SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “grade”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

239 records · Page 13Linked to original sources

PubMed2026

A randomized trial of viral vector and adjuvanted protein HBV therapeutic vaccine in people with chronic hepatitis B on nucleos(t)ide analogs.

BACKGROUND: This study assessed the safety, efficacy, and immunogenicity of a therapeutic immunization strategy aimed at reaching a functional cure for chronic hepatitis B (CHB), relying on a heterologous prime-boost with viral vectors ChAd155-hIi-HBV and MVA-HBV, combined with sequential or concomitant administration of adjuvanted recombinant HBV proteins (HBc-HBs/AS01B). METHODS: This single-blind, randomized, controlled, first-in-human, phase 1/2 trial enrolled adults aged 18-65 years with HBeAg-negative CHB, virally suppressed on nucleos(t)ide analogs (NAs), with HBsAg >50 IU/mL. Participants received NAs and the following regimens of 4 doses (8-week intervals): sequential administration of ChAd155-hIi-HBV, MVA-HBV, and 2 HBc-HBs/AS01B doses; co-administration of ChAd155-hIi-HBV+HBc-HBs/AS01B, followed by 3 co-administered MVA-HBV+HBc-HBs/AS01B doses; 4 HBc-HBs/AS01B doses; 2 placebo doses followed by ChAd155-hIi-HBV and MVA-HBV administered alone or with HBc-HBs/AS01B; or 4 placebo doses. Safety, efficacy (≥1-log decrease in quantitative (q)HBsAg or HBsAg loss 24 weeks post-dose 4 [day (D)337]), antibody, and T-cell responses were evaluated. RESULTS: In all, 134 participants were vaccinated. Grade 3 solicited adverse events (AEs) (median duration: 2-3 days) were more frequent after co-administration (systemic: 59.3%; administration-site: 33.3%) than sequential administration (systemic: 10.3%; administration-site: 12.8%) of high-dose viral vectors and proteins. No vaccine-related or fatal serious AEs were reported. After 4 doses, no participant had HBsAg loss or ≥1-log decrease in qHBsAg (D337 vs. D1). Co-administration induced the strongest anti-HBs response (73.7% achieved anti-HBs ≥10 mIU/mL 2 weeks post-dose 4 vs. 40.0% after sequential administration). Both sequential and co-administration induced HBc-specific CD4+ and CD8+ T-cell responses, with a prime-boost effect of the viral vectors. CONCLUSIONS: Heterologous prime-boost with ChAd155-hIi-HBV and MVA-HBV, combined with sequential or co-administration of HBc-HBs/AS01B, had an acceptable safety profile, were moderately immunogenic, but no participants showed the expected efficacy outcome.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Early Worsening of Diabetic Retinopathy Following Initiation of Hybrid Closed-Loop/Automated Insulin Delivery Systems in Type 1 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Structured Study-Level Synthesis.

BACKGROUND: Hybrid closed-loop (HCL) systems achieve rapid, algorithm-driven improvements in glycaemia in type 1 diabetes (T1D). Paradoxically, rapid improvement in glycaemic control is associated with early worsening of diabetic retinopathy (EWDR), a phenomenon established in the intensive insulin therapy era. Whether HCL initiation carries a clinically meaningful EWDR risk is unknown. No systematic review has previously addressed this question. METHODS: A systematic review and structured quantitative synthesis was performed using study-level estimates only (PROSPERO CRD:420261391951). MEDLINE, SCOPUS and Web of Science were searched to 14th May 2026. Studies reporting retinal outcomes in people with T1D initiating any HCL system were eligible. Two reviewers independently screened studies and extracted data. Risk of bias was assessed using ROBINS-I and certainty of evidence using the GRADE framework. EWDR incidence was summarised using study-level proportions, and comparative studies were summarised using study-specific risk ratios for HCL versus control therapy. Given substantial heterogeneity in EWDR definitions, retinal assessment timing, follow-up duration, and comparator groups, no pooled or meta-analytic estimates were derived. RESULTS: Eight studies (n = 1487 participants; 860 HCL users) were included; all were observational and six were retrospective. EWDR varied markedly with the timing of retinal assessment. In studies assessing the retina within ≤ 12 months of HCL initiation, EWDR rates ranged from 8.9% to 26.5%. Studies with longer follow-up reported lower rates of retinal worsening or incident DR, 6.7% at 24 months and 6.1% over a mean follow-up of 4.9 years, suggesting that these studies may capture background DR progression rather than true early worsening. Three comparative studies included 177 HCL users and 315 controls; EWDR study-specific risk ratios were directionally inconsistent, ranging from 0.32 to 1.51, and were therefore not pooled. The most consistently identified risk factors were higher baseline HbA1c and older age. The magnitude of HbA1c reduction was not a consistent predictor of EWDR in the HCL context, in contrast to pre-HCL era evidence. Risk of bias ranged from moderate to critical and certainty of evidence was very low for all outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Study-defined retinal worsening was reported in a minority of participants. The current evidence base is dominated by retrospective studies, variable retinal assessment timing, and inconsistent EWDR definitions. Well-designed prospective studies with protocol-specified retinal surveillance anchored to HCL initiation are required to generate reliable incidence estimates, identify risk factors, determine visual consequences, and inform standardised screening guidance.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Hip Arthroscopy-Assisted Management of Pipkin Types I and II Femoral Head Fracture-Dislocations: Mid-Term Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes.

OBJECTIVES: Hip arthroscopy-assisted surgery has been proposed as a minimally invasive option for femoral head fractures; however, evidence with mid-term follow-up remains limited. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical and radiographic outcomes of arthroscopy-assisted management for Pipkin Types I and II femoral head fracture-dislocations with a minimum follow-up of 5 years. METHODS: This retrospective study included 23 consecutive adults (19 Pipkin I and 4 Pipkin II) treated with hip arthroscopy-assisted fragment excision or internal fixation between March 2013 and January 2020. Preoperative computed tomography was used for surgical planning, and fixation was placed with arthroscopic headless screws. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the Harris Hip Score (HHS) and Thompson-Epstein (T-E) criteria. Radiographic evaluation included avascular necrosis (AVN), heterotopic ossification (HO; Brooker), osteoarthritis (OA; Tönnis), and fracture reduction quality (Matta's criteria). Group comparisons were evaluated using independent samples t-tests, Mann-Whitney U tests, and Fisher's exact test. The mean follow-up was 86.2 ± 21.2 months. RESULTS: The cohort consisted of 19 males and 4 females with a mean age of 28.7 ± 9.9 years. Fifteen patients underwent fixation and eight underwent excision. The final mean HHS was 98.3 ± 1.9, with 21 patients (91%) achieving excellent and 2 (9%) good T-E criteria. There were no significant differences between the fixation and excision groups in demographic characteristics, operative time, or functional outcomes (all p > 0.05); however, hospital stay was significantly shorter in the excision group (2.9 ± 0.6 vs. 5.5 ± 4.6 days, p = 0.028). In the fixation group, mean maximal displacement improved from 7.6 mm preoperatively to 2.6 mm postoperatively, with anatomic reduction achieved in 6 cases (40%), imperfect in 6 (40%), and poor in 3 (20%). Patients with Pipkin Type I fractures had significantly higher HHS than those with Type II fractures (98.7 ± 1.7 vs. 96.0 ± 0.8, p = 0.018). Complications were rare, with one case of Brooker Grade I HO and one case of mild OA. No AVN or total hip arthroplasty occurred during the follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Hip arthroscopy-assisted management of selected Pipkin Type I and II femoral head fractures yields excellent mid-term clinical outcomes with acceptable radiographic reduction and a low complication rate. This minimally invasive technique represents a viable alternative in appropriately selected patients when fragment characteristics and surgical expertise permit.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

A Phase I Study Assessing the Safety, Tolerability, and Pharmacokinetics of Yinfenidone: A Novel, Potent Drug for Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis Treatment in Healthy Chinese Subjects.

PURPOSE: Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a fatal interstitial lung disease with a median survival of only 2-3 years after diagnosis. Yinfenidone (HEC585) possesses the potential to inhibit the proliferation of pulmonary fibroblasts, making it a promising candidate for the treatment of IPF. This study assessed the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and metabolic profile of Yinfenidone hydrochloride capsule in healthy Chinese subjects. METHODS: This single-center, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, single ascending-dose trial included seven dose groups(20, 50, 100, 200, 400, 600, and 800 mg). Each group enrolled8 healthy subjects: 6 received Yinfenidone hydrochloride capsules and 2 received matching placebo under fasting conditions. Serial pharmacokinetic (PK) blood samples were collected pre-dose and post-dose, liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry was used to analyze the plasma concentrations of Yinfenidone. Additionally, metabolic biotransformation of Yinfenidone in plasma were conducted in the 100 mg dose group. Safety and tolerability endpoints were monitored via physical examinations, vital signs measurements, clinical laboratory tests, 12-lead electrocardiography (ECG), and adverse events (AEs) documentation throughout the trial. FINDINGS: Yinfenidone was rapidly absorbed, with a median maximum plasma concentration (Tmax) of 1.8-3.0 hours, and had a mean half-life (t1/2) ranging from 31.9 to 62.0 hours. Within the 20-100 mg dose range, systemic drug exposure generally increased with ascending dose, above 100 mg, exposure increased less than proportionally to dose. Metabolite profiling in the 100 mg group revealed that the parentcompound predominated in plasma, with metabolic pathways including mono-oxygenation and N-dealkylation. All reported AEswere mild, classified as Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 4.03 grade 1. No serious AEs observed; no subject discontinued the trial due to AEs. Single oral doses of 20-800 mg Yinfenidone hydrochloride capsules administered under fasting conditions demonstrated favorable safety and tolerability profiles in healthy Chinese subjects. IMPLICATIONS: Yinfenidone exhibited rapid absorption (median Tmax, 1.8-3.0 hours) and a long terminal t1/2 ranging from 31.9 to 62.0 hours in this single ascending-dose study, indicating that Yinfenidone can be taken once a day in subsequent clinical studies. Yinfenidone mainly exists in human plasma as the original drug and is metabolized through a variety of metabolic pathways. The AEs observed with Yinfenidone in this study, such as diarrhea, nausea, and dizziness, were similar to those reported with pirfenidone. Overall, Yinfenidone demonstrated a favorable safety and tolerability profile in this cohort of healthy subjects.

Adult↗

PubMed2026

Cardiovascular risks in psychiatric disorders and psychiatric risks in cardiovascular disorders: implications for prevention and clinical management - a large-scale umbrella review encompassing 76 meta-analyses.

OBJECTIVE: Psychiatric and cardiovascular disorders often co-occur, complicating their assessment and management. No umbrella review(UR) has summarized the meta-analytic evidence on the co-occurrence of psychiatric and cardiovascular disorders and assessed its credibility. METHODS: Meta-analytic systematic reviews of observational studies documenting the prevalence, risk factors, and outcomes associated with the co-occurrence of cardiovascular and psychiatric disorders, indexed from inception through March.16.2026, and meeting established diagnostic criteria, were included. Meta-analytic association and prevalence estimates were recalculated and graded based on established or adapted criteria. The AMSTAR-2 assessed the quality of the meta-analyses, while several subgroup analyses and meta-regressions aimed to explain the heterogeneity. RESULTS: We included 76 meta-analyses yielding 131 meta-analytic estimates. Based on pre-existing meta-analytic evidence, 22/24 prevalence estimates (91.7%) met moderate/strong credibility criteria. Strong credibility emerged for: orthostatic hypotension in Lewy body(58%;95%C.I. = 50-66%) and Alzheimer's dementias(28.0% = 95%C.I. = 17.0-40.0%); pericardial effusion in anorexia nervosa(25.0%;95%C.I. = 17.0-34.0%); in heart failure(HF): major depressive disorder(MDD)(41.9%;95%C.I. = 36.7-47.1%), mild cognitive impairment(MCI)(41.4%;95%C.I. = 38.3-45.6%), anxiety(32.0%;95%C.I. = 26.5-37.6%), MDD + anxiety(24.7%;95%C.I. = 17.9-34.3%), and dementia(19.8%;95%C.I. = 12.9-27.8%); in atrial fibrillation(AF): MCI(26.0%;95%C.I. = 21.0-30.0%), anxiety in patients undergoing pulmonary vein isolation(PVI)(25.0%;95%C.I. = 12.0-46.0%), MDD in PVI patients (20.0%;95%C.I. = 13.0-29.0%); in coronary artery disease: MDD + anxiety(19.8%;95%C.I. = 16.0-24.6%): in schizophrenia spectrum disorders: clozapine-associated-cardiomyopathy(0.6%;95%C.I. = 0.2-2.3%); clozapine-associated-cardiomyopathy absolute death rates (0.0003;95%C.I. = 0.0001-0.0012); clozapine-associated-cardiomyopathy case fatality rate (0.078;95%C.I. = 0.018-0.285). Several additional disorders were multimorbid in>5% of people, yet with a lower credibility rating. No re-pooled risk factors/outcomes reached strong credibility criteria. CONCLUSIONS: The present study provides an atlas of cardiovascular and psychiatric multimorbidity across varying levels of credibility, reinforcing the need for an integrated, multidisciplinary approach to patient care and for more research on actionable risk/protective factors and outcomes.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Higher Rates of PASS and SCB After Arthroscopic Subspine Decompression Are Associated With a Positive Diagnostic AIIS Injection: A Propensity Score-Matched Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Hip arthroscopy effectively treats femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS), but persistent pain may be related to concomitant extra-articular pathology such as subspine impingement syndrome (SSI). Standard diagnosis of SSI often relies on 3-dimensional computed tomography (3D-CT) morphology (Hetsroni type II/III), although this morphology is common in individuals who are asymptomatic and correlates poorly with symptoms. PURPOSE: To compare minimum 2-year clinical outcomes after arthroscopic subspine decompression in patients with concurrent FAIS and type II/III anterior inferior iliac spine (AIIS) morphology, stratified by diagnostic method: 3D-CT morphology alone versus 3D-CT morphology plus a positive ultrasound-guided diagnostic injection. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: This study included patients aged 18 to 55 years with type II/III AIIS morphology who underwent primary hip arthroscopy for FAIS and SSI between January 2021 and November 2023 and had minimum 2-year follow-up. Patients diagnosed by CT morphology alone (CT classification group) were propensity score matched 1:1 to patients with a positive ultrasound-guided AIIS injection (injection group), with 57 patients per group. Matching variables were age, sex, body mass index, lateral center-edge angle, alpha angle, Tönnis grade, and Beighton score. All patients underwent arthroscopic subspine decompression. Patient-reported outcomes and rates of achieving the minimal clinically important difference, Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS), and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) were compared. RESULTS: Preoperative patient-reported outcome scores were similar between groups (all P > .05). At minimum 2-year follow-up, the injection group had significantly better scores on the modified Harris Hip Score (90.8 vs 84.2), Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living (88.4 vs 82.4), Hip Outcome Score-Sports Subscale (71.9 vs 64.1), 12-item International Hip Outcome Tool (83.9 vs 76.1), and visual analog scale for pain (1.2 vs 2.0) (all P < .001). Minimal clinically important difference rates were high in both groups, with higher rates in the injection group for modified Harris Hip Score (93% vs 77%; P = .033) and Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living (91% vs 75%; P = .042). PASS and SCB rates were significantly higher in the injection group across all patient-reported outcome measures (all P < .05). Revision and complication rates were low and did not differ significantly between groups. CONCLUSION: Both groups improved significantly after arthroscopic subspine decompression. However, patients with a positive ultrasound-guided diagnostic AIIS injection achieved higher PASS and SCB rates than those selected by CT morphology alone, suggesting that injection-confirmed SSI may improve patient selection for subspine decompression.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Cognitive behavioural therapy-based interventions on stress outcomes in pregnant women: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Stress symptoms were the most common psychological problem in pregnancy. Cognitive behavioural therapy-based interventions are effective for antenatal depression and anxiety symptoms; but there are fewer studies for stress symptoms. OBJECTIVE: The review aims to (1) examine the effectiveness of cognitive behavioural therapy-based interventions in reducing stress outcomes (pregnancy-specific stress symptoms, generic symptoms, and objective stress) in pregnant women, and (2) identify significant moderators affecting the effectiveness of the intervention. DESIGN: Systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression analysis of randomised controlled trials. METHODS: We conducted a three-step search (12 databases, 4 clinical registries, and citation searches) in English and Chinese up to July 24, 2025, by two independent reviewers. Meta-analysis, subgroup, and meta-regression analyses were performed using the R software. Quality assessment and certainty of the evidence were assessed with the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool version 2 and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria. Publication bias was assessed using funnel plots and Egger's test. RESULTS: We included 20 randomised controlled trials involving a total of 6966 pregnant women from nine countries. Random-effects meta-analyses found that interventions significantly alleviated pregnancy-specific stress symptoms (Hedges' g = -0.84, 95% Confidence Interval, CI -1.42, -0.26, p < .01, I2 = 92.3%), reduced generic stress symptoms (g = -0.64, 95% CI -1.09, -0.20, p < .01, I2 = 87.4%) with median and large effect sizes at post-intervention. No effect was found in lowering cortisol levels (g = -0.99, 95% CI -2.58, -0.60, p = .12, I2 = 84%) at post-intervention. Subgroup and meta-regression analyses indicated that region, age of participants, use of intention-to-treat, missing data management analyses, frequency, modalities, and approaches of interventions, use of different comparators, and attrition rate were significant factors affecting the effectiveness of interventions. Subgroup analyses suggested that the intensity of intervention should be more than once per week using a blended mode among Asian populations. Multivariate meta-regression analyses indicated that both younger age (β = 0.13, p = .02) and a lower attrition rate (β = 0.03, p = .03) significantly improved the effectiveness of interventions. The overall certainty of the evidence was rated as either very low or low. CONCLUSIONS: Cognitive behavioural therapy-based interventions can supplement antenatal care to alleviate pregnancy-specific stress symptoms and generic stress symptoms, particularly in young Asian women. However, the evidence has some uncertainties. These findings should be interpreted with caution due to substantial heterogeneity. Well-designed trials on a large-scale with long-term follow-ups were needed. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration ID: CRD420251115913.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Addition of High-Dose Vitamin D3 to Standard Treatment in Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: The SOLARIS Randomized Clinical Trial (Alliance A021703).

IMPORTANCE: In a phase 2 randomized clinical trial, high-dose vitamin D3 added to standard treatment improved progression-free survival (PFS) compared with standard-dose vitamin D3 in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). OBJECTIVE: To determine if high-dose vitamin D3 added to standard chemotherapy improves outcomes in patients with previously untreated mCRC. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Double-blind phase 3 randomized clinical trial enrolling 455 patients with previously untreated mCRC, conducted in the US through the National Clinical Trials Network from October 2019 to December 2022 (database freeze: July 15, 2024). INTERVENTIONS: mFOLFOX6 (modified FOLFOX6 [5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin]) or FOLFIRI (5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan) plus bevacizumab every 2 weeks with either high-dose vitamin D3 (8000 IU daily × 14 days as loading dose followed by 4000 IU daily) or standard-dose vitamin D3 (400 IU daily) until disease progression, intolerable toxicity, or withdrawal of consent. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary end point was PFS assessed by the unstratified log-rank test. Secondary end points included objective response rate, overall survival, and toxicity. Prespecified subgroup analyses of PFS were performed according to known prognostic factors. RESULTS: Among 455 randomized patients (median age, 59 years; 181 [40%] female) with median follow-up 20 months, the median PFS for high-dose vitamin D3 (n = 228) was 11.8 months (95% CI, 10.3-13.3) vs 10.3 months (95% CI, 9.4-12.2) for standard-dose vitamin D3 (n = 227) (1-sided log-rank P = .25). There were no significant differences in objective response rate between high-dose and standard-dose vitamin D3 (51% [95% CI, 44%-58%] vs 44% [95% CI, 37%-50%], respectively; P = .12), or in overall survival (median, 25.6 vs 27.0 months; 1-sided log-rank P = .66). There were no clinically meaningful differences in the most common grade 3 or greater adverse events between the high- and standard-dose groups, including neutropenia (n = 67 [32%] vs n = 62 [30%]) and hypertension (n = 42 [20%] vs n = 49 [23%]) or in incidence of vitamin D-associated toxicities. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among patients with previously untreated mCRC, addition of high-dose vitamin D3, vs standard-dose vitamin D3, to standard chemotherapy plus bevacizumab did not improve PFS. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04094688.

Aged↗

PubMed2026

Osimertinib With or Without Chemotherapy in Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer With EGFR and Concurrent TP53 Mutations: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Combination therapy has emerged as a promising therapeutic approach for patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, its clinical benefit-risk profile remains a focus of ongoing debate. Identifying patients most likely to derive benefit from such regimens remains an unmet clinical need. OBJECTIVE: To prospectively compare the efficacy and safety of first-line osimertinib plus chemotherapy with osimertinib monotherapy for patients with EGFR-mutated advanced NSCLC harboring concurrent TP53 mutations. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase 3 study conducted at 17 sites in China. Between March 25, 2021, and July 11, 2024, a total of 294 eligible patients with treatment-naive, stage IV or recurrent nonsquamous NSCLC harboring concurrent TP53 and EGFR-sensitizing mutations were enrolled. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized (1:1) to receive osimertinib plus chemotherapy (pemetrexed and carboplatin every 3 weeks for 4 cycles, followed by maintenance therapy of osimertinib plus pemetrexed; n = 146) or osimertinib monotherapy (n = 148). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival. Secondary end points included overall survival, response, safety, and quality of life. RESULTS: Among 294 enrolled patients, the median age was 57 years (range, 26-79 years), and 159 (54.1%) were female. The data cutoff date was November 11, 2025. At a median follow-up of 25.1 months for the osimertinib-chemotherapy group and 26.1 months for the osimertinib monotherapy group, median progression-free survival was significantly longer with osimertinib plus chemotherapy than with osimertinib monotherapy (34.0 vs 15.6 months; difference, 18.4 months [95% CI, 9.9-22.3]; hazard ratio, 0.44 [95% CI, 0.32-0.60]; P < .001). This benefit was consistent across prespecified subgroups, including those with brain metastases and L858R mutations. The overall survival data remained immature (30.6% maturity); however, a trend toward overall survival benefit with combination therapy was observed. The incidence of grade 3 or higher treatment-related adverse events was higher in the combination group, with no new safety signal identified. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this randomized clinical trial, osimertinib plus chemotherapy significantly increased progression-free survival among patients with EGFR-mutated advanced NSCLC harboring concurrent TP53 mutations. These findings provided a clinical rationale for individualized combination strategies in the management of patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04695925.

Adult↗

PubMed2026

GLP-1 Receptor Agonists and Musculoskeletal Outcomes: A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) are increasingly used for the treatment of type 2 diabetes and obesity, but their effects on musculoskeletal health remain completely misunderstood. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review/meta-analysis aims to synthesise clinical data on the effects of GLP-1 RAs on key relevant bone, muscle, and joint outcomes. METHODS: MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (both via Ovid® platform) and Embase were searched from inception to March 2025 to identify relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or real-world evidence (RWE) studies to be included. This bibliographic search was completed manually. A random-effect model meta-analysis was performed for any outcome reported in at least 2 studies. Subgroup analyses were performed on the type of GLP-1 RAs, type of comparator used and study design. Sensitivity analyses (i.e., leave-out sensitivity analyses and analyses restricted to the most adjusted effect estimate) were performed to test the robustness of the data. The strength of evidence was assessed using GRADE. This work has been performed in adherence with PRISMA statement. (PROSPERO Record ID: CRD420251024082). RESULTS: From 1148 potentially relevant references, 60 articles (46 RCTs, 13 RWE studies and 1 pharmacovigilance study, comprising 1,250,717 individuals) met our inclusion criteria. Different GLP-1 RAs were represented across the panel of studies, i.e., semaglutide, liraglutide, exenatide, dulaglutide, tirzepatide (dual agonist gastric inhibitory polypeptide [GIP]/GLP-1) and others. No effect on bone outcomes (i.e., bone mineral density [all sites] and fractures [all sites]) were observed when the meta-analytical models included the most adjusted effect size. Regarding muscle outcomes, a significant decrease of lean body mass/fat-free mass was consistently observed with GLP-1 RAs in the global model (k = 28, standardised mean difference [SMD] 0.52, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.8; -0.23, I2 88%, p-value for heterogeneity <0.0001), which remained robust in all sensitivity analyses. Subgroup analyses showed that the effect was mainly driven by liraglutide and semaglutide, with a decrease in lean body mass/fat-free mass observed when GLP-1 RAs were compared with placebo. No publication bias was found. Regarding joint outcome, models revealed no significant change in The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain, physical function and stiffness. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis is the first to investigate the effects of GLP-1 RAs on a large panel of musculoskeletal health outcomes. While no significant effects were observed on bone- or joint-related outcomes, GLP-1 RAs were associated with reductions in lean body mass/fat-free mass, although the certainty of evidence was low and these changes appeared largely related to weight loss. Whether these changes translate into clinically meaningful impairments in muscle function or physical performance remains uncertain. Further studies in this field, including those looking at muscle function, strength or performance and using multivariate models considering confounding are needed to better reinforce the models and final findings.

Journal Article↗

PubMed2026

Effects of time-restricted eating on markers of glucose metabolism and regulation in individuals with prediabetes or type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the effects of time-restricted eating (TRE) on glucose metabolism and regulation in individuals with prediabetes (fasting blood glucose of 5.6-6.9 mmol/l or HbA1c of 39-47 mmol/mol [5.7-6.4%]) or type 2 diabetes (fasting blood glucose ≥7 mmol/l or HbA1c ≥48 mmol/mol [6.5%]). METHODS: A literature search was performed in MEDLINE, Embase and CENTRAL from inception to 5 August 2025. Moreover, forward and backward citation searches were performed. Eligible studies were RCTs in adults with prediabetes or type 2 diabetes, lasting ≥2 weeks, reporting markers of glucose metabolism and regulation, comparing TRE (≤12 h eating window) with a non-time-restricted control diet. Studies involving pregnancy, other fasting regimens, or non-peer-reviewed publications were excluded. Data were pooled as weighted mean differences with 95% CIs using random-effects generic inverse variance models in Cochrane Review Manager Web, and results are presented as forest plots. The certainty of evidence was defined using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations methodology, and risk of bias was estimated by using the Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomised trials (RoB 2). RESULTS: Out of 2043 records identified through the database search, as well as 1249 from forward and backward citation searches, ten RCTs including 599 participants were included. The mean length of the studies was 4 months, and the eating windows ranged from 4 to 10 h per day. The pooled meta-analysis showed no overall effect of TRE on HbA1c (-3.33 mmol/mol; 95% CI -6.87, 0.20 (-0.30% points; -0.63, 0.02); p=0.06, moderate certainty). Nevertheless, following stratification by subgroups, TRE resulted in a reduction in HbA1c of 0.93 mmol/mol (-1.70, -0.17 [-0.09% points; -0.16, -0.02]; p=0.02) in individuals with prediabetes but not in individuals with type 2 diabetes (-4.68 mmol/mol; -10.08, 0.72 (-0.43% points; -0.92, 0.07); p=0.09). TRE reduced fasting blood glucose in the pooled analysis (-0.30 mmol/l; -0.53, -0.07; p<0.01, moderate certainty) as well as in the subgroup analyses in individuals with prediabetes (-0.14 mmol/l; -0.27, -0.01; p=0.03) and with type 2 diabetes (-0.48 mmol/l; -0.78, -0.17; p<0.01). Moreover, TRE lowered body weight by 1.6 kg (-2.2, -1.0; p<0.001) in the pooled analysis. The evidence was limited by imprecision arising from wide confidence intervals in some of the included studies, which may be due to small sample sizes. Lastly, the effects of TRE on markers of insulin sensitivity, beta cell function and continuous glucose monitoring measurements were inconclusive. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Moderate-certainty evidence indicates that TRE reduces fasting blood glucose but not HbA1c. The subgroup analyses revealed that TRE improved HbA1c and fasting glucose in individuals with prediabetes and improved fasting glucose in individuals with type 2 diabetes. Future large-scale studies should investigate long-term effects of TRE in prevention and treatment of type 2 diabetes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42024523591 FUNDING: This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors. Three authors (JS, A-DT, THA) are employed at Steno Diabetes Center Copenhagen, a public hospital and research institution under the Capital Region of Denmark, partly funded by a grant from the Novo Nordisk Foundation.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Ibuprofen versus acetaminophen for acute mild-to-moderate pain management in pediatric populations: a systematic review and meta-analysis of their efficacy.

UNLABELLED: Ibuprofen and acetaminophen are the most widely used analgesics in pediatric practice for the management of acute mild-to-moderate pain. Despite their widespread use, the comparative analgesic efficacy of these two agents in children remains a subject of ongoing debate, with existing evidence largely derived from heterogeneous clinical settings and small individual trials. Therefore, this study aimed to systematically review and meta-analyze randomized controlled trials comparing the analgesic efficacy of ibuprofen versus acetaminophen in pediatric populations with acute mild-to-moderate pain. A systematic literature search was conducted up to May 2026 in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. The review was conducted and reported in accordance with the PRISMA-Children and Adolescents (PRISMA-C) 2026 reporting guideline. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials comparing ibuprofen with acetaminophen in children and adolescents (defined as individuals aged 0 to < 18 years) with acute pain, reporting at least one extractable efficacy outcome. Continuous outcomes were synthesized as standardized mean differences (Hedges' g) using random-effects models; dichotomous outcomes were pooled as risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool and certainty of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE framework. Eight randomized controlled trials enrolling 1325 participants were included. Three pediatric trials contributed to the primary continuous pain outcome meta-analysis (n = 196 analyzable participants), yielding a pooled SMD of - 0.28 (95% CI - 0.57 to 0.00; p = 0.052; I2 = 0%), indicating a small effect favoring ibuprofen that did not reach conventional statistical significance. Given the small number of contributing studies (k = 3), the I2 statistic should be interpreted with caution as it has limited power to detect heterogeneity in this context. For the dichotomous pain freedom outcome (2 trials, n = 114), no significant difference was observed (pooled RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.53-1.99; p = 0.93; I2 = 0%). A prespecified sensitivity analysis including an adult soft-tissue injury trial attenuated the pooled effect toward the null (SMD - 0.15, 95% CI - 0.38 to 0.09; p = 0.23; I2 = 36.6%). Narrative synthesis of additional studies generally demonstrated comparable analgesic efficacy between the two agents across postoperative and outpatient pediatric settings. The overall certainty of evidence was rated as low for both primary outcomes, primarily due to imprecision and indirectness. CONCLUSION: Current evidence from randomized controlled trials does not demonstrate a superiority of ibuprofen over acetaminophen for acute mild-to-moderate pain management in children. Both agents appear to provide clinically meaningful analgesia across heterogeneous pediatric pain settings. The clinical choice between agents should be guided by individual patient factors, including contraindications to NSAIDs, the inflammatory nature of the pain etiology, and patient-specific characteristics. The low certainty of evidence underscores the need for adequately powered, methodologically rigorous trials to definitively establish the comparative efficacy of these two analgesics in the pediatric population. WHAT IS KNOWN: • Ibuprofen and acetaminophen are the two most widely used non-opioid analgesics for acute mild-to-moderate pain in children, and both are recommended as first-line agents by major international guidelines. • Prior meta-analyses in mixed pediatric-adult populations have suggested a modest analgesic advantage of ibuprofen over acetaminophen, but pediatric-specific evidence has remained limited and methodologically heterogeneous. WHAT IS NEW: • This systematic review and meta-analysis, restricted to randomized controlled trials in pediatric populations, found that ibuprofen showed a small effect favoring pain reduction compared with acetaminophen (SMD - 0.28, p = 0.052), although this did not reach conventional statistical significance. • The analgesic advantage of ibuprofen may be more pronounced in pain etiologies with a significant inflammatory component (e.g., fractures). At the same time, both agents appear broadly equivalent in most other acute pediatric pain settings, supporting individualized analgesic selection based on clinical context and patient-specific factors.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Adjuvant alectinib versus chemotherapy in resected ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (ALINA): health-related quality-of-life and safety outcomes from a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: For patients with resected, ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), adjuvant alectinib significantly improved disease-free survival versus platinum-based chemotherapy in the global, phase 3, open-label, randomised ALINA trial. We report safety and health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) outcomes from the ALINA trial. METHODS: Eligible patients aged 18 years or older with resected, ALK-positive, stage IB (≥4 cm)-IIIA NSCLC (per the American Joint Committee on Cancer and the Union for International Cancer Control Cancer Staging Manual 7th edition) and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1 were randomly assigned (1:1) via a block-stratified randomisation method to receive oral alectinib (600 mg twice daily) for 24 months or intravenous platinum-based chemotherapy for four 3-week cycles. Randomisation was stratified according to disease stage and race. The primary endpoint, previously reported, was disease-free survival. Safety was a secondary endpoint and HRQoL was an exploratory endpoint. Safety was assessed by the investigator as per the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5·0 until 28 days after the last alectinib dose or chemotherapy cycle. HRQoL was assessed via the Short-Form 36-item health survey version 2 (SF-36v2) questionnaire at baseline, every 3 weeks to week 12, then every 12 weeks until disease recurrence, consent withdrawal, death, or week 96. Norm-based scoring was applied; clinically meaningful changes were defined using the SF-36v2 manual. Safety was assessed in the safety-evaluable population and HRQoL in the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03456076) and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between Aug 16, 2018, and Dec 8, 2021, 257 patients were assigned to receive alectinib (n=130) or chemotherapy (n=127). 123 (48%) patients were male and 134 (52%) were female; 143 (56%) were Asian. The safety-evaluable population comprised 128 patients who received alectinib and 120 patients who received chemotherapy; median duration of safety follow-up was 24·8 months (IQR 22·0-24·9) in the alectinib group and 3·7 months (IQR 3·7-3·8) in the chemotherapy group. The safety of adjuvant alectinib was generally consistent with its known profile. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were blood creatine phosphokinase increased (eight [6%] of 128), alanine aminotransferase increased (two [2%] of 128), and blood bilirubin increased (two [2%] of 128) in the alectinib group, and neutrophil count decreased (12 [10%] of 120), neutropenia (ten [8%] of 120), and nausea (five [4%] of 120) in the chemotherapy group. Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in two (2%; one each with appendicitis and pneumonitis) of 128 patients in the alectinib group and eight (7%) of 120 patients in the chemotherapy group ( most common were gastrointestinal disorders in three [3%] patients). No deaths due to adverse events were reported in either group. There were fewer discontinuations due to adverse events with alectinib (seven [5%]) versus chemotherapy (15 [13%]). A clinically meaningful difference in improvement from baseline was seen at week 12 for bodily pain, role physical, mental health, social functioning, and vitality SF-36v2 domains with alectinib; improvements in physical and mental HRQoL were maintained over 2 years of active treatment (at week 96, mean Mental Component Summary score: 49·9 [SD 10·4]; mean Physical Component Summary score: 48·8 [SD 7·2]) and reached levels similar to the general population (population norm: 50). INTERPRETATION: For patients with resected ALK-positive NSCLC, adjuvant alectinib had a manageable safety profile; HRQoL improved and was maintained over 2 years of active treatment. Together with the disease-free survival benefit seen in ALINA, these data support adjuvant alectinib as an important new standard-of-care for patients with resected ALK-positive NSCLC. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Adult↗

PubMed2026

Prevalence of unruptured intracranial aneurysms according to comorbidities, risk factors, country, and time period: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage declined between 1980 and 2010, which coincided with a decline in smoking and prevalence of hypertension. We aimed to investigate whether the decrease in subarachnoid haemorrhage incidence is paralleled by declines in unruptured intracranial aneurysm (UIA) prevalence. METHODS: For this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science for articles published in any language from Jan 1, 2011 to Dec 31, 2025, and reassessed 68 articles published before March 1, 2011 from a 2011 systematic review and meta-analysis. Articles were eligible for inclusion if they used a cross-sectional or case-control design and provided the crude number of participants and those with UIA. We only included studies reporting numbers of UIA separately from ruptured aneurysms and with ten or more patients. Summary data were independently extracted by JD with AZ or CB and conflicts were resolved by GJER. The primary outcome was proportion of participants with UIA. Relative to a hypothetical reference population (mean age 50 years, 50% women, and no comorbidities), age and/or sex-adjusted prevalence ratios (PRs) for regions, comorbidities, and risk ratios (RRs) for female sex, smoking, and hypertension were estimated using generalised linear mixed models. A time trend analysis was done by binomial meta regression using the mid-year of data acquisition. We assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE. The study was registered with PROSPERO, number CRD420261296728. FINDINGS: Our search screened 4708 studies. 67 reassessed and 95 newly identified articles, reporting on 316 131 participants and 11 822 people with UIAs, were included in our meta-analysis. In the reference population, the estimated prevalence of UIAs was 3·9% (95% CI 3·0-5·1). The prevalence of UIAs in individuals with atherosclerosis was 5·5% (4·7-6·4; 2229 of 40970 participants) and the adjusted PR was 1·3 (95% CI 0·8-2·0) compared with the reference population. For positive family history of aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage (aSAH) or UIA, the UIA prevalence was 7·9% (5·6-11·1; 412 of 4252 participants) and the adjusted PR was 2·4 (0·5-11·2). For connective-tissue disorder, the UIA prevalence was 10·3% (6·5-16·0; 94 of 879 participants) and the adjusted PR was 3·9 (2·0-7·6). For autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD), the UIA prevalence was 12·8% (9·2-17·6; 293 of 1990 participants) and the adjusted PR was 4·4 (1·5-12·6). RRs were for current smoking 1·4 (1·2-1·6; 798 of 27911 participants), for having hypertension 1·6 (1·5-1·7, 4043 of 83053 participants), and for female sex 1·9 (1·8-2·0; 3415 of 65020 women and 2122 of 76130 men). In studies on healthy individuals with MR angiography or CT angiography as imaging modality, the prevalence in 2016-2022 was 6·6% (6·3-6·8; 2904 of 41191 participants). The adjusted PR was 1·8 (1·1-2·8) for 2016-2022 versus 2002-2015. Prevalence of UIAs of 5 mm or larger was 0·7% (0·6-0·8) in 2002-2015 and 1·4% (1·0-1·9) in 2016-2022. The UIA prevalence did not differ between countries. τ2 showed significant heterogeneity between studies. The certainty of the evidence ranged from very low to moderate. INTERPRETATION: Prevalence of UIA is increasing, particularly over the past two decades. This increase is only in part explained by improved detection of small UIAs and an ageing population, and other factors-such as environmental-are likely involved. Alongside patients with ADPKD and a positive family history of aSAH, patients with connective-tissue disorders had a higher prevalence of UIA than the reference population. Our findings warrant further investigation into the potential benefit of personalised screening and management strategies in groups at high risk for having UIAs. FUNDING: None.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Chemoradiotherapy versus short-course radiotherapy for response-adapted organ preservation in early-stage and intermediate-stage rectal cancer (STAR-TREC): 12-month results of an international, multicentre, open-label, parallel-group, randomised, phase 2/3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Total mesorectal excision (TME) is the standard treatment for most early-stage and intermediate-stage rectal cancer but can cause substantial perioperative morbidity, functional impairment, and reduced quality of life. We assessed whether long-course chemoradiotherapy (LCCRT) or short-course radiotherapy (SCRT) could increase organ preservation and reduce surgery, toxicity, and quality-of-life harms without compromising oncological outcomes. METHODS: STAR-TREC is an international, multicentre, open-label, parallel-group, randomised, phase 2/3 trial in five European countries. Eligible patients were aged 16 years or older in the UK or aged 18 years or older elsewhere, had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0-1, and rectal adenocarcinoma (≤40 mm staged as mrT1-T3bN0). In phase 2, participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to LCCRT-based organ preservation (LCCRT-OP; 50 Gy in 25 fractions plus oral capecitabine 825 mg/m2 twice daily), SCRT-based organ preservation (SCRT-OP; 25 Gy in five fractions), or primary TME. Phase 2 assessed feasibility, with recruitment at months 12 and 24 as the primary endpoint and feasibility thresholds of four or more and six or more randomisations per month, respectively. Phase 3 adopted a partially randomised patient-preference design, allowing participants to choose either organ preservation or TME. Participants that chose organ preservation were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive LCCRT-OP or SCRT-OP using centralised, computer-generated assignment, with stratification by country and MRI T category (≤T3a vs T3b) using minimisation. The phase 3 primary endpoint was organ-preservation 30 months after treatment initiation, defined as absence of TME, stoma, or local recurrence, which was assessed in the modified intention-to-treat population, which included participants in phase 2 and phase 3. After a planned interim analysis of unmasked phase 2 data, the trial steering committee and independent data monitoring committee recommended reporting a 12-month, modified intention-to-treat analysis of implementation outcomes for participants recruited before Aug 8, 2023. This study is registered with ISRCTN (14240288) and is closed. FINDINGS: Between June 14, 2017, and April 8, 2024, 503 participants were enrolled at 37 sites. Phase 2 enrolled 120 participants, with recruitment rates of three and six participants per month at months 12 and 24, respectively. Overall, 12-month TME-free survival was 60% (47 of 78 participants). After phase 3 recruitment ended, interim analysis of unmasked phase 2 data showed an early TME-free survival benefit with LCCRT versus SCRT (12-month median TME-free survival not reached [95% CI not reached-not reached] vs 7·6 months [95% CI 6·4-not reached]; hazard ratio [HR] 3·7 [95% CI 1·7-8·0]; posterior probability of superiority >99·5%). The trial steering committee and independent data monitoring committee therefore recommended expanded analysis of 426 participants recruited before Aug 8, 2023: 120 from phase 2 and 306 from phase 3. 17 participants withdrew before treatment, leaving 409 in the modified intention-to-treat population: 163 allocated to LCCRT, 168 to SCRT, and 78 to primary TME. 116 (28%) participants were female and 293 (72%) were male. Among participants who opted for organ preservation, 12-month TME-free survival was 78·5% (95% CI 72·4-85·1) with LCCRT and 60·6% (53·6-68·4) with SCRT (HR 1·90 [95% CI 1·29-2·81]). The most common grade 3-4 serious adverse events were gastrointestinal disorders (four [2%] with LCCRT vs six [4%] with SCRT vs six [8%] with TME) and procedural complications (three [2%] with LCCRT vs five [3%] with SCRT vs five [6%] with TME). One participant allocated to primary TME died after an anastomotic leak. INTERPRETATION: These early results support a response-adapted organ-preservation approach, with LCCRT appearing more effective than SCRT at 12 months. Organ-preservation might also reduce treatment-related toxicity compared with primary TME. Longer follow-up is needed for the prespecified 30-month endpoint and definitive functional and oncological outcomes. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, Stand Up to Cancer, Dutch Cancer Society, Danish Cancer Society, Kom Op Tegen Kanker, Cancerfonden, ALF Region Stockholm, RCC Region Stockholm.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Ivonescimab plus chemotherapy versus placebo plus chemotherapy in patients with advanced EGFR-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer after disease progression on EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy (HARMONi): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Ivonescimab has shown clinical efficacy in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of ivonescimab plus chemotherapy versus placebo plus chemotherapy in patients with advanced EGFR-mutated NSCLC whose disease progressed after third-generation EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy. METHODS: HARMONi is a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 3 trial done at 114 cancer centres and hospitals across Asia, Europe, and North America. Eligible patients were aged at least 18 years (upper limit: 75 years in Asia) with stage IIIB/IIIC or IV non-squamous EGFR-mutated NSCLC, disease progression after treatment with a third-generation EGFR-TKI, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0 or 1. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via a centralised interactive voice response system or interactive web response system to receive ivonescimab (20 mg/kg) or placebo plus pemetrexed (500 mg/m2) and carboplatin (target area under the curve 5 mg/mL per min) intravenously every 3 weeks. Randomisation was stratified by brain metastases status at enrolment and geographical region. The primary endpoints were progression-free survival by blinded independent radiology review committee and overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in patients who received at least one dose of trial treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT06396065), has completed enrolment, and is ongoing for treatment and follow-up. FINDINGS: From Jan 25, 2022, to Oct 1, 2024, 660 individuals were screened for eligibility; of these, 438 were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive ivonescimab plus chemotherapy or placebo plus chemotherapy (219 per group). Of enrolled patients, 257 (59%) were female and 181 (41%) were male; 306 (70%) reported race as Asian, and 105 (24%) as White. At a median follow-up of 22·3 months (95% CI 21·5-23·0), 275 progression or death events had occurred in 345 patients (129 events among 172 patients in the ivonescimab plus chemotherapy group and 146 events among 173 patients in the placebo plus chemotherapy group). Median progression-free survival was 6·8 months (95% CI 5·7-7·1) in the ivonescimab plus chemotherapy group versus 4·4 months (4·1-5·5) in the placebo plus chemotherapy group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·52; 95% CI 0·41-0·66; p<0·0001). At a median follow-up of 29·7 months (95% CI 27·7-31·0), 262 deaths occurred in 438 patients (122 in the ivonescimab plus chemotherapy group and 140 in the placebo plus chemotherapy group). Median overall survival was 16·8 months (14·3-19·0) in the ivonescimab plus chemotherapy group versus 14·0 months (12·8-15·7) in the placebo plus chemotherapy group (HR 0·79; 0·62-1·01). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events in the ivonescimab plus chemotherapy versus the placebo plus chemotherapy group were decreased neutrophil count (42 [19%] of 218 vs 36 [17%] of 218), decreased white blood cell count (28 [13%] vs 24 [11%]), decreased platelet count (27 [12%] vs 14 [6%]), and anaemia (22 [10%] vs 27 [12%]). Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in 61 (28%) patients in the ivonescimab plus chemotherapy group and 33 (15%) patients in the placebo plus chemotherapy group. Treatment-related adverse events led to death in four patients (disease progression, multiple organ dysfunction syndrome, and hepatic failure, each in one patient; gastrointestinal haemorrhage and pulmonary embolism in one patient) in the ivonescimab plus chemotherapy group and five patients (pneumonitis, myocardial infarction, cerebrovascular accident, cognitive disorder, and embolic stroke, each in one patient) in the placebo plus chemotherapy group. INTERPRETATION: Ivonescimab plus chemotherapy showed a clinically meaningful and statistically significant progression-free survival benefit in patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC after progression on EGFR-TKI therapy. The clinical benefit and lack of new safety signals of ivonescimab with chemotherapy support the potential for the combination as a new treatment option in this patient population. FUNDING: Summit Therapeutics.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia.

RATIONALE: A range of surgical options is available for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), including holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP). The evidence is unclear regarding differences in functional, perioperative, and morbidity outcomes between these modalities. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate compared with other surgical treatments for lower urinary tract symptoms in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia. SEARCH METHODS: We searched multiple databases (including MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, Web of Science, LILACS, and the International HTA database), trial registries, and conference abstracts through April 08, 2026. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We only included randomized trials of men over 40 years of age with a prostate volume of at least 20 mL (assessed by digital rectal examination, ultrasound, or conventional imaging) who exhibited lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) defined by an International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) of eight or greater undergoing surgical interventions for BPH. OUTCOMES: The critical outcomes measured were the urologic symptoms score, the quality-of-life score, and major adverse events. The important outcomes measured were: re-treatment, erectile function, ejaculatory function, transfusions, acute urinary retention, indwelling urinary catheter duration, and hospital stay duration. RISK OF BIAS: We used the Cochrane risk of bias tool (RoB 1) to assess for potential sources of bias on a study and outcome level basis. SYNTHESIS METHODS: We pooled outcome data using the random-effects model and performed meta-analyses using the Mantel-Haenszel method. We assessed statistical heterogeneity in the pooled data by visually inspecting forest plots and using the I2 statistic to quantify it. We used the GRADE framework to assess the certainty of evidence. INCLUDED STUDIES: We included 52 trials that included 6242 participants that compared HoLEP to other surgical interventions for benign prostatic hyperplasia. The median age of participants across the studies ranged from 65 to 74 years. The baseline prostate volume ranged from 30 cc to 142 cc. Baseline IPSS scores ranged from 19.6 to 28.6 (range 0-35). SYNTHESIS OF RESULTS: We prioritized comparing HoLEP with transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) at short-term follow-up (up to 12 months), because TURP is the long-standing reference standard and the predominant comparator in randomized surgical trials. Findings for the four remaining comparisons (laser ablation, alternative energy source enucleation, other minimally invasive therapies, and simple prostatectomy), for long-term follow-up, and for all remaining outcomes are reported in full in the review. Compared to TURP, at short-term follow-up: Critical outcomes - HoLEP may result in little to no difference in short-term urologic symptom scores measured using the IPSS (range 0 to 35; lower values reflect fewer symptoms) (MD -0.67, 95% CI -1.20 to -0.14; I² = 93%; 14 studies, 1666 participants, low-certainty evidence). - HoLEP may result in little to no difference in short-term quality of life (range 0 to 6; lower values reflect better quality of life) (MD -0.04, 95% CI -0.23 to 0.15; I² = 73%; 6 studies, 876 participants, low-certainty evidence). - HoLEP may result in little to no difference in short-term major adverse events (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.58; I² = 0%; 10 studies, 1147 participants, low-certainty evidence). Important outcomes - HoLEP likely results in little to no difference in re-treatment (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.14 to 1.50; I² = 0%; 8 studies, 813 participants, moderate-certainty evidence). - HoLEP likely results in little to no difference in erectile function (MD -0.03, 95% CI -0.47 to 0.42; I² = 0%; 3 studies, 518 participants, moderate-certainty evidence). - Ejaculatory function: we did not find any data for this outcome. - HoLEP likely reduces the need for blood transfusion (RR 0.19, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.42; I² = 0%; 15 studies, 1755 participants, moderate-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Compared with TURP, HoLEP may achieve similar relief of urologic symptoms, similar quality of life, and similar rates of major adverse events in the first 12 months after surgery, and probably similar re-treatment rates and erectile function. HoLEP likely reduces the need for blood transfusion; this is the only advantage of HoLEP that the randomized evidence, as summarized here, supports as clinically important. There was insufficient evidence to assess outcomes in the subset of individuals with larger prostates or on anticoagulation. Future research should prioritize long-term trials reporting sexual function and urinary incontinence outcomes, recruit men with very large prostates (≥ 150 cc) or on anticoagulation therapy, and evaluate cost-effectiveness and training requirements. FUNDING: No external funding was received for this review. REGISTRATION: The protocol for this review was published in the Cochrane Database 2019 (https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD013291).

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Long-term hormone therapy for perimenopausal and postmenopausal women.

BACKGROUND: Hormone therapy is widely provided to control menopausal symptoms and has been used for the management and prevention of cardiovascular disease, osteoporosis and dementia in older women. This is an updated version of a Cochrane review first published in 2005. OBJECTIVES: To assess the long-term effects of prolonged use (at least one year) of hormone therapy on mortality, cardiovascular outcomes, cancer, gallbladder disease, fractures and cognition in perimenopausal and postmenopausal women. SEARCH METHODS: We used the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, three other databases and two trial registers, together with reference checking, citation searching and contact with study authors to identify the studies included in the review. The latest search date was 26 September 2024. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised, double-blind trials in which peri- or postmenopausal women took hormone therapy or placebo for at least one year. We included various oestrogen formulations, with or without progestogens. We focused on studies assessing hormone therapy's effects on long-term clinical outcomes, including death, coronary events and cancer. Hormone therapy's efficacy in managing menopausal symptoms was beyond the scope of this review, and is assessed in other Cochrane reviews. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected studies, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. We calculated risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous data and mean differences (MDs) for continuous data, along with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE. MAIN RESULTS: We included 24 studies - with two newly added in this update - involving 45,660 participants. We derived nearly 70% of the data from two well-conducted studies: the Heart and Estrogen/progestin Replacement Study (HERS 1998) and the large, multi-component Women's Health Initiative research programme, which included two hormone therapy arms (WHI 1998). Across all the studies, most participants were postmenopausal American women with one or more comorbidities. The mean participant age in most studies was over 60 years. Only one included study focused on perimenopausal women. We present full results for all included studies with available data in the main review. The results presented below are drawn from WHI 1998, in which the combined hormone therapy arm and the oestrogen-only arm were run concurrently, with women assigned to the appropriate trial based on their uterus status. One study with 16,608 postmenopausal women with an intact uterus compared combined continuous hormone therapy (conjugated equine oestrogen and medroxyprogesterone acetate) to placebo, and measured outcomes at an average of 5.6 years of follow-up. Based on this study, combined continuous hormone therapy probably makes little to no difference to the risk of a coronary event (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.44; moderate-certainty evidence). It may increase the risk of stroke (RR 1.39, 95% CI 1.09 to 2.09; low-certainty evidence) and venous thromboembolism (RR 2.03, 95% CI 1.55 to 6.64; low-certainty evidence). Compared to placebo, combined continuous hormone therapy probably increases the risk of breast cancer (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.56; moderate-certainty evidence) and probably makes little to no difference to the risk of lung cancer (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.46; moderate-certainty evidence). It may increase gallbladder disease requiring surgery (RR 1.64, 95% CI 1.30 to 2.06; 14,203 participants; low-certainty evidence), and probably reduces the risk of all clinical fractures (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.86; moderate-certainty evidence). One study including 10,739 postmenopausal women who had undergone a hysterectomy compared oestrogen-only (conjugated equine oestrogen) hormone therapy to placebo, and measured outcomes at an average of seven years' follow-up. Based on this study, oestrogen-only hormone therapy probably makes little to no difference to the risk of coronary events (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.13), venous thromboembolism (RR 1.32, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.74) and breast cancer (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.01), all with moderate-certainty evidence. It may make little to no difference to the risk of lung cancer (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.48; low-certainty evidence). Oestrogen-only hormone therapy probably increases the risk of stroke (RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.67) and gallbladder disease requiring surgery (RR 1.78, 95% CI 1.42 to 2.24), and probably reduces the risk of all clinical fractures (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.80), all with moderate-certainty evidence. We judged most included studies to have a low risk of bias for most domains. The overall certainty of evidence for the main comparisons was moderate. The main limitation was that only about 30% of women were 50 to 59 years old at baseline, the age group most likely to consider hormone therapy for vasomotor symptoms. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Long-term follow-up of women using hormone therapy suggests that the risk profiles vary between combined hormone therapy and oestrogen-only therapy. Oestrogen-only hormone therapy probably makes little to no difference to coronary events, and probably increases the risk of stroke and gallbladder disease. It probably makes little to no difference in the risk of breast cancer, and probably reduces the risk of all fractures. Combined hormone therapy may increase the risk of thromboembolism and probably increases the risk of breast cancer. These results should be interpreted with caution as they are based on one study using oral hormone therapy, which may not represent the risks of the hormone therapy currently used in clinical practice.

Humans↗