The treatment of tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC) using mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitors is clinically promising. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of mTOR inhibitors for improving the clinical symptoms of TSC. We performed a systematic search of major electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and WanFang, CNKI, and VIP databases) to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomized studies from the date of database inception to November 2017; the Chinese Food and Drug Administration and clinicaltrials.gov were also searched for unpublished studies. The endpoints of the study were the tumor response rate and seizure frequency response rate (the proportion of patients achieving a ≥ 50% reduction relative to the baseline). Two researchers screened articles, assessed the risk of bias and extracted data independently. The included RCTs were analyzed using RevMan 5.3, which was provided by the Cochrane Collaboration. Compared with the placebo, mTOR inhibitors significantly reduced tumor volume in both angiomyolipoma (AML) (RR = 24.69, 95% CI = 3.51,173.41, P = 0.001) and subependymal giant cell astrocytoma (SEGA) (RR = 27.85, 95% CI = 1.74,444.82, P = 0.02). Compared with the placebo, mTOR inhibitors significantly reduced seizure frequency (RR = 2.12, 95% CI = 1.41,3.19, P = 0.0003). Regarding safety, compared with patients who did not receive mTOR inhibitors, those who did had a higher risk of suffering stomatitis (RR = 3.20, 95% CI = 1.49,6.86, P = 0.003). In contrast, patients who did and did not receive mTOR inhibitors experienced similar adverse events, such as upper respiratory tract infections (RR = 1.08, 95% CI = 0.81,1.45, P = 0.59) and nasopharyngitis (RR = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.60,1.21, P = 0.38). In view of the efficacy and safety associated with tumor and seizure frequency in the TSC patients, mTOR inhibitors is a good therapeutic choice. Unlike the risks of upper respiratory tract infections and nasopharyngitis, mTOR inhibitors seem to increase the risk of stomatitis, mostly grade 1 and 2.

The bottleneck arising from castration‐resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) treatment is its high metastasis potential and antiandrogen drug resistance, which severely affects survival time of prostate cancer (PCa) patients. Secreted phosphoprotein 1 (SPP1) is a cardinal mediator of tumor‐associated inflammation and facilitates metastasis. In our previous study, we firstly revealed SPP1 was a potential hub signature for predicting metastatic CRPC (mCRPC) development. Herein, we integrated multiple databases to explore the association of SPP1 expression with prognosis, survival, and metastatic levels in CRPC progression and investigated SPP1 expression in PCa tissues and cell lines. Next, PCa cell lines with overexpression or depletion of SPP1 were established to study the effect of SPP1 on enzalutamide sensitivity and adhesion and migration of prostate cancer cell lines and further explore the underlying regulatory mechanisms. Bioinformatics analysis, polymerase chain reaction (PCR), immunohistochemical staining, and western blot results suggested SPP1 upregulation had strong relationship with the malignant progression of CRPC and enzalutamide resistance. SPP1 knockdown enhanced enzalutamide sensitivity and repressed invasion and migration of prostate cancer cells. Importantly, upregulating SPP1 promoted, while silencing SPP1 attenuated epithelial‐mesenchymal‐transition (EMT). Our results further demonstrated that SPP1 overexpression maintains the activation of PI3K/AKT and ERK1/2 signaling pathways. Overall, our findings unraveled the functional role and clinical significance of SPP1 in PCa progression and help to discover new potential targets against mCRPC.

▪▪▪: The aim of the present meta‐analysis was to determine the efficacy and safety of metformin for the treatment of women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). We searched databases, including PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing metformin and insulin treatments in women with GDM. We carried out statistical analyses using RevMan 2011 and used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations profiler to rate the quality of evidence of the primary outcomes. We analysed eight studies involving 1592 subjects. Meta‐analysis of the RCTs showed that metformin had statistically significant effects on pregnancy‐induced hypertension [PIH; risk ratio (RR) 0.54; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.31, 0.91]. However, its effects on neonatal hypoglycaemia (RR 0.80; 95% CI 0.62, 1.02), rate of large‐for‐gestational age infants (RR 0.77; 95% CI 0.55, 1.08), respiratory distress syndrome (RR 1.26; 95% CI 0.67, 2.37), phototherapy (RR 0.94; 95% CI 0.67, 1.31) and perinatal death (RR 1.01; 95% CI 0.11, 9.53) were not significant. Our analyses suggest that there is no clinically relevant difference in efficacy or safety between metformin and insulin; however, metformin may be a good choice for GDM because of the lower risk of PIH. The advantages of metformin in terms of glycaemic control, PIH incidence and gestational age at birth are unclear, and should be verified in further trials.

Anticoagulation management services are well known to improve the quality of patient care and to reduce the rates of hospitalization and emergency department visits following adverse events related to anticoagulation therapy. The complexity of managing warfarin has led to the development of a variety of specialized models managed by pharmacists, physicians, nurses, and self-managed care. The aim of the study is to compare the effectiveness of pharmacist-managed anticoagulation control of warfarin with other models. We performed a systematic literature search of the PubMed, Medline@Web of Knowledge, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from database inception up to July 2015. The search terms used for the study were ‘warfarin’, ‘pharmacists’, ‘Vitamin K antagonist’, ‘anticoagulation’ and ‘management model.’ We used the Cochrane Collaboration's tool from the Cochrane Handbook to assess the risk of bias of RCTs. We performed statistical analyses using RevMan 5.3 and used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations profiler to rate the quality of evidence of the outcomes. The anticoagulation control outcomes were the percentage of time within the standard and expanded therapeutic range and thrombosis events; the safety outcomes were bleeding events and mortality, and patients’ satisfaction of anticoagulation service. Eight RCTs from 981 potentially relevant publications with a total of 1493 patients were included. Meta-analysis of the RCTs showed that a significant difference existed between pharmacist-managed care and other models for satisfaction (mean difference (MD) = 0·41, 95% CI, 0·01–0·81, P = 0·04, low-quality evidence) with heterogeneity, and the percentage of time within the standard therapeutic range (MD = 3·66, 95% CI 2·20–5·11, P < 0·00001, high-quality evidence) without heterogeneity. However, the pharmacist-managed group demonstrated no significant improvement on the percentage of time within the expanded therapeutic range (MD = 2·85, 95% CI −0·56 to 6·26, P = 0·10, moderate-quality evidence) with heterogeneity, mortality [odds ratio (OR) = 0·97, 95% CI, 0·44–2·11, P = 0·09, high-quality evidence] without heterogeneity, the prevention of bleeding events (OR = 0·89, 95% CI, 0·56–1·44, P = 0·64, high-quality evidence) without heterogeneity, and thrombosis events (OR = 0·81, 95% CI, 0·34–1·92, P = 0·64, high-quality evidence) without heterogeneity. The advantage of pharmacist-managed warfarin anticoagulation therapy in terms of anticoagulation control, safety and mortality are unclear, but resulted in significantly better patient satisfaction. Compared with other models, the superiority of pharmacist-managed warfarin anticoagulation needs to be further evaluated and validated in future research.

Background: Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic illness involving the central nervous system (CNS) that is characterised by inflammation, demyelination, and degenerative changes. Dalfampridine is one of the available treatments for MS symptoms and comorbidities. This meta-analysis aimed to assess the safety and benefits of dalfampridine versus placebo in MS by summarising data deriving from previously published clinical randomised controlled studies (RCTs). Results: A total of 9 RCTs were included in this meta-analysis, involving 1691 participants. There were significant differences between dalfampridine and placebo in terms of decreased 12-item Multiple Sclerosis Walking Scale score (weighted mean difference [WMD] = − 3.68, 95% confidence interval [CI] [− 5.55, − 1.80], p = 0.0001), improved response to the timed 25-foot walk test (relative risk [RR] = 2.57, 95% CI [1.04, 6.33], p = 0.04), increased 6-min walk test (WMD = 18.40, 95% CI [1.30, 35.51], p = 0.03), increased 9-Hole Peg Test score (WMD = 1.33, 95% CI [0.60, 2.05], p = 0.0004), and increased Symbol Digit Modalities Test score (WMD = 4.47, 95% CI [3.91, 5.02], p < 0.00001). Significant differences in the incidence of side effects were also observed (RR = 1.12, 95% CI [1.04, 1.21], p = 0.002). Conclusion: Dalfampridine exerts positive effects on walking ability, finger dexterity, and cognitive function. Treatment should be administered under the guidance of a physician or pharmacist given the higher incidence of adverse events.

Aims: The aim of the present meta‐analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of sapropterin dihydrochloride in phenylketonuria (PKU) patients.Methods: The following databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCT) regarding PKU patients treated with sapropterin dihydrochloride: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and clinicaltrials. Two authors independently selected studies, assessed the risk of bias and extracted data. The meta‐analysis was performed in RevMan 5.3 provided by the Cochrane Collaboration.Results: Four studies met the inclusion criteria. In PKU patients with low blood phenylalanine (Phe) concentration, no significant difference was indicated for the decrease of Phe level (weighted mean difference (WMD) = −7.75 μmol L⁻¹; 95% confidence intervals (CI): −82.63 to 67.13, P = 0.84, I² = 0%), however, the dietary Phe tolerance was significantly improved in the sapropterin group (WMD = 19.89 mg kg⁻¹ d⁻¹; 95% CI: 10.26 to 29.52, P < 0.0001, I² = 0%). In PKU patients with high blood Phe level, sapropterin showed a significant lowering in blood Phe concentration (WMD = −225.31 μmol L⁻¹; 95% CI: −312.28 to −138.34, P < 0.00001, I² = 0%). There was no significant difference for adverse events.Conclusions: Sapropterin could bring benefit for PKU patients with high or low Phe level, due to Phe reduction in a short time or dietary Phe tolerance improvement respectively. Sapropterin has an acceptable safety profile.