The Brazilian national prospective active surveillance (AS) cohort of patients with low-risk prostate cancer in the public health system: vigiaSUS study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer exhibits a very diverse behaviour, with some patients dying from the disease and others never needing treatment. Active surveillance (AS) consists of periodic PSA assessment (prostate-specific antigen), DRE (digital rectal examination) and periodic prostate biopsies. According to the main guidelines, AS is the preferred strategy for low-risk patients, to avoid or delay definitive treatment. However, concerns remain regarding its applicability in certain patient subgroups, such as African American men, who were underrepresented in the main cohorts. Brazil has a very racially diverse population, with 56.1% self-reporting as brown or black. The aim of this study is to evaluate and validate the AS strategy in low-risk prostate cancer patients following an AS protocol in the Brazilian public health system. METHODS: This is a multicentre AS prospective cohort study that will include 200 patients from all regions of Brazil in the public health system. Patients with prostate adenocarcinoma and low-risk criteria, defined as clinical staging T1-T2a, Gleason score ≤ 6, and PSA < 10 ng/ml, will be enrolled. Archival prostate cancer tissue will be centrally reviewed. Patients enrolled in the study will follow the AS strategy, which involves PSA and physical examination every 6 months as well as multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) every two years and prostate biopsy at month 12 and then every two years. The primary objective is to evaluate the reclassification rate at 12 months, and secondary objectives include determining the treatment-free survival rate, metastasis-free survival, and specific and overall survival. Exploratory objectives include the evaluation of quality of life and anxiety, the impact of PTEN loss and the economic impact of AS on the Brazilian public health system. DISCUSSION: This is the first Brazilian prospective study of patients with low-risk prostate cancer under AS. To our knowledge, this is one of the largest AS study cohort with a majority of nonwhite patients. We believe that this study is an opportunity to better understand the outcomes of AS in populations underrepresented in studies. Based on these data, an AS national clinical guideline will be developed, which may have a beneficial impact on the quality of life of patients and on public health. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials registration is NCT05343936.

Study of anesthetics for euthanasia in rats and mice: A systematic review and meta-analysis on the impact upon biological outcomes (SAFE-RM).

AIM: To summarize the knowledge on the effect of anesthetics employed right before euthanasia on biological outcomes. DATA SOURCE: A systematic review of the literature to find studies with isoflurane, ketamine, halothane, pentobarbital, or thiopental just before euthanasia of laboratory rats or mice. STUDY SELECTION: Controlled studies with quantitative data available. DATA EXTRACTION: The search, data extraction, and risk of bias (RoB) were performed independently by two reviewers using a structured form. For each outcome, an effect size (ES) was calculated relative to the control group. Meta-analysis was performed using robust variance meta-regression for hierarchical data structures, with adjustment for small samples. DATA SYNTHESIS: We included 20 studies with 407 biological outcomes (110 unique). RoB analysis indicated that 87.5% of the domains evaluated showed unclear risk, 2% high risk, and 10.5% low risk. The effect size for all anesthetics considered together was 0.99 (CI95% = 0.75-1.23; p < 0.0001). Sub-analyses indicate high effect sizes for pentobarbital (1.14; CI95% = 0.75-1.52; p < 0.0001), and isoflurane (1.01; CI95% = 0.58-1.44; p = 0.0005) but not for ketamine (1.49; CI95% = -7.95-10.9; p = 0.295). CONCLUSION: We showed that anesthetics interfere differently with the majority of the outcomes assessed. However, our data did not support the use of one anesthetic over others or even the killing without anesthetics. We conclude that outcomes cannot be compared among studies without considering the killing method. This protocol was registered at Prospero (CRD42019119520). FUNDING: There was no direct funding for this research.

Cardiac pathology in mucopolysaccharidosis I mice: Losartan modifies ERK1/2 activation during cardiac remodeling.

Mucopolysaccharidosis type I (MPS I) is a lysosomal storage disorder caused by mutations in the IDUA gene, that codifies the alpha-L-iduronidase enzyme, which deficiency leads to storage of glycosaminoglycans, with multiple clinical manifestations. One of the leading causes of death in MPS I patients are cardiac complications such as cardiac valve thickening, conduction abnormalities, myocardial dysfunction, and cardiac hypertrophy. The mechanism leading to cardiac dysfunction in MPS I is not entirely understood. In a previous study, we have demonstrated that losartan and propranolol improved the cardiac function in MPS I mice. Thus, we aimed to investigate whether the pathways influenced by these drugs may modulate the cardiac remodeling process in MPS I mice. According to our previous observation, losartan and propranolol restore the heart function, without altering valve thickness. MPS I mice presented reduced activation of AKT and ERK1/2, increased activity of cathepsins, but no alteration in metalloproteinase activity was observed. Animals treated with losartan showed a reduction in cathepsin activity and restored ERK1/2 activation. While both losartan and propranolol improved heart function, no mechanistic evidence was found for propranolol so far. Our results suggest that losartan or propranolol could be used to ameliorate the cardiac disease in MPS I and could be considered as adjuvant treatment candidates for therapy optimization.

Exercise training modalities for heart transplant recipients: a systematic review and network meta-analysis protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Heart transplantation is the gold standard treatment for selected patients with end-stage heart failure. Although this procedure can improve quality and prolong life expectancy, several of these patients persist with decreased exercise tolerance. Evidence suggests that exercise training can bring multifactorial benefits to heart transplant (HTx) recipients. However, it is unclear that exercise modality should be preferred. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review and network meta-analysis is to compare the efficacy and safety of different training modalities in HTx recipients. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will perform a comprehensive literature search in PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, The Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Scopus, SportDISCUS, Web of Science Core Collection and PEDro from inception until November 2020. Two registries (ClinicalTrials.gov and REBEC) will also be searched for potential results in unpublished studies. There will be no restriction on language, date of publication, publication status or sample size. We will include randomised controlled trials enrolling adult HTx recipients with the presence of at least one exercise training group, which might be compared with another training modality and/or a non-exercise control group for a minimum of 4 weeks of intervention. The primary outcomes will be peak oxygen consumption and occurrence of adverse events. As secondary outcomes, the interaction between pulmonary ventilation, pulmonary perfusion and cardiac output, oxygen uptake efficiency slope, heart rate response, oxygen pulse, peak blood pressure and peak subjective perception of effort. In addition, we will evaluate the 6 min walking distance, health-related quality of life, endothelial function, muscle strength, body fat percentage and lean mass. Risk of bias will be assessed using the Cochrane RoB V.2.0 tool, and we plan to use the Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis tool to assess confidence in the results. All materials (raw data, processed data, statistical code and outputs) will be shared in a public repository. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Given the nature of this study, no ethical approval will be required. We believe that the findings of this study may show which is the most efficacious and safe physical training modality for HTx recipients. The completed systematic review and network meta-analysis will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020191192.