OBJECTIVE: To investigate the associations between eight serum per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) and regional fat depots, we analyzed the data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2011-2018 cycles. METHODS: Multiple linear regression models were developed to explore the associations between serum PFAS concentrations and six fat compositions along with a fat distribution score created by summing the concentrations of the six fat compositions. The associations between structurally grouped PFASs and fat distribution were assessed, and a prediction model was developed to estimate the ability of PFAS exposure to predict obesity risk. RESULTS: Among females aged 39-59 years, trunk fat mass was positively associated with perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS). Higher concentrations of PFOS, perfluorohexane sulfonate (PFHxS), perfluorodecanoate (PFDeA), perfluorononanoate (PFNA), and n-perfluorooctanoate (n-PFOA) were linked to greater visceral adipose tissue in this group. In men, exposure to total perfluoroalkane sulfonates (PFSAs) and long-chain PFSAs was associated with reductions in abdominal fat, while higher abdominal fat in women aged 39-59 years was associated with short-chain PFSAs. The prediction model demonstrated high accuracy, with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.9925 for predicting obesity risk. CONCLUSION PFAS exposure is associated with regional fat distribution, with varying effects based on age, sex, and PFAS structure. The findings highlight the potential role of PFAS exposure in influencing fat depots and obesity risk, with significant implications for public health. The prediction model provides a highly accurate tool for assessing obesity risk related to PFAS exposure.
Humans ; Fluorocarbons/blood* ; Female ; Adult ; Middle Aged ; Male ; Environmental Pollutants/blood* ; Abdominal Fat ; Nutrition Surveys ; Alkanesulfonic Acids/blood* ; Obesity ; Environmental Exposure

Objective:To examine the impact of varied surgical treatment strategies on the prognosis of patients with initial resectable gastric cancer liver metastases (IR-GCLM).Methods:This is a retrospective cohort study. Employing a retrospective cohort design, the study selected clinicopathological data from the national multi-center retrospective cohort study database, focusing on 282 patients with IR-GCLM who underwent surgical intervention between January 2010 and December 2019. There were 231 males and 51 males, aging ( M(IQR)) 61 (14) years (range: 27 to 80 years). These patients were stratified into radical and palliative treatment groups based on treatment decisions. Survival curves were generated using the Kaplan-Meier method and distinctions in survival rates were assessed using the Log-rank test. The Cox risk regression model evaluated HR for various factors, controlling for confounders through multivariate analysis to comprehensively evaluate the influence of surgery on the prognosis of IR-GCLM patients. A restricted cubic spline Cox proportional hazard model assessed and delineated intricate associations between measured variables and prognosis. At the same time, the X-tile served as an auxiliary tool to identify critical thresholds in the survival analysis for IR-GCLM patients. Subgroup analysis was then conducted to identify potential beneficiary populations in different surgical treatments. Results:(1) The radical group comprised 118 patients, all undergoing R0 resection or local physical therapy of primary and metastatic lesions. The palliative group comprised 164 patients, with 52 cases undergoing palliative resections for gastric primary tumors and liver metastases, 56 cases undergoing radical resections for gastric primary tumors only, 45 cases undergoing palliative resections for gastric primary tumors, and 11 cases receiving palliative treatments for liver metastases. A statistically significant distinction was observed between the groups regarding the site and the number of liver metastases (both P<0.05). (2) The median overall survival (OS) of the 282 patients was 22.7 months (95% CI: 17.8 to 27.6 months), with 1-year and 3-year OS rates were 65.4% and 35.6%, respectively. The 1-year OS rates for patients in the radical surgical group and palliative surgical group were 68.3% and 63.1%, while the corresponding 3-year OS rates were 42.2% and 29.9%, respectively. A comparison of OS between the two groups showed no statistically significant difference ( P=0.254). Further analysis indicated that patients undergoing palliative gastric cancer resection alone had a significantly worse prognosis compared to other surgical options ( HR=1.98, 95% CI: 1.21 to 3.24, P=0.006). (3) The size of the primary gastric tumor significantly influenced the patients′ prognosis ( HR=2.01, 95% CI: 1.45 to 2.79, P<0.01), with HR showing a progressively increasing trend as tumor size increased. (4) Subgroup analysis indicates that radical treatment may be more effective compared to palliative treatment in the following specific cases: well/moderately differentiated tumors ( HR=2.84, 95% CI 1.49 to 5.41, P=0.001), and patients with liver metastases located in the left lobe of the liver ( HR=2.06, 95% CI 1.19 to 3.57, P=0.010). Conclusions:In patients with IR-GCLM, radical surgery did not produce a significant improvement in the overall prognosis compared to palliative surgery. However, within specific patient subgroups (well/moderately differentiated tumors, and patients with liver metastases located in the left lobe of the liver), radical treatment can significantly improve prognosis compared to palliative approaches.

Traditional chemotherapy is the cornerstone of comprehensive treatment for gastric cancer, but its recurrence and metastasis rates are high, and the overall prognosis is not ideal. The rise of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) has brought new hope to gastric cancer patients and changed the current pattern of comprehensive treatment for gastric cancer. With the increasing use of ICI, immune related adverse reactions (irAEs) such as skin toxicity and gastrointestinal toxicity are becoming increasingly common. Scientific understanding, early diagnosis, and graded management are currently the main strategies for handling irAEs. This article aims to review the mechanisms, clinical manifestations, and prediction, treatment, and management of irAEs after ICI treatment of gastric cancer, in order to enhance the understanding of irAEs among clinical physicians, better manage immunotherapy related adverse reactions, and improve the prognosis and quality of life of patients.

China is a major country for gastric cancer incidence, with the majority being at the advanced stage. Currently, there has been a profound change in the perioperative diagnosis and treatment mode of locally advanced gastric cancer. It has become a gradually recommended diagnostic and treatment process in both eastern and western countries gastric cancer guidelines for patients to undergo radical surgery for gastric cancer after neoadjuvant therapy, followed by postoperative adjuvant therapy. Neoadjuvant therapy can downregulate the tumor grade and clinical stage of gastric cancer, facilitating the successful conduct of radical surgery for gastric cancer. Moreover, it allows for further therapeutic selection based on treatment response and empirically guides adjuvant therapy. However, after neoadjuvant therapy, tumor tissue and the whole body of the patient will inevitably undergo a series of changes, which will affect the implementation process of radical surgery for gastric cancer and postoperative management. Therefore, this article intends to discuss the indications and progress of neoadjuvant therapy for gastric cancer, the timing of radical surgery, technical points, postoperative complications, and other aspects, in order to provide reference and guidance for colleagues in the industry.

Objective:To examine the impact of varied surgical treatment strategies on the prognosis of patients with initial resectable gastric cancer liver metastases (IR-GCLM).Methods:This is a retrospective cohort study. Employing a retrospective cohort design, the study selected clinicopathological data from the national multi-center retrospective cohort study database, focusing on 282 patients with IR-GCLM who underwent surgical intervention between January 2010 and December 2019. There were 231 males and 51 males, aging ( M(IQR)) 61 (14) years (range: 27 to 80 years). These patients were stratified into radical and palliative treatment groups based on treatment decisions. Survival curves were generated using the Kaplan-Meier method and distinctions in survival rates were assessed using the Log-rank test. The Cox risk regression model evaluated HR for various factors, controlling for confounders through multivariate analysis to comprehensively evaluate the influence of surgery on the prognosis of IR-GCLM patients. A restricted cubic spline Cox proportional hazard model assessed and delineated intricate associations between measured variables and prognosis. At the same time, the X-tile served as an auxiliary tool to identify critical thresholds in the survival analysis for IR-GCLM patients. Subgroup analysis was then conducted to identify potential beneficiary populations in different surgical treatments. Results:(1) The radical group comprised 118 patients, all undergoing R0 resection or local physical therapy of primary and metastatic lesions. The palliative group comprised 164 patients, with 52 cases undergoing palliative resections for gastric primary tumors and liver metastases, 56 cases undergoing radical resections for gastric primary tumors only, 45 cases undergoing palliative resections for gastric primary tumors, and 11 cases receiving palliative treatments for liver metastases. A statistically significant distinction was observed between the groups regarding the site and the number of liver metastases (both P<0.05). (2) The median overall survival (OS) of the 282 patients was 22.7 months (95% CI: 17.8 to 27.6 months), with 1-year and 3-year OS rates were 65.4% and 35.6%, respectively. The 1-year OS rates for patients in the radical surgical group and palliative surgical group were 68.3% and 63.1%, while the corresponding 3-year OS rates were 42.2% and 29.9%, respectively. A comparison of OS between the two groups showed no statistically significant difference ( P=0.254). Further analysis indicated that patients undergoing palliative gastric cancer resection alone had a significantly worse prognosis compared to other surgical options ( HR=1.98, 95% CI: 1.21 to 3.24, P=0.006). (3) The size of the primary gastric tumor significantly influenced the patients′ prognosis ( HR=2.01, 95% CI: 1.45 to 2.79, P<0.01), with HR showing a progressively increasing trend as tumor size increased. (4) Subgroup analysis indicates that radical treatment may be more effective compared to palliative treatment in the following specific cases: well/moderately differentiated tumors ( HR=2.84, 95% CI 1.49 to 5.41, P=0.001), and patients with liver metastases located in the left lobe of the liver ( HR=2.06, 95% CI 1.19 to 3.57, P=0.010). Conclusions:In patients with IR-GCLM, radical surgery did not produce a significant improvement in the overall prognosis compared to palliative surgery. However, within specific patient subgroups (well/moderately differentiated tumors, and patients with liver metastases located in the left lobe of the liver), radical treatment can significantly improve prognosis compared to palliative approaches.

Objective:To investigate the prognosis of patients with initially resectable gastric cancer liver metastasis (GCLM) who were treated by different modalities, and analyze the influencing factors for prognosis of patients.Methods:The retrospective cohort study was conducted. The clinicopathological data of 327 patients with initially resectable GCLM who were included in the database of a nationwide multicenter retrospective cohort study on GCLM based on real-world data from January 2010 to December 2019 were collected. There were 267 males and 60 females, aged 61(54,68)years. According to the specific situations of patients, treatment modalities included radical surgery combined with systemic treatment, palliative surgery combined with systemic treatment, and systemic treatment alone. Observation indicators: (1) clinical characteristics of patients who were treated by different modalities; (2) prognostic outcomes of patients who were treated by different modalities; (3) analysis of influencing factors for prognosis of patients with initially resectable GCLM; (4) screening of potential beneficiaries in patients who were treated by radical surgery plus systemic treatment and patients who were treated by palliative surgery plus systemic treatment. Measurement data with normal distribution were represented as Mean± SD, and comparison between groups was conducted using the independent sample t test. Measurement data with skewed distribution were represented as M( Q1, Q3), and comparison between groups was conducted using the rank sum test. Count data were described as absolute numbers or percentages, and comparison between groups was conducted using the chi-square test. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to calculate survival rate and draw survival curve, and Log-Rank test was used for survival analysis. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted using the COX proportional hazard regression model. The propensity score matching was employed by the 1:1 nearest neighbor matching method with a caliper value of 0.1. The forest plots were utilized to evaluate potential benefits of diverse surgical combined with systemic treatments within the population. Results:(1) Clinical characteristics of patients who were treated by different modalities. Of 327 patients, there were 118 cases undergoing radical surgery plus systemic treatment, 164 cases undergoing palliative surgery plus systemic treatment, and 45 cases undergoing systemic treatment alone. There were significant differences in smoking, drinking, site of primary gastric tumor, diameter of primary gastric tumor, site of liver metastasis, and metastatic interval among the three groups of patients ( P<0.05). (2) Prognostic outcomes of patients who were treated by different modalities. The median overall survival time of the 327 pati-ents was 19.9 months (95% confidence interval as 14.9-24.9 months), with 1-, 3-year overall survival rate of 61.3%, 32.7%, respectively. The 1-year overall survival rates of patients undergoing radical surgery plus systemic treatment, palliative surgery plus systemic treatment and systemic treatment alone were 68.3%, 63.1%, 30.6%, and the 3-year overall survival rates were 41.1%, 29.9%, 11.9%, showing a significant difference in overall survival rate among the three groups of patients ( χ2=19.46, P<0.05). Results of further analysis showed that there was a significant difference in overall survival rate between patients undergoing radical surgery plus systemic treatment and patients undergoing systemic treatment alone ( hazard ratio=0.40, 95% confidence interval as 0.26-0.61, P<0.05), between patients undergoing palliative surgery plus systemic treatment and patients under-going systemic treatment alone ( hazard ratio=0.47, 95% confidence interval as 0.32-0.71, P<0.05). (3) Analysis of influencing factors for prognosis of patients with initially resectable GCLM. Results of multivariate analysis showed that the larger primary gastric tumor, poorly differentiated tumor, larger liver metastasis, multiple hepatic metastases were independent risk factors for prognosis of patients with initially resectable GCLM ( hazard ratio=1.20, 1.70, 1.20, 2.06, 95% confidence interval as 1.14-1.27, 1.25-2.31, 1.04-1.42, 1.45-2.92, P<0.05) and immunotherapy or targeted therapy, the treatment modality of radical or palliative surgery plus systemic therapy were independent protective factors for prognosis of patients with initially resectable GCLM ( hazard ratio=0.60, 0.39, 0.46, 95% confidence interval as 0.42-0.87, 0.25-0.60, 0.30-0.70, P<0.05). (4) Screening of potentinal beneficiaries in patients who were treated by radical surgery plus systemic treatment and patients who were treated by palliative surgery plus systemic treatment. Results of forest plots analysis showed that for patients with high-moderate differentiated GCLM and patients with liver metastasis located in the left liver, the overall survival rate of patients undergoing radical surgery plus systemic treatment was better than patients undergoing palliative surgery plus systemic treatment ( hazard ratio=0.21, 0.42, 95% confidence interval as 0.09-0.48, 0.23-0.78, P<0.05). Conclusions:Compared to systemic therapy alone, both radical and palliative surgery plus systemic therapy can improve the pro-gnosis of patients with initially resectable GCLM. The larger primary gastric tumor, poorly differen-tiated tumor, larger liver metastasis, multiple hepatic metastases are independent risk factors for prognosis of patients with initial resectable GCLM and immunotherapy or targeted therapy, the treatment modality of radical or palliative surgery plus systemic therapy are independent protective factors for prognosis of patients with initially resectable GCLM.

Objective To explore the diagnosis and clinical characteristics of atypical severe pneumonia caused by Chlamydia abortus(C.abortus).Methods Clinical data of 4 patients diagnosed with atypical severe pneumonia caused by C.abortus in a hospital from January 2021 to November 2022 were collected.Clinical characteristics,dia-gnosis and treatment,and precautions of the disease were comprehensively analyzed.Results All 4 patients were male,aged 63-73 years old,with acute onset,high fever,cough and expectoration.Three patients had a history of contact with poultry,one patient had a history of contact with abortion goat.The interval between the emerging of clinical symptoms and the onset of acute respiratory failure in 4 patients was 1-6 days,and the oxygenation index(PaO2/FiO2)at admission was less than 200 mmHg,which gradually decreased with the progression of the disease,active support with a ventilator was necessary.Two patients had an increase in white blood cell count,4 had an in-crease in neutrophil percentage,3 had a mild decrease in platelet count.Among 4 patients,2,2,3 and 4 patients showed elevated levels of aspartate aminotransferase,alanine aminotransferase,creatine kinase,and serum creati-nine respectively,2 patients had mild hyponatremia,4 patients showed significant increase in C-reactive protein,procalcitonin,and interleukin-6 levels.Four patients'chest CT findings showed main involvement of single or mul-tiple lung lobes,with exudation and consolidation,and later involvement of multiple lobes of lung.The metageno-mic next-generation sequencing of bronchoalveolar lavage fluid detected the DNA sequence of C.abortus.Based on the clinical manifestations,contact history,chest CT,and metagenomic next-generation sequencing results of 4 pa-tients,the diagnosis was C.abortus.atypical severe pneumonia.After timely adjustment of the treatment of anti-in-fection regimen based on doxycycline,the patients'condition improved and were discharged.Conclusion C.abor-tus may also cause human pneumonia,which can lead to serious clinical outcome after infection.Patient had a histo-ry of animal contact should be alert to such diseases.Metagenomic next-generation sequencing can detect C.abortus.

OBJECTIVES: To explore the potential biomarkers for the diagnosis of primary brain stem injury (PBSI) by using metabonomics method to observe the changes of metabolites in rats with PBSI caused death. METHODS: PBSI, non-brain stem brain injury and decapitation rat models were established, and metabolic maps of brain stem were obtained by LC-MS metabonomics method and annotated to the HMDB database. Partial least square-discriminant analysis (PLS-DA) and random forest methods were used to screen potential biomarkers associated with PBSI diagnosis. RESULTS: Eighty-six potential metabolic markers associated with PBSI were screened by PLS-DA. They were modeled and predicted by random forest algorithm with an accuracy rate of 83.3%. The 818 metabolic markers annotated to HMDB database were used for random forest modeling and prediction, and the accuracy rate was 88.9%. According to the importance in the identification of cause of death, the most important metabolic markers that were significantly up-regulated in PBSI group were HMDB0038126 (genipinic acid, GA), HMDB0013272 (N-lauroylglycine), HMDB0005199 [(R)-salsolinol] and HMDB0013645 (N,N-dimethylsphingosine). CONCLUSIONS GA, N-lauroylglycine, (R)-salsolinol and N,N-dimethylsphingosine are expected to be important metabolite indicators in the diagnosis of PBSI caused death, thus providing clues for forensic medicine practice.
Rats ; Animals ; Metabolomics/methods* ; Brain Injuries ; Biomarkers/metabolism* ; Brain Stem/metabolism*

Humans ; Receptor, Platelet-Derived Growth Factor beta ; Precursor Cell Lymphoblastic Leukemia-Lymphoma/genetics* ; Imatinib Mesylate ; Oncogene Proteins, Fusion/genetics* ; Trans-Activators