Objective To investigate the effect of Ophiopogonin D on lipopolysaccharide(LPS)-induced apoptosis of alveolar epithelial cells by regulating the interleukin-6(IL-6)/Janus kinase 2(JAK2)/signal transducer and activator of transcription 3(STAT3)signaling pathway.Methods A549 AT Ⅱ cells cultured in vitro were randomly divided into four groups:control group,LPS group,LPS+Ophiopogonin D group,LPS+Ophiopogonin D+colivelin(JAK2/STAT3 signal activator)group,except for the control group,and cells in all other groups were established injury models while being grouped with Ophiopogonin D and colivelin for treatment.Cell counting kit-8(CCK-8)experiment and flow cytometry were applied to detect cell proliferation and apoptosis in each group;Western blotting was applied to detect the expression of IL-6/JAK2/STAT3 signaling pathway proteins of cells in each group.Results The apoptosis rates of A549 cells in control group,LPS group,LPS+Ophiopogonin D group and LPS+Ophiopogonin D+colivelin group were(2.52±0.73)％,(52.43±4.14)％,(1.67±0.52)％and(47.94±3.43)％;IL-6 protein levels were 0.14±0.03,0.49±0.05,0.17±0.04 and 0.45±0.06,and p-JAK2/JAK2 protein levels were 0.17±0.04,0.64±0.08,0.19±0.06 and 0.61±0.07;p-STAT3/STAT3 protein levels were 0.20±0.06,0.69±0.10,0.22±0.07 and 0.65±0.09;the apoptosis rates of AT Ⅱ cells were(3.01±0.69)％,(55.16±3.94)％,(2.35±0.71)％and(50.28±3.78)％;the levels of IL-6 protein were 0.11±0.03,0.87±0.13,0.19±0.04 and 0.84±0.12;the p-JAK2/JAK2 protein levels were 0.13±0.04,0.56±0.08,0.15±0.03 and 0.53±0.07;p-STAT3/STAT3 protein levels were 0.30±0.08,0.79±0.14,0.33±0.09 and 0.75±0.13.The above indexes:control group,LPS+Ophiopogonin D group compared with LPS group,LPS+Ophiopogonin D+colivelin group compared with LPS+Ophiopogonin D group,the differences were statistically significant(all P＜0.05).Conclusion Ophiopogonin D can reduce LPS induced inflammation and oxidative stress levels by inhibiting the activation of IL-6/JAK2/STAT3 signaling pathway,ultimately reducing LPS-induced apoptosis of alveolar epithelial cells.

This work was aimed at predicting and verifying B-cell epitopes of SARS-CoV-2 E protein through bioinformatics methods,and clarifying the dominant B cell epitopes with mouse polyclonal antibody serum prepared through SARS-CoV-2 re-combinant E protein immunization and human positive serum vaccinated with inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine.The structural and B-cell linear epitopes of SARS-CoV-2 E protein were predicted with SOPMA,Expasy,SWISS-MODEL,IEDB database,and Bepid-2.0 software.Candidate epitopes were expressed as GST-tagged recombinant protein fragments in an E.coli sys-tem,and their immunoreactivity with mouse and human poly-clonal positive serum against SARS-CoV-2 E protein was de-tected by western blotting and indirect ELISA,respectively.The epitope prediction results showed that E protein contained linear B cell epitopes Ser6-Val14 and Tyr57-Pro71,and the conformational epitopes of Glu8-Val12,Leu39-Tyr59,and Ser60-Leu65.The GST tagged recombinant E protein fragments of E1 and E3,containing Ser6-Val14 and Tyr57-Pro71 epitopes,respectively,as well as E2 without an epitope sequence as a control,were expressed in an E.coli expression system and successfully purified with an Ni-NTA column.Western blotting and indirect ELISA analysis indicated that all mouse and human SARS-CoV-2 positive sera positively reacted with only E1 and E3 proteins,but negatively reacted with E2 protein,thus indicating that the corresponding epitope prediction with Ser6-Val14 and Tyr57-Pro71 was correct.This study successfully predicted and preliminarily identified two linear B cell epitopes of SARS-CoV-2 E protein,thus providing a reference for the preparation of new coronavirus vaccines and the analysis of immune response characteristics.

Purpose: In patients with acute left-sided colonic obstruction, stenting can convert an emergency operation into a semi-elective procedure. However, its use continues to be debated. We performed a cost-effective analysis using our institution’s experiences. Methods: Endoscopic, surgical, and financial details were prospectively collected for patients who presented with acute colonic obstruction and underwent stenting between 2019 and 2022. Outcomes were defined as technical/clinical success and successful surgical resection. The financial cost of stenting was compared with the expected cost without stenting. Results: Forty patients were included, with 29 undergoing definitive resection. The most common pathology was primary colon cancer (27 patients, 93%). Endoscopic stenting had high technical (90%) and clinical (83%) success rates, with low rates of complications such as perforation (2 patients, 7%) and migration (0 patients, 0%). As a bridge to surgery, the median procedure time was 226 minutes and the surgical outcomes also showed a low rate of complications (3 patients, 11%), such as anastomotic leakage (0 patients, 0%), intraabdominal abscesses (2 patients, 7%), and 30-day postoperative mortality (0 patients, 0%). The cumulative costs with colonic stenting were $32,900, while the expected costs with emergency surgery, including stoma reversal, were $40,700 (healthcare cost-savings of $7,800 per person). The difference was mainly due to the avoidance of upfront emergency surgery. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was 0.81, favoring colonic stenting over upfront emergency surgery. Conclusion Colonic stenting as a bridge to surgery is safe and cost-effective for treating left-sided colonic obstruction with high success rates and low complication rates.

Purpose: Total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) is becoming the standard of care for locally advanced rectal cancer. However, surgery is deferred for months after completion, which may lead to fibrosis and increased surgical difficulty. The aim of this study was to assess whether TNT (TNT-RAPIDO) is associated with increased difficulty of total mesorectal excision (TME) compared with long-course chemoradiotherapy (LCRT) and upfront surgery. Methods: Twelve laparoscopic videos of low anterior resection with TME for rectal cancer were prospectively collected from January 2020 to October 2021, with 4 videos in each arm. Seven colorectal surgeons assessed the videos independently, graded the difficulty of TME using a visual analog scale and attempted to identify which category the videos belonged to. Results: The median age was 67 years, and 10 patients were male. The median interval to surgery from radiotherapy was 13 weeks in the LCRT group and 24 weeks in the TNT-RAPIDO group. There was no significant difference in the visual analog scale for difficulty in TME between the 3 groups (LCRT, 3.2; TNT-RAPIDO, 4.6; upfront, 4.1; P=0.12). A subgroup analysis showed similar difficulty between groups (LCRT 3.2 vs. TNT-RAPIDO 4.6, P=0.05; TNT-RAPIDO 4.6 vs. upfront 4.1, P=0.54). During video assessments, surgeons correctly identified the prior treatment modality in 42% of the cases. TNT-RAPIDO videos had the highest recognition rate (71%), significantly outperforming both LCRT (29%) and upfront surgery (25%, P=0.01). Conclusion TNT does not appear to increase the surgical difficulty of TME.

Purpose: In patients with acute left-sided colonic obstruction, stenting can convert an emergency operation into a semi-elective procedure. However, its use continues to be debated. We performed a cost-effective analysis using our institution’s experiences. Methods: Endoscopic, surgical, and financial details were prospectively collected for patients who presented with acute colonic obstruction and underwent stenting between 2019 and 2022. Outcomes were defined as technical/clinical success and successful surgical resection. The financial cost of stenting was compared with the expected cost without stenting. Results: Forty patients were included, with 29 undergoing definitive resection. The most common pathology was primary colon cancer (27 patients, 93%). Endoscopic stenting had high technical (90%) and clinical (83%) success rates, with low rates of complications such as perforation (2 patients, 7%) and migration (0 patients, 0%). As a bridge to surgery, the median procedure time was 226 minutes and the surgical outcomes also showed a low rate of complications (3 patients, 11%), such as anastomotic leakage (0 patients, 0%), intraabdominal abscesses (2 patients, 7%), and 30-day postoperative mortality (0 patients, 0%). The cumulative costs with colonic stenting were $32,900, while the expected costs with emergency surgery, including stoma reversal, were $40,700 (healthcare cost-savings of $7,800 per person). The difference was mainly due to the avoidance of upfront emergency surgery. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was 0.81, favoring colonic stenting over upfront emergency surgery. Conclusion Colonic stenting as a bridge to surgery is safe and cost-effective for treating left-sided colonic obstruction with high success rates and low complication rates.

Purpose: In patients with acute left-sided colonic obstruction, stenting can convert an emergency operation into a semi-elective procedure. However, its use continues to be debated. We performed a cost-effective analysis using our institution’s experiences. Methods: Endoscopic, surgical, and financial details were prospectively collected for patients who presented with acute colonic obstruction and underwent stenting between 2019 and 2022. Outcomes were defined as technical/clinical success and successful surgical resection. The financial cost of stenting was compared with the expected cost without stenting. Results: Forty patients were included, with 29 undergoing definitive resection. The most common pathology was primary colon cancer (27 patients, 93%). Endoscopic stenting had high technical (90%) and clinical (83%) success rates, with low rates of complications such as perforation (2 patients, 7%) and migration (0 patients, 0%). As a bridge to surgery, the median procedure time was 226 minutes and the surgical outcomes also showed a low rate of complications (3 patients, 11%), such as anastomotic leakage (0 patients, 0%), intraabdominal abscesses (2 patients, 7%), and 30-day postoperative mortality (0 patients, 0%). The cumulative costs with colonic stenting were $32,900, while the expected costs with emergency surgery, including stoma reversal, were $40,700 (healthcare cost-savings of $7,800 per person). The difference was mainly due to the avoidance of upfront emergency surgery. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was 0.81, favoring colonic stenting over upfront emergency surgery. Conclusion Colonic stenting as a bridge to surgery is safe and cost-effective for treating left-sided colonic obstruction with high success rates and low complication rates.

Purpose: In patients with acute left-sided colonic obstruction, stenting can convert an emergency operation into a semi-elective procedure. However, its use continues to be debated. We performed a cost-effective analysis using our institution’s experiences. Methods: Endoscopic, surgical, and financial details were prospectively collected for patients who presented with acute colonic obstruction and underwent stenting between 2019 and 2022. Outcomes were defined as technical/clinical success and successful surgical resection. The financial cost of stenting was compared with the expected cost without stenting. Results: Forty patients were included, with 29 undergoing definitive resection. The most common pathology was primary colon cancer (27 patients, 93%). Endoscopic stenting had high technical (90%) and clinical (83%) success rates, with low rates of complications such as perforation (2 patients, 7%) and migration (0 patients, 0%). As a bridge to surgery, the median procedure time was 226 minutes and the surgical outcomes also showed a low rate of complications (3 patients, 11%), such as anastomotic leakage (0 patients, 0%), intraabdominal abscesses (2 patients, 7%), and 30-day postoperative mortality (0 patients, 0%). The cumulative costs with colonic stenting were $32,900, while the expected costs with emergency surgery, including stoma reversal, were $40,700 (healthcare cost-savings of $7,800 per person). The difference was mainly due to the avoidance of upfront emergency surgery. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was 0.81, favoring colonic stenting over upfront emergency surgery. Conclusion Colonic stenting as a bridge to surgery is safe and cost-effective for treating left-sided colonic obstruction with high success rates and low complication rates.

Purpose: In patients with acute left-sided colonic obstruction, stenting can convert an emergency operation into a semi-elective procedure. However, its use continues to be debated. We performed a cost-effective analysis using our institution’s experiences. Methods: Endoscopic, surgical, and financial details were prospectively collected for patients who presented with acute colonic obstruction and underwent stenting between 2019 and 2022. Outcomes were defined as technical/clinical success and successful surgical resection. The financial cost of stenting was compared with the expected cost without stenting. Results: Forty patients were included, with 29 undergoing definitive resection. The most common pathology was primary colon cancer (27 patients, 93%). Endoscopic stenting had high technical (90%) and clinical (83%) success rates, with low rates of complications such as perforation (2 patients, 7%) and migration (0 patients, 0%). As a bridge to surgery, the median procedure time was 226 minutes and the surgical outcomes also showed a low rate of complications (3 patients, 11%), such as anastomotic leakage (0 patients, 0%), intraabdominal abscesses (2 patients, 7%), and 30-day postoperative mortality (0 patients, 0%). The cumulative costs with colonic stenting were $32,900, while the expected costs with emergency surgery, including stoma reversal, were $40,700 (healthcare cost-savings of $7,800 per person). The difference was mainly due to the avoidance of upfront emergency surgery. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was 0.81, favoring colonic stenting over upfront emergency surgery. Conclusion Colonic stenting as a bridge to surgery is safe and cost-effective for treating left-sided colonic obstruction with high success rates and low complication rates.

This study explored the medication rules of Chinese herbal compound prescriptions for the treatment of angina based on the Chinese herbal compound patents in the patent database of the China National Intellectual Property Administration. The data of eligible Chinese herbal compound patents for the treatment of angina were collected from the patent database of the China National Intellectual Property Administration from database inception to November 10, 2022, and subjected to data modeling, analysis of main syndromes, medication frequency analysis, cluster analysis, association rule analysis, and data visualization by using Excel 2021, IBM SPSS Statistics 26.0, IBM SPSS Modeler 18.0, Cytoscape 3.9.1, and Rstudio R 4.2.2.2 to explore the medication rules for angina. The study included 636 pieces of patent data for angina that met the inclusion criteria, involving 815 drugs, with a total frequency of 6 586. The most common main syndromes were blood stasis obstructing the heart syndrome(222, 34.91%) and Qi deficiency and blood stasis syndrome(112, 17.61%). The top 10 most frequently used drugs were Salviae Miltiorrhizae Radix et Rhizoma, Chuanxiong Rhizoma, Notoginseng Radix et Rhizoma, Astragali Radix, Angelicae Sinensis Radix, Carthami Flos, Glycyrrhizae Radix et Rhizoma, Ginseng Radix et Rhizoma, Borneolum Syntheticum, and Corydalis Rhizoma. High-frequency drugs included blood-activating and stasis-resolving drugs(1 197, 18.17%) and deficiency-tonifying drugs(809, 12.28%). Cluster analysis identified eight drug combinations, including five new prescriptions suitable for clinical use and new drug development, and three drug pairs. The core drug combination of Salviae Miltiorrhizae Radix et Rhizoma-Chuanxiong Rhizoma-Carthami Flos was identified through the complex co-occurrence network analysis of Chinese medicines. Association rule analysis yielded a total of 17 rules, including 13 drug pairs and 4 tripartite combinations. Common drug pairs included Salviae Miltiorrhizae Radix et Rhizoma-Chuanxiong Rhizoma(support degree 25.79%, confidence coefficient 69.49%, lift 1.30) and Salviae Miltiorrhizae Radix et Rhizoma-Notoginseng Radix et Rhizoma(support degree 22.01%, confidence coefficient 61.95%, lift 1.16). Common tripartite combinations included Salviae Miltiorrhizae Radix et Rhizoma-Chuanxiong Rhizoma-Astragali Radix(support degree 10.85%, confidence coefficient 73.40%, lift 1.37) and Salviae Miltiorrhizae Radix et Rhizoma-Chuanxiong Rhizoma-Notoginseng Radix et Rhizoma(support degree 10.69%, confidence coefficient 79.07%, lift 1.48). The results showed that the underlying pathogenesis of angina involved blood stasis obstructing the heart and Qi deficiency and blood stasis. The overall nature of the disease was characterized as asthenia in origin and sthenia in superficiality. In the prescription formulation, blood-activating and stasis-resolving drugs, such as Salviae Miltiorrhizae Radix et Rhizoma, Chuanxiong Rhizoma, and Carthami Flos were often used to resolve the excess manifestation, which were combined with tonifying drugs such as Astragali Radix, Angelicae Sinensis Radix, Glycyrrhizae Radix et Rhizoma, and Ginseng Radix et Rhizoma to reinforce the deficiency. The syndrome, pathogenesis, disease nature, and medication were consistent with clinical practice. Additionally, the new compound prescriptions and drug combinations derived from the multiple data mining in this study could provide references and insights for the clinical diagnosis and treatment of angina and the development of new drugs.
Humans ; Medicine, Chinese Traditional ; Drugs, Chinese Herbal/therapeutic use* ; Angina Pectoris/drug therapy* ; Prescriptions ; Data Mining ; Drug Combinations

Humans ; Blast Crisis/genetics* ; Leukemia, Promyelocytic, Acute/genetics* ; Oncogene Proteins, Fusion/genetics* ; Tretinoin