Qingfeitang， specialized in resolving phlegm to stop cough and producing fluid to moisten dryness， is a classic prescription inherited and developed by physicians of successive generations and has been included in the Catalogue of Ancient Classic Prescriptions （First Batch） published by the National Administration of Traditional Chinese Medicine （TCM） in 2018. Relevant ancient books data and modern literature were collected by bibliometrics to analyze the historic origin， formula composition， herb origin， preparation methods， processing methods， clinical effect， and indications of Qingfeitang. The key information of Qingfeitang was summarized to provide reference for the clinical application of the decoction. In this study， a total of 43 pieces of effective data on relevant ancient literature， including 35 ancient TCM books， were collected based on a systematic collation of relevant historic and modern literature. Results showed that "Qingfeitang" was originated from the "Renshen Qingfeitang" recorded in the Taiping Holy Prescriptions for Universal Relief from the Qing dynasty. The name of "Qinfeitang" was first recorded in the Yeshi Luyanfang written by YE Dalian in the Song dynasty. We suggested the modern dosage and usage of Qingfeitang as follows： "Scutellariae Radix of 5.60 g， Platycodon grandiflora， Poria， Tangerine， Fritillaria， and Cortex Mori of 3.73 g respectively， Angelicae Sinensis Radix， Asparagi Radix， Gardeniae Fructus， Armeniacae Semen Amarum， and Ophiopogonis Radix of 2.61 g respectively， Schisandra of 1 g， and Glycyrrhizae Radix et Rhizoma of 1.12 g， and they were taken 3 times daily. The above formula is recommended to be decocted with 400 mL of water， with 3.37 g ginger and 6 g jujubae fructus， to 320 mL， and taken after a meal， three times per day". Qingfeitang has the effect of resolving phlegm to stop cough and producing fluid to moisten dryness， specialized in treating cough， asthma， rash， and other symptoms in ancient times. Modern applications are mainly focused on the respiratory system， used for treating diseases such as bronchopneumonia and cough. The above research results provide a reference basis for the later development and research of Qingfeitang.

Objective:To compare and analyze the differences in the setup accuracy of different immobilization method in breast cancer radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery.Methods:A retrospective study was conducted on 60 patients who received radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery from January to August, 2021. These patients were divided into two groups. One group consisted of 30 cases who were immobilized using a modified body thermoplastic membrane combined with a multifunction body board during the breast cancer radiotherapy and was called the modified body thermoplastic membrane group. The other group comprised 30 cases immobilized using a vacuum cushion during breast cancer radiotherapy and was referred to as the vacuum cushion group. The setup errors, 3D vector errors, the proportion of errors of > 5 mm, and the dosimetric differences in the planning target volume (PTV) and the clinical target volume (CTV) before and after simulated treatment bed moving (including the PTV_ V100, PTV_ V95, and CTV_ V95 before simulated treatment bed moving and the PTV_ V100 S, PTV_ V95 S, and CTV_ V95 S after simulated treatment bed moving) were compared between two groups. Moreover, for the modified body thermoplastic membrane group, the changes in the average setup errors at different radiotherapy stages were also analyzed. Results:A total of 369 cone-beam CT scans were conducted for 60 patients, including 195 CT scans for the modified body thermoplastic membrane group and 174 CT scans for the vacuum cushion group. The setup errors in the x, y, and z directions (right-left, anterior-posterior, and superior-inferior, respectively) of the modified body thermoplastic membrane group were (2.59±1.98) mm, (2.38±2.04) mm, and (1.45±1.16) mm, respectively, while those of the other group were (2.24±1.63) mm, (2.78±2.17) mm, and (2.70±1.88) mm, respectively. The 3D vector errors of both groups were (4.32±2.28) mm and (5.13±2.14) mm, respectively. Therefore, the setup error in direction z and the 3D vector error of the modified body thermoplastic membrane group were less than those of the vacuum cushion group ( t = -7.77, -3.41, P<0.05). Moreover, the proportion of setup errors of > 5 mm in the x direction of the vacuum cushion group was lower than that of the modified body thermoplastic membrane group ( χ2 = 7.13, P<0.05), while such proportion in the z direction of the modified body thermoplastic membrane group was lower than that of the vacuum cushion group ( χ2= 5.90, P<0.05). After the simulated treatment bed moving, the PTV_ V100 S of the modified body thermoplastic membrane group was better than that of the vacuum cushion group ( t = 2.47, P < 0.05). Furthermore, for the modified body thermoplastic membrane group, the setup errors in the x direction in the first week were higher than those in the 2-3 weeks and 4-5 weeks ( P<0.05). Conclusions:The modified body thermoplastic membrane combined with a multifunction body board yield better immobilization effects than a vacuum cushion. However, it produces high setup errors in the x direction in the first week of the radiotherapy, to which special attention should be paid.

Objective To characterize the urinary microbial profile of male non-muscle invasive bladder cancer patients compared to healthy controls.Methods Between March,2017 and September,2017,mid-stream urine from 26 non-muscle invasive bladder cancer and 18 non-neoplastic controls were collected by the clean method,then centrifuged and processed for 16S rRNA gene sequencing.Sequencing reads were processed for evaluating alpha diversity and beta diversity using QIIME.LEfSe algorithm was performed to identify potential bacterial genera biomarker.Results The smoking cases were more in tumor group than those in control group(21 vs.7,P ＜ 0.01).The urinary microenvironment of bladder cancer was characterized by increased bacterial richness (Observed species index,Chaol index and Ace index,125.77 ± 69.64 vs.80.38 ± 46.24;142.82 ± 76.74 vs.90.68 ± 47.62;and 147.92 ± 77.68 vs.88.19 ± 45.38,all P ＜ 0.05) and by the enrichment of some bacterial genera (e.g.,Acinetobacter and Anaerococcus).Significant difference in β diversity was found between cancer and non-cancer group (ANOSIM,P =O.009).A clear hierarchical clustering of cancer samples was observed,suggesting a common dysbiosis associated to bladder cancer.Conclusions Patients with non-muscle invasive bladder cancer exhibit a different microbial community compared to non-neoplastic controls,suggesting a possible pathophysiological correlation between microbiome and bladder cancer.Urinary microbial community may be associated with the prognosis of NMIBC.