Search

Background: Lenvatinib and atezolizumab plus bevacizumab(A + B) have been used for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) as first‐line therapy. Real‐world studies comparison of efficacy and safety in these two regimens are limited, we therefore conduct this study to investigate these issues. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed patients received lenvatinib (n = 46) and A + B (n = 46) as first‐line systemic therapy for unresectable HCC in a tertiary medical center. Objective response rate (ORR), progression free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were evaluated according to modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (mRECIST). Inverse probability weighting (IPW) was performed for baseline clinical features balance. Results: A total of 92 patients with median age of 63.8 year‐old, 78.3% male, 85.9% viral hepatitis infected, 67.4% BCLC stage C were enrolled. The median treatment and follow‐up duration were 4.7 months and 9.4 months, respectively. There was no significant difference in ORR (26.1% vs. 41.3%, p = 0.1226), PFS (5.9 vs. 5.3 months, p = 0.4066), and OS (not reached vs. not reached, p = 0.7128) between the lenvatinib and A + B groups. After IPW, the results of survival and response rate were also compared. Subgroup analysis suggested that using lenvatinib was not inferior to A + B in regards of PFS, including those with elder, Child‐Pugh class B, beyond up‐to‐seven, or portal vein invasion VP4 patients. Among the lenvatinib treated patients, multivariate analysis showed patients elder than 65‐year‐old was an independent predictor associated with shorter PFS (adjust HR: 2.085[0.914–4.753], p = 0.0213). The incidence rates of adverse events were similar between two groups (76 vs. 63%, p = 0.1740). Both of two regimens had similarly few impact on liver function by comparison of baseline, third month, and sixth month albumin‐bilirubin index and Child‐Pugh score. Conclusions: The efficacy and safety of lenvatinib are similar to A + B as a first‐line systemic therapy for unresectable HCC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Small extracellular vesicles (sEVs) provide major promise for advances in cancer diagnostics, prognostics, and therapeutics, ascribed to their distinctive cargo reflective of pathophysiological status, active involvement in intercellular communication, as well as their ubiquity and stability in bodily fluids. As a result, the field of sEV research has expanded exponentially. Nevertheless, there is a lack of standardisation in methods for sEV isolation from cells grown in serum‐containing media. The majority of researchers use serum‐containing media for sEV harvest and employ ultracentrifugation as the primary isolation method. Ultracentrifugation is inefficient as it is devoid of the capacity to isolate high sEV yields without contamination of non‐sEV materials or disruption of sEV integrity. We comprehensively evaluated a protocol using tangential flow filtration and size exclusion chromatography to isolate sEVs from a variety of human and murine cancer cell lines, including HeLa, MDA‐MB‐231, EO771 and B16F10. We directly compared the performance of traditional ultracentrifugation and tangential flow filtration methods, that had undergone further purification by size exclusion chromatography, in their capacity to separate sEVs, and rigorously characterised sEV properties using multiple quantification devices, protein analyses and both image and nano‐flow cytometry. Ultracentrifugation and tangential flow filtration both enrich consistent sEV populations, with similar size distributions of particles ranging up to 200 nm. However, tangential flow filtration exceeds ultracentrifugation in isolating significantly higher yields of sEVs, making it more suitable for large‐scale research applications. Our results demonstrate that tangential flow filtration is a reliable and robust sEV isolation approach that surpasses ultracentrifugation in yield, reproducibility, time, costs and scalability. These advantages allow for implementation in comprehensive research applications and downstream investigations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Probiotics comprise a large group of microorganisms, which have different properties and thus confer different benefits. The use of probiotics has shown promising results in the management of diarrheal diseases. While the availability of probiotic products has flourished in the marketplace, there is limited guidance on the selection of probiotics for clinical use. This position paper is aimed at informing clinicians about the proper selection criteria of probiotics based on current evidence on strain‐specific efficacy and safety for the management of diarrheal diseases. Members of the working group discussed issues on probiotic use in clinical practice, which were then drafted into statements. Literature to support or refute the statements were gathered through a search of medical literature from 2011 to 2020. Recommendations were formulated based on the drafted statements and evidence gathered, revised as necessary, and finalized upon agreement of all members. Twelve statements and recommendations were developed covering the areas of quality control in the manufacturing of probiotics, criteria for selection of probiotics, and established evidence for use of probiotics in diarrheal diseases in adults and children. Recommendations for the use of specific probiotic strains in clinical practice were categorized as proven and probable efficacy based on strength of evidence. Robust evidence is available to support the use of probiotics for diarrheal diseases in clinical practice. Based on the results obtained, we strongly advocate the careful evaluation of products, including manufacturing practices, strain‐specific evidence, and contraindications for at‐risk populations when choosing probiotics for use in clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose To automatically extract regions of interest (ROIs) and simultaneously preserve the anatomical characteristics of each individual, we developed a new atlas-based method utilizing a pair of coregistered brain template and digital atlas. Materials and Methods Unlike the previous atlas-based method, this method treats each individual as the target image, and the template and atlas are each transformed to register with the individual. To evaluate the accuracy of this method we implemented it in extracting the hippocampus from two groups of T2-weighted structural images with different spatial resolutions and a group of T2*-weighted functional images. Furthermore, the results were compared against a manually segmented hippocampus and an atlas-derived hippocampus. Results Jaccard similarity (JS) reached 84.7%-90.5%, and relative error in volume (RV) was 4.8%-12.7%. The consistency observed between the results of the proposed method and manual drawing was therefore considerable. Conclusion We developed a new atlas-based method for ROI extraction that can automatically extract ROI and simultaneously preserve each individual's unique anatomical characteristics. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2010;32:830-835. © 2010 Wiley-Liss, Inc. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]