BackgroundEmerging evidence has shown that miRNAs participate in human carcinogenesis as tumor suppressors or oncogenes, and have prognostic value for patients with cancers. In recent years, the miR-181 family was found dysregulated in a variety of human cancers and significantly associated with clinical outcome of cancerous patients. MiR-181a and miR-181b (miR-181a/b) were the most investigated members in the family. However, the results of miR-181a/b from different studies were inconsistent. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis to summarize all the results from available studies, aiming to delineate the prognostic role of miR-181a/b in human cancers.MethodsThe identified articles were retrieved from the two main on-line databases, PubMed and EMBASE. We extracted and estimated the hazard ratios (HRs) for overall survival (OS), which compared the high and low expression levels of miR-181a/b in patients of the available studies. Each individual HR was used to calculate the pooled HR.ResultsEleven studies of 1252 patients were selected into the final meta-analysis after a strict filtering and qualifying process. Fixed model or random model method was chosen depending on the heterogeneity between the studies. The subgroup analysis showed that high expressed miR-181a/b could prolong OS in patients with hematological malignancies rather than low expression level (HR = 0.717, P<0.0001). But the expression of miR-181a/b was not significantly relative to OS in patients with various cancers (HR = 0.861, p = 0.356).ConclusionOur study indicates that the expression level of miR-181a/b is significantly associated with OS in hematological malignancies and can be an important clinical prognostic factor for those patients.

Background We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis (CRD#42017070552) to quantify the impact of oral tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine (TDF/FTC) on bone mineral density (BMD) and the risk of osteoporosis, low bone mass and fractures, among people taking it as pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), HIV treatment and HBV treatment. Methods We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE for randomized controlled trials published from 1997–2018 reporting BMD, osteoporosis, low bone mass and/or fractures in treatment-naive patients taking compared with not taking TDF for 48 ±4 weeks. We pooled outcomes using DerSimonian random-effects models. Results Our search yielded 5,178 abstracts, representing 3,865 articles, with 25 meeting the inclusion criteria. TDF was associated with greater BMD decline when taken as PrEP (lumbar spine: mean difference [MD]=-0.82%, 95% CI=-1.28, -0.37%, I2=38%; total hip: MD=-0.81%, 95% CI=-1.22, -0.40%, I2=48%) and HIV treatment (lumbar spine: MD=-1.62%, 95% CI=-2.30, -0.95%, I2=93%; total hip: MD=-1.75%, 95% CI=-2.08, -1.42%, I2=83%; femoral neck: MD=-1.26%, 95% CI=-2.15, -0.38%, I2=43%) in comparison to those not taking TDF. Eight studies reported on incident osteoporosis or low bone mass, with variable results. Pooled results from five PrEP studies showed that TDF was not associated with increased fractures compared with no PrEP (RR=1.12, 95% CI=0.752, 1.74, I2=26%). Conclusions TDF caused greater decreases in BMD than did comparators when used for all three indications and the magnitude of this decrease was larger for HIV treatment compared with PrEP. Fractures were not increased among PrEP patients. The clinically significant BMD decline caused by TDF and current expansion of PrEP use suggest attention to the adverse bone effects of TDF will increase in importance.

BackgroundDaily tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF)/emtricitabine as HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) causes subclinical decreases in bone mineral density (BMD). We surveyed PrEP users to assess feasibility for a clinical trial of vitamin D supplementation to mitigate TDF-induced BMD loss.MethodsWe recruited participants using or starting PrEP in Toronto and Vancouver. The primary objective was to assess the acceptability of daily or weekly vitamin D supplementation. We also assessed the acceptability of calcium supplementation, existing use of non-pharmacological bone health interventions, prevalence of osteoporosis risk factors, and bone health knowledge (Osteoporosis Knowledge Test, OKT).ResultsOf 161 participants, 72.1% were current PrEP users, 18.0% were starting PrEP, and 9.9% did not indicate their PrEP status. All identified as males, 88.8% as gays, and 67.1% as Whites. Median (IQR) age was 32.0 (29.0, 40.0) years, and 62.1% reported family income $$60,000/year. Among those not already using the interventions, willingness to supplement with daily vitamin D, weekly vitamin D, or daily calcium was very high at 90.9%, 96.4%, and 93.0 %, respectively. Only 31.0% reported adequate dietary calcium intake, while 42.9% reported $1 osteoporosis risk factor (most commonly, alcohol and smoking). Overall bone health knowledge was low, as median (IQR) OKT score was 16/32. In post hoc comparisons, current PrEP users may have been more likely than new PrEP users to engage in bone loading exercise (Bone-specific Physical Activity Questionnaire score=12.5 vs 3.6, P=0.001) and have greater bone health knowledge (OKT=17 vs 14, P=0.08), but they had similar levels of current vitamin D supplementation (37.4% vs 21.4%, P=0.11), calcium supplementation (11.2% vs 13.8%, P=0.70), and adequate dietary calcium intake (32.7% vs 25.0%, P=0.43).DiscussionThe high acceptability of vitamin D and calcium supplementation in this cohort suggests that enrollment into a clinical trial of such interventions to mitigate PrEP-induced BMD loss is feasible.