Purpose: Biomarkers predicting clinically significant prostate cancer (sPC) before biopsy are currently lacking. This study aimed to develop a non-invasive urine test to predict sPC in at-risk men using urinary metabolomic profiles. Materials and Methods: Urine samples from 934 at-risk subjects and 268 treatment-naïve PC patients were subjected to liquid chromatography/mass spectrophotometry (LC-MS)-based metabolomics profiling using both C18 and hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography (HILIC) column analyses. Four models were constructed (training cohort [n=647]) and validated (validation cohort [n=344]) for different purposes. Model I differentiates PC from benign cases. Models II, III, and a Gleason score model (model GS) predict sPC that is defined as National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN)-categorized favorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model II), unfavorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model III), and GS ≥7 PC (model GS), respectively. The metabolomic panels and predicting models were constructed using logistic regression and Akaike information criterion. Results: The best metabolomic panels from the HILIC column include 25, 27, 28 and 26 metabolites in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively, with area under the curve (AUC) values ranging between 0.82 and 0.91 in the training cohort and between 0.77 and 0.86 in the validation cohort. The combination of the metabolomic panels and five baseline clinical factors that include serum prostate-specific antigen, age, family history of PC, previously negative biopsy, and abnormal digital rectal examination results significantly increased AUCs (range 0.88–0.91). At 90% sensitivity (validation cohort), 33%, 34%, 41%, and 36% of unnecessary biopsies were avoided in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively. The above results were successfully validated using LC-MS with the C18 column. Conclusions Urinary metabolomic profiles with baseline clinical factors may accurately predict sPC in men with elevated risk before biopsy.

Clinical practice guidelines represent the best recommendations for patient care. They are developed through systematically reviewing currently available clinical evidence and weighing the relative benefits and risks of various interventions. However, clinical practice guidelines have to go through a long translation cycle from development and revision to clinical promotion and application, facing problems such as scattered distribution, high duplication rate, and low actual utilization. At present, the clinical practice guideline information platform can directly or indirectly solve the problems related to the lengthy revision cycles, decentralized dissemination and limited application of clinical practice guidelines. Therefore, this paper systematically examines different types of clinical practice guideline information platforms and investigates their corresponding challenges and emerging trends in platform design, data integration, and practical implementation, with the aim of clarifying the current status of this field and providing valuable reference for future research on clinical practice guideline information platforms.

Purpose: Biomarkers predicting clinically significant prostate cancer (sPC) before biopsy are currently lacking. This study aimed to develop a non-invasive urine test to predict sPC in at-risk men using urinary metabolomic profiles. Materials and Methods: Urine samples from 934 at-risk subjects and 268 treatment-naïve PC patients were subjected to liquid chromatography/mass spectrophotometry (LC-MS)-based metabolomics profiling using both C18 and hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography (HILIC) column analyses. Four models were constructed (training cohort [n=647]) and validated (validation cohort [n=344]) for different purposes. Model I differentiates PC from benign cases. Models II, III, and a Gleason score model (model GS) predict sPC that is defined as National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN)-categorized favorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model II), unfavorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model III), and GS ≥7 PC (model GS), respectively. The metabolomic panels and predicting models were constructed using logistic regression and Akaike information criterion. Results: The best metabolomic panels from the HILIC column include 25, 27, 28 and 26 metabolites in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively, with area under the curve (AUC) values ranging between 0.82 and 0.91 in the training cohort and between 0.77 and 0.86 in the validation cohort. The combination of the metabolomic panels and five baseline clinical factors that include serum prostate-specific antigen, age, family history of PC, previously negative biopsy, and abnormal digital rectal examination results significantly increased AUCs (range 0.88–0.91). At 90% sensitivity (validation cohort), 33%, 34%, 41%, and 36% of unnecessary biopsies were avoided in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively. The above results were successfully validated using LC-MS with the C18 column. Conclusions Urinary metabolomic profiles with baseline clinical factors may accurately predict sPC in men with elevated risk before biopsy.

Purpose: Biomarkers predicting clinically significant prostate cancer (sPC) before biopsy are currently lacking. This study aimed to develop a non-invasive urine test to predict sPC in at-risk men using urinary metabolomic profiles. Materials and Methods: Urine samples from 934 at-risk subjects and 268 treatment-naïve PC patients were subjected to liquid chromatography/mass spectrophotometry (LC-MS)-based metabolomics profiling using both C18 and hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography (HILIC) column analyses. Four models were constructed (training cohort [n=647]) and validated (validation cohort [n=344]) for different purposes. Model I differentiates PC from benign cases. Models II, III, and a Gleason score model (model GS) predict sPC that is defined as National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN)-categorized favorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model II), unfavorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model III), and GS ≥7 PC (model GS), respectively. The metabolomic panels and predicting models were constructed using logistic regression and Akaike information criterion. Results: The best metabolomic panels from the HILIC column include 25, 27, 28 and 26 metabolites in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively, with area under the curve (AUC) values ranging between 0.82 and 0.91 in the training cohort and between 0.77 and 0.86 in the validation cohort. The combination of the metabolomic panels and five baseline clinical factors that include serum prostate-specific antigen, age, family history of PC, previously negative biopsy, and abnormal digital rectal examination results significantly increased AUCs (range 0.88–0.91). At 90% sensitivity (validation cohort), 33%, 34%, 41%, and 36% of unnecessary biopsies were avoided in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively. The above results were successfully validated using LC-MS with the C18 column. Conclusions Urinary metabolomic profiles with baseline clinical factors may accurately predict sPC in men with elevated risk before biopsy.

Purpose: Biomarkers predicting clinically significant prostate cancer (sPC) before biopsy are currently lacking. This study aimed to develop a non-invasive urine test to predict sPC in at-risk men using urinary metabolomic profiles. Materials and Methods: Urine samples from 934 at-risk subjects and 268 treatment-naïve PC patients were subjected to liquid chromatography/mass spectrophotometry (LC-MS)-based metabolomics profiling using both C18 and hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography (HILIC) column analyses. Four models were constructed (training cohort [n=647]) and validated (validation cohort [n=344]) for different purposes. Model I differentiates PC from benign cases. Models II, III, and a Gleason score model (model GS) predict sPC that is defined as National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN)-categorized favorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model II), unfavorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model III), and GS ≥7 PC (model GS), respectively. The metabolomic panels and predicting models were constructed using logistic regression and Akaike information criterion. Results: The best metabolomic panels from the HILIC column include 25, 27, 28 and 26 metabolites in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively, with area under the curve (AUC) values ranging between 0.82 and 0.91 in the training cohort and between 0.77 and 0.86 in the validation cohort. The combination of the metabolomic panels and five baseline clinical factors that include serum prostate-specific antigen, age, family history of PC, previously negative biopsy, and abnormal digital rectal examination results significantly increased AUCs (range 0.88–0.91). At 90% sensitivity (validation cohort), 33%, 34%, 41%, and 36% of unnecessary biopsies were avoided in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively. The above results were successfully validated using LC-MS with the C18 column. Conclusions Urinary metabolomic profiles with baseline clinical factors may accurately predict sPC in men with elevated risk before biopsy.

Purpose: Biomarkers predicting clinically significant prostate cancer (sPC) before biopsy are currently lacking. This study aimed to develop a non-invasive urine test to predict sPC in at-risk men using urinary metabolomic profiles. Materials and Methods: Urine samples from 934 at-risk subjects and 268 treatment-naïve PC patients were subjected to liquid chromatography/mass spectrophotometry (LC-MS)-based metabolomics profiling using both C18 and hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography (HILIC) column analyses. Four models were constructed (training cohort [n=647]) and validated (validation cohort [n=344]) for different purposes. Model I differentiates PC from benign cases. Models II, III, and a Gleason score model (model GS) predict sPC that is defined as National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN)-categorized favorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model II), unfavorable-intermediate risk group or higher (Model III), and GS ≥7 PC (model GS), respectively. The metabolomic panels and predicting models were constructed using logistic regression and Akaike information criterion. Results: The best metabolomic panels from the HILIC column include 25, 27, 28 and 26 metabolites in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively, with area under the curve (AUC) values ranging between 0.82 and 0.91 in the training cohort and between 0.77 and 0.86 in the validation cohort. The combination of the metabolomic panels and five baseline clinical factors that include serum prostate-specific antigen, age, family history of PC, previously negative biopsy, and abnormal digital rectal examination results significantly increased AUCs (range 0.88–0.91). At 90% sensitivity (validation cohort), 33%, 34%, 41%, and 36% of unnecessary biopsies were avoided in Models I, II, III, and GS, respectively. The above results were successfully validated using LC-MS with the C18 column. Conclusions Urinary metabolomic profiles with baseline clinical factors may accurately predict sPC in men with elevated risk before biopsy.

BACKGROUND: Delayed platelet engraftment is a common complication after umbilical cord blood transplantation (UCBT), and there is no standard therapy. Avatrombopag (AVA) is a second-generation thrombopoietin (TPO) receptor agonist (TPO-RA) that has shown efficacy in immune thrombocytopenia (ITP). However, few reports have focused on its efficacy in patients diagnosed with thrombocytopenia after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study at the First Affiliated Hospital of the University of Science and Technology of China to evaluate the efficacy of AVA as a first-line TPO-RA in 65 patients after UCBT; these patients were compared with 118 historical controls. Response rates, platelet counts, megakaryocyte counts in bone marrow, bleeding events, adverse events and survival rates were evaluated in this study. Platelet reconstitution differences were compared between different medication groups. Multivariable analysis was used to explore the independent beneficial factors for platelet implantation. RESULTS: Fifty-two patients were given AVA within 30 days post-UCBT, and the treatment was continued for more than 7 days to promote platelet engraftment (AVA group); the other 13 patients were given AVA for secondary failure of platelet recovery (SFPR group). The median time to platelet engraftment was shorter in the AVA group than in the historical control group (32.5 days vs . 38.0 days, Z  = 2.095, P  = 0.036). Among the 52 patients in the AVA group, 46 achieved an overall response (OR) (88.5%), and the cumulative incidence of OR was 91.9%. Patients treated with AVA only had a greater 60-day cumulative incidence of platelet engraftment than patients treated with recombinant human thrombopoietin (rhTPO) only or rhTPO combined with AVA (95.2% vs . 84.5% vs . 80.6%, P  <0.001). Patients suffering from SFPR had a slightly better cumulative incidence of OR (100%, P  = 0.104). Patients who initiated AVA treatment within 14 days post-UCBT had a better 60-day cumulative incidence of platelet engraftment than did those who received AVA after 14 days post-UCBT (96.6% vs . 73.9%, P  = 0.003). CONCLUSION Compared with those in the historical control group, our results indicate that AVA could effectively promote platelet engraftment and recovery after UCBT, especially when used in the early period (≤14 days post-UCBT).
Humans ; Female ; Male ; Thrombocytopenia/etiology* ; Adult ; Retrospective Studies ; Cord Blood Stem Cell Transplantation/adverse effects* ; Middle Aged ; Adolescent ; Young Adult ; Thiazoles/adverse effects* ; Platelet Count ; Receptors, Thrombopoietin/agonists* ; Child ; Thiophenes

PURPOSE: The rate of complications among patients undergoing surgery has increased due to infection with SARS-CoV-2 and other variants of concern. However, Omicron has shown decreased pathogenicity, raising questions about the risk of postoperative complications among patients who are infected with this variant. This study aimed to investigate complications and related factors among patients with recent Omicron infection prior to undergoing orthopedic surgery. METHODS: A historical control study was conducted. Data were collected from all patients who underwent surgery during 2 distinct periods: (1) between Dec 12, 2022 and Jan 31, 2023 (COVID-19 positive group), (2) between Dec 12, 2021 and Jan 31, 2022 (COVID-19 negative control group). The patients were at least 18 years old. Patients who received conservative treatment after admission or had high-risk diseases or special circumstances (use of anticoagulants before surgery) were excluded from the study. The study outcomes were the total complication rate and related factors. Binary logistic regression analysis was used to identify related factors, and odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated to assess the impact of COVID-19 infection on complications. RESULTS: In the analysis, a total of 847 patients who underwent surgery were included, with 275 of these patients testing positive for COVID-19 and 572 testing negative. The COVID-19-positive group had a significantly higher rate of total complications (11.27%) than the control group (4.90%, p < 0.001). After adjusting for relevant factors, the OR was 3.08 (95% CI: 1.45-6.53). Patients who were diagnosed with COVID-19 at 3-4 weeks (OR = 0.20 (95% CI: 0.06-0.59), p = 0.005), 5-6 weeks (OR = 0.16 (95% CI: 0.04-0.59), p = 0.010), or ≥7 weeks (OR = 0.26 (95% CI: 0.06-1.02), p = 0.069) prior to surgery had a lower risk of complications than those who were diagnosed at 0-2 weeks prior to surgery. Seven factors (age, indications for surgery, time of operation, time of COVID-19 diagnosis prior to surgery, C-reactive protein levels, alanine transaminase levels, and aspartate aminotransferase levels) were found to be associated with complications; thus, these factors were used to create a nomogram. CONCLUSION Omicron continues to be a significant factor in the incidence of postoperative complications among patients undergoing orthopedic surgery. By identifying the factors associated with these complications, we can determine the optimal surgical timing, provide more accurate prognostic information, and offer appropriate consultation for orthopedic surgery patients who have been infected with Omicron.
Humans ; COVID-19/complications* ; Male ; Female ; Middle Aged ; Postoperative Complications/epidemiology* ; SARS-CoV-2 ; Orthopedic Procedures/adverse effects* ; Aged ; Nomograms ; Adult ; Retrospective Studies ; Risk Factors

Ureaplasma urealyticum (UU) is one of the most commonly occurring pathogens associated with genital tract infections in infertile males, but the impact of seminal UU infection in semen on intrauterine insemination (IUI) outcomes is poorly understood. We collected data from 245 infertile couples who underwent IUI at The First Affiliated Hospital of USTC (Hefei, China) between January 2021 and January 2023. The subjects were classified into two groups according to their UU infection status: the UU-positive group and the UU-negative group. We compared semen parameters, pregnancy outcomes, and neonatal birth outcomes to investigate the impact of UU infection on IUI outcomes. There were no significantly statistical differences in various semen parameters, including semen volume, sperm concentration, total and progressive motility, sperm morphology, leukocyte count, the presence of anti-sperm antibody, and sperm DNA fragmentation index (DFI), between the UU-positive and UU-negative groups of male infertile patients (all P > 0.05). However, the high DNA stainability (HDS) status of sperm differed between the UU-positive and UU-negative groups, suggesting that seminal UU infection may affect sperm nuclear maturation ( P = 0.04). Additionally, there were no significant differences in pregnancy or neonatal birth outcomes between the two groups (all P > 0.05). These results suggest that IUI remains a viable and cost-effective option for infertile couples with UU infection who are facing infertility issues.
Humans ; Male ; Ureaplasma Infections/complications* ; Female ; Infertility, Male/therapy* ; Ureaplasma urealyticum/isolation & purification* ; Pregnancy ; Adult ; Pregnancy Outcome ; Semen Analysis ; Insemination, Artificial ; Semen/microbiology* ; China

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) expresses abundant glycolytic enzymes and displays comprehensive glucose metabolism reprogramming. Aldolase A (ALDOA) plays a prominent role in glycolysis; however, little is known about its role in HCC development. In the present study, we aim to explore how ALDOA is involved in HCC proliferation. HCC proliferation was markedly suppressed both in vitro and in vivo following ALDOA knockout, which is consistent with ALDOA overexpression encouraging HCC proliferation. Mechanistically, ALDOA knockout partially limits the glycolytic flux in HCC cells. Meanwhile, ALDOA translocated to nuclei and directly interacted with c-Jun to facilitate its Thr93 phosphorylation by P21-activated protein kinase; ALDOA knockout markedly diminished c-Jun Thr93 phosphorylation and then dampened c-Jun transcription function. A crucial site Y364 mutation in ALDOA disrupted its interaction with c-Jun, and Y364S ALDOA expression failed to rescue cell proliferation in ALDOA deletion cells. In HCC patients, the expression level of ALDOA was correlated with the phosphorylation level of c-Jun (Thr93) and poor prognosis. Remarkably, hepatic ALDOA was significantly upregulated in the promotion and progression stages of diethylnitrosamine-induced HCC models, and the knockdown of A ldoa strikingly decreased HCC development in vivo. Our study demonstrated that ALDOA is a vital driver for HCC development by activating c-Jun-mediated oncogene transcription, opening additional avenues for anti-cancer therapies.