BackgroundPatients with depressive episode and schizophrenia have a high risk of suicide. The sleep electroencephalogram power spectral density characteristics of patients with depressive episode accompanied by suicidal behavior and those with schizophrenia may be different， but there is currently a lack of direct comparative studies on these two groups of patients. ObjectiveTo compare the sleep electroencephalogram power spectral density between depressive episode and schizophrenic patients with suicidal behavior， in order to provide references for exploring predictive indicators of suicidal behavior. MethodsFrom June 2018 to December 2020， 20 patients with depressive episode and 20 patients with schizophrenia who had committed suicide within the past month and were treated at the outpatient department of Shenzhen Kangning Hospital were selected. All of them met the diagnostic criteria for depressive episode or schizophrenia as defined in the International Classification of Diseases， tenth edition （ICD-10）. Using a random sampling method， 20 volunteers with matching gender and age to the patient groups were selected from the Cuiping community in Shenzhen as the control group. The subjective sleep of the patients was evaluated using the Insomnia Severity Index （ISI）， the Dysfunctional Belief and Attitude about Sleep （DBAS）， the Disturbing Dreams and Nightmare Severity Index （DDNSI）， and the Epworth Somnolence Scale （ESS）. The objective sleep of the patients was assessed using polysomnography. The sleep electroencephalogram was filtered and the power spectral density of the brain wave was analyzed and processed for all the subjects. The subjective and objective sleep conditions of the two patient groups were compared， and the sleep electroencephalogram power spectral density of the patient groups and the control group were also compared. ResultsA comparison of subjective and objective sleep conditions between patients with depressive episode accompanied by suicidal behavior and patients with schizophrenia accompanied by suicidal behavior showed no statistically significant differences （P>0.05）. Comparisons of sleep electroencephalogram power spectral density in the W stage （average power of α wave， total power of δ wave， average power of δ wave， average power of θ wave）， N1 stage （average power of β wave， total power of α wave， total power of δ wave）， N2 stage （total power of α wave， average power of α wave， total power of δ wave， average power of δ wave）， N3 stage （average power of α wave， average power of δ wave）， and R stage （total power of α wave， average power of α wave， total power of δ wave， average power of δ wave） between patients with depressive episode accompanied by suicidal behavior， patients with schizophrenia accompanied by suicidal behavior， and the control group showed statistically significant differences （P<0.05 or 0.01）. The total power of δ wave in the W stage and the average power of β wave and δ wave in the N1 stage were higher in two patient groups were higher than those of the control group. The total power of α wave and the average power of α wave in the N2 stage were lower than those of the control group， while the average power of δ wave was higher than that of the control group. The average power of α wave in the N3 stage of both patient groups were lower than that of the control group， while the average power of δ wave was higher than that of the control group. The total power and average power of α wave in the R stage were lower than those of the control group， while the total power and average power of δ wave were higher than those of the control group. All the differences were statistically significant. Patients with depressive episode accompanied by suicidal behavior had higher average powers of α wave， δ wave， and θ wave in the W stage compared with the control group， while the total power of α wave in the N1 stage was lower in the former group. All these differences were statistically significant （P<0.05）. ConclusionThe depressive episode patients accompanied by suicidal behavior have highly overlapping sleep electroencephalogram abnormal patterns with those of schizophrenia patients， mainly manifested as a general decrease in α wave power （N2， N3， R stage） and a general increase in δ wave power （W， N1， N2， N3， R stage） as well as β wave power in N1 stage. At the same time， patients with depressive episode accompanied by suicidal behavior also show specific changes， including an increase in the average power of α and θ waves during the wakefulness period （W stage）， and a decrease in the total power of α wave in N1 stage. ［Funded by Guangdong Province High-level Clinical Key Specialty （with supporting funds from Shenzhen City） （number， SZGSP013）； Shenzhen Key Medical Discipline （number， SZXK041）； Shenzhen Clinical Medicine Research Center Project （number， 20210617155253001）］

Objective To explore the role and molecular mechanism of major vault protein (MVP) in tumor-associated macrophages in the occurrence and development of liver cancer. Methods The expression of MVP in macrophages was analyzed by bioinformatics method and multi-fluorescent immunohistochemical staining. Mice with MVP deficiency in macrophages were constructed by Cre/LoxP recombinant enzyme system. The proliferation and migration abilities of tumor cells were detected by cloning formation and Transwell migration assays. The effect of MVP in macrophages on tumorigenesis and development was investigated by mouse primary liver cancer model and subcutaneous tumor transplantation model. The effect of MVP on the tumor microenvironment was investigated by multi-fluorescent immunohistochemical staining. The effect of MVP on CD8⁺ T cells was detected by cell co-culture, flow cytometry, qPCR, and ELISA. Results The high expression of MVP in tumor-associated macrophages. The downregulation of the expression of MVP in tumor-associated macrophages compared with para-carcinoma tissues. MVP deficiency in macrophages promoted the proliferation and migration of tumor cells (P<0.05), promoted the development of tumor in vivo (P<0.05), formed an immunosuppressive microenvironment and weakened CD8⁺ T cell-mediated anti-tumor immunity (P<0.05). Conclusion MVP deficiency in macrophages can promote the occurrence and development of liver cancer by suppressing the function of CD8⁺ T cells.

In the ever-evolving landscape of cancer therapy, while cancer treatments such as chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and targeted therapy aim to eradicate malignant cells, they also inadvertently trigger cellular senescence in both cancerous and microenvironmental tissues. Therapy-induced senescence (TIS) can act as a barrier against tumor growth by halting cell proliferation in the short term, but the long-term persistence of therapy-induced senescent (TISnt) cells may pose a significant challenge in cancer management. Their distinct characteristics, like senescence-associated secretory phenotype (SASP), metabolic dysregulation, and immune evasion, make them exhibit remarkable heterogeneity to orchestrate the tumor microenvironment (TME), resulting in therapy resistance. However, how these TISnt cells functioning differently in cancer progression, and the intricate mechanisms by which they remodel the senescence-associated immunosuppressive microenvironment present challenges for improving anticancer therapy. Therefore, this review summarizes the heterogeneous TISnt cell phenotypes contributing to an accumulated senescent state, outlines their multidimensional interactions in the senescent microenvironment, and discusses current senescence-targeting strategies. Building on the current understanding of TIS, we propose potential avenues for improving TIS-targeting methodologies in the context of head and neck cancer, a representative heterogeneous malignancy, which can substantially enhance the efficacy of the "one-two punch" sequential treatment approach for head and neck cancer.
Humans ; Cellular Senescence/drug effects* ; Tumor Microenvironment ; Neoplasms/pathology* ; Senescence-Associated Secretory Phenotype

Objective:To investigate the pathways involved in bisphenol S(BPS)and bisphenol F(BPF)induced male reproductive injury by bioinformatics methods and experimental verification.Methods:Bioinformatics analysis was conducted to screen the genes related to male reproductive system diseases associated with BPF and BPS from the Comparative Toxicogenomics Database(CTD).Functional enrichment using Gene Ontology(GO)and Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes(KEGG)pathway enrichment analysis were performed to predict potential signaling pathways and key genes.Cell counting kit-8(CCK-8)method was used to assess the cell viability in various groups treated with different concentrations of BPS and BPF(1×10-3,1×10-2,1×10-1,1×100,1×101,and 1×102 μmol·L-1).TM3 cells were divided into control group(0.1％DMSO),different doses of BPS groups,and different doses of BPF groups.The cells were treated with 20,40,and 80 μmol·L-1 of BPS and BPF for 72 h,respectively.Real-time fluorescence quantitative PCR(RT-qPCR)and Western blotting method were used to detect the expression levels of key genes mRNA and proteins in various groups.Results:The bioinformatics analysis results revealed that 507 and 447 male systemic disease genes related to BPS and BPF were screened by CTD,respectively.The GO enrichment analysis results showed that the selected genes were primarily enriched in biological processes(BP)such as reproductive system development and reproductive structure development.The KEGG pathway analysis results indicated that these genes were significantly enriched in signaling pathways such as phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase/protein kinase B(PI3K/AKT),hypoxia-inducible factor-1(HIF-1),and cellular senescence(P＜0.001).The CCK-8 method results showed that compared with control group,the cell viabilities in 1× 102 μmol·L-1 BPF and BPS groups were significantly decreased(P＜0.05),while the viabilities of TM3 cells in other groups had no significant changes(P＞0.05).After BPS treatment,compared with control group,the expression levels of PI3K,AKT,hypoxia-inducible factor-1α(HIF-1α),and CREB-binding protein(CBP)mRNA in low,medium,and high doses of BPS groups were decreased(P＜0.05),the expression levels of PI3K protein were decreased(P＜0.05),the expression levels of B-cell lymphoma-2-associated X protein(Bax)protein were increased(P＜0.05),and the expression levels of serine protease inhibitor clade B,member 10(SERPINB10)mRNA were increased(P＜0.01);the expression levels of Bax and intraflagellar transport 80 homolog(IFT80)mRNA in the cells in medium and high doses of BPS groups were increased(P＜0.05);the expression levels of B-cell lymphoma-2(Bcl-2)mRNA and protein in low and high doses of BPS groups were decreased(P＜0.05);the expression levels of additional sex combs like 2(ASXL2)mRNA in low and medium doses of BPS groups were decreased(P＜0.01).After BPF treatment,compared with control group,the expression levels of Bcl-2,HIF-1α,and structural maintenance of chromosomes protein 1B(SMC1B)mRNA in low,medium,and high doses of BPF groups were decreased(P＜0.05),and the expression levels of IFT80 mRNA(P＜0.01)and Bax protein(P＜0.01)were increased;the expression levels of PI3K,AKT,and ring finger protein 130(RNF130)mRNA in low and high doses of BPF groups were decreased(P＜0.05);the expression level of CBP mRNA in medium dose of BPF group was decreased(P＜0.05),while the expression level of RNF130 mRNA was increased(P＜0.05);the expression levels of PI3K and Bcl-2 proteins in high dose of BPF group were decreased(P＜0.05).Conclusion:BPF and BPS may cause cell cytotoxicity and impair male reproductive health through PI3K/AKT and HIF-1 signaling pathways.RNF130 and SMC1B may be important targets for their induction of male reproductive toxicity.

Objective It conducted a rapid health technology assessment to evaluate the comparative safety,efficacy and economy of tumor treating fields(TTFields)combined with temozolomide treatment versus temozolomide(TMZ)alone for patients with glioblastoma(GBM).Methods It provided an extensive electronic search of databases,including PubMed,Embase,Cochrane Library,CNKI,and WanFang Data,to collect clinical evidence and health economic evaluations related to the,safety,efficacy,and economy of TTFields for Glioblastoma patients.The search covered literature from inception to July,2023,and assessed the risk of bias in the included studies.Descriptive analyses and data summaries were performed.Results A total of 19 references were included,comprising 5 randomized controlled trials,3 retrospective studies,8 systematic reviews or meta-analyses,and 3 cost-effectiveness analysis(CEA)studies.The quality of the literature evidence was heterogeneous.Recent meta-analyses mostly support the conclusion that TTFields combined with TMZ treatment provides a survival benefit compared to standard TMZ alone.However,the cost-effectiveness analysis literature from 2 countries showed different results,likely due to differences in socioeconomic levels,health systems,and heterogeneity in sources,model selection,and parameter selection.The majority of evidence supports the benefits of TTFields combined with TMZ for the treatment of GBM patients,but the results of CEAs tend to favor the view that this therapy is not cost-effective.Conclusion Current evidence indicates that TTFields combined with TMZ treatment have better safety and efficacy.However,there is still no consensus on whether it is cost-effective.

Objective It conducted a rapid health technology assessment to evaluate the comparative safety,efficacy and economy of tumor treating fields(TTFields)combined with temozolomide treatment versus temozolomide(TMZ)alone for patients with glioblastoma(GBM).Methods It provided an extensive electronic search of databases,including PubMed,Embase,Cochrane Library,CNKI,and WanFang Data,to collect clinical evidence and health economic evaluations related to the,safety,efficacy,and economy of TTFields for Glioblastoma patients.The search covered literature from inception to July,2023,and assessed the risk of bias in the included studies.Descriptive analyses and data summaries were performed.Results A total of 19 references were included,comprising 5 randomized controlled trials,3 retrospective studies,8 systematic reviews or meta-analyses,and 3 cost-effectiveness analysis(CEA)studies.The quality of the literature evidence was heterogeneous.Recent meta-analyses mostly support the conclusion that TTFields combined with TMZ treatment provides a survival benefit compared to standard TMZ alone.However,the cost-effectiveness analysis literature from 2 countries showed different results,likely due to differences in socioeconomic levels,health systems,and heterogeneity in sources,model selection,and parameter selection.The majority of evidence supports the benefits of TTFields combined with TMZ for the treatment of GBM patients,but the results of CEAs tend to favor the view that this therapy is not cost-effective.Conclusion Current evidence indicates that TTFields combined with TMZ treatment have better safety and efficacy.However,there is still no consensus on whether it is cost-effective.

Objective It conducted a rapid health technology assessment to evaluate the comparative safety,efficacy and economy of tumor treating fields(TTFields)combined with temozolomide treatment versus temozolomide(TMZ)alone for patients with glioblastoma(GBM).Methods It provided an extensive electronic search of databases,including PubMed,Embase,Cochrane Library,CNKI,and WanFang Data,to collect clinical evidence and health economic evaluations related to the,safety,efficacy,and economy of TTFields for Glioblastoma patients.The search covered literature from inception to July,2023,and assessed the risk of bias in the included studies.Descriptive analyses and data summaries were performed.Results A total of 19 references were included,comprising 5 randomized controlled trials,3 retrospective studies,8 systematic reviews or meta-analyses,and 3 cost-effectiveness analysis(CEA)studies.The quality of the literature evidence was heterogeneous.Recent meta-analyses mostly support the conclusion that TTFields combined with TMZ treatment provides a survival benefit compared to standard TMZ alone.However,the cost-effectiveness analysis literature from 2 countries showed different results,likely due to differences in socioeconomic levels,health systems,and heterogeneity in sources,model selection,and parameter selection.The majority of evidence supports the benefits of TTFields combined with TMZ for the treatment of GBM patients,but the results of CEAs tend to favor the view that this therapy is not cost-effective.Conclusion Current evidence indicates that TTFields combined with TMZ treatment have better safety and efficacy.However,there is still no consensus on whether it is cost-effective.

Objective It conducted a rapid health technology assessment to evaluate the comparative safety,efficacy and economy of tumor treating fields(TTFields)combined with temozolomide treatment versus temozolomide(TMZ)alone for patients with glioblastoma(GBM).Methods It provided an extensive electronic search of databases,including PubMed,Embase,Cochrane Library,CNKI,and WanFang Data,to collect clinical evidence and health economic evaluations related to the,safety,efficacy,and economy of TTFields for Glioblastoma patients.The search covered literature from inception to July,2023,and assessed the risk of bias in the included studies.Descriptive analyses and data summaries were performed.Results A total of 19 references were included,comprising 5 randomized controlled trials,3 retrospective studies,8 systematic reviews or meta-analyses,and 3 cost-effectiveness analysis(CEA)studies.The quality of the literature evidence was heterogeneous.Recent meta-analyses mostly support the conclusion that TTFields combined with TMZ treatment provides a survival benefit compared to standard TMZ alone.However,the cost-effectiveness analysis literature from 2 countries showed different results,likely due to differences in socioeconomic levels,health systems,and heterogeneity in sources,model selection,and parameter selection.The majority of evidence supports the benefits of TTFields combined with TMZ for the treatment of GBM patients,but the results of CEAs tend to favor the view that this therapy is not cost-effective.Conclusion Current evidence indicates that TTFields combined with TMZ treatment have better safety and efficacy.However,there is still no consensus on whether it is cost-effective.

Objective It conducted a rapid health technology assessment to evaluate the comparative safety,efficacy and economy of tumor treating fields(TTFields)combined with temozolomide treatment versus temozolomide(TMZ)alone for patients with glioblastoma(GBM).Methods It provided an extensive electronic search of databases,including PubMed,Embase,Cochrane Library,CNKI,and WanFang Data,to collect clinical evidence and health economic evaluations related to the,safety,efficacy,and economy of TTFields for Glioblastoma patients.The search covered literature from inception to July,2023,and assessed the risk of bias in the included studies.Descriptive analyses and data summaries were performed.Results A total of 19 references were included,comprising 5 randomized controlled trials,3 retrospective studies,8 systematic reviews or meta-analyses,and 3 cost-effectiveness analysis(CEA)studies.The quality of the literature evidence was heterogeneous.Recent meta-analyses mostly support the conclusion that TTFields combined with TMZ treatment provides a survival benefit compared to standard TMZ alone.However,the cost-effectiveness analysis literature from 2 countries showed different results,likely due to differences in socioeconomic levels,health systems,and heterogeneity in sources,model selection,and parameter selection.The majority of evidence supports the benefits of TTFields combined with TMZ for the treatment of GBM patients,but the results of CEAs tend to favor the view that this therapy is not cost-effective.Conclusion Current evidence indicates that TTFields combined with TMZ treatment have better safety and efficacy.However,there is still no consensus on whether it is cost-effective.

Objective It conducted a rapid health technology assessment to evaluate the comparative safety,efficacy and economy of tumor treating fields(TTFields)combined with temozolomide treatment versus temozolomide(TMZ)alone for patients with glioblastoma(GBM).Methods It provided an extensive electronic search of databases,including PubMed,Embase,Cochrane Library,CNKI,and WanFang Data,to collect clinical evidence and health economic evaluations related to the,safety,efficacy,and economy of TTFields for Glioblastoma patients.The search covered literature from inception to July,2023,and assessed the risk of bias in the included studies.Descriptive analyses and data summaries were performed.Results A total of 19 references were included,comprising 5 randomized controlled trials,3 retrospective studies,8 systematic reviews or meta-analyses,and 3 cost-effectiveness analysis(CEA)studies.The quality of the literature evidence was heterogeneous.Recent meta-analyses mostly support the conclusion that TTFields combined with TMZ treatment provides a survival benefit compared to standard TMZ alone.However,the cost-effectiveness analysis literature from 2 countries showed different results,likely due to differences in socioeconomic levels,health systems,and heterogeneity in sources,model selection,and parameter selection.The majority of evidence supports the benefits of TTFields combined with TMZ for the treatment of GBM patients,but the results of CEAs tend to favor the view that this therapy is not cost-effective.Conclusion Current evidence indicates that TTFields combined with TMZ treatment have better safety and efficacy.However,there is still no consensus on whether it is cost-effective.