Incidence and risk of QTc interval prolongation among cancer patients treated with vandetanib: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Vandetanib is a multikinase inhibitor that is under assessment for the treatment of various cancers. QTc interval prolongation is one of the major adverse effects of this drug, but the reported incidence varies substantially among clinical trials. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to obtain a better understanding in the risk of QTc interval prolongation among cancer patients administered vandetanib.

Methodology and Principal Findings

Eligible studies were phase II and III prospective clinical trials that involved cancer patients who were prescribed vandetanib 300 mg/d and that included data on QTc interval prolongation. The overall incidence and risk of QTc interval prolongation were calculated using random-effects or fixed-effects models, depending on the heterogeneity of the included studies. Nine trials with 2,188 patients were included for the meta-analysis. The overall incidence of all-grade and high-grade QTc interval prolongation was 16.4% (95% CI, 8.1–30.4%) and 3.7% (8.1–30.4%), respectively, among non-thyroid cancer patients, and 18.0% (10.7–28.6%) and 12.0% (4.5–28.0%), respectively, among thyroid cancer patients. Patients with thyroid cancer who had longer treatment duration also had a higher incidence of high-grade events, with a relative risk of 3.24 (1.57–6.71), than patients who had non-thyroid cancer. Vandetanib was associated with a significantly increased risk of all-grade QTc interval prolongation with overall Peto odds ratios of 7.26 (4.36–12.09) and 5.70 (3.09–10.53) among patients with non-thyroid cancer and thyroid cancer, respectively, compared to the controls.

Conclusions/Significance

Treatment with vandetanib is associated with a significant increase in the overall incidence and risk of QTc interval prolongation. Different cancer types and treatment durations may affect the risk of developing high-grade QTc interval prolongation.     

Calcium dobesilate for diabetic retinopathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Many randomized clinical controlled trials have confirmed the efficacy and safety of calcium dobesilate in treating diabetic retinopathy(DR).This systematic review critically evaluated the evidence that links calcium dobesilate to DR.In this fixed-effects meta-analysis,a total of 221 pertinent English-language articles published between January 1975 and October 2013 were identified.Systematic searches of PUBMED,Springer Link and the Cochrane Clinical Trials Database were conducted using the keywords “diabetic retinopathy” and “calcium dobesilate”.The extracted information included the study design,inclusion and exclusion criteria,setting,sample size,participant mean age,treatment regime,mean change in best corrected visual acuity,laboratory parameters,capillary fragility,intraocular pressure and fundus manifestations based on the findings of fluorescent angiography.The summary statistics indicated that calcium dobesilate was significantly associated with improving retinal microaneurysms(RR: 0.62,95%CI: 0.42?0.90,P=0.01),retinalhemorrhages(RR: 0.39,95% CI: 0.17?0.88,P=0.02); exudates(RR: 0.31,95% CI: 0.12?0.81,P=0.02),reduction of whole blood viscosity(MD: ?0.57 CP,95% CI: ?0.75 to ?0.38,P<0.001),plasma viscosity(MD: ?0.36 CP,95% CI: ?0.63 to ?0.09,P=0.01) and blood cholesterol(MD: ?0.48 mg m L?1,95% CI: ?0.64?0.33,P<0.00001).Intraocular pressure was also significantly reduced(MD: ?5.59 mm Hg,95% CI: ?6.69 to ?4.50,P<0.00001).The results indicate that calcium dobesilate effectively treats DR at the systematic and local ocular levels.     

Outcomes for patients with the same disease treated inside and outside of randomized trials: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background:

It is unclear whether participation in a randomized controlled trial (RCT), irrespective of assigned treatment, is harmful or beneficial to participants. We compared outcomes for patients with the same diagnoses who did (“insiders”) and did not (“outsiders”) enter RCTs, without regard to the specific therapies received for their respective diagnoses.

Methods:

By searching the MEDLINE (1966–2010), Embase (1980–2010), CENTRAL (1960–2010) and PsycINFO (1880–2010) databases, we identified 147 studies that reported the health outcomes of “insiders” and a group of parallel or consecutive “outsiders” within the same time period. We prepared a narrative review and, as appropriate, meta-analyses of patients’ outcomes.

Results:

We found no clinically or statistically significant differences in outcomes between “insiders” and “outsiders” in the 23 studies in which the experimental intervention was ineffective (standard mean difference in continuous outcomes −0.03, 95% confidence interval [CI] −0.1 to 0.04) or in the 7 studies in which the experimental intervention was effective and was received by both “insiders” and “outsiders” (mean difference 0.04, 95% CI −0.04 to 0.13). However, in 9 studies in which an effective intervention was received only by “insiders,” the “outsiders” experienced significantly worse health outcomes (mean difference −0.36, 95% CI −0.61 to −0.12).

Interpretation:

We found no evidence to support clinically important overall harm or benefit arising from participation in RCTs. This conclusion refutes earlier claims that trial participants are at increased risk of harm.When people are asked to participate in a randomized controlled trial (RCT), it is natural for them to ask several questions in return. How safe are these treatments? How many extra visits and tests must I undergo? Will the researchers keep my family doctor informed about what’s going on? What outcomes are to be measured, and do they include ones that are of interest to me as a patient?These multiple questions can be summarized as follows: Would I fare better being treated within the trial (as an “insider”) or in routine clinical care outside it (as an “outsider”)? Patients may ask this question in 1 of 2 ways. The first is highly specific: “Am I better off receiving this specific treatment as an insider or as an outsider?” Alternatively, they might ask a more general question: “Am I better off having my illness managed, regardless of the specific treatment I would receive, as an insider or as an outsider?” These questions are highly appropriate, and both deserve to be asked and answered,^1,2 especially given that nonsystematic reviews have suggested a possible “inclusion benefit” from participating in trials.³These 2 specific patient questions are analogous to those posed by researchers asking whether treatments do more good than harm when applied under “ideal” circumstances (in explanatory trials) or in the “real world” of routine health care (in pragmatic trials). Vist and colleagues answered the explanatory question when their earlier review⁴ found no advantage or disadvantage from receiving the same treatment inside or outside an RCT. Left unanswered, however, was the broader, more pragmatic question. In our experience, trial participants are often offered new, as-yet-untested treatments that would not be available to them outside the trial. This review looks at the dilemma faced by these patients, which needs to be addressed before general conclusions can be drawn about trial safety.     

Cognitive impairment and risk of future stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background:

Several studies have assessed the link between cognitive impairment and risk of future stroke, but results have been inconsistent. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies to determine the association between cognitive impairment and risk of future stroke.

Methods:

We searched MEDLINE and Embase (1966 to November 2013) and conducted a manual search of bibliographies of relevant retrieved articles and reviews. We included cohort studies that reported multivariable adjusted relative risks and 95% confidence intervals or standard errors for stroke with respect to baseline cognitive impairment.

Results:

We identified 18 cohort studies (total 121 879 participants) and 7799 stroke events. Pooled analysis of results from all studies showed that stroke risk increased among patients with cognitive impairment at baseline (relative risk [RR] 1.39, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.24–1.56). The results were similar when we restricted the analysis to studies that used a widely adopted definition of cognitive impairment (i.e., Mini-Mental State Examination score < 25 or nearest equivalent) (RR 1.64, 95% CI 1.46–1.84). Cognitive impairment at baseline was also associated with an increased risk of fatal stroke (RR 1.68, 95% CI 1.21–2.33) and ischemic stroke (RR 1.65, 95% CI 1.41–1.93).

Interpretation:

Baseline cognitive impairment was associated with a significantly higher risk of future stroke, especially ischemic and fatal stroke.Cognitive impairment is a major contributor to disability and dependence worldwide. Globally, stroke is the leading cause of long-term disability among adults and the second leading cause of death.¹ The high cumulative risk of dementia or stroke or both conditions has been shown by the Framingham study,² and the urgent need to improve knowledge regarding cognition and vascular conditions has been emphasized in a specific meeting providing harmonized standards.³ Beyond their personal tolls, both of these conditions carry substantial social and economic burdens. These conditions also correlate strongly with increasing age. Given the projected substantial rise in the number of older people around the world, prevalence rates of cognitive impairment and stroke are expected to soar over the next several decades, especially in high-income countries.^4,5Shared pathophysiologic mechanisms seem to exist between cognitive impairment and cerebrovascular disease.⁶ Indeed, risk factors for stroke (hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes, obesity and physical inactivity) have been shown to play a role in the onset and progression of cognitive impairment,⁷ and it is well established that stroke itself increases the risk of future cognitive impairment.⁸ However, whether cognitive impairment increases the risk of future stroke remains unclear. Early identification and regular surveillance for cognitive impairment could potentially enable prompt initiation of treatment aimed at not only potentially limiting further deterioration of cognitive function (if mild), but also possibly reducing the risk of future stroke through timely and optimal control of risk factors.Several published studies have assessed the association between cognitive impairment and subsequent risk of stroke, but the results have not been consistent. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the qualitative and quantitative association between baseline cognitive impairment and risk of future stroke.     

Chemoprophylaxis in contacts of patients with cholera: systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction

There is a pressing need for effective measures to prevent the spread of cholera. Our systematic review assesses the effects of chemoprophylaxis in preventing cholera among exposed contacts.

Methods and Findings

We considered published and unpublished reports of studies up to July 2011. For this we searched: PubMed (1966 to July, 2011), Embase (1980 to July 2011), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (6; 2011), LILACS (1982 to July, 2011), the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (July 2011) and references of identified publications. We included controlled clinical trials (randomized and non-randomized) in which chemoprophylaxis was used to prevent cholera among patient contacts. The main outcome measures were hospitalization and laboratory diagnosis of cholera in contacts for cholera patients. We assessed the risk of bias. We identified 2638 references and these included 2 randomized trials and 5 controlled trials that added up to a total of 4,154 participants. The risk of bias scored high for most trials. The combined results from two trials found that chemoprophylaxis reduced hospitalization of contacts during the follow-up period by 8–12 days (2826 participants; RR 0.54 95% CI 0.40–0.74;I² 0%). A meta-analysis of five trials found a significant reduction in disease among contacts with at least one positive sample who received chemoprophylaxis during the overall follow-up (range 4–15 days) (1,414 participants; RR 0.35 95% CI 0.18–0.66;I² 74%). A significant reduction in the number of positive samples was also found with chemoprophylaxis (3 CCT; 6,918 samples; RR 0.39 95% CI 0.29–0.51;I² 0%).

Conclusion

Our findings suggest that chemoprophylaxis has a protective effect among household contacts of people with cholera but the results are based on studies with a high risk of bias. Hence, there is a need for adequate reliable research that allows balancing benefits and harms by evaluating the effects of chemoprophylaxis.     

The relationship between proteinuria and coronary risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Markers of kidney dysfunction such as proteinuria or albuminuria have been reported to be associated with coronary heart disease, but the consistency and strength of any such relationship has not been clearly defined. This lack of clarity has led to great uncertainty as to how proteinuria should be treated in the assessment and management of cardiovascular risk. We therefore undertook a systematic review of published cohort studies aiming to provide a reliable estimate of the strength of association between proteinuria and coronary heart disease.

Methods and Findings

A meta-analysis of cohort studies was conducted to obtain a summary estimate of the association between measures of proteinuria and coronary risk. MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched for studies reporting an age- or multivariate-adjusted estimate and standard error of the association between proteinuria and coronary heart disease. Studies were excluded if the majority of the study population had known glomerular disease or were the recipients of renal transplants. Two independent researchers extracted the estimates of association between proteinuria (total urinary protein >300 mg/d), microalbuminuria (urinary albumin 30–300 mg/d), macroalbuminuria (urinary albumin >300 mg/d), and risk of coronary disease from individual studies. These estimates were combined using a random-effects model. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to examine possible sources of heterogeneity in effect size. A total of 26 cohort studies were identified involving 169,949 individuals and 7,117 coronary events (27% fatal). The presence of proteinuria was associated with an approximate 50% increase in coronary risk (risk ratio 1.47, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.23–1.74) after adjustment for known risk factors. For albuminuria, there was evidence of a dose–response relationship: individuals with microalbuminuria were at 50% greater risk of coronary heart disease (risk ratio 1.47, 95% CI 1.30–1.66) than those without; in those with macroalbuminuria the risk was more than doubled (risk ratio 2.17, 1.87–2.52). Sensitivity analysis indicated no important differences in prespecified subgroups.

Conclusion

These data confirm a strong and continuous association between proteinuria and subsequent risk of coronary heart disease, and suggest that proteinuria should be incorporated into the assessment of an individual''s cardiovascular risk.     

Previous lung diseases and lung cancer risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

In order to review the epidemiologic evidence concerning previous lung diseases as risk factors for lung cancer, a meta-analysis and systematic review was conducted.

Methods

Relevant studies were identified through MEDLINE searches. Using random effects models, summary effects of specific previous conditions were evaluated separately and combined. Stratified analyses were conducted based on smoking status, gender, control sources and continent.

Results

A previous history of COPD, chronic bronchitis or emphysema conferred relative risks (RR) of 2.22 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.66, 2.97) (from 16 studies), 1.52 (95% CI: 1.25, 1.84) (from 23 studies) and 2.04 (95% CI: 1.72, 2.41) (from 20 studies), respectively, and for all these diseases combined 1.80 (95% CI: 1.60, 2.11) (from 39 studies). The RR of lung cancer for subjects with a previous history of pneumonia was 1.43 (95% CI: 1.22–1.68) (from 22 studies) and for subjects with a previous history of tuberculosis was 1.76 (95% CI = 1.49, 2.08), (from 30 studies). Effects were attenuated when restricting analysis to never smokers only for COPD/emphysema/chronic bronchitis (RR = 1.22, 0.97–1.53), however remained significant for pneumonia 1.36 (95% CI: 1.10, 1.69) (from 8 studies) and tuberculosis 1.90 (95% CI: 1.45, 2.50) (from 11 studies).

Conclusions

Previous lung diseases are associated with an increased risk of lung cancer with the evidence among never smokers supporting a direct relationship between previous lung diseases and lung cancer.     

Assisted reproductive techniques with congenital hypogonadotropic hypogonadism patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

After hormonal replacement therapy (HRT) including androgen replacement or sequential therapy of estrogen and progesterone, The combination of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) and human menopausal gonadotropin (hMG) and pulsatile GnRH, is not sufficient to produce sufficient gametes in some patients with Congenital hypogonadotropic hypogonadism (CHH). A Systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to determine that assisted reproductive techniques (ART) can effectively treat different causes of infertility.

Methods

To determine the effect of ART on fertility of CHH patients and investigate whether outcomes are similar to infertility due to other causes, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of retrospective trials.Clinical trials were systematically searched in Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane central register of controlled trials databases. The keywords and major terms covered “hypogonadotropic hypogonadism”, “kallmann syndrome”, “assisted reproductive techniques”, “intrauterine insemination”, “intracytoplasmic sperm injection”, “testicular sperm extraction”, “in vitro fertilization”, “embryo transplantation” and “intra-Fallopian transfer”.

Results

A total of 388 pregnancies occurred among 709 CHH patients who received ART (effectiveness 46, 95% confidence interval 0.39 to 0.53) in the 20 studies we included. The I² in trials assessing overall pregnancy rate (PR) per embryo transfer (ET) cycle was 73.06%. Similar results were observed in subgroup analysis by different gender. Regression indicates pregnancy rate decreases with increasing age. Fertilization, implantation and live birth rates (72, 36 and 40%) showed no significant differences as compared to infertility due to other causes.

Conclusions

Despite CHH patients usually being difficult to generate gametes, their actual chances of fertility are similar to subjects with other non-obstructive infertility. ART is a suitable option for CHH patients who do not conceive after long-term gonadotropin treatment.

     

Parental risk factors and anorectal malformations: systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Anderson's disease (AD) or chylomicron retention disease (CMRD) is a very rare hereditary lipid malabsorption syndrome. In order to discover novel mutations in the SAR1B gene and to evaluate the expression, as compared to healthy subjects, of the Sar1 gene and protein paralogues in the intestine, we investigated three previously undescribed individuals with the disease.

Methods

The SAR1B, SAR1A and PCSK9 genes were sequenced. The expression of the SAR1B and SAR1A genes in intestinal biopsies of both normal individuals and patients was measured by RTqPCR. Immunohistochemistry using antibodies to recombinant Sar1 protein was used to evaluate the expression and localization of the Sar1 paralogues in the duodenal biopsies.

Results

Two patients had a novel SAR1B mutation (p.Asp48ThrfsX17). The third patient, who had a previously described SAR1B mutation (p.Leu28ArgfsX7), also had a p.Leu21dup variant of the PCSK9 gene. The expression of the SAR1B gene in duodenal biopsies from an AD/CMRD patient was significantly decreased whereas the expression of the SAR1A gene was significantly increased, as compared to healthy individuals. The Sar1 proteins were present in decreased amounts in enterocytes in duodenal biopsies from the patients as compared to those from healthy subjects.

Conclusions

Although the proteins encoded by the SAR1A and SAR1B genes are 90% identical, the increased expression of the SAR1A gene in AD/CMRD does not appear to compensate for the lack of the SAR1B protein. The PCSK9 variant, although reported to be associated with low levels of cholesterol, does not appear to exert any additional effect in this patient. The results provide further insight into the tissue-specific nature of AD/CMRD.     

Hypertension outcomes of adrenalectomy in patients with primary aldosteronism: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

The hypertension cure rate of unilateral adrenalectomy in primary aldosteronism (PA) patients varies widely in existing studies.

Methods

We conducted an observational meta-analysis to summarize the pooled hypertension cure rate of unilateral adrenalectomy in PA patients. Comprehensive electronic searches of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, China National Knowledge Internet (CNKI), WanFang, SinoMed and Chongqing VIP databases were performed from initial state to May 20, 2016. We manually selected eligible studies from references in accordance with the inclusion criteria. The pooled hypertension cure rate of unilateral adrenalectomy in PA patients was calculated using the DerSimonian–Laird method to produce a random-effects model.

Results

Forty-three studies comprising approximately 4000 PA patients were included. The pooled hypertension cure rate was 50.6% (95% CI: 42.9–58.2%) for unilateral adrenalectomy in PA. Subgroup analyses showed that the hypertension cure rate was 61.3% (95% CI: 49.4–73.3%) in Chinese studies and 43.7% (95% CI: 38.0–49.4%) for other countries. Furthermore, the hypertension cure rate at 6-month follow-up was 53.3% (95% CI: 36.0–70.5%) and 49.6% (95% CI: 40.9–58.3%) for follow-up exceeding 6 months. The pooled hypertension cure rate was 50.9% (95% CI: 40.5–61.3%) from 2001 to 2010 and 50.2% (95% CI: 39.0–61.5%) from 2011 to 2016.

Conclusions

The hypertension cure rate for unilateral adrenalectomy in PA is not optimal. Large clinical trials are required to verify the utility of potential preoperative predictors in developing a novel and effective prediction model.

     

Use of acid-suppressive drugs and risk of pneumonia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Observational studies and randomized controlled trials have yielded inconsistent findings about the association between the use of acid-suppressive drugs and the risk of pneumonia. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to summarize this association.

Methods

We searched three electronic databases (MEDLINE [PubMed], Embase and the Cochrane Library) from inception to Aug. 28, 2009. Two evaluators independently extracted data. Because of heterogeneity, we used random-effects meta-analysis to obtain pooled estimates of effect.

Results

We identified 31 studies: five case–control studies, three cohort studies and 23 randomized controlled trials. A meta-analysis of the eight observational studies showed that the overall risk of pneumonia was higher among people using proton pump inhibitors (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.27, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.11–1.46, I² 90.5%) and histamine₂ receptor antagonists (adjusted OR 1.22, 95% CI 1.09–1.36, I² 0.0%). In the randomized controlled trials, use of histamine₂ receptor antagonists was associated with an elevated risk of hospital-acquired pneumonia (relative risk 1.22, 95% CI 1.01–1.48, I² 30.6%).

Interpretation

Use of a proton pump inhibitor or histamine₂ receptor antagonist may be associated with an increased risk of both community- and hospital-acquired pneumonia. Given these potential adverse effects, clinicians should use caution in prescribing acid-suppressive drugs for patients at risk.Recently, the medical literature has paid considerable attention to unrecognized adverse effects of commonly used medications and their potential public health impact.¹ One group of medications in widespread use is acid-suppressive drugs, which represent the second leading category of medication worldwide, with sales totalling US$26.9 billion in 2005.²Over the past 40 years, the development of potent acid-suppressive drugs, including proton pump inhibitors, has led to considerable improvements in the treatment of acid-related disorders of the upper gastrointestinal tract.³ Experts have generally viewed proton pump inhibitors as safe.⁴ However, potential complications such as gastrointestinal neoplasia, malabsorption of nutrients and increased susceptibility to infection have caused concern.⁵Of special interest is the possibility that acid-suppressive drugs could increase susceptibility to respiratory infections because these drugs increase gastric pH, thus allowing bacterial colonization.^6,7 Several previous studies have shown that treatment with acid-suppressive drugs might be associated with an increased risk of respiratory tract infections⁸ and community-acquired pneumonia in adults^6,7 and children.⁹ However, the association between use of acid-suppressive drugs and risk of pneumonia has been inconsistent.^10–13Given the widespread use of proton pump inhibitors and histamine₂ receptor antagonists, clarifying the potential impact of acid-suppressive therapy on the risk of pneumonia is of great importance to public health.¹⁴ Previous meta-analyses have focused on the role of acid-suppressive drugs in preventing stress ulcer,^11,13,15 but none have examined pneumonia as the primary outcome.The aim of this study was to summarize the association between the use of acid-suppressive drugs and the risk of pneumonia in observational studies and randomized controlled trials.     

Cigarette smoking and risk of second primary cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Approximately 5% of the population are living with a diagnosis of cancer. Recent improvements in survival following a diagnosis of cancer have led to an increase in second primary cancers (SPCs) worldwide. Their aetiology remains largely unknown with a large proportion believed to be related to modifiable lifestyle factors. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of published data that evaluated an association between cigarette smoking and risk of SPC. Studies were identified by searching Medline, Web of Science, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature) and Scopus databases through March 2021 using broad search criteria. A meta-analysis was performed to derive pooled relative risks (RRs) for SPC defined a priori as smoking-related based on current evidence (lung, upper aero-digestive tract, stomach, pancreas, colorectum, liver, kidney, ureter, bladder and acute myeloid leukaemia). Eleven cohort studies and ten case-control studies met the eligibility criteria for review. There was marked heterogeneity in methods used in terms of classification and timing of smoking, confounders adjusted for and duration of follow-up across the studies. Nine cohort and seven case-control studies classified smoking habits prior to diagnosis of first cancer while the remaining studies classified post-first cancer smoking habits. In a meta-analysis using six studies, an increased risk of smoking-related SPC was observed for both former (RR=1.42; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.20–1.67) and current smoking (RR=2.76; 95% CI 2.29–3.33), compared with never smoking. The pooled RRs changed only slightly when studies which measured post-first cancer smoking were excluded. A two-fold increase in risk was observed for ever smoking compared with never smoking. In conclusion, there was evidence that smoking might increase the risk of SPC in cancer survivors. For better informed cancer survivorship practice guidelines, more studies are needed particularly of post-cancer smoking and for cancers not known to be caused by smoking.     

Short- and long-term outcomes in infective endocarditis patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Despite advances in medical knowledge, technology and antimicrobial therapy, infective endocarditis (IE) is still associated with devastating outcomes. No reviews have yet assessed the outcomes of IE patients undergoing short- and long-term outcome evaluation, such as all-cause mortality and IE-related complications. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the short- and long-term mortality, as well as IE-related complications in patients with definite IE.

Methods

A computerized systematic literature search was carried out in PubMed, Scopus and Google Scholar from 2000 to August, 2016. Included studies were published studies in English that assessed short-and long-term mortality for adult IE patients. Pooled estimations with 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated with DerSimonian-Laird (DL) random-effects model. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses were also performed. Publication bias was evaluated using inspection of funnel plots and statistical tests.

Results

Twenty five observational studies (retrospective, 14; prospective, 11) including 22,382 patients were identified. The overall pooled mortality estimates for IE patients who underwent short- and long-term follow-up were 20% (95% CI: 18.0–23.0, P?<?0.01) and 37% (95% CI: 27.0–48.0, P?<?0.01), respectively. The pooled prevalence of cardiac complications in patients with IE was found to be 39% (95%CI: 32.0–46.0) while septic embolism and renal complications accounted for 25% (95% CI: 20.0–31) and 19% (95% CI: 14.0–25.0) (all P?<?0.01), respectively.

Conclusion

Irrespective of the follow-up period, a significantly higher mortality rate was reported in IE patients, and the burden of IE-related complications were immense. Further research is needed to assess the determinants of overall mortality in IE patients, as well as well-designed observational studies to conform our results.

     

Cardiac complications in patients with community-acquired pneumonia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies

Background

Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. CAP can trigger acute cardiac events. We sought to determine the incidence of major cardiac complications in CAP patients to characterize the magnitude of this problem.

Methods and Findings

Two investigators searched MEDLINE, Scopus, and EMBASE for observational studies of immunocompetent adults with clinical and radiological evidence of CAP that reported any of the following: overall cardiac complications, incident heart failure, acute coronary syndromes (ACS), or incident cardiac arrhythmias occurring within 30 days of CAP diagnosis. At a minimum, studies had to establish enrolment procedures and inclusion and exclusion criteria, enrol their patients sequentially, and report the incidence of cardiac complications as a function of their entire cohorts. Studies with focus on nosocomial or health care–associated pneumonia were not included. Review of 2,176 citations yielded 25 articles that met eligibility and minimum quality criteria. Seventeen articles (68%) reported cohorts of CAP inpatients. In this group, the pooled incidence rates for overall cardiac complications (six cohorts, 2,119 patients), incident heart failure (eights cohorts, 4,215 patients), acute coronary syndromes (six cohorts, 2,657 patients), and incident cardiac arrhythmias (six cohorts, 2,596 patients), were 17.7% (confidence interval [CI] 13.9–22.2), 14.1% (9.3–20.6), 5.3% (3.2–8.6), and 4.7% (2.4–8.9), respectively. One article reported cardiac complications in CAP outpatients, four in low-risk (not severely ill) inpatients, and three in high-risk inpatients. The incidences for all outcomes except overall cardiac complications were lower in the two former groups and higher in the latter. One additional study reported on CAP outpatients and low-risk inpatients without discriminating between these groups. Twelve studies (48%) asserted the evaluation of cardiac complications in their methods but only six (24%) provided a definition for them. Only three studies, all examining ACS, carried out risk factor analysis for these events. No study analyzed the association between cardiac complications and other medical complications or their impact on other CAP outcomes.

Conclusions

Major cardiac complications occur in a substantial proportion of patients with CAP. Physicians and patients need to appreciate the significance of this association for timely recognition and management of these events. Strategies aimed at preventing pneumonia (i.e., influenza and pneumococcal vaccination) in high-risk populations need to be optimized. Further research is needed to understand the mechanisms underlying this association, measure the impact of cardiac complications on other CAP outcomes, identify those patients with CAP at high risk of developing cardiac complications, and design strategies to prevent their occurrence in this population. Please see later in the article for the Editors'' Summary     

Circulating visfatin levels and cancers risk: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Visfatin levels have been reported to be abnormal in many types of cancers. However, epidemiological studies yielded inconsistent results. Therefore, a meta-analysis was performed to assess the association between circulating visfatin levels and cancer risk. A systematic search was conducted for relevant studies in health-related electronic databases up to March 2018. Data related to standard mean difference (SMD) and overall odds ratio (ORS) were collected and analyzed. Summary SMD and pooled OR with 95% CIs were calculated using a random-effect model. Funnel plot and Egger's linear regression test were conducted to examine the risk of publication bias. A total of 27 studies with 2,693 cases and 3,040 healthy controls were included in meta-analysis for pooling SMD analysis. The results of the meta-analysis showed a significant higher visfatin levels in patients with various cancers than in controls, with a pooled SMD of 0.88, 95% CI = 0.56–1.20, p = 0.000. In subgroup, metaregression, Galbraith plot, and sensitivity analysis showed no substantial difference among all the analyzed factors. Data from 14 studies were also used for pooling ORs analysis. Metaresults revealed that high visfatin levels were associated with cancer risk (OR = 1.24, 95% CI: 1.14–1.34, p = 0.000). No evidence of publication bias was observed for pooling ORs and SMD analysis. This meta-analysis indicated a significant association between high circulating visfatin levels and increased risk of various cancers. Visfatin may represent a potential biomarker for early detection of cancers who may benefit from preventive treatment.Note.     

Sleep disturbances and risk of sick leave: systematic review and meta-analysis

Sleep and Biological Rhythms - Sleep disturbances have multiple negative effects on psychological, social, and occupational aspects. The effects of sleep disturbances on the risk of taking sick...     

Genetic polymorphisms in adipokine genes and the risk of obesity: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Polymorphisms in adipokine genes, such as leptin (LEP), leptin receptor (LEPR), resistin (RETN), adiponectin (ADIPOQ), interleukin-1β (IL-1β), IL-6 (IL-6), and tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) may be involved in the development of obesity. We conducted a systematic review of published evidence on the association between different adipokine genes and the risk of obesity. Librarian-designed searches of PubMed and HuGeNet, review of reference lists from published reviews and content expert advice identified potentially eligible studies. The genotyping information and polymorphisms of different adipokine genes, numbers of genotyped cases and controls and frequencies of genotypes were extracted from 48 eligible studies included in this review. Twenty-one polymorphisms each associated with obesity in at least one study were identified. Polymorphisms in the adipokine genes, LEP, LEPR, and RETN were not associated with obesity susceptibility, whereas ADIPOQ G276T (T vs. G: odds ratio (OR), 1.59; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.39-1.81), IL-1β C3953T (CC vs. CT+TT: OR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.18-2.20), and TNF-α G308A (GG vs. GA+AA: OR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.02-1.39) polymorphisms were associated with an increased risk of obesity. The IL-6 G174C polymorphism was also associated obesity when using allelic comparisons, the recessive genetic model and the dominant genetic model with OR (95% CI) of 1.95 (1.37-2.77), 1.44 (1.15-1.80), and 1.36 (1.16-1.59), respectively. No significant evidence of publication bias was present. However, these "null" results were underpowered due to a small pooled sample size, and analysis of additional case-control studies with larger sample sizes should provide further clarifications.     

Periprocedural heparin bridging in patients receiving oral anticoagulation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Periprocedural heparin bridging therapy aims to reduce the risk of thromboembolic events in patients requiring an interruption in their anticoagulation therapy for the purpose of an elective procedure. The efficacy and safety of heparin bridging therapy has not been well established.

Objectives

To compare through meta-analysis the effects of heparin bridging therapy on the risk of major bleeding and thromboembolic events of clinical significance among patients taking oral anticoagulants.

Methods

We searched PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane library from January 2005 to July 2016. Studies were included if they reported clinical outcomes of patients receiving heparin bridging therapy during interruption of oral anticoagulant for operations. Data were pooled using random-effects modeling.

Results

A total of 25 studies, including 6 randomized controlled trials and 19 observational studies, were finally included in this analysis. Among all the 35,944 patients, 10,313 patients were assigned as heparin bridging group, and the other 25,631 patients were non-heparin bridging group. Overall, compared with patients without bridging therapy, heparin bridging therapy increased the risk of major bleeding (OR?=?3.23, 95%CI: 2.06–5.05), minor bleeding (OR?=?1.52, 95%CI: 1.06–2.18) and overall bleeding (OR?=?2.83, 95%CI: 1.86–4.30).While there was no significant difference in thromboembolic events (OR?=?0.99,95%CI: 0.49–2.00), stroke or transient ischemic attack(OR?=?1.45, 95%CI: 0.93–2.26,) or all-cause mortality (OR?=?0.71, 95%CI: 0.31–1.65).

Conclusions

Heparin-bridging therapy increased the risk of major and minor bleeding without decreasing the risk of thromboembolic events and all cause death compared to non-heparin bridging.

     

Use of labour induction and risk of cesarean delivery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background:

Induction of labour is common, and cesarean delivery is regarded as its major complication. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate whether the risk of cesarean delivery is higher or lower following labour induction compared with expectant management.

Methods:

We searched 6 electronic databases for relevant articles published through April 2012 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in which labour induction was compared with placebo or expectant management among women with a viable singleton pregnancy. We assessed risk of bias and obtained data on rates of cesarean delivery. We used regression analysis techniques to explore the effect of patient characteristics, induction methods and study quality on risk of cesarean delivery.

Results:

We identified 157 eligible RCTs (n = 31 085). Overall, the risk of cesarean delivery was 12% lower with labour induction than with expectant management (pooled relative risk [RR] 0.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.84–0.93; I² = 0%). The effect was significant in term and post-term gestations but not in preterm gestations. Meta-regression analysis showed that initial cervical score, indication for induction and method of induction did not alter the main result. There was a reduced risk of fetal death (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.25–0.99; I² = 0%) and admission to a neonatal intensive care unit (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.79–0.94), and no impact on maternal death (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.10–9.57; I² = 0%) with labour induction.

Interpretation:

The risk of cesarean delivery was lower among women whose labour was induced than among those managed expectantly in term and post-term gestations. There were benefits for the fetus and no increased risk of maternal death.Labour is induced in 1 of 5 births^1,2 for maternal reasons (e.g., preeclampsia, cardiac or renal disease), fetal reasons (e.g., intrauterine growth restriction) or a combination (e.g., poorly controlled diabetes, preterm rupture of the membranes or post-term pregnancy).³ Induction of labour artificially ripens the cervix and initiates uterine contractions in women who are not already in labour, leading to progressive dilation of the cervix to achieve vaginal birth of a baby at any gestation beyond the legal definition of fetal viability.⁴Although induction of labour has been criticized for an associated increased risk of cesarean delivery, recent studies have shown that there are fewer cesarean deliveries with induction than without it. However, the findings have not had much impact on practice, in part because the systematic reviews^5–8 investigated subsets of induction and included few randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and because observational data in a cohort study⁹ had risk of confounding. Consumer organizations,¹⁰ guidelines¹¹ and textbooks^12,13 have given contradictory information about cesarean risk, which can lead to confusion over decision-making, particularly given a desire to support normal birth in the face of increasing cesarean rates worldwide. Cesarean delivery carries multiple risks to mother and baby, including maternal death,¹⁴ infection and postnatal depression,^15,16 and respiratory distress syndrome in neonates.¹⁴ Accurate, precise information about cesarean risk is therefore needed for decision-making regarding labour induction.We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs to investigate the risk of cesarean delivery associated with labour induction compared with expectant management. We also explored the effects of clinical characteristics and study quality on the overall result using subgroup and meta-regression analyses.