Background:To compare the efficacy and safety of monthly administrations of gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists LY01005 and Zoladex ? in Chinese patients with premenopausal breast cancer. Methods:From October 2020 to November 2021, 188 premenopausal breast cancer patients were enrolled in 34 hospitals and randomized 1:1 to receive either LY01005 or Zoladex ? every 28 days for a total of three injections. All patients concomitantly received oral tamoxifen (TAM). The primary efficacy endpoint was cumulative probability of maintaining menopausal level [oestradiol (E2) ≤30 pg/ml] from day 29 to day 85. The second efficacy endpoint included changes in E2, luteinizing hormone (LH), and follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) compared with the baseline. Pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD), and safety were analyzed. The study also evaluated the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic characteristics of LY01005. Results:A total of 188 patients were randomised and 187 patients received either LY01005 or Zoladex ?. Cumulative probabilities of maintaining menopausal level (E2≤30 pg/ml) from day 29 to day 85 were 93.1% for LY01005 and 86.3% for Zoladex ?. The between-group difference was 6.8% (95% CI: -2.3%, 15.9%) and primary efficacy in the LY01005 group was not inferior to that in the Zoladex ? group. Changes in E2, LH, and FSH levels compared with the baseline were equivalent between the two groups (E2: 89.34% to 90.23% vs. 82.11% to 85.02%; LH: 88.89% to 95.52% vs. 89.70% to 97.02%; FSH: 75.36% to 80.85% vs.73.07% to 80.24%, respectively). After three consecutive doses of LY01005, the LH and FSH levels of the subjects showed a transient increase after the first dose, reached a peak on the second day and then started to decrease. The LH and FSH reached a lower level and remained at or below that level until the 85th day. Both treatments were well-tolerated. Conclusion:LY01005 is as effective as Zoladex ? in suppressing E2 to menopausal levels in Chinese patients with premenopausal breast cancer, with a similar safety profile.

Background:To compare the efficacy and safety of monthly administrations of gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists LY01005 and Zoladex ? in Chinese patients with premenopausal breast cancer. Methods:From October 2020 to November 2021, 188 premenopausal breast cancer patients were enrolled in 34 hospitals and randomized 1:1 to receive either LY01005 or Zoladex ? every 28 days for a total of three injections. All patients concomitantly received oral tamoxifen (TAM). The primary efficacy endpoint was cumulative probability of maintaining menopausal level [oestradiol (E2) ≤30 pg/ml] from day 29 to day 85. The second efficacy endpoint included changes in E2, luteinizing hormone (LH), and follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) compared with the baseline. Pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD), and safety were analyzed. The study also evaluated the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic characteristics of LY01005. Results:A total of 188 patients were randomised and 187 patients received either LY01005 or Zoladex ?. Cumulative probabilities of maintaining menopausal level (E2≤30 pg/ml) from day 29 to day 85 were 93.1% for LY01005 and 86.3% for Zoladex ?. The between-group difference was 6.8% (95% CI: -2.3%, 15.9%) and primary efficacy in the LY01005 group was not inferior to that in the Zoladex ? group. Changes in E2, LH, and FSH levels compared with the baseline were equivalent between the two groups (E2: 89.34% to 90.23% vs. 82.11% to 85.02%; LH: 88.89% to 95.52% vs. 89.70% to 97.02%; FSH: 75.36% to 80.85% vs.73.07% to 80.24%, respectively). After three consecutive doses of LY01005, the LH and FSH levels of the subjects showed a transient increase after the first dose, reached a peak on the second day and then started to decrease. The LH and FSH reached a lower level and remained at or below that level until the 85th day. Both treatments were well-tolerated. Conclusion:LY01005 is as effective as Zoladex ? in suppressing E2 to menopausal levels in Chinese patients with premenopausal breast cancer, with a similar safety profile.

Patients with severe trauma require an extremely timely treatment and transfusion plays an irreplaceable role in the emergency treatment of such patients. An increasing number of evidence-based medicinal evidences and clinical practices suggest that patients with severe traumatic bleeding benefit from early transfusion of low-titer group O whole blood or hemostatic resuscitation with red blood cells, plasma and platelet of a balanced ratio. However, the current domestic mode of blood supply cannot fully meet the requirements of timely and effective blood transfusion for emergency treatment of patients with severe trauma in clinical practice. In order to solve the key problems in blood supply and blood transfusion strategies for emergency treatment of severe trauma, Branch of Clinical Transfusion Medicine of Chinese Medical Association, Group for Trauma Emergency Care and Multiple Injuries of Trauma Branch of Chinese Medical Association, Young Scholar Group of Disaster Medicine Branch of Chinese Medical Association organized domestic experts of blood transfusion medicine and trauma treatment to jointly formulate Chinese expert consensus on blood support mode and blood transfusion strategies for emergency treatment of severe trauma patients ( version 2024). Based on the evidence-based medical evidence and Delphi method of expert consultation and voting, 10 recommendations were put forward from two aspects of blood support mode and transfusion strategies, aiming to provide a reference for transfusion resuscitation in the emergency treatment of severe trauma and further improve the success rate of treatment of patients with severe trauma.

OBJECTIVE:To provide reference to promote the proper use of TCM decoction pieces.METHODS:According to Beijing TCM Decoction Piece Dispensing Regulation,stratified random sampling method was adopted to select a group of physicians in our hospital and conduct questionnaire survey about their knowledge of the prescription handling of 8 commonly used TCM decoction pieces including Scutellaria baicalensis,Angelica sinensis,Fritillary,Phellodendron chinense,Aconitum carmichaeli,Eucommia ulmoides,Ziziphus jujuba,Rhei Radix et Rhizoma.Then,the survey data was collected and analyzed.RESULTS:A total of 81 questionnaires were given out and all were returned with effective recovery rate of 100％.In terms of professional titles,associate chief physicians showed the lowest average error rates in prescription handling cognition (27.5 ％),compared with physicians (35.8％) and attending doctors (37.0％).They made most mistakes about Fritillary and E.ulmoides.To the contrary,both physicians and attending doctors made most mistakes about E.ulmoides.In the scope of working life,physicians from different groups showed similar average error rates in prescription handing recognition (31.3％-38.8％).All of them made most mistakes about P.chinense and E.ulmoides.As for major,those who study western internal medicine shared larger average error rates (43.8％) than those who study internal medicine of TCM (36.8％),traumatology and orthopedics of TCM (31.8％) and acupuncture (36.5％).Each major showed the highest error rates in E.ulmoides.The order of 8 TCM decoction pieces from the most mistakes to the least mistakes made by physicians was E.ulmoides,P.chinense,Fritillary,Rhei Radix et Rhizoma,S.baicalensis,A.carmichaeli,Z.jujuba and A.sinensis.CONCLUSIONS:Physicians with different professional titles,working life and majors show deficiency in knowledge about the prescription handling of 8 commonly used TCM decoction pieces.Generally,physicians show the worst understanding of E.ulmoides.