Zobrazení zdroje stránky Mayshernandez9087

Radiation therapy is one of the main cancer treatment modalities applied in 50-70% of cancer patients. Despite the many advantages of this treatment, such as non-invasiveness, organ-preservation, and spatiotemporal flexibility in tumor targeting, it can lead to complications in irradiated healthy cells/tissues. In this regard, the use of radio-protective agents can alleviate radiation-induced complications. This study aimed to review the potential role of alpha-lipoic acid in the prevention/reduction of radiation-induced toxicities on healthy cells/tissues.<br /><br /> A systematic search was performed following PRISMA guidelines to identify relevant literature on the "role of alpha-lipoic acid in the treatment of radiotherapy-induced toxicity" in the electronic databases of Web of Science, Embase, PubMed, and Scopus up to January 2021. Based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the present study, 278 articles were screened. Finally, 29 articles were included in this systematic review.<br /><br /> The obtained results showed that in experimental in vivo models, the radiation-treated groups had decreased survival rate and body weight compared to the control groups. It was also found that radiation can induce mild to severe toxicities on gastrointestinal, circulatory, reproductive, central nervous, respiratory, endocrine, exocrine systems, etc. However, the use of alpha-lipoic acid could alleviate the radiation-induced toxicities in most cases. This radio-protective agent exerts its effects through mechanisms of anti-oxidant, anti-apoptosis, anti-inflammatory, and so on.<br /><br /> According to the obtained results, it can be mentioned that co-treatment of alpha-lipoic acid with radiotherapy ameliorates the radiation-induced toxicities in healthy cells/tissues.<br /><br />According to the obtained results, it can be mentioned that co-treatment of alpha-lipoic acid with radiotherapy ameliorates the radiation-induced toxicities in healthy cells/tissues.There is significant association between obesity and depression. Naltrexone/Bupropion (NB) is indicated for treatment of overweight and obesity (BMI ≥27 kg/m2 with a comorbidity or ≥30 kg/m2). [https://www.selleckchem.com/products/combretastatin-a4.html CombretastatinA4] This post-hoc analysis examines safety and efficacy of NB and placebo among individuals with overweight or obesity who were also taking antidepressant therapy during the LIGHT trial (N=8910). Subjects were divided into four subgroups NB + antidepressants (n=1150), NB without antidepressants (n=3300), placebo + antidepressants (n=1127) and placebo without antidepressants (n=3317). Among subjects taking NB, the combined incidence of serious adverse events (AEs) and AEs leading to treatment discontinuation was not significantly different between those on antidepressants and those who were not. The key weight-loss efficacy analyses were performed on NB or placebo-treated subjects who remained on study therapy through 104 weeks and who did or did not have documented antidepressant use at each of the baseline, week 52 and week 104 visits (Completers N=1811; 47.0% female, 86.9% white, mean age of 61 years, mean baseline BMI 37.4 kg/m2). The mean adjusted weight change in subjects taking antidepressants was numerically, but not significantly greater for NB vs. placebo (-6.3% vs. -4.3%). For those subjects not on antidepressants, weight loss was significantly greater for NB vs. PL (-6.8% vs. -3.6%). NB is generally well tolerated in patients with overweight or obesity who are on antidepressants and is effective in promoting weight loss regardless of antidepressant use. These results show that for patients on antidepressant therapy, NB may be an effective option for obesity management.<br /><br /> To compare physicians' ability to read Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score (ASPECTS) in patients with a large vessel occlusion within 6 hours of symptom onset when assisted by a machine learning-based automatic software tool, compared with their unassisted score.<br /><br /> 50 baseline CT scans selected from two prior studies (CRISP and GAMES-RP) were read by 3 experienced neuroradiologists who were provided access to a follow-up MRI. The average ASPECT score of these reads was used as the reference standard. Two additional neuroradiologists and 6 non-neuroradiologist readers then read the scans both with and without assistance from the software reader-augmentation program and reader improvement was determined. The primary hypothesis was that the agreement between typical readers and the consensus of 3 expert neuroradiologists would be improved with software augmented vs. unassisted reads. Agreement was based on the percentage of the individual ASPECT regions (50 cases, 10 regions each; N=500) where agreement was achieved.<br /><br /> Typical non-neuroradiologist readers agreed with the expert consensus read in 72% of the 500 ASPECTS regions, evaluated without software assistance. The automated software alone agreed in 77%. When the typical readers read the scan in conjunction with the software, agreement improved to 78% (P&lt;0.0001, test of proportions). The software program alone achieved correlations for total ASPECT scores that were similar to the expert readers who had access to the follow-up MRI scan to help enhance the quality of their reads.<br /><br /> Typical readers had statistically significant improvement in their scoring of scans when the scan was read in conjunction with the automated software, achieving agreement rates that were comparable to neuroradiologists.<br /><br />Typical readers had statistically significant improvement in their scoring of scans when the scan was read in conjunction with the automated software, achieving agreement rates that were comparable to neuroradiologists.<br /><br /> To compare image quality, radiation, and contrast medium (CM) doses between individualized and conventional scan protocols in combined coronary CT angiography (CCTA) and iliac artery CTA for kidney transplantation patients.<br /><br /> 148 patients needing assessment for coronary and iliac arteries before kidney transplantation were prospectively enrolled and randomly divided into the conventional and individualized groups. All patients underwent one-stop combined scans on a 256-row CT scanner with automatic tube current modulation, 50 % pre-ASIR-V to control radiation dose. CCTA was performed first using one heartbeat axial scan mode with bolus tracking technique and iliac CTA was performed 3 s after CCTA using a spiral scan. The conventional group (n = 72) used the standard protocol 100 kVp, 60 mL of 350 mgI/mL CM at 4.5 mL/s flow rate. The individualized group (n = 76) used a body-mass-index (BMI)-dependent protocol kVp 80 (BMI &lt; 24) and 100 (BMI ≥ 24) and CM 19 mgI/kg (BMI &lt; 18); 21 mgI/kg (18 ≤ BMI &lt; 24); and 22 mgI/kg (BMI ≥ 24).