Prostate cancer is the second most common cause of cancer-related mortality in men. In patients undergoing a failure after radical treatment, one of the therapeutic option is androgen deprivation: despite initial response rates, a progression to a state of castration resistance is observed in most of the patients. In the present article, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of all clinical trials assessing treatment for nmCRPC with next-generation androgen receptor inhibitors. We performed a review and meta-analysis of phase III randomized controlled trials comparing new agents (apalutamide, enzalutamide, darolutamide) with placebo as control arm, in the setting of nmCRPC. Patients treated with next-generation ARIs had a 26% reduction in the risk of death compared with placebo; compared with other ARIs, darolutamide had the lowest rate of grade 3 and 4 AEs and the lowest therapy discontinuation rate due to any grade AEs. This meta-analysis shows that treatment with new ARIs is safe and significantly reduces the risk of death and of metastasis onset in nmCRPC patients. Under way studies on new biomarkers such as genomic classifiers will probably allow the stratification in more specific subsets of disease. New imaging modalities such as PSMA-PET have shown greater sensibility and specificity than conventional imaging in metastases detection. All patients were randomized in a 2:1 fashion, with a total of 2,694 who underwent next-generation ARIs (806 apalutamide, 955 darolutamide, 933 enzalutamide) and 1,423 in the placebo arm.

A systematic review and meta-analysis on non-metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer: The radiation oncologist's perspective.

The present systematic review aimed to report the studies concerning the primers in improving bond strength and identifying pertinent primers for a particular dental alloy by adhering to PRISMA precepts.
PubMed and Semantic Scholar databases were scoured for articles using 10 search terms. 
A total of 48 studies assessing shear bond strength (SBS) and 15 studies evaluating tensile bond strength (TBS) were included in the qualitative synthesis. Concerning SBS, 33.4% moderate and 66.6% high RoB was observed. Concerning TBS, 26.8% moderate and 73.2% high RoB was discerned. Seventeen and two studies assessing SBS and TBS, respectively, were included in meta-analyses.
Shear bond strength and TBS increased for the primed alloys. Cyclic disulfide primer is best-suited for noble alloys when compared with thiol/thione primers. Phosphoric acid- and phosphonic acid ester-based primers are opportune for base alloys.
The alloy-resin interface (ARI) would fail if an inappropriate primer was selected. Therefore, the selection of an appropriate alloy adhesive primer for an alloy plays a crucial role in prosthetic success. This systematic review would help in the identification and selection of a congruous primer for a selected alloy.

Dental Alloy Adhesive Primers and Bond Strength at Alloy-Resin Interface: A Systematic Review and Meta-analyses.

To systematically review the problem of appetite loss after major abdominal surgery.
Appetite loss is a common problem after major abdominal surgery. Understanding of etiology and treatment options is limited.
We searched Medline, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science for studies describing postoperative appetite loss. Data were extracted to clarify definition, etiology, measurement, surgical influence, pharmacological, and nonpharmacological treatment. PROSPERO registration ID: CRD42021224489.
Out of 6144 articles, we included 165 studies, 121 of which were also analyzed quantitatively. A total of 19.8% were randomized, controlled trials (n = 24) and 80.2% were nonrandomized studies (n = 97). The studies included 20,506 patients undergoing the following surgeries: esophageal (n = 33 studies), gastric (n = 48), small bowel (n = 6), colon (n = 27), rectal (n = 20), hepatobiliary (n = 6), and pancreatic (n = 13). Appetite was mostly measured with the Quality of Life Questionnaire of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC QLQ C30, n = 54). In a meta-analysis of 4 randomized controlled trials gum chewing reduced time to first hunger by 21.2 hours among patients who had bowel surgery. Other reported treatment options with positive effects on appetite but lower levels of evidence include, among others, intravenous ghrelin administration, the oral Japanese herbal medicine Rikkunshito, oral mosapride citrate, multidisciplin-ary-counseling, and watching cooking shows. No studies investigated the effect of well-known appetite stimulants such as cannabinoids, steroids, or megestrol acetate on surgical patients.
Appetite loss after major abdominal surgery is common and associated with increased morbidity and reduced quality of life. Recent studies demonstrate the influence of reduced gastric volume and ghrelin secretion, and increased satiety hormone secretion. There are various treatment options available including level IA evidence for postoperative gum chewing. In the future, surgical trials should include the assessment of appetite loss as a relevant outcome measure.

The Problem of Appetite Loss After Major Abdominal Surgery: A Systematic Review.

Coronary heart disease is the leading cause of mortality worldwide with approximately 7.4 million deaths each year. People with established coronary heart disease have a high risk of subsequent cardiovascular events including myocardial infarction, stroke, and cardiovascular death. Antibiotics might prevent such outcomes due to their antibacterial, antiinflammatory, and antioxidative effects. However, a randomised clinical trial and several observational studies have suggested that antibiotics may increase the risk of cardiovascular events and mortality. Furthermore, several non-Cochrane Reviews, that are now outdated, have assessed the effects of antibiotics for coronary heart disease and have shown conflicting results. No previous systematic review using Cochrane methodology has assessed the effects of antibiotics for coronary heart disease.
We assessed the benefits and harms of antibiotics compared with placebo or no intervention for the secondary prevention of coronary heart disease.
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, SCI-EXPANDED, and BIOSIS in December 2019 in order to identify relevant trials. Additionally, we searched TRIP, Google Scholar, and nine trial registries in December 2019. We also contacted 11 pharmaceutical companies and searched the reference lists of included trials, previous systematic reviews, and other types of reviews.
Randomised clinical trials assessing the effects of antibiotics versus placebo or no intervention for secondary prevention of coronary heart disease in adult participants (≥18 years). Trials were included irrespective of setting, blinding, publication status, publication year, language, and reporting of our outcomes.
Three review authors independently extracted data. Our primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, serious adverse event according to the International Conference on Harmonization - Good Clinical Practice (ICH-GCP), and quality of life. Our secondary outcomes were cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, and sudden cardiac death. Our primary time point of interest was at maximum follow-up. Additionally, we extracted outcome data at 24±6 months follow-up. We assessed the risks of systematic errors using Cochrane 'Rosk of bias' tool. We calculated risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for dichotomous outcomes. We calculated absolute risk reduction (ARR) or increase (ARI) and number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) or for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) if the outcome result showed a beneficial or harmful effect, respectively. The certainty of the body of evidence was assessed by GRADE.
We included 38 trials randomising a total of 26,638 participants (mean age 61.6 years), with 23/38 trials reporting data on 26,078 participants that could be meta-analysed. Three trials were at low risk of bias and the 35 remaining trials were at high risk of bias. Trials assessing the effects of macrolides (28 trials; 22,059 participants) and quinolones (two trials; 4162 participants) contributed with the vast majority of the data. Meta-analyses at maximum follow-up showed that antibiotics versus placebo or no intervention seemed to increase the risk of all-cause mortality (RR 1.06; 95% CI 0.99 to 1.13; P = 0.07; I
Our present review indicates that antibiotics (macrolides or quinolones) for secondary prevention of coronary heart disease seem harmful when assessing the risk of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and stroke at maximum follow-up and all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and sudden cardiac death at 24±6 months follow-up. Current evidence does, therefore, not support the clinical use of macrolides and quinolones for the secondary prevention of coronary heart disease. Future trials on the safety of macrolides or quinolones for the secondary prevention in patients with coronary heart disease do not seem ethical. In general, randomised clinical trials assessing the effects of antibiotics, especially macrolides and quinolones, need longer follow-up so that late-occurring adverse events can also be assessed.

Papers