Background::Chemotherapy plus granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (GCSF) regimen is one of the available approaches to mobilize peripheral blood progenitor cells (PBPCs). It causes thrombocytopenia and delays leukapheresis. This study aimed to evaluate the role of recombinant human thrombopoietin (rhTPO) before mobilization chemotherapy in facilitating leukapheresis in patients with lymphoma.Methods::In this randomized open-label phase 2 trial, patients were randomly assigned in a 1:2 ratio to receive mobilization with rhTPO plus GCSF in combination with chemotherapy (the rhTPO plus GCSF arm) or GCSF alone in combination with chemotherapy (the GCSF alone arm). The recovery of neutrophils and platelets and the amount of platelet transfusion were monitored.Results::Thirty patients were enrolled in this study between March 2016 and August 2018. Patients in the rhTPO plus GCSF arm (n = 10) had similar platelet nadir after mobilization chemotherapy ( P=0.878) and similar amount of platelet transfusion (median 0 vs. 1 unit, P=0.735) when compared with the GCSF alone arm (n = 20). On the day of leukapheresis, the median platelet count was 86 × 10 9/L (range 18-219) among patients who received rhTPO and 73 × 10 9/L (range 42-197) among those who received GCSF alone ( P=0.982). After the use of rhTPO, the incidence of platelet count <75 × 10 9/L on the day of leukapheresis did not decrease significantly (30.0% vs. 50.0%, P=0.297). Platelet recovery after PBPC transfusion was more rapid in the rhTPO plus GCSF arm (median 8.0 days [95% confidence interval 2.9-13.1] to platelets ≥50 × 10 9/L vs. 11.0 days [95% confidence interval 8.6-13.4], P=0.011). The estimated total cost of the mobilization and reconstitution phases per patient was similar between the two treatmtent groups ( P=0.362 and P=0.067, respectively). Conclusions::Our findings indicate that there was no significant clinical benefit of rhTPO use in facilitating mobilization of progenitor cells, but it may promote platelet recovery in the reconstitution phase after high-dose therapy.Trial registration::This trial has been registered in Clinicaltrials.gov as NCT03014102.

Background::Chemotherapy plus granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (GCSF) regimen is one of the available approaches to mobilize peripheral blood progenitor cells (PBPCs). It causes thrombocytopenia and delays leukapheresis. This study aimed to evaluate the role of recombinant human thrombopoietin (rhTPO) before mobilization chemotherapy in facilitating leukapheresis in patients with lymphoma.Methods::In this randomized open-label phase 2 trial, patients were randomly assigned in a 1:2 ratio to receive mobilization with rhTPO plus GCSF in combination with chemotherapy (the rhTPO plus GCSF arm) or GCSF alone in combination with chemotherapy (the GCSF alone arm). The recovery of neutrophils and platelets and the amount of platelet transfusion were monitored.Results::Thirty patients were enrolled in this study between March 2016 and August 2018. Patients in the rhTPO plus GCSF arm (n = 10) had similar platelet nadir after mobilization chemotherapy ( P=0.878) and similar amount of platelet transfusion (median 0 vs. 1 unit, P=0.735) when compared with the GCSF alone arm (n = 20). On the day of leukapheresis, the median platelet count was 86 × 10 9/L (range 18-219) among patients who received rhTPO and 73 × 10 9/L (range 42-197) among those who received GCSF alone ( P=0.982). After the use of rhTPO, the incidence of platelet count <75 × 10 9/L on the day of leukapheresis did not decrease significantly (30.0% vs. 50.0%, P=0.297). Platelet recovery after PBPC transfusion was more rapid in the rhTPO plus GCSF arm (median 8.0 days [95% confidence interval 2.9-13.1] to platelets ≥50 × 10 9/L vs. 11.0 days [95% confidence interval 8.6-13.4], P=0.011). The estimated total cost of the mobilization and reconstitution phases per patient was similar between the two treatmtent groups ( P=0.362 and P=0.067, respectively). Conclusions::Our findings indicate that there was no significant clinical benefit of rhTPO use in facilitating mobilization of progenitor cells, but it may promote platelet recovery in the reconstitution phase after high-dose therapy.Trial registration::This trial has been registered in Clinicaltrials.gov as NCT03014102.

Objective To assess the efficacy of combining vestibular rehabilitation with cognitive behavioral therapy in treating chronic subjective dizziness ( CSD) and the associated anxiety. Methods A total of 98 anxious CSD patients were randomly divided into an experimental group ( n=50) and a control group ( n=48) . All of the pa-tients′scores on the Hamilton anxiety scale ( HAMA) were no less than 14 and their scores on the Hamilton depres-sion scale ( HAMD) were less than 18. Systematic vestibular rehabilitation was given to the patients in the control group, while this was combined with cognitive behavioral therapy for the patients in the experimental group. All pa-tients were evaluated using a dizziness handicap inventory ( DHI) and the HAMA before treatment and in the 4th and 8th week of the treatment. Results Before the treatment there was no significant difference between the 2 groups in any of the assessments. After 3 weeks of treatment, the average HAMA score, DHI total score and its factor scores had decreased significantly. Four weeks later, the average HAMA score, DHI total score and its factor scores for som-atization, emotion and function had improved significantly in both groups compared with before treatment and the scores after 3 weeks. After 3 and 7 weeks of treatment, the average HAMA score, DHI total score and its factor scores of the experimental group were significantly lower than those of the control group. Conclusion Cognitive behavioral therapy amplifies the effects of vestibular rehabilitation in treating persons with CSD, in part by significantly relieving their anxiety.

Objective To evaluate efficacy and safety of escitalopram in treating depression .Methods In this randomized , single-blind, citalopram parallel controlled, fixed dosage study, the study group was treated with escitalopram tablet 10mg/d and the control group with citalopram tablet 20mg/d.Observation duration was 6 weeks.Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression ( 17-item HAMD),Clinical Global Impression (CGI) and Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety (HAMA) were used to measure the efficacy.Items including Treatment Emergent Symptoms Scale (TESS), lab examination and vital signs for assessment of safety .Results Eighty-eight patients were randomly divided into study group (43 patients) and control group (45 patients).After 6 weeks treatment, a signif-icant greater reduction in HAMD 17 ,CGI-SI and HAMA total score was found for both study group and control group showing significant difference with their baseline ( P <0.01 );but there were no significant difference between two groups ( P >0.05 ) .However , after 1 week treatment , the HAMD17 and CGI-SI score reductions between two groups were significant difference ( P <0.01 ) .The score of HAMA was no significant difference between two groups ( P >0.05 ) .In study group , the positive response rates was 81.4%,and in controls was 80.8%, there was no significant difference between two groups ( P >0.05 ) .There was no significant difference about the incidence of adverse reaction between two groups ( P >0.05 ) .Conclusions Escitalopram is a safe and effective antidepressant as citalopram , however , it has a more rapid reaction than the latter .

Objective: To explore the relationship between the expressions of chemokine receptor CXCR4 and vascular endothelial growth factor C (VEGF-C ) with lymph node metastasis in human rectal cancer. Methods: Immuohistochemical staining was used to detect the expressions of CXCR4 and VEGF-C in 73 samples of human rectal cancer. The relationship between CXCR4 and VEGF-C in 73 samples of human rectal cancer. The relationship between CXCR4 and VEGF-C expressions was analyzed. Results: The positive rate of CXCR4 expression with lymph node metastasis was higher than that without lymph node metastasis (60.1% vs 23.3%,P