Activation of the kynurenine pathway is one of the described mechanisms by which inflammation can induce depression. It involves multiple pathways including interference with the bioavailability of tryptophan central to the synthesis of the neurotransmitter serotonin. In this systematic review, we examine the relationship between kynurenine metabolites (kynurenine, kynurenic acid, tryptophan, quinolinic acid, the ratio of kynurenine and tryptophan) and mood disorders by conducting a meta-analysis. Fifty-six studies were identified, 21 met inclusion criteria and 14 were deemed suitable (9 investigating unipolar depression and 5 bipolar disorder). We found decreased levels of kynurenine in unipolar major depression vs. healthy controls but studies were significantly heterogeneous in nature. No significant differences were found in tryptophan levels or kynurenine/tryptophan ratios. Kynurenine metabolites are likely to play a role in major depression but an exact etiological role in mood disorder seem complex and requires further research.
Context Decision aids (DAs) prepare patients to make decisions about healthcare options consistent with their preferences. Helping patients choose among available options for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is important because rates are lower than screening for other cancers. This systematic review describes studies evaluating patient DAs for CRC screening in average-risk adults and their impact on knowledge, screening intentions, and uptake. Evidence acquisition Sources included Ovid MEDLINE, Elsevier EMBASE, EBSCO CINAHL Plus, Ovid PsycINFO through July 21, 2015, pertinent reference lists, and Cochrane review of patient DAs. Reviewers independently selected studies that quantitatively evaluated a DA compared to one or more conditions or within a pre–post evaluation. Using a standardized form, reviewers independently extracted study characteristics, interventions, comparators, and outcomes. Analysis was conducted in August 2015. Evidence synthesis Twenty-three articles representing 21 trials including 11,900 subjects were eligible. Patients exposed to a DA showed greater knowledge than those exposed to a control condition (mean difference [MD], 18.3 of 100; 95% CI=15.5, 21.1), were more likely to be interested in screening (pooled relative risk [RR], 1.5; 95% CI=1.2, 2.0), and more likely to be screened (pooled RR, 1.3; 95% CI=1.1, 1.4). DA patients had greater knowledge than patients receiving general CRC screening information (pooled MD, 19.3 of 100; 95% CI=14.7, 23.8); however, there were no significant differences in screening interest or behavior. Conclusions DAs improve knowledge and interest in screening, and lead to increased screening over no information, but their impact on screening is similar to general CRC screening information.
Objective To compare the effectiveness of two search methods in identifying studies that used the Control Preferences Scale (CPS), a healthcare decision-making instrument commonly used in clinical settings. Study Design & Setting We searched the literature using two methods: 1) keyword searching using variations of “control preferences scale” and 2) cited reference searching using two seminal CPS publications. We searched three bibliographic databases [PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science (WOS)] and one full-text database (Google Scholar). We report precision and sensitivity as measures of effectiveness. Results Keyword searches in bibliographic databases yielded high average precision (90%), but low average sensitivity (16%). PubMed was the most precise, followed closely by Scopus and WOS. The Google Scholar keyword search had low precision (54%) but provided the highest sensitivity (70%). Cited reference searches in all databases yielded moderate sensitivity (45–54%), but precision ranged from 35–75% with Scopus being the most precise. Conclusion Cited reference searches were more sensitive than keyword searches, making it a more comprehensive strategy to identify all studies that use a particular instrument. Keyword searches provide a quick way of finding some but not all relevant articles. Goals, time and resources should dictate the combination of which methods and databases are used.
Atypical femoral fractures (AFFs) are rare adverse events attributed to bisphosphonate (BP) use. Few cases of AFF in cancer have been described; the aim of this study is to identify the incidence and risk factors for AFF in a large cancer center. This retrospective study was conducted at the MD Anderson Cancer Center. The incidence rate of AFF among BP users was calculated from January 1, 2004 through December 31, 2013. The control group (n = 51) included 2 or 3 patients on BPs matched for age (≤1 year) and gender. Logistic regression analysis was used to assess the relationship between clinical characteristics and AFF. Twenty-three AFF cases were identified radiographically among 10,587 BP users, the total BP exposure was 53,789 months (4482 years), and the incidence of AFF in BP users was 0.05 cases per 100,000 person-years. Meanwhile, among 300,553 patients who did not receive BPs there were 2 cases of AFF as compared with the 23 cases noted above. The odds ratio (OR) of having AFF in BP users was 355.58 times higher (95% CI, 84.1 to 1501.4, p < 0.0001) than the risk in non-BP users. The OR of having AFF in alendronate users was 5.54 times greater (OR 5.54 [95% CI, 1.60 to 19.112, p = 0.007]) than the odds of having AFF among other BP users. Patients who were on zoledronic acid (ZOL) had smaller odds of developing AFF compared with other BP users in this matched case control sample. AFFs are rare, serious adverse events that occur in patients with cancer who receive BP therapy. Patients with cancer who receive BPs for prior osteoporosis therapy or for metastatic cancer are at higher risk of AFF. © 2016 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.