Statins represent the first-line therapy for cholesterol management. However, for patients prone to statin side effects, unable to tolerate higher doses, or requiring additional low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) reduction, ezetimibe alone or in combination with statins is recommended. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of combining lowor moderate-intensity statins with ezetimibe compared to high-intensity statin monotherapy, yielding reliable evidence to guide clinical decision-making and personalize treatment strategies. PubMed, Embase, and Scopus were systematically searched from inception until May 2023. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing a high-intensity statin with a low/ moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe were included. The outcomes of interest comprised changes in concentrations of lipids—LDL-C, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), total cholesterol (TC), and triglycerides (TGs)—and apolipoprotein (Apo) A1, Apo B, and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), along with major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). All data were analyzed using Review Manager version 5.4. p-values less than 0.05 were considered to indicate statistical significance. Overall, 20 RCTs, with 5,412 participants, were included. A low/moderate-intensity statin combined with ezetimibe yielded a significantly greater reduction in LDL-C levels than high-intensity statin monotherapy (mean difference [MD], −6.59; 95% confidence interval [CI], −10.95, −2.24; p=0.003; I 2 =84%). No significant differences were observed between combination and high-intensity statin monotherapy regarding TC, TG, or HDL-C levels. However, hs-CRP levels were significantly higher with combination therapy (MD, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.01, 0.64; p=0.04; I 2 =0%). Combination therapy involving a low/moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe was significantly associated with lower LDL-C levels than high-intensity statin monotherapy. No significant differences were observed for TC, TGs, HDL-C, alanine transaminase, or MACE. However, creatine phosphokinase levels significantly increased with monotherapy.

Statins represent the first-line therapy for cholesterol management. However, for patients prone to statin side effects, unable to tolerate higher doses, or requiring additional low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) reduction, ezetimibe alone or in combination with statins is recommended. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of combining lowor moderate-intensity statins with ezetimibe compared to high-intensity statin monotherapy, yielding reliable evidence to guide clinical decision-making and personalize treatment strategies. PubMed, Embase, and Scopus were systematically searched from inception until May 2023. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing a high-intensity statin with a low/ moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe were included. The outcomes of interest comprised changes in concentrations of lipids—LDL-C, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), total cholesterol (TC), and triglycerides (TGs)—and apolipoprotein (Apo) A1, Apo B, and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), along with major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). All data were analyzed using Review Manager version 5.4. p-values less than 0.05 were considered to indicate statistical significance. Overall, 20 RCTs, with 5,412 participants, were included. A low/moderate-intensity statin combined with ezetimibe yielded a significantly greater reduction in LDL-C levels than high-intensity statin monotherapy (mean difference [MD], −6.59; 95% confidence interval [CI], −10.95, −2.24; p=0.003; I 2 =84%). No significant differences were observed between combination and high-intensity statin monotherapy regarding TC, TG, or HDL-C levels. However, hs-CRP levels were significantly higher with combination therapy (MD, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.01, 0.64; p=0.04; I 2 =0%). Combination therapy involving a low/moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe was significantly associated with lower LDL-C levels than high-intensity statin monotherapy. No significant differences were observed for TC, TGs, HDL-C, alanine transaminase, or MACE. However, creatine phosphokinase levels significantly increased with monotherapy.

Statins represent the first-line therapy for cholesterol management. However, for patients prone to statin side effects, unable to tolerate higher doses, or requiring additional low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) reduction, ezetimibe alone or in combination with statins is recommended. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of combining lowor moderate-intensity statins with ezetimibe compared to high-intensity statin monotherapy, yielding reliable evidence to guide clinical decision-making and personalize treatment strategies. PubMed, Embase, and Scopus were systematically searched from inception until May 2023. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing a high-intensity statin with a low/ moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe were included. The outcomes of interest comprised changes in concentrations of lipids—LDL-C, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), total cholesterol (TC), and triglycerides (TGs)—and apolipoprotein (Apo) A1, Apo B, and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), along with major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). All data were analyzed using Review Manager version 5.4. p-values less than 0.05 were considered to indicate statistical significance. Overall, 20 RCTs, with 5,412 participants, were included. A low/moderate-intensity statin combined with ezetimibe yielded a significantly greater reduction in LDL-C levels than high-intensity statin monotherapy (mean difference [MD], −6.59; 95% confidence interval [CI], −10.95, −2.24; p=0.003; I 2 =84%). No significant differences were observed between combination and high-intensity statin monotherapy regarding TC, TG, or HDL-C levels. However, hs-CRP levels were significantly higher with combination therapy (MD, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.01, 0.64; p=0.04; I 2 =0%). Combination therapy involving a low/moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe was significantly associated with lower LDL-C levels than high-intensity statin monotherapy. No significant differences were observed for TC, TGs, HDL-C, alanine transaminase, or MACE. However, creatine phosphokinase levels significantly increased with monotherapy.

Statins represent the first-line therapy for cholesterol management. However, for patients prone to statin side effects, unable to tolerate higher doses, or requiring additional low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) reduction, ezetimibe alone or in combination with statins is recommended. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of combining lowor moderate-intensity statins with ezetimibe compared to high-intensity statin monotherapy, yielding reliable evidence to guide clinical decision-making and personalize treatment strategies. PubMed, Embase, and Scopus were systematically searched from inception until May 2023. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing a high-intensity statin with a low/ moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe were included. The outcomes of interest comprised changes in concentrations of lipids—LDL-C, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), total cholesterol (TC), and triglycerides (TGs)—and apolipoprotein (Apo) A1, Apo B, and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), along with major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). All data were analyzed using Review Manager version 5.4. p-values less than 0.05 were considered to indicate statistical significance. Overall, 20 RCTs, with 5,412 participants, were included. A low/moderate-intensity statin combined with ezetimibe yielded a significantly greater reduction in LDL-C levels than high-intensity statin monotherapy (mean difference [MD], −6.59; 95% confidence interval [CI], −10.95, −2.24; p=0.003; I 2 =84%). No significant differences were observed between combination and high-intensity statin monotherapy regarding TC, TG, or HDL-C levels. However, hs-CRP levels were significantly higher with combination therapy (MD, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.01, 0.64; p=0.04; I 2 =0%). Combination therapy involving a low/moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe was significantly associated with lower LDL-C levels than high-intensity statin monotherapy. No significant differences were observed for TC, TGs, HDL-C, alanine transaminase, or MACE. However, creatine phosphokinase levels significantly increased with monotherapy.

The present study aimed at exploring whether sunlight exposure might account for the relative difference in COVID-19-related morbidity and mortality between tropical and non-tropical countries. A retrospective observational study was designed and data from the World Health Organization weekly COVID-19 epidemiological update was compiled. We examined the total number of confirmed COVID-19 cases per 100 000 population, as well as the total number of COVID-19-related mortalities per 100 000 population. Solar variables data were obtained from the Global Solar Atlas website (https://globalsolaratlas.info/). These data were analyzed to determine the association of sunlight exposure to COVID-19-related morbidity and mortality in tropical and non-tropical countries. Results revealed a statistically significant decrease in the number of confirmed COVID-19 cases per 100 000 population (P<0.001), as well as the number of COVID-19-related mortalities per 100 000 population (P<0.001) between tropical and non-tropical countries. Analyses of sunlight exposure data found that specific photovoltaic power output, global horizontal irradiation, diffuse horizontal irradiation and global tilted irradiation at optimum angle were significantly inversely correlated to COVID-19-related morbidity and mortality. This suggests that stronger sunlight exposure potentially leads to lower COVID-19-related morbidity and mortality. Findings from this study suggest that the relatively low COVID-19-related morbidity and mortality in tropical countries were possibly due to better sunlight exposure that translates into adequate vitamin D status.

Introduction: Time away from training and competition from sport injuries may lead to detrimental effects on muscle strength and endurance. The cross-education effect plays an important role in preserving strength during recovery and rehabilitation; however, the effects have been found to be inconclusive. In addition, the distinct impacts of eccentric and concentric strengthening exercises need to be explored. The objective of this study was to compare the cross-education effects of eccentric and concentric wrist flexor strengthening exercises on hand grip strength among recreational athletes. Methods: A total of 39 recreational athletes aged between 18-25 years old were randomly assigned into two groups of wrist flexor strengthening exercise: eccentric (ECC) and concentric (CON) training groups. The training period for the study was 4 weeks with 3 sessions of strengthening exercises per week. Handgrip strength was measured bilaterally, before and after the intervention using the JAMAR handgrip dynamometer. Results: Significant increases in hand grip strength were observed for the ECC and CON groups in both the trained and untrained hands following 4 weeks of training. However, the handgrip strength between the two groups in the untrained hand was not significantly different (p=0.64). The strength gain in the untrained hand was 9.8% and 10.8%, for ECC and CON groups, respectively. Conclusion: The cross-education effect was significant in improving strength in the untrained hand. There was no difference in strength gains between concentric and eccentric strength training.

Introduction: Methotrexate (MTX), Moringa oleifera (MO), and Andrographis paniculata (AP) have been reported to have anti-hyperglycemic, antioxidative, and anti-inflammatory effects in diabetic rats. This study aims to investigate the single and combination effects of MTX, MO, and AP on random blood glucose levels, interleukin-6 (IL-6) levels, and trabecular density in diabetic rats. Methods: A total of 49 male rats were divided into seven groups, namely one control group and six diabetes mellitus (DM) groups. All rats in the DM groups were injected with streptozotocin-nicotinamide (STZ-NA) intraperitoneally. In addition, the DM groups were administered with a placebo daily (DG), a single dose of 500 mg/kg BW MO daily (DG+MO), a single dose of 500mg/kg BW AP daily (DG+AP), a single dose of 7 mg/kg BW MTX once a week (DG+MTX), a combination of MTX+MO, and a combination MTX+AP, respectively. The experiment lasted for 28 days. On day 29, the right and left femur of the rats were collected for IL-6 examination (ELISA) and histopathological analysis. Results: IL-6 expression levels were significantly lower in diabetic rats treated with single and combination of MTX, MO, and AP compared to untreated diabetic rats (p < 0.05). However, the random blood glucose levels and trabecular density between treated and untreated diabetic rats were not significantly different (p < 0.001, p = 0.152). In addition, IL-6 levels were not correlated with trabecular density in all groups (r = -0.057, p = 0.722). Conclusion: Single doses of MTX, MO leaf extract, and AP leaf extract could suppress IL-6 expression in the femur tissue in diabetic rats. However, the IL-6 expression was not correlated with trabecular density although it significantly affected blood glucose levels in this study.