Background Cytokine release syndrome (CRS) has been reported after immunologic manipulations, most often through therapeutic monoclonal antibodies. To our knowledge, CRS after radiation therapy (RT) for cancer has not been reported before. The development of unusual clinical signs and symptoms after RT led us to investigate the possibility of CRS after RT and review the medical literature on this topic. Case presentation A 65 year-old man with untreated chronic lymphocytic leukemia and recurrent, metastatic Merkel cell carcinoma undergoing anti-programmed death 1 (PD1) immunotherapy was referred for palliative RT to sites of progressing metastases. Within hours of each weekly dose of RT, he experienced fever, tachycardia, hypotension, rash, dyspnea, and rigors. Based on clinical suspicion for CRS, blood cytokine measurements were performed 1 h after the second and third dose of RT and demonstrated tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) and interleukin-6 (IL-6) levels approximately ten-fold higher than normal. These were near normal immediately prior to the third dose of RT, and resolved to normal levels 3 weeks after RT. He experienced rapid regression of irradiated tumors, with development of new sites of metastases soon thereafter. A literature review revealed no clinical cases of CRS after RT for cancer. Conclusions RT during anti-PD1 immunotherapy in a patient with underlying immune dysfunction appeared to be the putative mediator of an immune process which yielded significant increases in pro-inflammatory cytokines, and produced the clinical symptoms meeting the definition of grade 3 CRS. This case demonstrates the capability of RT to elicit immune-related adverse events.

Objective Evaluate the quality of exercise randomised controlled trial (RCT) reporting and conduct in clinical populations (ie, adults with or at risk of chronic conditions) and compare with matched pharmacological RCTs. Design Systematic review. Data sources Embase (Elsevier), PubMed (NLM) and CINAHL (EBSCO). Study selection RCTs of exercise in clinical populations with matching pharmacological RCTs published in leading clinical, medical and specialist journals with impact factors ≥15. Review methods Overall RCT quality was evaluated by two independent reviewers using three research reporting guidelines (ie, Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT; pharmacological RCTs)/CONSORT for non-pharmacological treatments; exercise RCTs), CONSORT-Harms, Template for Intervention Description and Replication) and two risk of bias assessment (research conduct) tools (ie, Cochrane Risk of Bias, Jadad Scale). We compared research reporting and conduct quality within exercise RCTs with matched pharmacological RCTs, and examined factors associated with quality in exercise and pharmacological RCTs, separately. Findings Forty-eight exercise RCTs (11 658 patients; median sample n=138) and 48 matched pharmacological RCTs were evaluated (18 501 patients; median sample n=160). RCTs were conducted primarily in cardiovascular medicine (43%) or oncology (31%). Overall quality score (composite of all research reporting and conduct quality scores; primary endpoint) for exercise RCTs was 58% (median score 46 of 80; IQR: 39–51) compared with 77% (53 of 68; IQR: 47–58) in the matched pharmacological RCTs (p≤0.001). Individual quality scores for trial reporting and conduct were lower in exercise RCTs compared with matched pharmacological RCTs (p≤0.03). Factors associated with higher overall quality scores for exercise RCTs were journal impact factor (≥25), sample size (≥152) and publication year (≥2013). Conclusions and relevance Research reporting and conduct quality within exercise RCTs is inferior to matched pharmacological RCTs. Suboptimal RCT reporting and conduct impact the fidelity, interpretation, and reproducibility of exercise trials and, ultimately, implementation of exercise in clinical populations. PROSPERO registration number CRD42018095033.

Objective: Akathisia is a neuropsychiatric syndrome characterized by subjective and objective restlessness. It is a common side effect in patients taking antipsychotics and other psychotropics. Patients with delirium are frequently treated with antipsychotic medications that are well known to induce akathisia as a side effect. However, the prevalence, phenomenology, and management of akathisia in patients with delirium remain largely unknown. The purpose of this review was to examine the medical literature in order to establish the current state of knowledge regarding the prevalence of antipsychotic-induced akathisia in patients with delirium.Method: A systematic review of the literature was conducted using the EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and CINAHL databases. Ten studies addressing the incidence of akathisia in patients taking antipsychotic medication for delirium were identified and included in our review.Results: The included studies reported a variable prevalence of antipsychotic-induced akathisia. A higher prevalence was found in patients taking haloperidol. Among atypical antipsychotics, paliperidone and ziprasidone were associated with a higher risk of akathisia. The risk for akathisia appeared to be a dose-related phenomenon.Significance of results: Studies using specific scales for evaluation of akathisia in delirium are lacking. Some populations, such as patients with cancer or terminally ill patients in palliative care settings taking antipsychotics for the treatment of delirium, could be at higher risk for development of akathisia as a side effect.

Background/Objectives: Prostate cancer (PCa) is the second most common malignancy among men worldwide and a leading cause of cancer-related mortality. In 2022, over 1.4 million new cases were reported globally, with a prevalence exceeding 5 million. Despite its widespread occurrence, the incidence and mortality of PCa show substantial geographic variation, influenced by factors such as genetic predisposition, healthcare access, lifestyle, and the adoption of screening programs. Regions with high PCa incidence, such as Northern America and Oceania, often have lower mortality rates due to early detection and advanced healthcare infrastructure. Conversely, areas with limited access to medical resources, such as parts of Africa and Latin America, experience higher mortality rates. Methods: This review explores non-modifiable risk factors such as age, family history, and race, emphasizing their role in PCa development and progression. Results: Modifiable factors, including diet, physical activity, alcohol consumption, and smoking, are also addressed, with evidence suggesting their potential in mitigating risk. Emerging data on medications such as 5-alpha reductase inhibitors and statins, as well as dietary supplements such as vitamins D, indicate their potential for chemoprevention, though further research is needed to solidify these findings. Healthcare disparities, especially in low- and middle-income regions, highlight the need for equitable access to diagnostic tools and treatment options. The review underscores the significance of tailored screening approaches, particularly in high-risk populations, to optimize outcomes while minimizing overdiagnosis and overtreatment. Conclusions: The review concludes with recommendations for future research, including the need for standardized screening protocols and the exploration of novel biomarkers for early detection. By synthesizing epidemiological data and current evidence, this review aims to enhance understanding of PCa risk factors, geographic disparities, and preventive strategies, ultimately contributing to improved global PCa management and outcomes.