Platelets have long been recognized as key players in hemostasis and thrombosis; however, there is growing evidence that they are also involved in cancer. Preclinical and clinical studies have shown that platelets can promote tumorigenesis and metastasis through various crosstalks between platelets and cancer cells. Platelets play an active role in all stages of tumorigenesis, including tumor growth, tumor cell extravasation, and metastasis. In addition, thrombocytosis in cancer patients is associated with poor patient survival. Platelets are also well-placed to coordinate local and distant tumor-host interactions due to the a- bundance of microparticles and exosomes. Therefore, antitumor drugs targeting platelets have great development and application prospects. The following will review the research progress of anti-tumor drugs targeting platelets.

Objective:To investigate the prognosis of patients with initially resectable gastric cancer liver metastasis (GCLM) who were treated by different modalities, and analyze the influencing factors for prognosis of patients.Methods:The retrospective cohort study was conducted. The clinicopathological data of 327 patients with initially resectable GCLM who were included in the database of a nationwide multicenter retrospective cohort study on GCLM based on real-world data from January 2010 to December 2019 were collected. There were 267 males and 60 females, aged 61(54,68)years. According to the specific situations of patients, treatment modalities included radical surgery combined with systemic treatment, palliative surgery combined with systemic treatment, and systemic treatment alone. Observation indicators: (1) clinical characteristics of patients who were treated by different modalities; (2) prognostic outcomes of patients who were treated by different modalities; (3) analysis of influencing factors for prognosis of patients with initially resectable GCLM; (4) screening of potential beneficiaries in patients who were treated by radical surgery plus systemic treatment and patients who were treated by palliative surgery plus systemic treatment. Measurement data with normal distribution were represented as Mean± SD, and comparison between groups was conducted using the independent sample t test. Measurement data with skewed distribution were represented as M( Q1, Q3), and comparison between groups was conducted using the rank sum test. Count data were described as absolute numbers or percentages, and comparison between groups was conducted using the chi-square test. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to calculate survival rate and draw survival curve, and Log-Rank test was used for survival analysis. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted using the COX proportional hazard regression model. The propensity score matching was employed by the 1:1 nearest neighbor matching method with a caliper value of 0.1. The forest plots were utilized to evaluate potential benefits of diverse surgical combined with systemic treatments within the population. Results:(1) Clinical characteristics of patients who were treated by different modalities. Of 327 patients, there were 118 cases undergoing radical surgery plus systemic treatment, 164 cases undergoing palliative surgery plus systemic treatment, and 45 cases undergoing systemic treatment alone. There were significant differences in smoking, drinking, site of primary gastric tumor, diameter of primary gastric tumor, site of liver metastasis, and metastatic interval among the three groups of patients ( P<0.05). (2) Prognostic outcomes of patients who were treated by different modalities. The median overall survival time of the 327 pati-ents was 19.9 months (95% confidence interval as 14.9-24.9 months), with 1-, 3-year overall survival rate of 61.3%, 32.7%, respectively. The 1-year overall survival rates of patients undergoing radical surgery plus systemic treatment, palliative surgery plus systemic treatment and systemic treatment alone were 68.3%, 63.1%, 30.6%, and the 3-year overall survival rates were 41.1%, 29.9%, 11.9%, showing a significant difference in overall survival rate among the three groups of patients ( χ2=19.46, P<0.05). Results of further analysis showed that there was a significant difference in overall survival rate between patients undergoing radical surgery plus systemic treatment and patients undergoing systemic treatment alone ( hazard ratio=0.40, 95% confidence interval as 0.26-0.61, P<0.05), between patients undergoing palliative surgery plus systemic treatment and patients under-going systemic treatment alone ( hazard ratio=0.47, 95% confidence interval as 0.32-0.71, P<0.05). (3) Analysis of influencing factors for prognosis of patients with initially resectable GCLM. Results of multivariate analysis showed that the larger primary gastric tumor, poorly differentiated tumor, larger liver metastasis, multiple hepatic metastases were independent risk factors for prognosis of patients with initially resectable GCLM ( hazard ratio=1.20, 1.70, 1.20, 2.06, 95% confidence interval as 1.14-1.27, 1.25-2.31, 1.04-1.42, 1.45-2.92, P<0.05) and immunotherapy or targeted therapy, the treatment modality of radical or palliative surgery plus systemic therapy were independent protective factors for prognosis of patients with initially resectable GCLM ( hazard ratio=0.60, 0.39, 0.46, 95% confidence interval as 0.42-0.87, 0.25-0.60, 0.30-0.70, P<0.05). (4) Screening of potentinal beneficiaries in patients who were treated by radical surgery plus systemic treatment and patients who were treated by palliative surgery plus systemic treatment. Results of forest plots analysis showed that for patients with high-moderate differentiated GCLM and patients with liver metastasis located in the left liver, the overall survival rate of patients undergoing radical surgery plus systemic treatment was better than patients undergoing palliative surgery plus systemic treatment ( hazard ratio=0.21, 0.42, 95% confidence interval as 0.09-0.48, 0.23-0.78, P<0.05). Conclusions:Compared to systemic therapy alone, both radical and palliative surgery plus systemic therapy can improve the pro-gnosis of patients with initially resectable GCLM. The larger primary gastric tumor, poorly differen-tiated tumor, larger liver metastasis, multiple hepatic metastases are independent risk factors for prognosis of patients with initial resectable GCLM and immunotherapy or targeted therapy, the treatment modality of radical or palliative surgery plus systemic therapy are independent protective factors for prognosis of patients with initially resectable GCLM.

Objective To discuss the correlation of serum visceraladiposetissue-derived serineproteinase inhibitor(vaspin)and atrial fibrosis biochemical markers in atrial fibrillation(AF)patients.Methods The subjects were selected from inpatients in Shanghai Putuo District People's Hospital during January 2021 to October 2022.Enzyme linked immunosorbent assay(ELISA)was used to determine the levels of serum vaspin,C-terminal propeptide of prollagen type Ⅰ(PⅠCP),matrix metalloproteinase-1(MMP-1),N-terminal type Ⅲ collagen peptide(PⅢNP),tissue matrix metalloproteinase inhibitory factor-1(TIMP-1)of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation(PAF)group,persistent atrial fibrillation(PeAF)group,and control group.The correlation between serum vaspin and the above serum biochemical markers was analyzed.Results ①Levels of serum vaspin(9.51±1.47)ng/ml,PⅠCP(704.83±120.45)ng/ml,MMP-1(5.92±0.73)ng/ml,PⅢNP(63.34±12.24)ng/ml,and TIMP-1(7.56±0.90)ng/ml in PeAF group were significantly higher than those of PAF group and control group(P<0.05);②vaspin was significantly and positively correlated with PⅠCP,MMP-1,PⅢNP,TIMP-1 in PAF group and PeAF group.Conclusion Serum vaspin level of AF patients were significantly high and positively correlated with atrial fibrosis biochemical markers,which indicated that serum vaspin level might be closly related to atrial fibrosis in AF patients.It may be a potential marker to identify the degree of fibrosis in atrial fibrillation.

Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of brexpiprazole in treating acute schizophrenia.Methods Patients with schizophrenia were randomly divided into treatment group and control group.The treatment group was given brexpiprozole 2-4 mg·d-1 orally and the control group was given aripiprazole 10-20 mg·d-1orally,both were treated for 6 weeks.Clinical efficacy of the two groups,the response rate at endpoint,the changes from baseline to endpoint of Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale(PANSS),Clinical Global Impression-Improvement(CGI-S),Personal and Social Performance scale(PSP),PANSS Positive syndrome subscale,PANSS negative syndrome subscale were compared.The incidence of treatment-related adverse events in two groups were compared.Results There were 184 patients in treatment group and 186 patients in control group.After treatment,the response rates of treatment group and control group were 79.50％(140 cases/184 cases)and 82.40％(150 cases/186 cases),the scores of CGI-I of treatment group and control group were(2.00±1.20)and(1.90±1.01),with no significant difference(all P＞0.05).From baseline to Week 6,the mean change of PANSS total score wese(-30.70±16.96)points in treatment group and(-32.20±17.00)points in control group,with no significant difference(P＞0.05).The changes of CGI-S scores in treatment group and control group were(-2.00±1.27)and(-1.90±1.22)points,PSP scores were(18.80±14.77)and(19.20±14.55)points,PANSS positive syndrome scores were(-10.30±5.93)and(-10.80±5.81)points,PANSS negative syndrome scores were(-6.80±5.98)and(-7.30±5.15)points,with no significant difference(P＞0.05).There was no significant difference in the incidence of treatment-related adverse events between the two group(69.00％vs.64.50％,P＞0.05).Conclusion The non-inferiority of Brexpiprazole to aripiprazole was established,with comparable efficacy and acceptability.

Objective:To examine the impact of varied surgical treatment strategies on the prognosis of patients with initial resectable gastric cancer liver metastases (IR-GCLM).Methods:This is a retrospective cohort study. Employing a retrospective cohort design, the study selected clinicopathological data from the national multi-center retrospective cohort study database, focusing on 282 patients with IR-GCLM who underwent surgical intervention between January 2010 and December 2019. There were 231 males and 51 males, aging ( M(IQR)) 61 (14) years (range: 27 to 80 years). These patients were stratified into radical and palliative treatment groups based on treatment decisions. Survival curves were generated using the Kaplan-Meier method and distinctions in survival rates were assessed using the Log-rank test. The Cox risk regression model evaluated HR for various factors, controlling for confounders through multivariate analysis to comprehensively evaluate the influence of surgery on the prognosis of IR-GCLM patients. A restricted cubic spline Cox proportional hazard model assessed and delineated intricate associations between measured variables and prognosis. At the same time, the X-tile served as an auxiliary tool to identify critical thresholds in the survival analysis for IR-GCLM patients. Subgroup analysis was then conducted to identify potential beneficiary populations in different surgical treatments. Results:(1) The radical group comprised 118 patients, all undergoing R0 resection or local physical therapy of primary and metastatic lesions. The palliative group comprised 164 patients, with 52 cases undergoing palliative resections for gastric primary tumors and liver metastases, 56 cases undergoing radical resections for gastric primary tumors only, 45 cases undergoing palliative resections for gastric primary tumors, and 11 cases receiving palliative treatments for liver metastases. A statistically significant distinction was observed between the groups regarding the site and the number of liver metastases (both P<0.05). (2) The median overall survival (OS) of the 282 patients was 22.7 months (95% CI: 17.8 to 27.6 months), with 1-year and 3-year OS rates were 65.4% and 35.6%, respectively. The 1-year OS rates for patients in the radical surgical group and palliative surgical group were 68.3% and 63.1%, while the corresponding 3-year OS rates were 42.2% and 29.9%, respectively. A comparison of OS between the two groups showed no statistically significant difference ( P=0.254). Further analysis indicated that patients undergoing palliative gastric cancer resection alone had a significantly worse prognosis compared to other surgical options ( HR=1.98, 95% CI: 1.21 to 3.24, P=0.006). (3) The size of the primary gastric tumor significantly influenced the patients′ prognosis ( HR=2.01, 95% CI: 1.45 to 2.79, P<0.01), with HR showing a progressively increasing trend as tumor size increased. (4) Subgroup analysis indicates that radical treatment may be more effective compared to palliative treatment in the following specific cases: well/moderately differentiated tumors ( HR=2.84, 95% CI 1.49 to 5.41, P=0.001), and patients with liver metastases located in the left lobe of the liver ( HR=2.06, 95% CI 1.19 to 3.57, P=0.010). Conclusions:In patients with IR-GCLM, radical surgery did not produce a significant improvement in the overall prognosis compared to palliative surgery. However, within specific patient subgroups (well/moderately differentiated tumors, and patients with liver metastases located in the left lobe of the liver), radical treatment can significantly improve prognosis compared to palliative approaches.

YY 0585.4-2009 and ISO 8536-12:2021 standards were compared in terms of the blocking performance test method of disposable check valves for infusion equipment.The affecting factors and possible errors were analyzed when the blocking performance test was carried out according to YY 0585.4-2009,and it's pointed out ISO 8536-12:2021 gained advantages over YY 0585.4-2009 in the blocking performance test method of check valves.References and guidance were provided for standard revision and actual operation.[Chinese Medical Equipment Journal,2024,45(9):78-83]

Objective:To examine the impact of varied surgical treatment strategies on the prognosis of patients with initial resectable gastric cancer liver metastases (IR-GCLM).Methods:This is a retrospective cohort study. Employing a retrospective cohort design, the study selected clinicopathological data from the national multi-center retrospective cohort study database, focusing on 282 patients with IR-GCLM who underwent surgical intervention between January 2010 and December 2019. There were 231 males and 51 males, aging ( M(IQR)) 61 (14) years (range: 27 to 80 years). These patients were stratified into radical and palliative treatment groups based on treatment decisions. Survival curves were generated using the Kaplan-Meier method and distinctions in survival rates were assessed using the Log-rank test. The Cox risk regression model evaluated HR for various factors, controlling for confounders through multivariate analysis to comprehensively evaluate the influence of surgery on the prognosis of IR-GCLM patients. A restricted cubic spline Cox proportional hazard model assessed and delineated intricate associations between measured variables and prognosis. At the same time, the X-tile served as an auxiliary tool to identify critical thresholds in the survival analysis for IR-GCLM patients. Subgroup analysis was then conducted to identify potential beneficiary populations in different surgical treatments. Results:(1) The radical group comprised 118 patients, all undergoing R0 resection or local physical therapy of primary and metastatic lesions. The palliative group comprised 164 patients, with 52 cases undergoing palliative resections for gastric primary tumors and liver metastases, 56 cases undergoing radical resections for gastric primary tumors only, 45 cases undergoing palliative resections for gastric primary tumors, and 11 cases receiving palliative treatments for liver metastases. A statistically significant distinction was observed between the groups regarding the site and the number of liver metastases (both P<0.05). (2) The median overall survival (OS) of the 282 patients was 22.7 months (95% CI: 17.8 to 27.6 months), with 1-year and 3-year OS rates were 65.4% and 35.6%, respectively. The 1-year OS rates for patients in the radical surgical group and palliative surgical group were 68.3% and 63.1%, while the corresponding 3-year OS rates were 42.2% and 29.9%, respectively. A comparison of OS between the two groups showed no statistically significant difference ( P=0.254). Further analysis indicated that patients undergoing palliative gastric cancer resection alone had a significantly worse prognosis compared to other surgical options ( HR=1.98, 95% CI: 1.21 to 3.24, P=0.006). (3) The size of the primary gastric tumor significantly influenced the patients′ prognosis ( HR=2.01, 95% CI: 1.45 to 2.79, P<0.01), with HR showing a progressively increasing trend as tumor size increased. (4) Subgroup analysis indicates that radical treatment may be more effective compared to palliative treatment in the following specific cases: well/moderately differentiated tumors ( HR=2.84, 95% CI 1.49 to 5.41, P=0.001), and patients with liver metastases located in the left lobe of the liver ( HR=2.06, 95% CI 1.19 to 3.57, P=0.010). Conclusions:In patients with IR-GCLM, radical surgery did not produce a significant improvement in the overall prognosis compared to palliative surgery. However, within specific patient subgroups (well/moderately differentiated tumors, and patients with liver metastases located in the left lobe of the liver), radical treatment can significantly improve prognosis compared to palliative approaches.

Humans ; Consensus ; Hypersensitivity ; Desensitization, Immunologic/adverse effects* ; Immunotherapy/adverse effects* ; Injections, Subcutaneous ; Allergens

Objective: To explore the heterogeneity and correlation of clinical phenotypes and genotypes in children with disorders of sex development (DSD). Methods: A retrospective study of 1 235 patients with clinically proposed DSD in 36 pediatric medical institutions across the country from January 2017 to May 2021. After capturing 277 DSD-related candidate genes, second-generation sequencing was performed to analyzed the heterogeneity and correlation combined with clinical phenotypes. Results: Among 1 235 children with clinically proposed DSD, 980 were males and 255 were females of social gender at the time of initial diagnosis with the age ranged from 1 day of age to 17.92 years. A total of 443 children with pathogenic variants were detected through molecular genetic studies, with a positive detection rate of 35.9%. The most common clinical phenotypes were micropenis (455 cases), hypospadias (321 cases), and cryptorchidism (172 cases) and common mutations detected were in SRD5A2 gene (80 cases), AR gene (53 cases) and CYP21A2 gene (44 cases). Among them, the SRD5A2 mutation is the most common in children with simple micropenis and simple hypospadias, while the AMH mutation is the most common in children with simple cryptorchidism. Conclusions: The SRD5A2 mutation is the most common genetic variant in Chinese children with DSD, and micropenis, cryptorchidism, and hypospadias are the most common clinical phenotypes. Molecular diagnosis can provide clues about the biological basis of DSD, and can also guide clinicians to perform specific clinical examinations. Target sequence capture probes and next-generation sequencing technology can provide effective and economical genetic diagnosis for children with DSD.
3-Oxo-5-alpha-Steroid 4-Dehydrogenase/genetics* ; Child ; China/epidemiology* ; Cryptorchidism/genetics* ; Disorders of Sex Development/genetics* ; Female ; Genital Diseases, Male ; Genotype ; Humans ; Hypospadias/genetics* ; Male ; Membrane Proteins/genetics* ; Penis/abnormalities* ; Phenotype ; Retrospective Studies ; Steroid 21-Hydroxylase/genetics*

OBJECTIVE: To establish a culture system for human nasal mucosal organoids with controllable differentiation to reproduce the structure and function of the source tissue through staged expansion-differentiation culture. METHODS: Fresh samples of surgically resected middle turbinate and nasal polyp tissues were collected, from which the nasal mucosa epithelial cells were isolated by enzymatic digestion and filtration for continuous culture at the air-liquid interface for expansion (EO group) or staged culture for expansion and differentiation (DO group). Immunohistochemical staining was used to characterize the structure, cellular composition and ciliary function of nasal mucosal organoids in the two groups. The secretion function of the differentiated nasal mucosal organoids in DO group was evaluated using PAS staining. RESULTS: Both of the two organoid culture systems yielded vacuolar or solid spherical 3D organoids, and their diameters increased progressively with time. On day 16 of culture, more vacuolar organoids occurred in DO group, while more solid spherical organoids were seen in EO group, and the proportion of vacuoles was significantly greater in DO group than in EO group [(54.67±13.26)% vs (21.67±8.57)%, P < 0.05]. Short tandem repeat (STR) test of the nasal mucosal organoids and the source tissue showed a 100% match between them. On day 21 of culture, scanning and transmission electron microscopy of the nasal mucosal organoids identified ultrastructure of cilia in DO group and short villi structure in most of the organoids in EO group. Immunohistochemical staining showed positivity for P63 (basal cells), β-tubulin (ciliated columnar cells), and MUC5AC (goblet cells) in the organoids. Compared with those in EO group, the organoids in DO group showed significantly greater percentages of ciliated cells [(7.95±1.81)% vs (27.04±5.91)%, P < 0.05] and goblet cells [(14.46±0.93)% vs (39.85±5.43)%, P < 0.05) with a similar percentage of basal cells [(56.91±14.12)% vs (53.42±15.77)%, P > 0.05]. The differentiated nasal mucosal organoids in DO group were positively stained for glycogen. CONCLUSION The staged expansion-differentiation culture method allows more stable and prolonged growth of the cultured cells in vitro to produce organoids with controllable differentiation closely resembling the morphological structure and functions (ciliary function and secretory function) of the source tissue.
Cell Differentiation ; Cells, Cultured ; Epithelial Cells ; Humans ; Nasal Mucosa ; Organoids