Introduction: Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) has shown favorable outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) who are on insulin therapy. However, the efficacy of CGM in managing glucose levels in noninsulin-treated people with T2D remains controversial. Methods: PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing CGM to self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) in people with T2D not using insulin. We computed weighted mean differences (WMDs) and standard mean differences (SMD) for continuous outcomes, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Heterogeneity was assessed using I ² statistics. Statistical analyses were performed using R version 4.2.3. Results: We included six RCTs comprising 407 noninsulin-treated people with T2D of whom 228 were randomized to CGM. Diabetes duration ranged from 5.4 to 13.9 years. The mean age was 57.9 years and the mean body mass index was 30.8 kg/m ² . Four trials used real-time CGM (rt-CGM) and two intermittent scanning CGM (is-CGM). Compared with SMBG, CGM significantly reduced the glycated hemoglobin level (WMD −0.31%; 95% CI −0.42 to −0.21; I ² = 0%), glucose level (WMD −11.16 mg/dL; 95% CI −19.94 to −2.39; I ² = 0%), time in hypoglycemia level 2 (WMD −0.28%; 95% CI −0.52 to −0.03; I ² = 91%), glucose time >180 mg/dL (WMD −7.75%; 95% CI −12.04 to −3.45; I ² = 0%), and the standard deviation of glucose variation (WMD −4.00 mg/dL; 95% CI −6.86 to −1.14; I ² = 0%). CGM also increased time in range (WMD 8.63%; 95% CI 4.54–12.71; I ² = 0%) and treatment satisfaction (SMD 0.79; 95% CI 0.54–1.05; I ² = 0%). Conclusion: In this meta-analysis, rt-CGM and is-CGM were associated with improvement in glycemic control in people with T2D not using insulin when compared to SMBG.

Background: The benefit of adding Zolbetuximab to the treatment in patients with Claudin-18 isoform 2 (CLDN18.2)-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, locally advanced unresectable or metastatic gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (GC/GEJ) is not yet fully elucidated. Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase and Cochrane databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated Zolbetuximab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone for GC or GEJ adenocarcinoma. We computed hazard-ratios (HRs) or odds-ratios (ORs) for binary endpoints, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results: Three studies and 1,233 patients were included. Comparing with Zolbetuximab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone, progression-free survival (PFS) rate (HR 0.64; 95% CI 0.49–0.84; p < 0.01) and overall survival (OS) rate (HR 0.72; 95% CI 0.62–0.83; p < 0.01) were significant in favor of the Zolbetuximab group. Regarding effectiveness, the Objective Response Rate (ORR) was (OR 1.15; 95% CI 0.87–1.53; p = 0.34). Conclusions: In this comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs, the incorporation of Zolbetuximab alongside chemotherapy offers a promising prospect for reshaping the established treatment paradigms for patients diagnosed with advanced CLDN18.2-positive GC/GEJ cancer.

Patients with heart failure have high rehospitalisation rates and poor cardiovascular outcomes. Home-based monitoring (HBM) has emerged with promising results in different settings. However, its long-term effects on patients recently admitted for acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) remain uncertain. We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing HBM with usual care (UC) that were published between database inception and June 24, 2023. We included studies with patients admitted for ADHF in the previous 6 months and with a minimum follow-up of 6 months. We excluded studies with patients hospitalised for reasons other than ADHF and studies with disproportional education interventions between arms. Statistical analyses were performed using R software version 4.3.2. We pooled risk ratios (RR) and mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for categorical and continuous outcomes, respectively. Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in RCTs (RoB 2) was used to assess study quality. Publication bias was assessed via funnel plots and Egger’s test, and heterogeneity was assessed through I² statistics and sensitivity analysis. The protocol for this systematic review and meta-analysis was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO, CRD42023465359). We included 16 RCTs comprising 4629 patients, of whom 2393 (51.7%) were randomised to HBM and 3150 (68%) were men. Follow-up ranged from six to fifteen months. As compared with UC, HBM significantly reduced all-cause mortality (RR 0.75; 95% CI 0.61, 0.91; p = 0.005), all-cause hospitalisations (RR 0.82; 95% CI 0.70, 0.97; p = 0.018), cardiovascular (CV) mortality (RR 0.53; 95% CI 0.36, 0.79; p = 0.002), hospitalisations for heart failure (RR 0.75; 95% CI 0.62, 0.91; p = 0.004), and CV hospitalisations (RR 0.72; 95% CI 0.55, 0.95; p = 0.018). There were no significant differences in length of hospital stay (MD 0.97 days; 95% CI -0.90, 2.84; p = 0.308). In patients recently admitted with ADHF, HBM significantly reduces long-term all-cause mortality and hospitalisations, CV mortality and hospitalisations, and hospitalisations for heart failure, as compared with UC. This supports the implementation of HBM as a standard practice to optimise patient outcomes following admissions for ADHF. However, future studies are warranted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of implementing HBM in the real-world setting. None.

Background: The benefit of adding programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1)/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors to the treatment of early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), both neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) and adjuvant therapy (AT), is not yet fully elucidated. Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases for randomized controlled trials (RCT) that investigated PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors plus chemotherapy for resectable stage NSCLC. We computed hazard ratios (HRs) or odds ratios (ORs) for binary endpoints, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results: A total of seven RCTs comprising 3915 patients with resectable stage NSCLC were randomized to chemotherapy with or without PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors as NAT or AT. As NAT, the PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors plus chemotherapy group demonstrated significantly improved overall survival (HR 0.66; 95% CI 0.51–0.86) and event-free survival (HR 0.53; 95% CI 0.43–0.67) compared with the chemotherapy alone group. There was a significant increase in favor of the PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors plus chemotherapy group for major pathological response (OR 6.40; 95% CI 3.86–10.61) and pathological complete response (OR 8.82; 95% CI 4.51–17.26). Meanwhile, as AT, disease-free survival was significant in favor of the PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors plus chemotherapy group (HR 0.78; 95% CI 0.69–0.90). Conclusions: In this comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs, the incorporation of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors alongside chemotherapy offers a promising prospect for reshaping the established treatment paradigms for patients diagnosed with resectable stages of NSCLC. Moreover, our analyses support that neoadjuvant administration with these agents should be encouraged, in light of the fact that it was associated with an increased survival and pathological response, at the expense of a manageable safety profile.

To assess the effects of once-weekly subcutaneous retatrutide on weight and metabolic markers and the occurrence of side effects in patients with overweight, obesity and/or type 2 diabetes (T2D). PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were systematically searched for placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trials (RCTs) published up until February 23, 2024. Weighted mean differences (WMDs) for continuous outcomes and risk ratios (RRs) for binary endpoints were computed, with 95 % confidence intervals (CIs). A total of three studies were included, comprising 640 patients, of whom 510 were prescribed retatrutide. Compared with placebo, retatrutide significantly reduced body weight (WMD -10.66 kg; 95 % CI -17.63, −3.69), body mass index (WMD -4.53 kg/m²; 95 % CI -7.51, −1.55), and waist circumference (WMD -6.61 cm; 95 % CI -13.17, −0.05). In addition, retatrutide significantly increased the proportion of patients who achieved a weight reduction of ≥5 % (RR 2.92; 95 % CI 2.17–3.93), ≥10 % (RR 9.32; 95 % CI 4.56–19.06), ≥15 % (RR 18.40; 95 % CI 6.00–56.42), and ≥20 % (RR 16.61; 95 % CI 4.17–66.12). In this meta-analysis, the use of once-weekly subcutaneous retatrutide was associated with a significant reduction in body weight and improvement of metabolic markers in patients with overweight, obesity and/or T2D, compared with placebo, with an increase in non-severe gastrointestinal and hypersensitivity adverse events. Phase 3 RCTs are expected to shed further light on the efficacy and safety of once-weekly subcutaneous retatrutide over the long term.

Endoscopic third ventriculostomy (ETV) and ventriculoperitoneal shunt (VPS) are surgical methods for treating obstructive hydrocephalus. However, there is still disagreement regarding the most effective technique, in terms of both operative success and postoperative complications. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of these two methods in patients with obstructive hydrocephalus. We performed a systematic search of the PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing ETV and VPS in pediatric or adult patients with obstructive hydrocephalus were included. The outcomes included were operative success, postoperative cerebrospinal fluid leak, postoperative infection, postoperative or intraoperative bleeding, blockage rate, and mortality. The risk ratio (RR) was calculated with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Heterogeneity was evaluated with I ² statistics. We used a fixed-effects model for outcomes with I ² < 25% and DerSimonian and Laird random-effects model for other conditions. The Cochrane collaboration tool for assessing the risk of bias in randomized trials was used for risk-of-bias assessment. R, version 4.2.1, was used for statistical analyses. Of the 2,353 identified studies, 5 RCTs were included, involving 310 patients with obstructive hydrocephalus, of which 163 underwent ETV. There was a significant difference in favor of ETV for postoperative infection (risk ratio [RR]: 0.11; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.04–0.33; p < 0.0001; I ² = 0%) and blockage rate (RR: 0.15; 95% CI: 0.03–0.75; p = 0.02; I ² = 53%). Meanwhile, there was no significant difference between groups for the postoperative or intraoperative bleeding (RR: 0.44; 95% CI: 0.17–1.15; p = 0.09; I ² = 0%), postoperative cerebrospinal fluid leak (RR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.22–1.92; p = 0.44; I ² = 18%), operative success (RR: 1.18; 95% CI: 0.77–1.82; p = 0.44; I ² = 84%), and mortality (RR: 0.19; 95% CI: 0.03–1.09; p = 0.06; I ² = 0%). Three RCTs had some concerns about the risk of bias and one RCT had a high risk of bias due to the process of randomization and selection of reported results. Thus, this meta-analysis of RCTs evaluating ETV compared with VPS demonstrated that although there is no superiority of ETV in terms of operative success, the incidence of complications was significantly higher in patients who underwent VPS. Our results suggest that the use of ETV provides greater benefits for the treatment of obstructive hydrocephalus. However, more RCTs are needed to corroborate the superiority of ETV. All the authors contributed to the design, conduct/data collection, analysis, and writing of the manuscript. Article published online: 13 September 2023 © 2023. Asian Congress of Neurological Surgeons. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd. A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India