Objective To explore the differences in the incidence and severity of diarrhea between patients receiving propylene glycol-melphalan (PG-MEL) or propylene glycol-free-melphalan (PGF-MEL) pretreatment during autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (AHSCT). Methods The clinical data of 30 patients who underwent AHSCT with high-dose melphalan (HDM) pretreatment at the Department of Hematology, Zhongshan Hospital (Xiamen), Fudan University, from January 2024 to November 2025 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided into the PG-MEL group (n＝15) and the PGF-MEL group (n＝15) according to the formulation. The incidence, onset time, maximum daily frequency, duration, type, and severity of diarrhea were compared between the two groups. Oral mucositis, vomiting, infection, fever, and other related adverse events, as well as hematopoietic recovery, were also observed. Results The overall incidence of diarrhea was 93.3% in both groups. There was no significant difference in the onset time of diarrhea between the two groups ([4.0±2.0] d vs [3.0±2.0] d). Compared with the PG-MEL group, the PGF-MEL group had a higher maximum daily frequency of diarrhea (8 [6,14] times vs 6 [4,6] times, P＝0.009), a higher proportion of grade 3–4 diarrhea (57.1% vs 14.3%, P＝0.046), and a longer duration of diarrhea ([8.0±4.0] d vs [5.0±2.0] d, P＝0.033). No statistically significant differences were observed between the two groups in the incidence of other adverse events such as oral mucositis, vomiting, infection, fever, or neutrophil and platelet engraftment times. Conclusions PG-MEL and PGF-MEL showed the same overall incidence of diarrhea in AHSCT. However, the PGF-MEL group experienced more severe diarrhea and longer duration. There were no significant differences between the two formulations in other adverse reactions or short-term transplant outcomes.

Objective:To compare the efficacy and safety of octreotide and somatostatin in the treatment of liver cirrhosis and up-per digestive tract hemorrhage. Methods:The randomized controlled trails ( RCTs) on the comparison between octreotide and soma-tostatin in the treatment of liver cirrhosis and upper digestive tract hemorrhage were searched from Cochrane Library, PubMed, Med-line, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure(CNKI), VIP China Science and Technology Journal Database and Wanfang database (till February 2017). The randomized controlled trails meeting the inclusion criteria were collected and the quality of included RCTs was assessed according to the Cochrane Collaboration system review, and then Meta -analysis was performed using RevMan 5. 3 software after data extraction and bias risk assessment. Results:A total of 11 RCTs were included. Meta-analysis showed the efficacy of octreotide group was similar to that of somatostatin group (OR=1. 10, 95%CI:0. 79-1. 53, P=0. 56). The levels of blood transfu-sion and hemostasis of octreotide group were higher than those of somatostatin group (MD=0. 68, 95%CI:0. 54-0. 82, P<0. 01 and MD=6. 26, 95%CI:4. 89-7. 63, P<0. 01). The risk of abdominal pain in octreotide group was lower than that in somatostatin group (OR=0. 43, 95%CI:0. 22-0. 86, P=0. 02). The other adverse reactions were similar in both groups. Conclusion:The efficacy of octreotide is similar to that of somatostatin in the treatment of liver cirrhosis and upper digestive tract hemorrhage, and the effect of som-atostatin is quicker than that of octreotide with less blood transfusion. The adverse reactions are similar in both groups, except that oct-reotide has a lower risk of abdominal pain. The long-term safety of octreotide still needs to be confirmed by performing higher quality and large-sample RCTs.