Poly-amino acid repeats, especially long stretches of glutamine (Q), are common features of transcription factors and cell-signalling proteins and are prone to expansion, resulting in ...neurodegenerative diseases. The amino-terminal domain of the androgen receptor (AR-NTD) has a poly-Q repeat between 9 and 36 residues, which when it expands above 40 residues results in spinal bulbar muscular atrophy. We have used spectroscopy and biochemical analysis to investigate the structural consequences of an expanded repeat (Q45) or removal of the repeat (DeltaQ) on the folding of the AR-NTD. Circular dichroism spectroscopy revealed that in aqueous solution, the AR-NTD has a relatively limited amount of stable secondary structure. Expansion of the poly-Q repeat resulted in a modest increase in alpha-helix structure, while deletion of the repeat resulted in a small loss of alpha-helix structure. These effects were more pronounced in the presence of the structure-promoting solvent trifluoroethanol or the natural osmolyte trimethylamine N-oxide. Fluorescence spectroscopy showed that the microenvironments of four tryptophan residues were also altered after the deletion of the Q stretch. Other structural changes were observed for the AR-NTDQ45 polypeptide after limited proteolysis; in addition, this polypeptide not only showed enhanced binding of the hydrophobic probe 8-anilinonaphthalene-1-sulphonic acid but was more sensitive to urea-induced unfolding. Taken together, these findings support the view that the presence and length of the poly-Q repeat modulate the folding and structure of the AR-NTD.
The somatostatin analogs (SSAs) lanreotide Autogel/Depot and octreotide long-acting release are used to treat acromegaly and neuroendocrine tumors. The present study evaluated opinions on SSA ...injection devices, including a recently approved lanreotide new device (lanreotide-ND), among nurses in Europe and the USA. Nurses injecting SSAs for at least three patients per year (n = 77) were interviewed regarding SSA devices. Device attributes were rated via questionnaire; nurses were then timed administering test injections with lanreotide-ND and octreotide long-acting release. The most important delivery system attributes were easy/convenient preparation and injection (ranked in the top five by 70% of nurses), low clogging risk (58%), and high product efficacy (55%). Compared with the octreotide long-acting release device, lanreotide-ND scored higher on 15/16 attributes, had shorter mean preparation and administration time (329 versus 66 seconds, respectively; P ≤ 0.01) and a higher overall preference score (70 versus 114, respectively; P ≤ 0.01). The five most important lanreotide-ND attributes were: prefilled device, confidence a full dose was delivered, low clogging risk, easy/convenient preparation and injection, and fast administration. These device features could lead to improvements in clinical practice and benefit patients/caregivers who administer SSAs at home.
Healthcare professionals have a duty to maintain basic life support (BLS) skills. This study aims to evaluate medical students' factual knowledge of BLS and the training they receive.
A ...cross-sectional, closed-response questionnaire was distributed to the first- and fourth-year students studying at institutions in the United Kingdom. The paper questionnaire sought to quantify respondent's previous BLS training, factual knowledge of the BLS algorithm using five multiple choice questions (MCQs), and valuate their desire for further BLS training. Students received 1 point for each correctly identified answer to the 5 MCQ's.
A total of 3,732 complete responses were received from 21 medical schools. Eighty percent (
=2,999) of students completed a BLS course as part of their undergraduate medical studies. There was a significant difference (
<0.001) in the percentage of the fourth-year students selecting the correct answer in all the MCQ's compared to the first-year students except in identifying the correct depth of compressions required during CPR (
=0.095). Overall 10.3% (95% CI 9.9% to 10.7%) of respondents correctly identified the answer to 5 MCQ's on BLS 9% of the first-year students (
=194) and 12% of the fourth-year students (
=190). On an institutional level the proportion of students answering all MCQ's correctly ranged from 2% to 54% at different universities. Eighty-one percent of students (
=3,031) wished for more BLS training in their curriculum.
Factual knowledge of BLS is poor among medical students in the UK. There is a disparity in standards of knowledge across institutions and respondents indicating that they would like more training.
Lipid lowering drugs are still widely underused, despite compelling evidence about their effectiveness in the treatment and prevention of cardiovascular disease. Poor patient adherence to a ...medication regimen is a major factor in the lack of success in treating hyperlipidaemia. In this updated review we focus on interventions which encourage patients at risk of heart disease or stroke to take lipid lowering medication regularly.
To assess the effects of interventions aimed at improved adherence to lipid lowering drugs, focusing on measures of adherence and clinical outcomes.
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2008, Issue 1), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and CINAHL (March 2008). No language restrictions were applied.
Randomised controlled trials of adherence-enhancing interventions for lipid lowering medication in adults for both primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease in an ambulatory setting looking at adherence, serum lipid levels, adverse effects and health outcomes. Studies were selected independently by two review authors.
Data were extracted and assessed by two review authors following criteria outlined by the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.
Three additional studies were found in the update and, in total, 11 studies were included in this review. The studies included interventions that caused a change in adherence ranging from -3% to 25% (decrease in adherence by 3% to increase in adherence by 25%). Patient re-enforcement and reminding was the most promising category of interventions, investigated in six trials of which four showed improved adherent behaviour of statistical significance (absolute increase: 24%, 9%, 8% and 6%). Other interventions associated with increased adherence were simplification of the drug regimen (absolute increase 11%) and patient information and education (absolute increase 13%). The methodological and analytical quality of some studies was low and results have to be considered with caution.
At this stage, reminding patients seems the most promising intervention to increase adherence to lipid lowering drugs. The lack of a gold standard method of measuring adherence is one major barrier in adherence research. More reliable data might be achieved by newer methods of measurement, more consistency in adherence assessment and longer duration of follow up. More recent studies have started using more reliable methods for data collection but follow-up periods remain too short. Increased patient-centredness with emphasis on the patient's perspective and shared decision-making might lead to more conclusive answers when searching for tools to encourage patients to take lipid lowering medication.
Although antidepressants are often a first-line treatment for adults with moderate to severe depression, many people do not respond adequately to medication, and are said to have treatment-resistant ...depression (TRD). Little evidence exists to inform the most appropriate 'next step' treatment for these people.
To assess the effectiveness of standard pharmacological treatments for adults with TRD.
We searched the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Controlled Trials Register (CCMDCTR) (March 2016), CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and Web of Science (31 December 2018), the World Health Organization trials portal and ClinicalTrials.gov for unpublished and ongoing studies, and screened bibliographies of included studies and relevant systematic reviews without date or language restrictions.
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with participants aged 18 to 74 years with unipolar depression (based on criteria from DSM-IV-TR or earlier versions, International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-10, Feighner criteria or Research Diagnostic Criteria) who had not responded to a minimum of four weeks of antidepressant treatment at a recommended dose. Interventions were: (1) increasing the dose of antidepressant monotherapy; (2) switching to a different antidepressant monotherapy; (3) augmenting treatment with another antidepressant; (4) augmenting treatment with a non-antidepressant. All were compared with continuing antidepressant monotherapy. We excluded studies of non-standard pharmacological treatments (e.g. sex hormones, vitamins, herbal medicines and food supplements).
Two reviewers used standard Cochrane methods to extract data, assess risk of bias, and resolve disagreements. We analysed continuous outcomes with mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI). For dichotomous outcomes, we calculated a relative risk (RR) and 95% CI. Where sufficient data existed, we conducted meta-analyses using random-effects models.
We included 10 RCTs (2731 participants). Nine were conducted in outpatient settings and one in both in- and outpatients. Mean age of participants ranged from 42 - 50.2 years, and most were female. One study investigated switching to, or augmenting current antidepressant treatment with, another antidepressant (mianserin). Another augmented current antidepressant treatment with the antidepressant mirtazapine. Eight studies augmented current antidepressant treatment with a non-antidepressant (either an anxiolytic (buspirone) or an antipsychotic (cariprazine; olanzapine; quetiapine (3 studies); or ziprasidone (2 studies)). We judged most studies to be at a low or unclear risk of bias. Only one of the included studies was not industry-sponsored. There was no evidence of a difference in depression severity when current treatment was switched to mianserin (MD on Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D) = -1.8, 95% CI -5.22 to 1.62, low-quality evidence)) compared with continuing on antidepressant monotherapy. Nor was there evidence of a difference in numbers dropping out of treatment (RR 2.08, 95% CI 0.94 to 4.59, low-quality evidence; dropouts 38% in the mianserin switch group; 18% in the control). Augmenting current antidepressant treatment with mianserin was associated with an improvement in depression symptoms severity scores from baseline (MD on HAM-D -4.8, 95% CI -8.18 to -1.42; moderate-quality evidence). There was no evidence of a difference in numbers dropping out (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.38 to 2.72; low-quality evidence; 19% dropouts in the mianserin-augmented group; 38% in the control). When current antidepressant treatment was augmented with mirtazapine, there was little difference in depressive symptoms (MD on Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II) -1.7, 95% CI -4.03 to 0.63; high-quality evidence) and no evidence of a difference in dropout numbers (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.15 to 1.62; dropouts 2% in mirtazapine-augmented group; 3% in the control). Augmentation with buspirone provided no evidence of a benefit in terms of a reduction in depressive symptoms (MD on Montgomery and Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) -0.30, 95% CI -9.48 to 8.88; low-quality evidence) or numbers of drop-outs (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.53; low-quality evidence; dropouts 11% in buspirone-augmented group; 19% in the control). Severity of depressive symptoms reduced when current treatment was augmented with cariprazine (MD on MADRS -1.50, 95% CI -2.74 to -0.25; high-quality evidence), olanzapine (MD on HAM-D -7.9, 95% CI -16.76 to 0.96; low-quality evidence; MD on MADRS -12.4, 95% CI -22.44 to -2.36; low-quality evidence), quetiapine (SMD -0.32, 95% CI -0.46 to -0.18; I2 = 6%, high-quality evidence), or ziprasidone (MD on HAM-D -2.73, 95% CI -4.53 to -0.93; I2 = 0, moderate-quality evidence) compared with continuing on antidepressant monotherapy. However, a greater number of participants dropped out when antidepressant monotherapy was augmented with an antipsychotic (cariprazine RR 1.68, 95% CI 1.16 to 2.41; quetiapine RR 1.57, 95% CI: 1.14 to 2.17; ziprasidone RR 1.60, 95% CI 1.01 to 2.55) compared with antidepressant monotherapy, although estimates for olanzapine augmentation were imprecise (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.04 to 2.69). Dropout rates ranged from 10% to 39% in the groups augmented with an antipsychotic, and from 12% to 23% in the comparison groups. The most common reasons for dropping out were side effects or adverse events. We also summarised data about response and remission rates (based on changes in depressive symptoms) for included studies, along with data on social adjustment and social functioning, quality of life, economic outcomes and adverse events.
A small body of evidence shows that augmenting current antidepressant therapy with mianserin or with an antipsychotic (cariprazine, olanzapine, quetiapine or ziprasidone) improves depressive symptoms over the short-term (8 to 12 weeks). However, this evidence is mostly of low or moderate quality due to imprecision of the estimates of effects. Improvements with antipsychotics need to be balanced against the increased likelihood of dropping out of treatment or experiencing an adverse event. Augmentation of current antidepressant therapy with a second antidepressant, mirtazapine, does not produce a clinically important benefit in reduction of depressive symptoms (high-quality evidence). The evidence regarding the effects of augmenting current antidepressant therapy with buspirone or switching current antidepressant treatment to mianserin is currently insufficient. Further trials are needed to increase the certainty of these findings and to examine long-term effects of treatment, as well as the effectiveness of other pharmacological treatment strategies.
The health research agenda has historically been led by researchers; however, their priorities may not necessarily align with those of patients, caregivers and clinicians. Research priority setting ...initiatives identify and prioritise topics which lack evidence. This is particularly important in plastic surgery, a speciality lacking high-quality evidence to definitively answer many common clinical questions. Research priorities direct research activity and funding, so their selection process must be representative and transparent. This review appraised all priority setting initiatives in plastic surgery using the reporting guideline for priority setting of health research (REPRISE).
OVID Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL and the James Lind Alliance (JLA) repository were searched (inception - 11/06/21) using search terms for ‘research priority setting’ and ‘plastic and reconstructive surgery’. Dual-author screening and data extraction were conducted, according to PRISMA.
Of 3899 de-duplicated citations, 17 were included. Most studies were conducted in national (14/17), high-income (16/17) settings. More priority setting initiatives focussed on burns (6/17) and hand surgery (4/17) than other subspecialties. The JLA (5/17) and qualitative (5/17) approaches were most used for prioritisation, followed by Delphi techniques (3/17), other surveys (3/17) and mixed methods (1/17). A minority included patient (8/17) or multi-disciplinary (8/17) stakeholders. Few reported strategies for implementing research priorities (6/17) or measuring their impact (2/17).
Stakeholders from lower-income countries are underrepresented in priority setting initiatives for plastic surgery, despite the global burden of disease. Future studies should recruit more patient and multidisciplinary stakeholders, to achieve meaningful consensus. Clear implementation strategies are needed to maximise impact.
Coronary heart disease (CHD) is the most common cause of death globally, although mortality rates are falling. Psychological symptoms are prevalent for people with CHD, and many psychological ...treatments are offered following cardiac events or procedures with the aim of improving health and outcomes. This is an update of a Cochrane systematic review previously published in 2011.
To assess the effectiveness of psychological interventions (alone or with cardiac rehabilitation) compared with usual care (including cardiac rehabilitation where available) for people with CHD on total mortality and cardiac mortality; cardiac morbidity; and participant-reported psychological outcomes of levels of depression, anxiety, and stress; and to explore potential study-level predictors of the effectiveness of psychological interventions in this population.
We updated the previous Cochrane Review searches by searching the following databases on 27 April 2016: CENTRAL in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), PsycINFO (Ovid), and CINAHL (EBSCO).
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of psychological interventions compared to usual care, administered by trained staff, and delivered to adults with a specific diagnosis of CHD. We selected only studies estimating the independent effect of the psychological component, and with a minimum follow-up of six months. The study population comprised of adults after: a myocardial infarction (MI), a revascularisation procedure (coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)), and adults with angina or angiographically defined coronary artery disease (CAD). RCTs had to report at least one of the following outcomes: mortality (total- or cardiac-related); cardiac morbidity (MI, revascularisation procedures); or participant-reported levels of depression, anxiety, or stress.
Two review authors independently screened titles and abstracts of all references for eligibility. A lead review author extracted study data, which a second review author checked. We contacted study authors to obtain missing information.
This review included 35 studies which randomised 10,703 people with CHD (14 trials and 2577 participants added to this update). The population included mainly men (median 77.0%) and people post-MI (mean 65.7%) or after undergoing a revascularisation procedure (mean 27.4%). The mean age of participants within trials ranged from 53 to 67 years. Overall trial reporting was poor, with around a half omitting descriptions of randomisation sequence generation, allocation concealment procedures, or the blinding of outcome assessments. The length of follow-up ranged from six months to 10.7 years (median 12 months). Most studies (23/35) evaluated multifactorial interventions, which included therapies with multiple therapeutic components. Ten studies examined psychological interventions targeted at people with a confirmed psychopathology at baseline and two trials recruited people with a psychopathology or another selecting criterion (or both). Of the remaining 23 trials, nine studies recruited unselected participants from cardiac populations reporting some level of psychopathology (3.8% to 53% with depressive symptoms, 32% to 53% with anxiety), 10 studies did not report these characteristics, and only three studies excluded people with psychopathology.Moderate quality evidence showed no risk reduction for total mortality (risk ratio (RR) 0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.77 to 1.05; participants = 7776; studies = 23) or revascularisation procedures (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.11) with psychological therapies compared to usual care. Low quality evidence found no risk reduction for non-fatal MI (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.05), although there was a 21% reduction in cardiac mortality (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.98). There was also low or very low quality evidence that psychological interventions improved participant-reported levels of depressive symptoms (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.27, 95% CI -0.39 to -0.15; GRADE = low), anxiety (SMD -0.24, 95% CI -0.38 to -0.09; GRADE = low), and stress (SMD -0.56, 95% CI -0.88 to -0.24; GRADE = very low).There was substantial statistical heterogeneity for all psychological outcomes but not clinical outcomes, and there was evidence of small-study bias for one clinical outcome (cardiac mortality: Egger test P = 0.04) and one psychological outcome (anxiety: Egger test P = 0.012). Meta-regression exploring a limited number of intervention characteristics found no significant predictors of intervention effects for total mortality and cardiac mortality. For depression, psychological interventions combined with adjunct pharmacology (where deemed appropriate) for an underlying psychological disorder appeared to be more effective than interventions that did not (β = -0.51, P = 0.003). For anxiety, interventions recruiting participants with an underlying psychological disorder appeared more effective than those delivered to unselected populations (β = -0.28, P = 0.03).
This updated Cochrane Review found that for people with CHD, there was no evidence that psychological treatments had an effect on total mortality, the risk of revascularisation procedures, or on the rate of non-fatal MI, although the rate of cardiac mortality was reduced and psychological symptoms (depression, anxiety, or stress) were alleviated; however, the GRADE assessments suggest considerable uncertainty surrounding these effects. Considerable uncertainty also remains regarding the people who would benefit most from treatment (i.e. people with or without psychological disorders at baseline) and the specific components of successful interventions. Future large-scale trials testing the effectiveness of psychological therapies are required due to the uncertainty within the evidence. Future trials would benefit from testing the impact of specific (rather than multifactorial) psychological interventions for participants with CHD, and testing the targeting of interventions on different populations (i.e. people with CHD, with or without psychopathologies).
International clinical practice guidelines routinely recommend that cardiac patients participate in rehabilitation programmes for comprehensive secondary prevention. However, data show that only a ...small proportion of these patients utilise rehabilitation.
First, to assess interventions provided to increase patient enrolment in, adherence to, and completion of cardiac rehabilitation. Second, to assess intervention costs and associated harms, as well as interventions intended to promote equitable CR utilisation in vulnerable patient subpopulations.
Review authors performed a search on 10 July 2018, to identify studies published since publication of the previous systematic review. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); the National Health Service (NHS) Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD) databases (Health Technology Assessment (HTA) and Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE)), in the Cochrane Library (Wiley); MEDLINE (Ovid); Embase (Elsevier); the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) (EBSCOhost); and Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science (CPCI-S) on Web of Science (Clarivate Analytics). We checked the reference lists of relevant systematic reviews for additional studies and also searched two clinical trial registers. We applied no language restrictions.
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in adults with myocardial infarction, with angina, undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery or percutaneous coronary intervention, or with heart failure who were eligible for cardiac rehabilitation. Interventions had to aim to increase utilisation of comprehensive phase II cardiac rehabilitation. We included only studies that measured one or more of our primary outcomes. Secondary outcomes were harms and costs, and we focused on equity.
Two review authors independently screened the titles and abstracts of all identified references for eligibility, and we obtained full papers of potentially relevant trials. Two review authors independently considered these trials for inclusion, assessed included studies for risk of bias, and extracted trial data independently. We resolved disagreements through consultation with a third review author. We performed random-effects meta-regression for each outcome and explored prespecified study characteristics.
Overall, we included 26 studies with 5299 participants (29 comparisons). Participants were primarily male (64.2%). Ten (38.5%) studies included patients with heart failure. We assessed most studies as having low or unclear risk of bias. Sixteen studies (3164 participants) reported interventions to improve enrolment in cardiac rehabilitation, 11 studies (2319 participants) reported interventions to improve adherence to cardiac rehabilitation, and seven studies (1567 participants) reported interventions to increase programme completion. Researchers tested a variety of interventions to increase utilisation of cardiac rehabilitation. In many studies, this consisted of contacts made by a healthcare provider during or shortly after an acute care hospitalisation.Low-quality evidence shows an effect of interventions on increasing programme enrolment (19 comparisons; risk ratio (RR) 1.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.13 to 1.42). Meta-regression revealed that the intervention deliverer (nurse or allied healthcare provider; P = 0.02) and the delivery format (face-to-face; P = 0.01) were influential in increasing enrolment. Low-quality evidence shows interventions to increase adherence were effective (nine comparisons; standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.38, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.55), particularly when they were delivered remotely, such as in home-based programs (SMD 0.56, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.76). Moderate-quality evidence shows interventions to increase programme completion were also effective (eight comparisons; RR 1.13, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.25), but those applied in multi-centre studies were less effective than those given in single-centre studies, leading to questions regarding generalisability. A moderate level of statistical heterogeneity across intervention studies reflects heterogeneity in intervention approaches. There was no evidence of small-study bias for enrolment (insufficient studies to test for this in the other outcomes).With regard to secondary outcomes, no studies reported on harms associated with the interventions. Only two studies reported costs. In terms of equity, trialists tested interventions designed to improve utilisation among women and older patients. Evidence is insufficient for quantitative assessment of whether women-tailored programmes were associated with increased utilisation, and studies that assess motivating women are needed. For older participants, again while quantitative assessment could not be undertaken, peer navigation may improve enrolment.
Interventions may increase cardiac rehabilitation enrolment, adherence and completion; however the quality of evidence was low to moderate due to heterogeneity of the interventions used, among other factors. Effects on enrolment were larger in studies targeting healthcare providers, training nurses, or allied healthcare providers to intervene face-to-face; effects on adherence were larger in studies that tested remote interventions. More research is needed, particularly to discover the best ways to increase programme completion.
Recent evidence suggests that PD-1/PD-L1 immunotherapy improves outcomes in patients with brain metastatic non-small cell lung cancer.
Records were searched electronically on MEDLINE, Embase and ...BIOSIS. Hazard ratios and their 95% confidence intervals for overall survival and progression free survival, and treatment-related adverse events data were extracted. Risk of bias was assessed in included studies using the Cochrane Collaboration's revised tool to assess risk of bias in randomized trials.
PD-1/PD-L1 immunotherapy increased overall survival by 33% and progression free survival by 47% compared with chemotherapy. Two studies had a high risk of bias. Treatment-related adverse events were reported in 95%, 89% and 65% of patients receiving chemoimmunotherapy,chemotherapy and single agent immunotherapy, respectively.
PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors alone or in addition to chemotherapy increase overall and progression free survival when compared with chemotherapy alone. Chemoimmunotherapy and chemotherapy patients experienced the most treatment-related adverse events.
•Immunotherapy, both adjuvant and mono, provides extended survival over chemotherapy.•For overall survival, adjuvant therapy is superior to mono-immunotherapy.•For progression free survival, both immunotherapies provided similar effects.•Adjuvant therapy holds the highest proportion of treatment related adverse events.
Abstract
AIMS
Lung cancer causes the most deaths worldwide due to cancer. Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) represents the largest subgroup (80-90%), with most patients presenting at an advanced ...stage of disease. Brain metastases (BM) develop in about 27% of these cases, leading to a poor survival outcome. Previous literature has suggested that BM derived from NSCLC have a different genomic profile compared to the primary NSCLC. We aim to review the literature to discover the genomic landscape of BM derived from NSCLC.
METHOD
Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and BIOSIS were searched, and any records found were assessed for eligibility. For the included papers, patient information, smoking status, genomic data, matched primary NSCLC, and PD-L1 expression was extracted.
RESULTS
72 papers were included in the review, with data on 2,340 patients. The most mutated genes were EGFR (n=560), TP53 (n=331), KRAS (n=328), CDKN2A (n=97), STK11 (n=72). Frequently mutated missense mutations included L858R (n=80) in EGFR and G12C (n=17) in KRAS. Ever versus never smokers were found to have differing mis- sense mutations in TP53 and EGFR, with the expectation of L858R and T790M. BM were suggested to have a different genomic landscape compared to the primary NSCLC. PD-L1 expression was found to be low in BM derived from NSCLC.
CONCLUSIONS
To our knowledge, this is the first systematic review which assessed the genomic landscape of BM derived from NSCLC. This review highlights the most mutated genes, missense mutations, and their clinical actionability. Differing genomic profiles were suggested in primary compared to BM and smoking status.
PDF
