Background: Due to the lack of comprehensive evidence based on prospective studies, the efficacy and safety of Janus Kinase (JAK) inhibitors (including tofacitinib, ruxolitinib, baricitinib, ritlecitinib and brepocitinib) for alopecia areata (AA) are yet to be proved.Methods: The systematic review and meta-analysis was performed pursuant to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline and registered on PROSPERO (CRD42022303007).Results: Fourteen prospective studies (5 RCTs and 9 non-RCTs), enrolling a total of 1845 patients with AA, were included for quantitative analysis. In RCTs, oral JAK inhibitors resulted in higher good response rate compared with control (RR: 6.86, 95% CI: 2.91–16.16); topical JAK inhibitors did not show any difference compared with control (RR: 1.00, 95% CI: 0.31–3.18). In non-RCTs, the pooled rate of good response to oral, topical and sublingual JAK inhibitors were 63% (95% CI: 44%–80%), 28% (95% CI: 1%–72%) and 11% (95% CI: 1%–29%), respectively. The pooled recurrence rate in patients treated with JAK inhibitors was 54% (95% CI: 39%–69%), mainly due to the withdrawal of JAK inhibitors. In RCTs, no difference was found in the risk of experiencing most kind of adverse events; in non-RCTs, the reported adverse events with high incidence rate were mostly mild and manageable.Conclusion: JAK inhibitors are efficacious and generally well-tolerated in treating AA with oral administration, whereas topical or sublingual administration lacks efficacy. Subgroup analyses indicate that baricitinib, ritlecitinib and brepocitinib seem to have equal efficacy for AA in RCTs; ruxolitinib (vs. tofacitinib) and AA (vs. AT/AU) are associated with better efficacy outcomes in non-RCT. Due to the high recurrence rate after withdrawal of JAK inhibitors, continuous treatment should be considered to maintain efficacy.Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO: CRD 42022303007

No abstract

Background: Preclinical and clinical evidence suggests that mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) may be beneficial in treating heart failure (HF). However, the effects of stem cell therapy in patients with heart failure is an ongoing debate and the safety and efficacy of MSCs therapy is not well-known. We conducted a systematic review of clinical trials that evaluated the safety and efficacy of MSCs for HF. This study aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of MSCs therapy compared to the placebo in heart failure patients. Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane library systematically, with no language restrictions. Randomized controlled trials(RCTs) assessing the influence of MSCs treatment function controlled with placebo in heart failure were included in this analysis. We included RCTs with data on safety and efficacy in patients with heart failure after mesenchymal stem cell transplantation. Two investigators independently searched the articles, extracted data, and assessed the quality of the included studies. Pooled data was performed using the fixed-effect model or random-effect model when it appropriate by use of Review Manager 5.3. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was used to assess bias of included studies. The primary outcome was safety assessed by death and rehospitalization and the secondary outcome was efficacy which was assessed by six-minute walk distance and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF)，left ventricular end-systolic volume（LVESV），left ventricular end-diastolic volume（LVEDV） and brain natriuretic peptide（BNP） Results: A total of twelve studies were included, involving 823 patients who underwent MSCs or placebo treatment. The overall rate of death showed a trend of reduction of 27% (RR [CI]=0.73 [0.49, 1.09], p=0.12) in the MSCs treatment group. The incidence of rehospitalization was reduced by 47% (RR [CI]=0.53[0.38, 0.75], p=0.0004). The patients in the MSCs treatment group realised an average of 117.01m (MD [95% CI]=117.01m [94.87, 139.14], p<0.00001) improvement in 6MWT.MSCs transplantation significantly improved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) by 5.66 % (MD [95% CI]=5.66 [4.39, 6.92], p<0.00001), decreased left ventricular end-systolic volume (LVESV) by 14.75 ml (MD [95% CI]=-14.75 [-16.18, -12.83], p<0.00001 ) and left ventricular end-diastolic volume (LVEDV) by 5.78 ml (MD [95% CI]=-5.78[-12.00, 0.43], p=0.07 ) ,in the MSCs group , BNP was decreased by 133.51 pg/ml MD [95% CI]= -133.51 [-228.17,-38.85], p=0.54, I2= 0.0%) than did in the placebo group. Conclusions: Our results suggested that mesenchymal stem cells as a regenerative therapeutic approach for heart failure is safe and effective by virtue of their self-renewal potential, vast differentiation capacity and immune modulating properties. Allogenic MSCs have superior therapeutic effects and intracoronary injection is the optimum delivery approach. In the tissue origin, patients who received treatment with umbilical cord MSCs seem more effective than bone marrow MSCs. As to dosage injected, (1-10)*10^8 cells were of better effect.

No abstract

Background: Chimeric antigen receptor T cells treatment targeting B cell maturation antigen (BCMA) is an emerging treatment option for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) and has demonstrated outstanding outcomes in clinical studies.Objective: The aim of this comprehensive review and meta-analysis was to summarize the effectiveness and safety of anti-BCMA CAR-T treatment for patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). Our research identifies variables influencing outcome measures to provide additional evidence for CAR-T product updates, clinical trial design, and clinical treatment guidance.Methods: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) standard was followed for conducting this comprehensive review and meta-analysis, which was submitted to PROSPERO (CRD42023390037). From the inception of the study until 10 September 2022, PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, CNKI, and WanFang databases were searched for eligible studies. Stata software (version 16.0) was used to assess effectiveness and safety outcomes.Results: Out of 875 papers, we found 21 relevant trials with 761 patients diagnosed as RRMM and were given anti-BCMA CAR-T treatment. The overall response rate (ORR) for the entire sample was 87% (95% CI: 80–93%) complete response rate (CRR) was 44% (95% CI: 34–54%). The minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity rate within responders was 78% (95% CI: 65–89%). The combined incidence of cytokine release syndrome was 82% (95% CI: 72–91%) and neurotoxicity was 10% (95% CI: 5%–17%). The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 8.77 months (95% CI: 7.48–10.06), the median overall survival (OS) was 18.87 months (95% CI: 17.20–20.54) and the median duration of response (DOR) was 10.32 months (95% CI: 9.34–11.31).Conclusion: According to this meta-analysis, RRMM patients who received anti-BCMA CAR-T treatment have demonstrated both effectiveness and safety. Subgroup analysis confirmed the anticipated inter-study heterogeneity and pinpointed potential factors contributing to safety and efficacy, which may help with the development of CAR-T cell studies and lead to optimized BCMA CAR-T-cell products.Systematic Review Registration:Clinicaltrials.gov, PROSPERO, CRD42023390037.