Objective To understand the fluorescence pattern of antinuclear antibody(ANA)and the distribution of target anti-gen and ANA′s impact on rheumatoid arthritis(RA)RA.Methods The data of rheumatoid factor(RF)and anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide antibodies(anti-CCP antibodies)and ANA of 860 RA patients during 2014-2015 were collected and divided into 2 groups according to the ANA levels.The differences of RF and anti-CCP antibodies level between 2 groups were analyzed.Analyzed the fluorescence pattern of RA merger ANA and the distribution of target antigen by statistical.Results Of the 860 RA patients,the positive rate of ANA was 37.6%,the major fluorescence pattern of RA merger ANA was speckled pattern,anti SSA positive rate was 21.7%.The RF and anti-CCP antibodies level had statistical difference between ANA positive group and ANA negative group (P <0.05).Conclusion RA merger ANA positive can show different fluorescence patterns and target antigen,the speckled pattern and anti-SSA positive are the main pattern.The severity of arthritis symptoms and the degree of bone destruction between ANA positive group and ANA negative group were difference.Anti-ANA positive has a certain promoting effect on the progression of RA disease.

Objective: Mirvetuximab soravtansine (MIRV), a new antibody-drug conjugate, versus the investigator’s choice of chemotherapy (IC) was the first treatment to demonstrate benefits for progression-free and overall survival in platinum-resistant recurrent ovarian cancer (PROC) with high folate receptor-alpha (high-FRα) expression. Efficacy, safety, and economic effectiveness make MIRV the new standard of care for these patients. Methods: Based on patients and clinical parameters from MIRASOL (GOG 3045/ENGOTov55) phase III randomized controlled trials, the Markov model with a 20-year time horizon was established to evaluate the cost and efficacy of MIRV and IC for PROC with high-FRα expression, considering the bevacizumab-pretreated situation from the American healthcare system. Total cost, life-years (LYs), quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), incremental costeffectiveness ratio (ICER), and incremental net health benefits were the main outcome indicators and compared with willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/QALY. Sensitivity and scenario analyses were conducted. Results: Compared with the IC, MIRV was associated with incremental costs of $538,251, $575,674, and $188,248 with the corresponding QALYs (LYs) increased by 0.90 (1.55), 1.09 (1.88), and 0.53 (0.79), leading to ICERs of $596,189/QALY ($347,995/LY), $530,061/QALY ($306,894/LY), and $1,011,310/QALY ($680,025/LY) in the overall, bevacizumab-naïve, and bevacizumab-pretreated patients, respectively. When MIRV is reduced by more than 75%, it may be a cost-effective treatment. Conclusion At the current price, MIRV for PROC with high-FRα expression is not the cost-effective strategy in the US. However, its treatment has higher health benefits in bevacizumab-naïve patients, which is likely to be an alternative.

Objective: Mirvetuximab soravtansine (MIRV), a new antibody-drug conjugate, versus the investigator’s choice of chemotherapy (IC) was the first treatment to demonstrate benefits for progression-free and overall survival in platinum-resistant recurrent ovarian cancer (PROC) with high folate receptor-alpha (high-FRα) expression. Efficacy, safety, and economic effectiveness make MIRV the new standard of care for these patients. Methods: Based on patients and clinical parameters from MIRASOL (GOG 3045/ENGOTov55) phase III randomized controlled trials, the Markov model with a 20-year time horizon was established to evaluate the cost and efficacy of MIRV and IC for PROC with high-FRα expression, considering the bevacizumab-pretreated situation from the American healthcare system. Total cost, life-years (LYs), quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), incremental costeffectiveness ratio (ICER), and incremental net health benefits were the main outcome indicators and compared with willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/QALY. Sensitivity and scenario analyses were conducted. Results: Compared with the IC, MIRV was associated with incremental costs of $538,251, $575,674, and $188,248 with the corresponding QALYs (LYs) increased by 0.90 (1.55), 1.09 (1.88), and 0.53 (0.79), leading to ICERs of $596,189/QALY ($347,995/LY), $530,061/QALY ($306,894/LY), and $1,011,310/QALY ($680,025/LY) in the overall, bevacizumab-naïve, and bevacizumab-pretreated patients, respectively. When MIRV is reduced by more than 75%, it may be a cost-effective treatment. Conclusion At the current price, MIRV for PROC with high-FRα expression is not the cost-effective strategy in the US. However, its treatment has higher health benefits in bevacizumab-naïve patients, which is likely to be an alternative.

Objective: Mirvetuximab soravtansine (MIRV), a new antibody-drug conjugate, versus the investigator’s choice of chemotherapy (IC) was the first treatment to demonstrate benefits for progression-free and overall survival in platinum-resistant recurrent ovarian cancer (PROC) with high folate receptor-alpha (high-FRα) expression. Efficacy, safety, and economic effectiveness make MIRV the new standard of care for these patients. Methods: Based on patients and clinical parameters from MIRASOL (GOG 3045/ENGOTov55) phase III randomized controlled trials, the Markov model with a 20-year time horizon was established to evaluate the cost and efficacy of MIRV and IC for PROC with high-FRα expression, considering the bevacizumab-pretreated situation from the American healthcare system. Total cost, life-years (LYs), quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), incremental costeffectiveness ratio (ICER), and incremental net health benefits were the main outcome indicators and compared with willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/QALY. Sensitivity and scenario analyses were conducted. Results: Compared with the IC, MIRV was associated with incremental costs of $538,251, $575,674, and $188,248 with the corresponding QALYs (LYs) increased by 0.90 (1.55), 1.09 (1.88), and 0.53 (0.79), leading to ICERs of $596,189/QALY ($347,995/LY), $530,061/QALY ($306,894/LY), and $1,011,310/QALY ($680,025/LY) in the overall, bevacizumab-naïve, and bevacizumab-pretreated patients, respectively. When MIRV is reduced by more than 75%, it may be a cost-effective treatment. Conclusion At the current price, MIRV for PROC with high-FRα expression is not the cost-effective strategy in the US. However, its treatment has higher health benefits in bevacizumab-naïve patients, which is likely to be an alternative.

Objective:To investigate the risk factors for positive margins after endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for early gastric cancer and precancerous lesions, and to follow up the recurrence.Methods:The endoscopic, clinical and pathological data of 489 patients with early gastric cancer or precancerous lesions treated by ESD in Fujian Provincial Hospital from January 2015 to December 2020 were retrospectively collected. They were categorized into a negative group (371 cases), a low-grade intraepithelial neoplasia (LGIN)-positive group (79 cases), and a high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia (HGIN) or cancer-positive group (39 cases) according to the different margins. Logistic regression was used to analyze the risk factors for positive margins, the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test to compare the risk of recurrence in different margin groups, and the Cox proportional risk regression model to explore the associated factors that caused recurrence in those with positive margins.Results:In the 489 patients, the positive resection margin rate was 24.1% (118/489), of which HGIN or cancer accounted for 33.1% (39/118). LGIN-positive margin was more likely to occur for lesions larger than 10 cm 2 ( OR=1.58, 95% CI: 1.13-2.08, P=0.033), in the presence of ulcers ( OR=2.92, 95% CI: 1.37-4.54, P=0.012) and for 1-2 years of ESD experience [ OR=1.69 (1-2 years VS 5-6 years), 95% CI: 1.51-1.94, P=0.026]. Those located in the upper 1/3 of the stomach [ OR=3.64 (upper 1/3 VS lower 1/3), 95% CI: 1.27-5.50 P=0.010] and submucosal infiltration (SM1 VS M1+M2: OR=2.37, 95% CI: 1.04-5.72, P=0.028; SM2 VS M1+M2: OR=6.08, 95% CI: 1.31-12.75, P=0.002) were high risk factors for HGIN/cancer-positive margin. Postoperative follow-up was completed in 337 patients, with a median follow-up time of 26.0 (22) months. The overall cumulative recurrence was 5.3% (18/337), 2.1% (5/239) in the negative margin group, 8.3% (6/72) in the LGIN-positive margin group, and 26.9% (7/26) in the HGIN/cancer-positive group, with statistically significant differences among the 3 groups ( P<0.05). Risk factors for recurrence in the positive margin group included positive basal margins ( HR=5.17, 95% CI: 1.47-14.09, P=0.011) and SM1 invasion ( HR=4.82, 95% CI: 1.38-14.77, P=0.013). Conclusion:Positive margins after ESD for early gastric cancer and precancerous lesions are related to lesion location, size, presence of ulceration, depth of infiltration, and endoscopists' experience. The overall risk of recurrence is higher in those with positive margins than in those with negative margins. Additional treatments need to be considered comprehensively for those with submucosal invasion and positive basal margins.