Serum tumor-associated autoantibodies as diagnostic biomarkers for lung cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: We performed a comprehensive review and meta-analysis to evaluate the diagnostic values of serum single and multiplex tumor-associated autoantibodies (TAAbs) in patients with lung cancer (LC). METHODS: We searched the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases for relevant studies investigating serum TAAbs for the diagnosis of LC. The primary outcomes included sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of the test. RESULTS: The systematic review and meta-analysis included 31 articles with single autoantibody and 39 with multiplex autoantibodies. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) was the most common detection method. For the diagnosis of patients with all stages and early-stage LC, different single or combinations of TAAbs demonstrated different diagnostic values. Although individual TAAbs showed low diagnostic sensitivity, the combination of multiplex autoantibodies offered relatively high sensitivity. For the meta-analysis of a same panel of autoantibodies in patients at all stages of LC, the pooled results of the panel of 6 TAAbs (p53, NY-ESO-1, CAGE, GBU4-5, Annexin 1 and SOX2) were: sensitivity 38% (95% CI 0.35-0.40), specificity 89% (95% CI 0.86-0.91), diagnostic accuracy 65.9% (range 62.5-81.8%), AUC 0.52 (0.48-0.57), while the summary estimates of 7 TAAbs (p53, CAGE, NY-ESO-1, GBU4-5, SOX2, MAGE A4 and Hu-D) were: sensitivity 47% (95% CI 0.34-0.60), specificity 90% (95% CI 0.89-0.92), diagnostic accuracy 78.4% (range 67.5-88.8%), AUC 0.90 (0.87-0.93). For the meta-analysis of the same panel of autoantibodies in patients at early-stage of LC, the sensitivities of both panels of 7 TAAbs and 6 TAAbs were 40% and 29.7%, while their specificities were 91% and 87%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Serum single or combinations of multiplex autoantibodies can be used as a tool for the diagnosis of LC patients at all stages or early-stage, but the combination of multiplex autoantibodies shows a higher detection capacity; the diagnostic value of the panel of 7 TAAbs is higher than the panel of 6 TAAbs, which may be used as potential biomarkers for the early detection of LC.

Lack of efficacy of nebulized magnesium sulfate in treating adult asthma: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Nebulized magnesium sulfate (MgSO4) has been used to treat asthma, but the efficacy remains controversial. We aimed to comprehensively review the efficacy of nebulized MgSO4 in treating adult patients with asthma. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched for relevant studies published up to July 18, 2016. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included if adult patients with acute or stable asthma had been treated with nebulized MgSO4 compared with placebo or another bronchodilator. Standardized mean differences (SMDs), relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Outcomes included pulmonary function, hospital admission and adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 1386 patients from sixteen trials (1240 acute asthma patients and 146 stable asthma patients) were subjected to meta-analysis. Compared to placebo as normal saline, whether using in acute or stable adult asthma, nebulized MgSO4 did not significantly improve the respiratory function: SMD 0.39 (95% CI -0.03-0.82, P = 0.07), and 1.48 (95% CI -0.14-3.11, P = 0.07), respectively. Furthermore, nebulized MgSO4 did not reduce hospital admission in adult patients with acute asthma (RR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.52-1.00; P = 0.05), although it was not associated with increased adverse events (RR 1.15; 95% CI, 0.88-1.52; P = 0.31). CONCLUSIONS: Evidence to date suggests that nebulized MgSO4 has no role in the management of adult patients with acute or stable asthma.

Prognostic Value of Pleural Lavage Cytology in Patients with Lung Cancer Resection: An Updated Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Pleural lavage cytology (PLC) is considered as a possible tool for assessing prognosis of lung cancer patients. We aimed to comprehensively review the prognosis value of PLC in patients undergoing surgical resection. METHODS: We searched 4 electronic databases for relevant studies comparing positive PLC and negative PLC. The primary outcomes included survival rate and recurrence rate at maximum follow-up. RESULTS: The meta-analysis included 28 studies, with a total of 20,714 patients. For the overall survival rate of all stages, the results demonstrated that positive pre-resection, post-resection and pooled PLC were associated with unfavorable survival: hazard ratio (HR) 2.89 (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.48-3.37), 2.70 (1.90-3.83), and 2.89 (2.52-3.31), respectively. For the stage I survival rate, the combined results also suggested that positive pre-resection, post-resection and pooled PLC were associated with unfavorable survival: HR 3.29 (95% CI 2.55-4.25), 4.85 (2.31-10.20), and 3.16 (2.53-3.94), respectively. Furthermore, a meta-analysis of 14 studies included 14,279 patients showed that positive pre-resection, post-resection and pooled PLC were associated with an increased risk of overall recurrence: risk ratio (RR) 2.45 (95% CI 1.91-3.15), 2.37 (1.11-5.09), and 2.37 (95% CI 2.00-2.80), respectively. Positive PLC was also associated with a high pleural recurrence (RR 4.77; 95% CI 3.13-7.26) or distant recurrence (RR 2.33; 95% CI 1.65-3.29). CONCLUSIONS: Both positive pre- resection and post-resection PLC are associated with not only higher tumor recurrence but also unfavorable survival outcomes in patients with lung cancer resection. This technique can therefore act as a strong prognostic factor for tumor recurrence and adverse survival rates.

The effect of pleural abrasion on the treatment of primary spontaneous pneumothorax: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Pleural abrasion has been widely used to control the recurrence of primary spontaneous pneumothorax (PSP). However, controversy still exists regarding the advantages and disadvantages of pleural abrasion compared with other interventions in preventing the recurrence of PSP. METHODS: The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched up to December 15, 2014 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the effects of pleural abrasion with those of other interventions in the treatment of PSP. The study outcomes included the PSP recurrence rate and the occurrence rate of adverse effects. RESULTS: Mechanical pleural abrasion and apical pleurectomy after thoracoscopic stapled bullectomy exhibited similarly persistent postoperative air leak occurrence rates (p = 0.978) and 1-year PSP recurrence rates (p = 0.821), whereas pleural abrasion led to reduced residual chest pain and discomfort (p = 0.001) and a smaller rate of hemothorax (p = 0.036) than did apical pleurectomy. However, the addition of minocycline pleurodesis to pleural abrasion did not reduce the pneumothorax recurrence rate compared with apical pleurectomy (3.8% for both procedures) but was associated with fewer complications. There was no statistical difference in the pneumothorax recurrence rate between mechanical pleural abrasion and chemical pleurodesis with minocycline on either an intention-to-treat basis (4 of 42 versus 0 of 42, p = 0.12; Fisher exact test) or after exclusions (2 of 40 versus 0 of 42, p = 0.24; Fisher exact test). Pleural abrasion plus minocycline pleurodesis also did not reduce the pneumothorax recurrence rate compared with pleural abrasion alone (p = 0.055). Moreover, pleural abrasion plus minocycline pleurodesis was associated with more intense acute chest pain. The postoperative overall recurrence rate in patients who underwent staple line coverage with absorbable cellulose mesh and fibrin glue was similar to that with mechanical abrasion after thoracoscopic bullectomy (13.8% vs. 14.2%, respectively; p = 0.555), but staple line coverage resulted in less postoperative residual pain than mechanical abrasion (0.4% vs.3.2%; p<0.0001). Pleural abrasion after thoracoscopic wedge resection did not decrease the recurrence of pneumothorax compared with wedge resection alone (p = 0.791), but the intraoperative bleeding and postoperative pleural drainage rates were higher when pleural abrasion was performed. CONCLUSIONS: In addition to resulting in the same pneumothorax recurrence rate, thoracoscopic pleural abrasion with or without minocycline pleurodesis is safer than apical pleurectomy in the treatment of PSP. However, minocycline pleurodesis with or without pleural abrasion is not any more effective than pleural abrasion alone. Moreover, additional mechanical abrasion is not safer than additional staple line coverage with absorbable cellulose mesh and fibrin glue after thoracoscopic bullectomy because of increased postoperative pain. Additionally, pleural abrasion after thoracoscopic wedge resection should not be recommended for routine application due to the greater incidence of adverse effects than wedge resection alone. However, further large-scale, well-designed RCTs are needed to confirm the best procedure.