Sex Differences in Anxiety and Depression Conditions among Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

(1) Background: Evidence suggested inconsistent results in anxiety and depression scores among female and male cancer patients. The present systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess how anxiety and depression conditions among cancer patients vary according to sex. (2) Methods: This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA). The protocol was registered in PROSPERO with id no. CRD42024512553. The search strategy involved combining keywords using Boolean operators, including "Anxiety", "Cancer", and "Depression", across several databases: Embase, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. The outcomes were evaluated using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). (3) Results: Data were collected from five studies, enrolling a total of 6317 cancer patients, of whom 2961 were females and 3356 males. For each study, HADS-A and HADS-D scores were considered, also differentiating HADS scores according to cancer typology, and then three different meta-analyses were performed. Generally, females reported significantly higher levels of depression scores than males and, conversely, males reported significantly greater levels of anxiety than females. (4) Conclusions: Previous studies suggested higher rates of depression and anxiety conditions in females than in males, but the present data highlighted controversial findings, since males reported significantly higher levels of anxiety than females. In this scenario, the theoretical approach justified females being more open than males to expressing anxiety or depression conditions. It would be necessary for healthcare professionals to improve effective measures purposed at assessing and mitigating depressive symptoms in cases of advanced cancer, thereby improving their mental health, given the high rates of depression in advanced cancer patients, due to the difficulty level of performing their daily living activities, which deteriorate further over time.

Gender differences in vaccine therapy: where are we in COVID-19 pandemic?

Vaccination is one of the greatest achievements of public health. Vaccination programs have contributed to the decline in mortality and morbidity of various infectious diseases. This review aims to investigate the impact of sex/gender on the vaccine acceptance, responses, and outcomes. The studies were identified by using PubMed, until 30th June 2020. The search was performed by using the following keywords: SARS-CoV-2, COVID-19, gender, sex, vaccine, adverse reaction. Clinical trials, retrospective and prospective studies were included. Studies written in languages other than English were excluded. Studies were included if gender differences in response to vaccination trials were reported. All selected studies were qualitatively analyzed. Innate recognition and response to viruses, as well as, adaptive immune responses during viral infections, differ between females and males. Unfortunately, a majority of vaccine trials have focused on healthy people, with ages between 18 to 65 years, excluding the elderly, pregnant women, post-menopausal female and children. In conclusion, it is apparent that the design of vaccines and vaccine strategies should be sex-specific, to reduce adverse reactions in females and increase immunogenicity in males. It should be mandatory to examine sex-related variables in pre-clinical and clinical vaccine trials, such as their crucial role for successful prevention of pandemic COVID-19.

A Markov model to evaluate hospital readmission.

BACKGROUND: The analysis of non-fatal recurring events is frequently found in studies on chronic-degenerative diseases. The aim of this paper is to estimate the probability of readmission of patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) or with Respiratory Failure (RF). METHODS: The Repeated hospital admissions of a patient are considered as a Markov Chain. The transitions between the states are estimated using the Nelson-Aalen estimator. The analysis was carried out using the Puglia Region hospital patient discharge database for the years 1998-2005. Patients were selected on the basis of first admission between 01/01/2001 and 31/12/2005 with ICD-9-CM code of COPD or RF as principal and/or secondary diagnosis. For those selected two possible transitions were considered in the case they had the second and third admission with an ICD-9-CM code of COPD or RF as principal diagnosis. RESULTS: The probability of readmission is increased in patients with a diagnosis of RF (OR = 1.618 in the first transition and 1.279 in the second) and also in those with a diagnosis of COPD or RF as the principal diagnosis at first admission (OR = 1.615 in the first transition and 1.193 in the second). The clinical gravity and the ward from which they were discharged did not significantly influence the probability of readmission. CONCLUSION: The time to readmission depends on the gravity of the pathology at onset. In patients with a grave clinical picture, either COPD or Respiratory Failure, when treated and controlled after the first admission, they become minor problems and they are indicated among secondary diagnoses in any further admission.