for influenza vaccines (GAP). WHO, recognizing potential advantages of LAIV over the inactivated influenza vaccine in a pandemic situation, included LAIV in the GAP.BioDiem Ltd., a vaccine development company based in Melbourne, Australia which held the rights for the Russian LAIV, licensed this technology to WHO in 2009. WHO was permitted to grant sub-licenses to vaccine manufacturers in newly industrialized and developing countries to use the Russian LAIV for the development, manufacture, use and sale of pandemic and seasonal LAIVs. To date, WHO has granted sub-licenses to vaccine manufacturers in China (Changchun BCHT Biotechnology Co., Ltd.), India (Serum Institute of India Pvt. Ltd.) and Thailand (Government Pharmaceutical Organization). In parallel, in 2009, IEM signed an agreement with WHO, under which IEM committed to supply pandemic and seasonal candidate vaccine viruses to the sub-licensees.This paper describes the progress made by collaborators from China, India, Russia and Thailand in developing preventive measures, including LAIV against pandemic influenza.     

Additional bedtime H2‐receptor antagonist for the control of nocturnal gastric acid breakthrough: A Cochrane systematic review

OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and safety of additional bedtime H₂‐receptor antagonists (H₂RAs) in suppressing nocturnal gastric acid breakthrough (NAB) via a systematic review. METHODS: Eligible trials were identified by searching the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Cochrane Library Issue 2, 2004), MEDLINE (January 1966–June 2004), EMBASE (January 1980–June 2004) and CINAHL (January 1982–June 2004). Additional hand‐searching was conducted on the proceedings of correlated conferences, eight important Chinese journals and references of all included trials. All randomized controlled trials evaluating H₂RAs for the control of NAB were eligible for inclusion. The systematic review was conducted using methods recommended by The Cochrane Collaboration. RESULTS: Only two randomized crossover studies, comprising 32 participants, met the inclusion criteria. Because the design, dosage and duration of the treatments were different between the studies, it was not possible to conduct meta‐analysis. There were no consistent conclusions found between the two included studies in evaluating H₂RAs for the control of NAB. CONCLUSIONS: No implications for practice at this stage can be concluded. Appropriately designed large‐scale randomized controlled trials with long‐term follow up are needed to determine the effects of additional bedtime H₂RAs in suppressing NAB.     

Comparison of parent and teacher reports of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder symptoms from two placebo-controlled studies of atomoxetine in children.

BACKGROUND: The validity of parent reports regarding children's attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptoms has been questioned. This study assessed whether parent reports were as sensitive as teacher reports to document change in ADHD symptoms during clinical trials with atomoxetine. METHODS: Data were compared from two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials of atomoxetine using different versions (parent or teacher) of the same rating scale (Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Rating Scale-IV [parent or teacher] Version: Investigator Administered and Scored - ADHD RS). Exclusion criteria included history of bipolar disorder, psychosis, seizures, alcohol abuse, or positive drug screen. Patients (6-16 years old) were treated with atomoxetine (titrated to a maximum dose of 1.8 mg/kg/day) administered once daily for up to 7 weeks. Parent and teacher ratings were compared using an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model. RESULTS: The analysis (n = 318) showed that treatment effects (mean change, baseline to endpoint) were similar between parent and teacher ratings (total, p = .762; inattention, p = .519; hyperactive/impulsive, p = .955). Effect sizes also were similar based on total scores (parent ratings = .69; teacher ratings = .63). CONCLUSIONS: Parent reports are as sensitive as teacher reports in assessing the efficacy of long-acting pharmacologic treatment for ADHD in children during clinical trials using the nonstimulant atomoxetine.