Objective: Neutrophil extracellular traps (NETs) are associated with impaired wound healing in diabetes. This study evaluates the association between NET-specific markers and wound healing among diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) patients treated in a multidisciplinary setting. Approach: Clinical data of diabetic patients with active foot ulcers who presented to our team between January 1, 2016 and June 30, 2017 were recorded. The diabetic ulcer severity score (DUSS) and wound, ischemia, and foot infection (WIfI) score were calculated. NET-specific markers in plasma and wound tissues were tested. The capacity for plasma and platelets to prime neutrophils to release NETs was assessed. The prognostic value of NET-specific markers for wound healing was evaluated. Results: NET-specific markers were significantly higher in DFU patients than in diabetic patients without DFU or healthy controls and were found to correlate positively with DUSS or WIfI score. Elastase levels in ulcer tissue significantly increased in wounds with infections and delayed healing. Higher levels of NET release were observed after the stimulation of plasma or platelets from ulcer-related vessels than from nonulcer-related vessels of the DFU patients. Citrullinated histone 3 (citH3) was identified as a risk factor for wound healing impairment and amputation. The patients with the highest quartile of citH3 levels presented significantly lower healing rates and higher amputation rates than those with the lower three quartiles. Innovation: This study extended current knowledge of NETs on wound healing in DFU patients. Conclusion: NET-specific markers negatively correlated with wound healing in DFU patients, and citH3 is a potential marker.

With the increased use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in advanced lung cancer, adverse events (AEs), particularly immune-related AEs (irAEs), have garnered considerable interest. We conducted a comprehensive assessment of the toxicity profile in advanced lung cancer using multi-source medical data. First, we systematically searched the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases (from inception to 10 August 2021) for relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) involving ICI-based treatments for advanced lung cancer. The primary outcomes were treatment-related AEs and irAEs, including events that were assigned grade 1–5 and 3–5. The secondary outcomes were grade 5 AEs and irAEs (grade 1–5 and grade 3–5) in specific organs. Network comparisons were conducted for 11 treatments, including chemotherapy (CT), ICI monotherapy (three regimens: programmed death-1 receptor [PD-1] inhibitors, programmed death ligand-1 [PD-L1] inhibitors, and cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen [CTLA-4] inhibitors), dual-ICI combination therapy (two regimens), and treatment using one or two ICI drugs administered in combination with CT (five regimens). We also conducted a disproportionality analysis by extracting reports of various irAEs associated with ICIs from the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database. The reporting odds ratios and fatality proportions of different irAEs were calculated and compared. PROSPERO: CRD42021268650. Overall, 41 RCTs involving 23,121 patients with advanced lung cancer were included. Treatments containing chemotherapy increased the risk of treatment-related AEs compared to ICI-based regimens without chemotherapy. Concerning irAEs, PD-L1 + CTLA-4 + CT was associated with the highest risk of grade 1–5 irAEs, followed by two regimens of dual ICI combination, three regimens of ICI monotherapy, and three regimens of one ICI combined with CT. For 3–5 irAEs, CTLA-4 accounted for most AEs. Detailed comparisons of ICI-based treatment options provided irAE profiles based on specific organs/systems and AE severity. Insights from the FAERS database revealed that signals corresponding to pneumonitis, colitis, thyroiditis, and hypophysitis were observed across all ICI regimens. Further analyses of the outcomes indicated that myocarditis (163 of 367, 44.4%), pneumonitis (1610 of 4497, 35.8%), and hepatitis (290 of 931, 31.1%) had high fatality rates. Included RCTs showed heterogeneity in a few clinical factors, and reports derived from the FAERS database might have involved inaccurate data. Our results can be used as a basis for improving clinical treatment strategies and designing preventive methods for ICI treatment in advanced lung cancer. This study was supported by the Research Project of Drug Clinical Comprehensive Evaluation and Drug Treatment Pathway (SHYXH-ZP-2021-001, SHYXH-ZP-2021-006), Clinical Research Innovation and Cultivation Fund of Ren Ji Hospital (RJPY-LX-008), Ren Ji Boost Project of National Natural Science Foundation of China (RJTJ–JX–001), and Shanghai “Rising Stars of Medical Talent” Youth Development Program – Youth Medical Talents – Clinical Pharmacist Program (SHWJRS (2019) 072).

Background: The use of direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) off-label doses in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients may result in poor clinical outcomes. However, the true prevalence remains scarce. This study aims at estimating the prevalence of DOAC off-label doses in AF patients.Methods: Databases of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and COCHRANE were searched from inception through February 2020 for real-world studies that reported the off-label definition and prevalence data of AF patients using DOACs. The primacy outcomes were the overall prevalence of DOAC off-label doses and the corresponding underdose and overdose. The random-effects model was used for data synthesis. Variations on individual DOAC and different regions were examined by subgroup analyses.Results: A total of 23 studies involving 162,474 AF patients were finally included. The overall prevalence of DOAC off-label doses was 24% (95% CI, 19–28%), with 18% for dabigatran, 27% for rivaroxaban, 24% for apixaban, and 26% for edoxaban. The prevalence of underdosed DOACs was 20% (95% CI, 16–24%) with significant difference among individual anticoagulants (13% for dabigatran, 22% for rivaroxaban, 22% for apixaban, and 18% for edoxaban; P_interaction=0.02). The prevalence of overdosed DOACs was 5% (95% CI, 3–7%), with the lowest prevalence observed in apixaban (2%). Subgroup analyses by regions demonstrated that the prevalence of DOAC off-label doses was higher in Asia (32%) than in North America (14%) and in Europe (22%), with underdose being predominant. Regardless of different regions, the prevalence of overdose was relatively low (4–6%).Conclusion: This study provides an estimation of DOAC off-label doses in the real-world setting. The prevalence rate of DOAC off-label doses in AF patients was relatively high, with underdose being predominant. Clinicians in Asia preferred to prescribe underdose of DOACs to AF patients. More evidence about the appropriateness of DOAC off-label doses in AF patients is urgently needed. Education programs concerning the appropriate prescription of DOACs within the drug labels and accepted guidelines are necessary to DOAC prescribers to ensure the safety and effectiveness of anticoagulation therapy for patients with AF.

Background: Emerging evidence shows that coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is commonly complicated by coagulopathy, and venous thromboembolism (VTE) is considered to be a potential cause of unexplained death. Information on the incidence of VTE in COVID-19 patients, however, remains unclear. Method: English-language databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane), Chinese-language databases (CNKI, VIP, WANFANG), and preprint platforms were searched to identify studies with data of VTE occurrence in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Pooled incidence and relative risks (RRs) of VTE were estimated by a random-effects model. Variations were examined based on clinical manifestations of VTE (pulmonary embolism-PE and deep vein thrombosis-DVT), disease severity (severe patients and non-severe patients), and rate of pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis (≥60 and <60%). Sensitivity analyses were conducted to strengthen the robustness of results. Meta-regression was performed to explore the risk factors associated with VTE in COVID-19 patients. Results: A total of 17 studies involving 1,913 hospitalized COVID-19 patients were included. The pooled incidence of VTE was 25% (95% CI, 19–31%; I², 95.7%), with a significant difference between the incidence of PE (19%; 95% CI, 13–25%; I², 93.2%) and DVT (7%; 95% CI, 4–10%; I², 88.3%; P_interaction < 0.001). Higher incidence was observed in severe COVID-19 patients (35%; 95 CI%, 25–44%; I², 92.4%) than that in non-severe patients (6%; 95 CI%, 3–10%; I², 62.2%; P_interaction < 0.001). The high rate of pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis in COVID-19 patients (≥60%) was associated with a lower incidence of VTE compared with the low pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis rate (<60%) (19 vs. 40%; P_interaction = 0.052). Severe patients had a 3.76-fold increased risk of VTE compared with non-severe patients (RR, 4.76; 95% CI, 2.66–8.50; I², 47.0%). Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the primacy results. Conclusions: This meta-analysis revealed that the estimated VTE incidence was 25% in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Higher incidence of VTE was observed in COVID-19 patients with a severe condition or with a low rate of pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis. Assessment of VTE risk is strongly recommended in COVID-19 patients, and effective measures of thromboprophylaxis should be taken in a timely manner for patients with high risk of VTE.