Summary Background MicroRNAs (miRNAs) can be used as prognostic biomarkers in many types of cancer. We aimed to identify miRNAs that were prognostic in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Methods ...We retrospectively analysed miRNA expression profiles in 312 paraffin-embedded specimens of nasopharyngeal carcinoma from Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center (Guangzhou, China) and 18 specimens of non-cancer nasopharyngitis. Using an 873 probe microarray, we assessed associations between miRNA signatures and clinical outcome in a randomly selected 156 samples (training set) and validated findings in the remaining 156 samples (internal validation set). We confirmed the miRNAs signature using quantitative RT-PCR analysis in 156 samples from a second randomisation of the 312 samples, and validated the miRNA signature in 153 samples from the West China Hospital of Sichuan University in Chengdu, China (independent set). We used the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank tests to estimate correlations of the miRNA signature with disease-free survival (DFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and overall survival. Findings 41 miRNAs were differentially expressed between nasopharyngeal carcinoma and non-cancer nasopharyngitis tissues. A signature of five miRNAs, each significantly associated with DFS, was identified in the training set. We calculated a risk score from the signature and classified patients as high risk or low risk. Compared with patients with low-risk scores, patients with high risk scores in the training set had shorter DFS (hazard ratio HR 2·73, 95% CI 1·46–5·11; p=0·0019), DMFS (3·48, 1·57–7·75; p=0·0020), and overall survival (2·48, 1·24–4·96; p=0·010). We noted equivalent findings in the internal validation set for DFS (2·47, 1·32–4·61; p=0·0052), DMFS (2·28, 1·09–4·80; p=0·030), and overall survival (2·87, 1·38–5·96; p=0·0051) and in the independent set for DFS (3·16, 1·65–6·04; p=0·0011), DMFS (2·39, 1·05–5·42; p=0·037), and overall survival (3·07, 1·34–7·01; p=0·0082). The five-miRNA signature was an independent prognostic factor. A combination of this signature and TNM stage had better prognostic value than did TNM stage alone in the training set (area under receiver operating characteristics 0·68 95% CI 0·60–0·76 vs 0·60 0·52–0·67; p=0·013), the internal validation set (0·70 0·61–0·78 vs 0·61 0·54–0·68; p=0·012), and the independent set (0·70 0·62–0·78 vs 0·63 0·56–0·69; p=0·032). Interpretation Identification of patients with the five-miRNA signature might add prognostic value to the TNM staging system and inform treatment decisions for patients at high risk of progression. Funding Science Foundation of Chinese Ministry of Health, National Natural Science Foundation of China, Pearl River Scholar Funded Scheme, Guangdong Key Scientific and Technological Innovation Program, Guangdong Natural Science Foundation, Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities.
Abstract Background Conflicting results about the prognostic value of surgical margin status in patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) have been reported. We aimed to assess the ...association between surgical margin status and prognosis in ICC through a meta-analysis. Materials and methods We conducted a literature search of the articles evaluating the prognostic value of surgical margin status in patients with ICC. The pooled estimation of the hazard ratio (HR) with the 95% confidence interval (CI) was performed to determine the influence of surgical margin status on the survival outcome. Results A total of 21 studies involving 3201 patients were finally included into the meta-analysis. The percentage of patients with positive surgical margin ranged from 7.2% to 75.9% in the enrolled studies. The pooled estimates showed that patients with positive surgical margin had inferior overall survival (HR: 1.864; 95% CI: 1.542–2.252; P < 0.001) and progression-free survival (HR: 2.033; 95% CI: 1.030–4.011; P = 0.041) than patients with negative ones. The subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses were consistent with the overall results. Conclusions Patients with negative surgical margin had significantly favorable overall survival and progression-free survival after surgical resection for ICC. The notion of achieving the R0 resection should be emphasized.
Current risk scores of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) need sophisticated algorithm and were limited for bedside use. Our study aimed to evaluate the usefulness of admission shock ...index (SI) for predicting the short-term outcomes in patients with STEMI. Included were 7,187 consecutive patients with STEMI. The admission SI was defined as the ratio of admission heart rate and systolic blood pressure. Patients were divided into 2 groups with SI <0.7 and ≥0.7, respectively, based on the receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. The major end points were 7- and 30-day all-cause mortality. Of 7,187 patients, 5,026 had admission SI <0.7 and 2,161 had admission SI ≥0.7. Those who presented with SI ≥0.7 had greater 7- and 30-day all-cause mortality and major adverse cardiovascular events than patients with SI <0.7. After multivariate adjustment, patients with SI ≥0.7 had a 2.2-fold increased risk of 7-day all-cause mortality (hazard ratio 2.21, 95% confidence interval CI 1.71 to 2.86) and 1.9-fold increased risk of 30-day all-cause mortality (hazard ratio 1.94, 95% CI 1.54 to 2.44). Moreover, admission SI ≥0.7 was also associated with 1.6- and 1.5-fold increased risk of 7- and 30-day major adverse cardiovascular events (hazard ratio 1.63, 95% CI 1.36 to 1.95 and hazard ratio 1.47, 95% CI 1.24 to 1.74, respectively). The C statistic of admission SI for predicting 7- and 30-day all-cause mortality was 0.701 and 0.686, respectively, compared with 0.744 and 0.738 from the Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction risk score. In conclusion, admission SI, an easily calculated index at first contact, may be a useful predictor for short-term outcomes especially for acute phase outcomes in patients with STEMI.
Atrial fibrillation (AF) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are 2 common morbidities and often coexist. Studies have shown that COPD is a risk factor for cardiovascular disease, but the ...characteristics in patients with COPD and AF, as well as the impact of COPD on the outcomes of AF were lacking. The aim of present study was to analyze the clinical characteristics and to evaluate the association of COPD with 1-year outcomes in patients with AF.
Longitudinal observational study.
A total of 1975 consecutive patients with AF were registered. Patients were divided into COPD group and non-COPD group according to whether AF coexisted with COPD.
Outcome measures included all-cause mortality, stroke, and major adverse events (MAE) during 1-year follow-up.
A group of 227 (11.5%) patients had concomitant COPD. Compared with non-COPD patients, patients with COPD were older and tended to have other coexisting cardiovascular morbidities, and had a significantly higher percentage of smoking history. Anticoagulation with warfarin was adopted by only a few patients both with and without COPD. During 1-year follow-up, the all-cause mortality and major adverse event rate in the COPD group were significantly higher than that of non-COPD group (26.9% vs 12.3%, P < .001 and 25.6% vs 19.1%, P = .027, respectively), whereas the incidence of stroke in the 2 groups was comparable (7.9% vs 7.4%, P = .788). Moreover, the cause-specific mortality between the 2 groups was comparable. After multivariate adjustments, COPD was still an independent risk factor for both 1-year all-cause mortality hazard rate (HR) = 1.491, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.110-2.002, P = .008 and cardiovascular mortality (HR = 1.595, 95% CI 1.071-2.376, P = .022), but not a risk factor for stroke (HR = 0.879, 95% CI 0.527-1.464, P = .620).
Anticoagulation treatment is inadequate in patients with AF and COPD. The presence of COPD in patients with AF is an independent risk factor for 1-year all-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality but not a risk factor for stroke.
Background:
Post-traumatic related limb osteomyelitis (PTRLO) is a complex bone infection. Currently, there are no available microbial data on a national scale that can guide appropriate antibiotic ...selection, and explore the dynamic changes in dominant pathogens over time. This study aimed to conduct a comprehensive epidemiological analysis of PTRLO in China.
Methods:
The study was approved by the Institutional Research Board (IRB), and 3526 PTRLO patients were identified from 212 394 traumatic limb fracture patients at 21 hospitals between 1 January 2008 and 31 December 2017. A retrospective analysis was conducted to investigate the epidemiology of PTRLO, including changes in infection rate (IR), pathogens, infection risk factors and antibiotic resistance and sensitivity.
Results:
The IR of PTRLO increased gradually from 0.93 to 2.16% (Z=14.392,
P
<0.001). Monomicrobial infection (82.6%) was significantly higher than polymicrobial infection (17.4%) (
P
<0.001). The IR of Gram-positive (GP) and Gram-negative (GN) pathogens showed a significant increase from the lowest 0.41% to the highest 1.15% (GP) or 1.62% (GN), respectively. However, the longitudinal trend of GP vs. GN’s composition did not show any significance (Z=±1.1918,
P
>0.05). The most prevalent GP strains were Methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) (17.03%), Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) (10.46%),
E. faecalis
(5.19%) and
S. epidermidis
(4.87%). In contrast, the dominant strains GN strains were
Pseudomonas Aeruginosa
(10.92%),
E. cloacae
(10.34%),
E. coli
(9.47%),
Acinetobacter Baumannii
(7.92%) and
Klebsiella Pneumoniae
(3.33%). In general, the high-risk factors for polymicrobial infection include opened-fracture (odds ratio, 2.223), hypoproteinemia (odds ratio, 2.328), and multiple fractures (odds ratio, 1.465). It is important to note that the antibiotics resistance and sensitivity analysis of the pathogens may be influenced by complications or comorbidities.
Conclusions:
This study provides the latest data of PTRLO in China and offers trustworthy guidelines for clinical practice. (China Clinical Trials.gov number, ChiCTR1800017597).
