Treatment of traumatic hypertrophic scars and keloids: a systematic review of randomized control trials.

Exaggerated healing and remodeling after skin injury may cause hypertrophic and keloidal scars, which are associated with functional and quality of life impairment. There is limited guidance available regarding the relative effectiveness of therapies for hypertrophic scars and keloids. In this review, we aim to compare the effectiveness of treatments for hypertrophic scars and keloids. MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane Collaboration database were searched from inception to March 2019 for randomized control trials of treatments for hypertrophic and keloid scars that included 20 or more patients. Outcomes evaluated included the standardized mean reduction in scarring and adverse events. The type of scar and the demographic features were analyzed for their effect on clinical outcome. Based on 25 included clinical trials, intralesional injection (64.1% [95% CI 60.8-67.5%]) may be more effective than physical (29.9% [95% CI 28.9-30.9%]) or topical treatments (34% [95% CI 31.8-36.8%]). Combination of 5-fluorouracil and triamcinolone (9:1 dilution) appeared superior among intralesional treatments for keloids. Ablative laser and pulsed-dye laser were the most useful laser treatments. Regression modeling showed laser treatment response was linked to Fitzpatrick skin type (p = 0.002). Adverse events were uncommon for all treatments and mostly transient. Intralesional treatments for keloid and hypertrophic scars may be the most reliable treatment option to improve pathologic scars, while laser treatment may have specific benefits for Fitzpatrick skin types I-III over types IV-VI. Management of pathological scars is an area of critical need, where appropriate treatment can have a significant impact on quality of life.

Inflammatory bowel disease induces inflammatory and pre-neoplastic changes in the prostate.

BACKGROUND: Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has been implicated as a risk factor for prostate cancer, however, the mechanism of how IBD leads to prostate tumorigenesis is not known. Here, we investigated whether chronic intestinal inflammation leads to pro-inflammatory changes associated with tumorigenesis in the prostate. METHODS: Using clinical samples of men with IBD who underwent prostatectomy, we analyzed whether prostate tumors had differences in lymphocyte infiltrate compared to non-IBD controls. In a mouse model of chemically-induced intestinal inflammation, we investigated whether chronic intestinal inflammation could be transferred to the wild-type mouse prostate. In addition, mouse prostates were evaluated for activation of pro-oncogenic signaling and genomic instability. RESULTS: A higher proportion of men with IBD had T and B lymphocyte infiltration within prostate tumors. Mice with chronic colitis showed significant increases in prostatic CD45 + leukocyte infiltration and elevation of three pro-inflammatory cytokines-TIMP-1, CCL5, and CXCL1 and activation of AKT and NF-kB signaling pathways. Lastly, mice with chronic colitis had greater prostatic oxidative stress/DNA damage, and prostate epithelial cells had undergone cell cycle arrest. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest chronic intestinal inflammation is associated with an inflammatory-rich, pro-tumorigenic prostatic phenotype which may explain how gut inflammation fosters prostate cancer development in men with IBD.

Insurance coverage, stage at diagnosis, and time to treatment following dependent coverage and Medicaid expansion for men with testicular cancer.

INTRODUCTION: We sought to assess the impact of Affordable Care Act Dependent Care Expansion (ACA-DCE), which allowed dependent coverage for adults aged 19-25, and Medicaid expansion on outcomes for men with testicular cancer. METHODS: Using a US-based cancer registry, we performed adjusted difference-in-difference (DID) analyses comparing outcomes between men aged 19-25 (n = 8,026) and 26-64 (n = 33,303) pre- (2007-2009) and post-ACA-DCE (2011-2016) and between men in states that expanded Medicaid (n = 2,296) to men in those that did not (n = 2,265)pre- (2011-2013) and post-Medicaid expansion (2015-2016). RESULTS: In ACA-DCE analysis, rates of uninsurance decreased (DID -5.64, 95% confidence interval [CI] -7.23 to -4.04%, p<0.001) among patients aged 19-25 relative to older patients aged 26-64. There was no significant DID in advanced stage at diagnosis (stage≥II; p = 0.6) or orchiectomy more than 14 days after diagnosis (p = 0.6). For patients who received chemotherapy or radiotherapy as their first course of treatment, treatment greater than 60 days after diagnosis decreased (DID -4.84%, 95% CI -8.22 to -1.45%, p = 0.005) among patients aged 19-25 relative to patients aged 26-64. In Medicaid expansion states, rates of uninsurance decreased (DID -4.20%, 95% CI -7.67 to -0.73%, p = 0.018) while patients receiving chemotherapy or radiotherapy greater than 60 days after diagnosis decreased (DID -8.76, 95% CI -17.13 to -0.38%, p = 0.040) compared to rates in non-expansion states. No significant DIDs were seen for stage (p = 0.8) or time to orchiectomy (p = 0.1). CONCLUSIONS: Men with testicular cancer had lower uninsurance rates and decreased time to delivery of chemotherapy or radiotherapy following ACA-DCE and Medicaid expansions. Time to orchiectomy and stage at diagnosis did not change following either insurance expansion.

Medicaid Expansion Did not Improve Time to Treatment for Young Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma.

INTRODUCTION: The absence of health insurance coverage has been associated with worse outcomes for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Medicaid expansion in the United States was an important provision of the Affordable Care Act, which increased the number of low-income individuals eligible for Medicaid starting in January 2014 in several states. The effect of Medicaid expansion on access to healthcare for patients with mRCC is unknown. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of 6844 patients aged < 65 years with mRCC at diagnosis within the National Cancer Database. We compared the time to treatment and the rates of no insurance before (2012-2013) and after (2015-2016) expansion between patients living in states that had and had not expanded Medicaid using difference-in-difference (DID) analyses. DIDs were calculated using linear regression analysis with adjustment for sociodemographic covariates. RESULTS: The rate of no insurance did not change in the expansion states compared with the nonexpansion states (DID, -0.55%; 95% confidence interval, -3.32% to 2.21%; P = .7). The percentage of patients receiving treatment within 60 days of diagnosis had increased in the expansion states from 43% to 49% and in the nonexpansion states from 42% to 46% after expansion. No change was found in treatment within 60 days of diagnosis among all patients (DID, 2.81%; 95% confidence interval, -2.61% to 8.22%; P = .3). CONCLUSIONS: Medicaid expansion was not associated with improved healthcare access for patients with mRCC as reflected by timely treatment. Future work should assess the association between Medicaid expansion and oncologic outcomes.