The Expert Consensus on Clinical Application of Qinbaohong Zhike Oral Liquid in Treatment of Acute Bronchitis and Acute Attack of Chronic Bronchitis （GS/CACM 337-2023） was released by the China Association of Chinese Medicine on December 13^th， 2023. This expert consensus was developed by experts in methodology， pharmacy， and Chinese medicine in strict accordance with the development requirements of the China Association of Chinese Medicine （CACM） and based on the latest medical evidence and the clinical medication experience of well-known experts in the fields of respiratory medicine （pulmonary diseases） and pediatrics. This expert consensus defines the application of Qinbaohong Zhike oral liquid in the treatment of cough and excessive sputum caused by phlegm-heat obstructing lung， acute bronchitis， and acute attack of chronic bronchitis from the aspects of applicable populations， efficacy evaluation， usage， dosage， drug combination， and safety. It is expected to guide the rational drug use in medical and health institutions， give full play to the unique value of Qinbaohong Zhike oral liquid， and vigorously promote the inheritance and innovation of Chinese patent medicines.

ObjectiveTo investigate the influence of histone deacetylase 3 (HDAC3) on the occurrence, development of psoriasis-like inflammation in mice, and the relative immune mechanisms. MethodsHealthy C57BL/6 mice aged 6-8 weeks were selected and randomly divided into 3 groups: control group (Control), psoriasis model group (IMQ), and HDAC3 inhibitor RGFP966-treated psoriasis model group (IMQ+RGFP966). One day prior to the experiment, the back hair of the mice was shaved. After a one-day stabilization period, the mice in Control group was treated with an equal amount of vaseline, while the mice in IMQ group was treated with imiquimod (62.5 mg/d) applied topically on the back to establish a psoriasis-like inflammation model. The mice in IMQ+RGFP966 group received intervention with a high dose of the HDAC3-selective inhibitor RGFP966 (30 mg/kg) based on the psoriasis-like model. All groups were treated continuously for 5 d, during which psoriasis-like inflammation symptoms (scaling, erythema, skin thickness), body weight, and mental status were observed and recorded, with photographs taken for documentation. After euthanasia, hematoxylin-eosin (HE) staining was used to assess the effect of RGFP966 on the skin tissue structure of the mice, and skin thickness was measured. The mRNA and protein expression levels of HDAC3 in skin tissues were detected using reverse transcription real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) and Western blot (WB), respectively. Flow cytometry was employed to analyze neutrophils in peripheral blood and lymph nodes, CD4⁺ T lymphocytes, CD8⁺ T lymphocytes in peripheral blood, and IL-17A secretion by peripheral blood CD4⁺ T lymphocytes. Additionally, spleen CD4⁺ T lymphocyte expression of HDAC3, CCR6, CCR8, and IL-17A secretion levels were analyzed. Immunohistochemistry was used to detect the localization and expression levels of HDAC3, IL-17A, and IL-10 in skin tissues. ResultsCompared with the Control group, the IMQ group exhibited significant psoriasis-like inflammation, characterized by erythema, scaling, and skin wrinkling. Compared with the IMQ group, RGFP966 exacerbated psoriasis-like inflammatory symptoms, leading to increased hyperkeratosis. The psoriasis area and severity index (PASI) skin symptom scores were higher in the IMQ group than those in the Control group, and the scores were further elevated in the IMQ+RGFP966 group compared to the IMQ group. Skin thickness measurements showed a trend of IMQ+RGFP966>IMQ>Control. The numbers of neutrophils in the blood and lymph nodes increased sequentially in the Control, IMQ, and IMQ+RGFP966 groups, with a similar trend observed for CD4⁺ and CD8⁺ T lymphocytes in the blood. In skin tissues, compared with the Control group, the mRNA and protein levels of HDAC3 decreased in the IMQ group, but RGFP966 did not further reduce these expressions. HDAC3 was primarily located in the nucleus. Compared with the Control group, the nuclear HDAC3 content decreased in the skin tissues of the IMQ group, and RGFP966 further reduced nuclear HDAC3. Compared with the Control and IMQ groups, RGFP966 treatment decreased HDAC3 expression in splenic CD4⁺ and CD8⁺ T cells. RGFP966 treatment increased the expression of CCR6 and CCR8 in splenic CD4⁺ T cells and enhanced IL-17A secretion by peripheral blood and splenic CD4⁺ T lymphocytes. Additionally, compared with the IMQ group, RGFP966 reduced IL-10 protein levels and upregulated IL-17A expression in skin tissues. ConclusionRGFP966 exacerbates psoriatic-like inflammatory responses by inhibiting HDAC3, increasing the secretion of the cytokine IL-17A, and upregulating the expression of chemokines CCR8 and CCR6.

Objective: To establish a database of CD36 antigen-negative donors through large-scale screening of apheresis platelet donors in Shenzhen for CD36 deficiency subtypes and blood group distribution, and to assess clinical demand and blood supply capacity through a retrospective analysis of the apheresis platelet donation volumes from 2019 to 2023. Methods: Flow cytometry with fluorescent CD36 monoclonal antibodies was employed to screen platelet/monocyte CD36 deficiency (Type I and Ⅱ), and statistical analyses were conducted using SPSS software (version 27.0). Results: Among 11 603 apheresis platelet donors, 248 (2.14%) exhibited CD36 deficiency, comprising 51 type Ⅰ (0.43%, 51/11, 603) and 197 type Ⅱ (1.70%, 197/11, 603) cases, with significant difference (P<0.001). CD36 deficient platelets were mainly distributed in blood group B (2.28%, 902.3/39 602.1) and AB (2.14, 269/12 544.5), significantly exceeding those in blood group A (1.43%, 667/46 508.4) and O (1.64%, 1 000/60 965.6) (P<0.001). The proportion of donors with 10-100 U from CD36 deficient donors was the highest (51%, 1 446.4/2 838.3). Conclusion: Sustained screening for CD36-deficient donors is recommended to meet the clinical transfusion needs for immunized patients and those requiring antigen-negative products. Regional resource-sharing mechanisms should be optimized to maximize utilization of CD36-deficient platelet inventories.

Background: Automated insulin delivery (AID) systems studies are upsurging, half of which were published in the last 5 years. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of AID systems in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov until August 31, 2023. Randomized clinical trials that compared AID systems with other insulin-based treatments in patients with T1DM were considered eligible. Studies characteristics and glycemic metrics was extracted by three researchers independently. Results: Sixty-five trials (3,623 patients) were included. The percentage of time in range (TIR) was 11.74% (95% confidence interval [CI], 9.37 to 14.12; P<0.001) higher with AID systems compared with control treatments. Patients on AID systems had more pronounced improvement of time below range when diabetes duration was more than 20 years (–1.80% vs. –0.86%, P=0.031) and baseline glycosylated hemoglobin lower than 7.5% (–1.93% vs. –0.87%, P=0.033). Dual-hormone full closed-loop systems revealed a greater improvement in TIR compared with hybrid closed-loop systems (–19.64% vs. –10.87%). Notably, glycemia risk index (GRI) (–3.74; 95% CI, –6.34 to –1.14; P<0.01) was also improved with AID therapy. Conclusion AID systems showed significant advantages compared to other insulin-based treatments in improving glucose control represented by TIR and GRI in patients with T1DM, with more favorable effect in euglycemia by dual-hormone full closedloop systems as well as less hypoglycemia for patients who are within target for glycemic control and have longer diabetes duration.

Background: Automated insulin delivery (AID) systems studies are upsurging, half of which were published in the last 5 years. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of AID systems in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov until August 31, 2023. Randomized clinical trials that compared AID systems with other insulin-based treatments in patients with T1DM were considered eligible. Studies characteristics and glycemic metrics was extracted by three researchers independently. Results: Sixty-five trials (3,623 patients) were included. The percentage of time in range (TIR) was 11.74% (95% confidence interval [CI], 9.37 to 14.12; P<0.001) higher with AID systems compared with control treatments. Patients on AID systems had more pronounced improvement of time below range when diabetes duration was more than 20 years (–1.80% vs. –0.86%, P=0.031) and baseline glycosylated hemoglobin lower than 7.5% (–1.93% vs. –0.87%, P=0.033). Dual-hormone full closed-loop systems revealed a greater improvement in TIR compared with hybrid closed-loop systems (–19.64% vs. –10.87%). Notably, glycemia risk index (GRI) (–3.74; 95% CI, –6.34 to –1.14; P<0.01) was also improved with AID therapy. Conclusion AID systems showed significant advantages compared to other insulin-based treatments in improving glucose control represented by TIR and GRI in patients with T1DM, with more favorable effect in euglycemia by dual-hormone full closedloop systems as well as less hypoglycemia for patients who are within target for glycemic control and have longer diabetes duration.

Background: Automated insulin delivery (AID) systems studies are upsurging, half of which were published in the last 5 years. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of AID systems in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov until August 31, 2023. Randomized clinical trials that compared AID systems with other insulin-based treatments in patients with T1DM were considered eligible. Studies characteristics and glycemic metrics was extracted by three researchers independently. Results: Sixty-five trials (3,623 patients) were included. The percentage of time in range (TIR) was 11.74% (95% confidence interval [CI], 9.37 to 14.12; P<0.001) higher with AID systems compared with control treatments. Patients on AID systems had more pronounced improvement of time below range when diabetes duration was more than 20 years (–1.80% vs. –0.86%, P=0.031) and baseline glycosylated hemoglobin lower than 7.5% (–1.93% vs. –0.87%, P=0.033). Dual-hormone full closed-loop systems revealed a greater improvement in TIR compared with hybrid closed-loop systems (–19.64% vs. –10.87%). Notably, glycemia risk index (GRI) (–3.74; 95% CI, –6.34 to –1.14; P<0.01) was also improved with AID therapy. Conclusion AID systems showed significant advantages compared to other insulin-based treatments in improving glucose control represented by TIR and GRI in patients with T1DM, with more favorable effect in euglycemia by dual-hormone full closedloop systems as well as less hypoglycemia for patients who are within target for glycemic control and have longer diabetes duration.

Background: Automated insulin delivery (AID) systems studies are upsurging, half of which were published in the last 5 years. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of AID systems in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov until August 31, 2023. Randomized clinical trials that compared AID systems with other insulin-based treatments in patients with T1DM were considered eligible. Studies characteristics and glycemic metrics was extracted by three researchers independently. Results: Sixty-five trials (3,623 patients) were included. The percentage of time in range (TIR) was 11.74% (95% confidence interval [CI], 9.37 to 14.12; P<0.001) higher with AID systems compared with control treatments. Patients on AID systems had more pronounced improvement of time below range when diabetes duration was more than 20 years (–1.80% vs. –0.86%, P=0.031) and baseline glycosylated hemoglobin lower than 7.5% (–1.93% vs. –0.87%, P=0.033). Dual-hormone full closed-loop systems revealed a greater improvement in TIR compared with hybrid closed-loop systems (–19.64% vs. –10.87%). Notably, glycemia risk index (GRI) (–3.74; 95% CI, –6.34 to –1.14; P<0.01) was also improved with AID therapy. Conclusion AID systems showed significant advantages compared to other insulin-based treatments in improving glucose control represented by TIR and GRI in patients with T1DM, with more favorable effect in euglycemia by dual-hormone full closedloop systems as well as less hypoglycemia for patients who are within target for glycemic control and have longer diabetes duration.