Objectives To compare the survival and complications of neoadjuvant chemoradiation (NCRT) versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). Methods We conducted a systematic literature search of the PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, CNKI, Wanfang Data, CBM, and VIP databases from inception to November 2021. Meta-analyses were performed using RevMan (version 5.3) and Stata version 15.0. Results A total of 18 studies were included, which involved 3137 patients, The results of the metaanalysis showed that the pathological complete remission rate (odds ratio [OR] = 5.21, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.85–9.50, p<0.00001) and complete tumor resection rate (OR = 2.31, 95% CI: 1.57–3.41, p<0.0001) in the NCRT group were significantly better than those in the NCT group. Our meta-analysis results showed that 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates (1-year overall survival [OS]: OR = 1.51, 95% CI: 1.11–2.05, p = 0.009; 3-year OS: OR = 1.73, 95% CI: 1.36–2.21, p<0.0001; 5-year OS: OR = 1.61, 95% CI: 1.30–1.99, p<0.00001) in the NCRT group were significantly higher than those in the NCT group. NCRT can lead a significant survival benefit compared with NCT and there was no significant difference between the two neoadjuvant treatments in terms of postoperative complications. Conclusion The use of NCRT in the treatment of patients with ESCC patients showed significant advantages in terms of survival and safety relative to the use of NCT.

BackgroundThere is increasing evidence that neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy is superior to neoadjuvant chemotherapy for patients with locally advanced gastric cancer. However, a number of studies have come to the opposite conclusion. Therefore, our meta-analysis is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy in the treatment of locally advanced gastric cancer.MethodsWe searched Wanfang Database, China National Knowledge Network database, VIP database, China Biomedical Literature Database, PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library. The searched terms included’Stomach Neoplasms’, ‘Neoadjuvant Therapy’ and ‘Chemoradiotherapy’. The retrieval time was from the establishment of the corresponding database to September 2022, and our meta-analysis was performed using RevMan (version 5.3) and Stata (version 17) software.ResultsA total of 17 literatures were included, which involved 7 randomized controlled trials and 10 retrospective studies, with a total of 6831 patients. The results of meta-analysis showed that compared with NACT group, the complete response rate(RR=1.95, 95%CI 1.39-2.73, p=0.0001), the partial response rate(RR=1.44, 95%CI 1.22-1.71, p=0.0001), the objective response rate(RR=1.37, 95%CI 1.27-1.54, p=0.00001), the pathologic complete response rate(RR=3.39, 95%CI 2.17-5.30, p=0.00001), the R0 resection rate(RR=1.18, 95%CI 1.09-1.29, p=0.0001) and 3-year overall survival rate(HR=0.89, 95%CI 0.82-0.96, p=0.002) of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy group were significantly improved. The results of subgroup analyses of gastric cancer subgroup and gastroesophageal junction cancer subgroup were consistent with the overall results. Meanwhile, the stable disease(RR=0.59, 95%CI:0.44-0.81, P=0.0010) of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy group was lower than that of neoadjuvant chemotherapy group, and there were no statistical significance in the progressive disease rate(RR=0.57, 95%CI:0.31-1.03, P=0.06), five-year overall survival rate(HR=1.03, 95%CI:0.99-1.07, P=0.839), postoperative complications and adverse reactions between the neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy group and neoadjuvant chemotherapy group.ConclusionCompared with neoadjuvant chemotherapy, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy might bring more survival benefits without significantly increasing adverse reactions. neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy may be a recommended treatment for patients with locally advanced gastric cancer.Systematic Review Registrationhttps://inplasy.com/inplasy-2022-12-0068/, identifier INPLASY202212068.

Bullous pemphigoid (BP) is an autoimmune blistering disease associated with anti-BP180 and anti-BP230 antibodies. The pathogenic action mechanism of immunoglobulin E (IgE) antibodies in BP has been studied since the 1970s, and IgE antibodies have gradually been confirmed as being important in BP; therefore, anti-IgE therapy may be a new option for the treatment of BP. Omalizumab, as an IgE monoclonal antibody, has been increasingly used clinically to treat BP in recent years. Here, we collected 35 papers investigating omalizumab for BP treatment in a total of 83 patients, and the vast majority of patients showed varying degrees of improvement after treatment, except for a small number of patients with poor clinical outcomes. The patients were then divided into three groups according to dosing frequency and number of doses. Statistical analysis indicated that dosing frequency had little effect on clinical efficacy. While the groups with different numbers of doses were evaluated, the results concluded that clinical efficacy was affected by the number of doses, but there was no positive correlation between the number of doses and clinical efficacy.

ObjectivesAndrogen deprivation therapy combined with radiotherapy for intermediate-risk prostate cancer is still a matter of debate. We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the necessity of androgen deprivation therapy combined with radiotherapy for intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients.MethodsA comprehensive literature search of articles was performed in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane library, Web of Science, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chinese Biological Medicine, Wanfang, and VIP Databases published between February 1988 and April 2022. Studies comparing the survival of patients diagnosed with intermediate-risk prostate cancer who were treated with androgen deprivation therapy combined with radiotherapy or radiotherapy alone were included. Data were extracted and analyzed with the RevMan software (version 5.3) and the Stata software (version 17).ResultsSix randomized controlled trials and nine retrospective studies, including 6853 patients (2948 in androgen deprivation therapy combined with radiotherapy group and 3905 in radiotherapy alone group) were enrolled. Androgen deprivation therapy combined with radiotherapy did not provide an overall survival (HR 1.12, 95% CI 1.01-1.12, p=0.04) or biochemical recurrence-free survival (HR 1.23, 95% CI 1.09-1.39, P=0.001) advantage to intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients.ConclusionAndrogen deprivation therapy combined with radiotherapy did not show some advantages in terms of overall survival and biochemical recurrence-free survival and radiotherapy alone may be the effective therapy for intermediate-risk prostate cancer patients.Systematic review registrationhttps://inplasy.com/inplasy-2022-8-0095/, identifier 202280095.

No abstract