AIM: To evaluate the effects induced by topical antiglaucomatous drugs, Travoprost eyedrops on tear film.
METHODS: Eighteen patients ( 32 eyes ) with primary open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension were all treated with Travoprost eyedrops once every night. The symptom score, Schirmer's test ( S Ⅰ t ) , corneal fluorescein staining ( FL ) , tear film break - up time (BUT), were observed before the treatment and 1, 2 and 3mo after the treatment.
RESULTS: The average symptom score, FL of all patients were 1. 34 ± 1. 56 and 0. 44 ± 0. 73 before the treatment, and 2. 75±1. 63, 1. 08±0. 84; 5. 10±1. 68, 1. 53±0-67;6. 33±1. 40, 1. 98±0. 50 respectively after 1, 2 and 3mo of the treatment. There was significant increase in symptom score and FL after the treatment for 1, 2 and 3mo (P=0. 00). The average BUT, SⅠt of all patients were (7. 76±0. 92s), (8. 47±2. 73mm/5min) before the treatment, and (7. 08±1. 15s), (7. 73±3. 44mm/5min);(5-59±1. 33s), (6. 82±3. 05mm/5min); (4. 29±1. 87s), (6-04±3. 15mm/5min) respectively after 1, 2 and 3mo of the treatment. There was significant decrease in BUT and ST after the treatment for 1, 2 and 3mo (P=0. 00).
CONCLUSION: Travoprost eyedrops can obviously aggravate patients’ corneal irritation after treatment. Our results show abnormal decreased tear secretion and stability of tear film induced by Travoprost eyedrops over the short term.

Abstract: Objective　To analyze the nucleic acid detection results of severe acute respiratory syndrome corona virus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) by droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) and compare with the detection results of real-time fluorescence quantitative RT-PCR (qRT-PCR), so as to evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of detection, and to provide data support for optimizing the nucleic acid detection scheme of SARS-CoV-2. Methods　According to the SARS-CoV-2 specific primer probe published by the China Center for Disease Control and Prevention, a ddPCR detection method for SARS-CoV-2 was designed. One sample was selected for sensitivity test after gradient dilution; six respiratory virus nucleic acid positive samples including seasonal H3N2 influenza virus and SARS-CoV-2 positive samples were selected for specificity test; five SARS-CoV-2 positive samples were selected for repeatability test; in addition, 30 positive and 20 negative SARS-CoV-2 samples were selected for multiple clinical samples testing, and the results were analyzed and compared with those of qRT-PCR. Results　The ddPCR method can specifically detect SARS-CoV-2, and directly obtain the original copy number of the sample target gene to achieve accurate quantification; the sensitivity test of gradient dilution positive samples showed that qRT-PCR detected target genes in part of the 10-5 dilution of samples, and no target genes were detected in 10-6 dilution, while ddPCR detected all target genes in both 10-5 and 10-6 dilution of samples. The detection limit of ddPCR was two orders of magnitude higher than that of qRT-PCR, and the sensitivity was higher than that of qRT-PCR; in the comparison of the repeatability test results of the two methods, the coefficient of variation of ddPCR was 1.266%-11.814%, lower than 1.729%-26.174% of qRT PCR, and the repeatability was higher than qRT-PCR; among 50 clinical samples, 30 positive samples of confirmed cases of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) were detected by both methods, SARS-CoV-2 was successfully detected by both methods, and 20 negative samples of COVID-19 were detected by both methods, and the results were negative, with a coincidence rate of 100.00% (50/50). Conclusion　The ddPCR method can accurately quantify SARS-CoV-2 with strong specificity, and its sensitivity and repeatability are higher than those of qRT-PCR, but it also has certain detection limitations and is more suitable for the detection of low load samples. In the actual detection, the two methods can be reasonably combined to improve the detection accuracy.

Abstract: Objective　To evaluate the influence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) prevention and control measures on the transmission and epidemic of influenza in Chongqing, so as to provide references for formulating targeted influenza prevention and control strategies. Methods　The influenza surveillance data, during the year 2018 to 2020, were collected through the "China Influenza Surveillance Information System", and the seasonal characteristics of influenza epidemic were analyzed. The percentage of influenza like cases (ILI%) and influenza virus positive rate between 2020 and 2018-2019 were compared, so as to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 prevention and control measures on influenza epidemic characteristics. Results　The annual proportions of ILI cases in Chongqing were respectively 3.53%, 2.23% and 1.2% from 2018 to 2020, while the positive rates of influenza virus were respectively 13.97%, 23.81% and 2.65%. The distribution trend of ILI% from 2018 to 2019 fluctuated were similar, but it continued to drop and remain at a low level since February 2020. The positive rate of influenza virus showed an epidemic peak from December to March in 2018-2019, also peaked from November 2019 to January 2020, but decreased to 0 in March. ILI% was positively correlated with the positive rate of influenza virus (r=0.404 8, P<0.05). In 2020, compared with the same period of 2018-2019, the growth rate of ILI% was -66.09% and -46.32%, respectively. The positive rate of influenza virus in 2020 decreased by 81.03% and 88.87% compared with the same period of 2018-2019, respectively. The growth rates of influenza virus positive rate in January 2020 were decreased with a small rate of about 39.87%, and with a significantly decline of more than 93.65% from February. No influenza epidemic was found after March. Conclusions　Since COVID-19 prevention and control measures were implemented in January 2020 in Chongqing, the ILI% and the positive rate of influenza virus in sentinel hospitals decreased significantly. In the season of high incidence of respiratory infectious diseases, personal protection and other measures can effectively reduce influenza virus infection.

Radiotherapy is one of the main treatment methods for malignant tumors, which can cause the radiation damage to normal tissues. Radiation-induced skin injury (RISI) is one of the main adverse reactions caused by radiotherapy. The main clinical manifestations of RISI are dermatitis, ulcer, erosion and necrosis, which seriously affect the quality of life and treatment effect of tumor radiotherapy patients, and even affect the overall survival of patients. The pathological mechanism of RISI is still unclear. Some studies have shown that inflammation and oxidative stress are the main causes of RISI. RISI can be divided into acute and chronic RISI according to the different onset time, and different treatment strategies can be formulated according to the severity of the injury. In this article, clinical manifestations, classification, pathogenesis, prevention and treatment of RISI are comprehensively summarized.

BACKGROUND: LY01005 (Goserelin acetate sustained-release microsphere injection) is a modified gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist injected monthly. This phase III trial study aimed to evaluated the efficacy and safety of LY01005 in Chinese patients with prostate cancer. METHODS: We conducted a randomized controlled, open-label, non-inferiority trial across 49 sites in China. This study included 290 patients with prostate cancer who received either LY01005 or goserelin implants every 28 days for three injections. The primary efficacy endpoints were the percentage of patients with testosterone suppression ≤50 ng/dL at day 29 and the cumulative probability of testosterone ≤50 ng/dL from day 29 to 85. Non-inferiority was prespecified at a margin of -10%. Secondary endpoints included significant castration (≤20 ng/dL), testosterone surge within 72 h following repeated dosing, and changes in luteinizing hormone, follicle-stimulating hormone, and prostate specific antigen levels. RESULTS: On day 29, in the LY01005 and goserelin implant groups, testosterone concentrations fell below medical-castration levels in 99.3% (142/143) and 100% (140/140) of patients, respectively, with a difference of -0.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], -3.9% to 2.0%) between the two groups. The cumulative probabilities of maintaining castration from days 29 to 85 were 99.3% and 97.8%, respectively, with a between-group difference of 1.5% (95% CI, -1.3% to 4.4%). Both results met the criterion for non-inferiority. Secondary endpoints were similar between groups. Both treatments were well-tolerated. LY01005 was associated with fewer injection-site reactions than the goserelin implant (0% vs . 1.4% [2/145]). CONCLUSION: LY01005 is as effective as goserelin implants in reducing testosterone to castration levels, with a similar safety profile. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04563936.
Humans ; Male ; Antineoplastic Agents, Hormonal/therapeutic use* ; East Asian People ; Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone/agonists* ; Goserelin/therapeutic use* ; Prostate-Specific Antigen ; Prostatic Neoplasms/drug therapy* ; Testosterone