Objective To investigate the current situation of off-label use of immune checkpoint inhibitors(ICIs)in China and the cognition of medical staff.Methods From August 31 to September 9,2022,a nationwide survey questionnaire was sent to medical staff in the form of electronic questionnaire.The questionnaire included 13 questions,covering four dimensions:Drug allocation,current situation of medication beyond the instructions,cognition of medication beyond the instructions and current situation of medication beyond the instructions.Results A total of 745 questionnaires were collected.75.70％of respondents reported off-label use of ICIs in their hospitals,with the most common type being off-label indications.The primary reasons for such practices included support from authoritative domestic and international guidelines,clinical research data validation,and approved indications in foreign regulatory documents.85.37％of respondents believed off-label use could offer new hope for patients,while 68.86％considered it unlikely to increase adverse reactions.44.97％of respondents' hospitals had not established off-label use registration systems for ICIs.88.86％of respondents emphasized the need for stricter regulations governing off-label use of immunotherapeutic agents.Conclusion Off-label use of ICIs is common,and there is a lack of unified guidance in clinical practice.It is urgent to form norms and consensus on the management of off-label use of ICIs.

Objective To investigate the current situation of off-label use of immune checkpoint inhibitors(ICIs)in China and the cognition of medical staff.Methods From August 31 to September 9,2022,a nationwide survey questionnaire was sent to medical staff in the form of electronic questionnaire.The questionnaire included 13 questions,covering four dimensions:Drug allocation,current situation of medication beyond the instructions,cognition of medication beyond the instructions and current situation of medication beyond the instructions.Results A total of 745 questionnaires were collected.75.70％of respondents reported off-label use of ICIs in their hospitals,with the most common type being off-label indications.The primary reasons for such practices included support from authoritative domestic and international guidelines,clinical research data validation,and approved indications in foreign regulatory documents.85.37％of respondents believed off-label use could offer new hope for patients,while 68.86％considered it unlikely to increase adverse reactions.44.97％of respondents' hospitals had not established off-label use registration systems for ICIs.88.86％of respondents emphasized the need for stricter regulations governing off-label use of immunotherapeutic agents.Conclusion Off-label use of ICIs is common,and there is a lack of unified guidance in clinical practice.It is urgent to form norms and consensus on the management of off-label use of ICIs.

Objective:To compare the short-term efficacy of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) combined with sharp His angle reconstruction (LSG-His) versus traditional LSG.Methods:In this retrospective cohort study we collected clinical data of patients with obesity who had undergone LSG or LSG-His in the Department of General Surgery, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, from January to June 2022. After excluding patients with incomplete follow-up data and those with hiatal hernia, 83 obese patients, of which 39 who had undergone LSG (LSG group) and 44 who had undergone LSG-His (LSG-His group), were included in the study. The basic steps in LSG-His are the same as in conventional LSG. After continuous suturing of the gastric staple line, one stitch is placed between the proximal side of the gastric greater curvature staple line and the proximal side of the gastric fundus posterior wall with the left diaphragm, and another stitch between the right side of the gastric fundus and the esophagus, reconstructing the sharp His angle. Clinical data, postoperative complications, and follow-up data on weight loss and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) symptoms 1-, 3-, 6-, and 12-months post-discharge were compared between the two groups. GERD symptoms were assessed using the Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Questionnaire and Reflux Diagnostic Questionnaire.Results:There were no significant differences between the two groups in baseline characteristics, length of hospital stay, hospitalization costs, intraoperative bleeding, postoperative nausea and vomiting, dysphagia, or postoperative complications (all P>0.05). Compared with the LSG group, the LSG-His group had significantly longer operative times (92 [80, 100] minutes vs. 80 [70, 100] minutes, U=2.227, P=0.026), higher postoperative 24-hour pain scores (5.2±1.8 vs. 4.3±1.9, t=-2.065, P=0.041), and higher rates of morphine use (70.5% [31/44] vs. 46.2% [18/39], χ2=4.519, P=0.025). The incidence of new-onset GERD 12 months postoperatively was significantly lower in the LSG-His than the LSG group (10.7% [3/28] vs. 61.3% [19/31], χ2=14.00, P<0.001). According to changes in Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Questionnaire and Reflux Diagnostic Questionnaire scores, the LSG-His group also had significantly lower rates of exacerbation of GERD (2/16 vs. 5/8, χ2=4.27, P=0.021) and higher rates of GERD remission (12/16 vs. 2/8, χ2=3.62, P=0.032) than did the LSG group. Additionally, excess weight loss rates were significantly higher in the LSG-His group at 3 months [(54.7± 18.7)% vs. (46.5±15.0)% , t=-2.166, P=0.033], 6 months [(73.8±24.7)% vs. (64.0±19.1)% , t=-2.018, P=0.047], and 12 months [(82.9±26.7)% vs. (72.2±19.3)%, t=-2.063, P=0.042] than in the LSG group. Conclusion:Compared with LSG, LSG-His is safe and feasible and achieves better short-term control of postoperative GERD and more effective weight loss. Further large-scale, long-term, prospective studies are needed to confirm the long-term efficacy of LSG-His.

Objective:To compare the short-term efficacy of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) combined with sharp His angle reconstruction (LSG-His) versus traditional LSG.Methods:In this retrospective cohort study we collected clinical data of patients with obesity who had undergone LSG or LSG-His in the Department of General Surgery, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, from January to June 2022. After excluding patients with incomplete follow-up data and those with hiatal hernia, 83 obese patients, of which 39 who had undergone LSG (LSG group) and 44 who had undergone LSG-His (LSG-His group), were included in the study. The basic steps in LSG-His are the same as in conventional LSG. After continuous suturing of the gastric staple line, one stitch is placed between the proximal side of the gastric greater curvature staple line and the proximal side of the gastric fundus posterior wall with the left diaphragm, and another stitch between the right side of the gastric fundus and the esophagus, reconstructing the sharp His angle. Clinical data, postoperative complications, and follow-up data on weight loss and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) symptoms 1-, 3-, 6-, and 12-months post-discharge were compared between the two groups. GERD symptoms were assessed using the Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Questionnaire and Reflux Diagnostic Questionnaire.Results:There were no significant differences between the two groups in baseline characteristics, length of hospital stay, hospitalization costs, intraoperative bleeding, postoperative nausea and vomiting, dysphagia, or postoperative complications (all P>0.05). Compared with the LSG group, the LSG-His group had significantly longer operative times (92 [80, 100] minutes vs. 80 [70, 100] minutes, U=2.227, P=0.026), higher postoperative 24-hour pain scores (5.2±1.8 vs. 4.3±1.9, t=-2.065, P=0.041), and higher rates of morphine use (70.5% [31/44] vs. 46.2% [18/39], χ2=4.519, P=0.025). The incidence of new-onset GERD 12 months postoperatively was significantly lower in the LSG-His than the LSG group (10.7% [3/28] vs. 61.3% [19/31], χ2=14.00, P<0.001). According to changes in Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Questionnaire and Reflux Diagnostic Questionnaire scores, the LSG-His group also had significantly lower rates of exacerbation of GERD (2/16 vs. 5/8, χ2=4.27, P=0.021) and higher rates of GERD remission (12/16 vs. 2/8, χ2=3.62, P=0.032) than did the LSG group. Additionally, excess weight loss rates were significantly higher in the LSG-His group at 3 months [(54.7± 18.7)% vs. (46.5±15.0)% , t=-2.166, P=0.033], 6 months [(73.8±24.7)% vs. (64.0±19.1)% , t=-2.018, P=0.047], and 12 months [(82.9±26.7)% vs. (72.2±19.3)%, t=-2.063, P=0.042] than in the LSG group. Conclusion:Compared with LSG, LSG-His is safe and feasible and achieves better short-term control of postoperative GERD and more effective weight loss. Further large-scale, long-term, prospective studies are needed to confirm the long-term efficacy of LSG-His.