Risultati per: Linee guida per la gestione del carcinoma basocellulare

To the Editor Qin and colleagues conducted an important trial to compare tislelizumab with sorafenib. The study was designed within a noninferiority setting for overall survival (OS) by claiming tislelizumab would be noninferior to sorafenib if the upper bound of the 95.003% CI for the hazard ratio (HR) was less than 1.08. The observed HR was 0.85 with a 95.003% CI of 0.71 to 1.02. The objective response rates were 14.3% and 5.4% for tislelizumab and sorafenib, respectively. The corresponding median durations of response were 36.1 and 11.0 months, respectively. There are several issues that may deserve our attention for conducting future clinical studies in a similar setting.

In Reply We appreciate the interest in our article by Faries and Venna et al as well as their comments on the analysis. While we agree that there are inherent limitations to retrospective studies of survival outcomes using registry data, we believe that it is prudent to glean what insights we can from these datasets given the lack of large-scale studies of rare cancers, such as Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC), in the existing literature.

This cross-sectional study assesses risk of dermatological immune-related adverse events associated with immunotherapy for cancer.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a leading cause of cancer death. HCC is preventable with about 70 percent of HCC attributable to modifiable risk factors. Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs), FDA-approved medications for treating type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), have pleiotropic effects on counteracting risk factors for HCC. Here we evaluate the association of GLP-1RAs with incident HCC risk in a real-world population.

New England Journal of Medicine, Volume 390, Issue 15, Page 1359-1371, April 2024.

New England Journal of Medicine, Volume 390, Issue 14, Page 1339-1341, April 2024.

Objectives
To assess and compare the diagnostic value of contrast-enhanced MRI (CEMRI) and contrast-enhanced CT (CECT) for evaluating the response of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after transarterial chemoembolisation (TACE).

Design
Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Data sources
PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, CNKI and Wanfang databases were systematically searched from inception to 1 August 2023.

Eligibility criteria
Studies with any outcome that demonstrates the diagnostic performance of CEMRI and CECT for HCC after TACE were included.

Data extraction and synthesis
Two authors independently extracted the data and assessed the quality of included studies. Study quality was assessed using Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2. The diagnostic performance of CEMRI and CECT for the response of HCC was investigated by collecting true and false positives, true and false negatives, or transformed-derived data from each study to calculate specificity and sensitivity. Other outcomes are the positive likelihood ratio/negative likelihood ratio (NLR), the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for diagnostic tests and the diagnostic OR (DOR). Findings were summarised and synthesised qualitatively according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.

Results
This study included 5843 HCC patients diagnosed with CEMRI or CECT and treated with TACE from 36 studies. The mean proportion of men in the total sample was 76.3%. The pool sensitivity, specificity and AUC of CEMRI in diagnosing HCC after TACE were 0.92 (95% CI: 0.86 to 0.96), 0.94 (95% CI: 0.86 to 0.98) and 0.98 (95% CI: 0.96 to 0.99). The pool sensitivity, specificity and AUC of CECT in diagnosing HCC after TACE were 0.74 (95% CI: 0.68 to 0.80), 0.98 (95% CI: 0.93 to 1.00) and 0.90 (95% CI: 0.88 to 0.93).

Conclusions
In conclusion, this study found that both CEMRI and CECT had relatively high predictive power for assessing the response of HCC after TACE. Furthermore, the diagnostic value of CEMRI may be superior to CECT in terms of sensitivity, AUC, DOR and NLR.