Explore the vast range of titles available.

The impact of ctDNA changes after chemotherapy on the clinical outcomes of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) remains unclear. The present study evaluated the clinical implications of the early change in ctDNA levels as a predictor of objective response and clinical outcome in mCRC patients who received chemotherapy. We investigated the effects of after/before ratio of ctDNA levels 2 and 8 weeks after initiation of second-line chemotherapy, on objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). ctDNA was detected using amplicon-based deep sequencing with a molecular barcode encompassing >240 hotspot mutations in 14 colon cancer-related genes. In multivariate analysis, as compared to baseline, patients with lower ctDNA level (≤50%) 8 weeks after initiation of chemotherapy showed significantly longer PFS and OS than the patients with higher (>50%) ctDNA level. In patients achieving a partial response or stable disease, the after/before ratio of ctDNA level 8 weeks after initiation of chemotherapy was significantly lower than those in patients with progressive disease. The present study suggests that an early change in the ctDNA level might serve as a biomarker to predict the chemotherapeutic efficacy and clinical outcomes in patients with mCRC.

There is an urgent and unmet need for accurate biomarkers in Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis. A pharmaco-metabolomics study was conducted using plasma samples from the TRO19622 (olesoxime) trial to assess the link between early metabolomic profiles and clinical outcomes. Patients included in this trial were randomized into either Group O receiving olesoxime (n = 38) or Group P receiving placebo (n = 36). The metabolomic profile was assessed at time-point one (V1) and 12 months (V12) after the initiation of the treatment. High performance liquid chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry was used to quantify 188 metabolites (Biocrates® commercial kit). Multivariate analysis based on machine learning approaches (i.e. Biosigner algorithm) was performed. Metabolomic profiles at V1 and V12 and changes in metabolomic profiles between V1 and V12 accurately discriminated between Groups O and P (p<5×10-6), and identified glycine, kynurenine and citrulline/arginine as the best predictors of group membership. Changes in metabolomic profiles were closely linked to clinical progression, and correlated with glutamine levels in Group P and amino acids, lipids and spermidine levels in Group O. Multivariate models accurately predicted disease progression and highlighted the discriminant role of sphingomyelins (SM C22:3, SM C24:1, SM OH C22:2, SM C16:1). To predict SVC from SM C24:1 in group O and SVC from SM OH C22:2 and SM C16:1 in group P+O, we noted a median sensitivity between 67% and 100%, a specificity between 66.7 and 71.4%, a positive predictive value between 66 and 75% and a negative predictive value between 70% and 100% in the test sets. This proof-of-concept study demonstrates that the metabolomics has a role in evaluating the biological effect of an investigational drug and may be a candidate biomarker as a secondary outcome measure in clinical trials.

High baseline levels of IP-10 predict a slower first phase decline in HCV RNA and a poor outcome following interferon/ribavirin therapy in patients with chronic hepatitis C. Several recent studies report that single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) adjacent to IL28B predict spontaneous resolution of HCV infection and outcome of treatment among HCV genotype 1 infected patients. In the present study, we correlated the occurrence of variants at three such SNPs (rs12979860, rs12980275, and rs8099917) with pretreatment plasma IP-10 and HCV RNA throughout therapy within a phase III treatment trial (HCV-DITTO) involving 253 Caucasian patients. The favorable SNP variants (CC, AA, and TT, respectively) were associated with lower baseline IP-10 (P = 0.02, P = 0.01, P = 0.04) and were less common among HCV genotype 1 infected patients than genotype 2/3 (P<0.0001, P<0.0001, and P = 0.01). Patients carrying favorable SNP genotypes had higher baseline viral load than those carrying unfavorable variants (P = 0.0013, P = 0.029, P = 0.0004 respectively). Among HCV genotype 1 infected carriers of the favorable C, A, or T alleles, IP-10 below 150 pg/mL significantly predicted a more pronounced reduction of HCV RNA from day 0 to 4 (first phase decline), which translated into increased rates of RVR (62%, 53%, and 39%) and SVR (85%, 76%, and 75% respectively) among homozygous carriers with baseline IP-10 below 150 pg/mL. In multivariate analyses of genotype 1-infected patients, baseline IP-10 and C genotype at rs12979860 independently predicted the first phase viral decline and RVR, which in turn independently predicted SVR. Concomitant assessment of pretreatment IP-10 and IL28B-related SNPs augments the prediction of the first phase decline in HCV RNA, RVR, and final therapeutic outcome.

Purpose To compare the effects of prevention interventions on delirium occurrence in critically ill adults. Methods MEDLINE, Embase, PsychINFO, CINAHL, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Prospero, and WHO international clinical trial registry were searched from inception to April 8, 2021. Randomized controlled trials of pharmacological, sedation, non-pharmacological, and multi-component interventions enrolling adult critically ill patients were included. We performed conventional pairwise meta-analyses, NMA within Bayesian random effects modeling, and determined surface under the cumulative ranking curve values and mean rank. Reviewer pairs independently extracted data, assessed bias using Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and evidence certainty with GRADE. The primary outcome was delirium occurrence; secondary outcomes were durations of delirium and mechanical ventilation, length of stay, mortality, and adverse effects. Results Eighty trials met eligibility criteria: 67.5% pharmacological, 31.3% non-pharmacological and 1.2% mixed pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions. For delirium occurrence, 11 pharmacological interventions (38 trials, N  = 11,993) connected to the evidence network. Compared to placebo, only dexmedetomidine (21/22 alpha 2 agonist trials were dexmedetomidine) probably reduces delirium occurrence (odds ratio (OR) 0.43, 95% Credible Interval (CrI) 0.21–0.85; moderate certainty). Compared to benzodiazepines, dexmedetomidine (OR 0.21, 95% CrI 0.08–0.51; low certainty), sedation interruption (OR 0.21, 95% CrI 0.06–0.69; very low certainty), opioid plus benzodiazepine (OR 0.27, 95% CrI 0.10–0.76; very low certainty), and protocolized sedation (OR 0.27, 95% CrI 0.09–0.80; very low certainty) may reduce delirium occurrence but the evidence is very uncertain. Dexmedetomidine probably reduces ICU length of stay compared to placebo (Ratio of Means (RoM) 0.78, CrI 0.64–0.95; moderate certainty) and compared to antipsychotics (RoM 0.76, CrI 0.61–0.98; low certainty). Sedative interruption, protocolized sedation and opioids may reduce hospital length of stay compared to placebo, but the evidence is very uncertain. No intervention influenced mechanical ventilation duration, mortality, or arrhythmia. Single and multi-component non-pharmacological interventions did not connect to any evidence networks to allow for ranking and comparisons as planned; pairwise comparisons did not detect differences compared to standard care. Conclusion Compared to placebo and benzodiazepines, we found dexmedetomidine likely reduced the occurrence of delirium in critically ill adults. Compared to benzodiazepines, sedation-minimization strategies may also reduce delirium occurrence, but the evidence is uncertain.

This WHO report produced in collaboration withMember States and other partners provides as accuratea picture as is presently possible of the magnitude ofAMR and the current state of surveillance globally.The report focuses on antibacterial resistance (ABR)in common bacterial pathogens. Why? There is amajor gap in knowledge about the magnitude of thisproblem and such information is needed to guideurgent public health actions. ABR is complex andmultidimensional. It involves a range of resistancemechanisms affecting an ever-widening range ofbacteria most of which can cause a wide spectrumof diseases in humans and animals. One important finding of the report which will serveas a baseline to measure future progress is that thereare many gaps in information on pathogens of majorpublic health importance. In addition surveillance ofABR generally is neither coordinated nor harmonized compromising the quality and representativeness ofmany data. Nonetheless the report makes a clear case thatresistance to common bacteria has reached alarminglevels in many parts of the world suggesting thatmany of the available treatment options for commoninfections in some settings are becoming ineffective.Furthermore systematic reviews of the scientificevidence show that ABR has a negative impact onoutcomes for patients and health-care expenditures.Generally surveillance in TB malaria and HIV to detectresistance determine disease burden and monitorpublic health interventions is better established andexperiences from these programmes are describedin the report so that lessons learnt can be appliedto ABR and opportunities for collaboration identified.

ObjectivesWe investigated the management of travel fatigue and jet lag in athlete populations by evaluating studies that have applied non-pharmacological interventions (exercise, sleep, light and nutrition), and pharmacological interventions (melatonin, sedatives, stimulants, melatonin analogues, glucocorticoids and antihistamines) following long-haul transmeridian travel-based, or laboratory-based circadian system phase-shifts.DesignSystematic review Eligibility criteria Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), and non-RCTs including experimental studies and observational studies, exploring interventions to manage travel fatigue and jet lag involving actual travel-based or laboratory-based phase-shifts. Studies included participants who were athletes, except for interventions rendering no athlete studies, then the search was expanded to include studies on healthy populations.Data sourcesElectronic searches in PubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Google Scholar and SPORTDiscus from inception to March 2019. We assessed included articles for risk of bias, methodological quality, level of evidence and quality of evidence.ResultsTwenty-two articles were included: 8 non-RCTs and 14 RCTs. No relevant travel fatigue papers were found. For jet lag, only 12 athlete-specific studies were available (six non-RCTs, six RCTs). In total (athletes and healthy populations), 11 non-pharmacological studies (participants 600; intervention group 290; four non-RCTs, seven RCTs) and 11 pharmacological studies (participants 1202; intervention group 870; four non-RCTs, seven RCTs) were included. For non-pharmacological interventions, seven studies across interventions related to actual travel and four to simulated travel. For pharmacological interventions, eight studies were based on actual travel and three on simulated travel.ConclusionsWe found no literature pertaining to the management of travel fatigue. Evidence for the successful management of jet lag in athletes was of low quality. More field-based studies specifically on athlete populations are required with a multifaceted approach, better design and implementation to draw valid conclusions. PROSPERO registration number The protocol was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO: CRD42019126852).

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is one of the most common neurodevelopmental disorders having a high influence on social interactions. The number of approved treatments and clinical trials for ADHD have increased markedly during the recent decade. This analytical review provides a quantitative overview of the existing pharmacological and non-pharmacological methods of ADHD treatments investigated in clinical trials during 1999–2021. A total of 695 interventional trials were manually assessed from clinicaltrial.gov with the search term « ADHD», and trial data has been used for analysis. A clear majority of the studies investigated non-pharmacological therapies (∼80%), including many behavioral options, such as social skills training, sleep and physical activity interventions, meditation and hypnotherapy. Devices, complementary and other alternative methods of ADHD treatment are also gaining attention. The pharmacological group accounts for ∼20% of all the studies. The most common drug classes include central nervous system stimulants (e.g., methylphenidate hydrochloride, lisdexamfetamine dimesylate, amphetamine sulfate, mixed amphetamine salts, a combination of dexmethylphenidate hydrochloride and serdexmethylphenidate chloride), selective noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (atomoxetine, viloxazine), and alpha2 adrenergic receptor agonists (guanfacine hydrochloride, clonidine hydrochloride). Several studies investigated antidepressants (e.g., bupropion hydrochloride, vortioxetine), and atypical antipsychotics (e.g., quetiapine, aripiprazole) but these are yet not approved by the FDA for ADHD treatment. We discuss the quantitative trends in clinical trials and provide an overview of the new drug agents and non-pharmacological therapies, drug targets, and novel treatment options.