An overview of therapeutic potentials of Taraxacum officinale (dandelion): a traditionally valuable herb with a reach historical background

Taraxacum officinale or dandelion (Asteraceae or Compositae family), is an edible plant spread worldwide. It has been believed that dandelion originated in Greece, or perhaps the Northern Himalayas, and spread across temperate areas to Europe and Asia Minor. Dandelion is widely used worldwide in food products. It is traditionally proposed as a dietary supplement and herbal remedy for the prevention, management, and treatment of various human diseases. This review intended to investigate the pharmacological and therapeutic features of dandelion in traditional medicine and scientific documents. Results from several studies indicated that this plant owned numerous biological potencies, including anti-inflammatory, anti-tumor, immunostimulatory, anti-microbial, anti-viral, anti-oxidant, anti-diabetic, geno-protective, diuretic and kidney-protective, hepato-protective, neuro-protective, anti-depressant, lung-protective, pancreas-protective, and differentiation-inducing actions as well as exerting a positive influence on dyslipidemia, hematological profile, stomach motility, fatigue, and bifidobacteria. Nevertheless, the exact mechanism of action for these features is not fully understood. All the studies done on dandelion involved experimental animal studies as well as some human studies and cell cultures, and no clinical data are available for the claimed benefits in the prevention and treatment/management of diseases. Available published data about animal and human studies, both in vitro and in vivo showed great potentials for the use of dandelion as therapy in most diseases. For such a ubiquitous herb, well-designed human studies are surprisingly rare. Due to the lack of toxicity and side effects, this plant has been considered as a worthwhile complementary drug. Further clinical trials are required to validate the reported promising experimental effects in clinical use. Here we reviewed the studies that validated the efficacy of dandelion claimed by traditional healers

Analysis of risk factors for recurrence in cervical cancer patients after fertility-sparing treatment: The FERTIlity Sparing Surgery retrospective multicenter study

Background: Fertility-sparing treatment in patients with cervical cancer should, in principle, follow identical algorithms to that in patients without future reproductive plans. In recent years, a trend toward nonradical procedures, such as conization or simple trachelectomy, has become apparent in medical literature, because of their associations with better pregnancy outcomes. However, the published reports included small numbers of patients and heterogenous treatment strategies to ascertain the safety of such approaches. Objective: This study aimed to collect multi-institutional data regarding the oncological outcomes after fertility-sparing treatment in patients with cervical cancer and to identify prognostic risk factors, including the influence of the radicality of individual cervical procedures. Study design: Patients aged 18 to 40 years with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics 2018 stage IA1 with positive lymphovascular space invasion or ≥IA2 cervical cancer who underwent any type of fertility-sparing procedure were eligible for this retrospective observational study, regardless of their histotype, tumor grade, and history of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Associations between disease- and treatment-related characteristics with the risk of recurrence were analyzed. Results: A total of 733 patients from 44 institutions across 13 countries were included in this study. Almost half of the patients had stage IB1 cervical cancer (49%), and two-thirds of patients were nulliparous (66%). After a median follow-up of 72 months, 51 patients (7%) experienced recurrence, of whom 19 (2.6%) died because of the disease. The most common sites of recurrence were the cervix (53%) and pelvic nodes (22%). The risk of recurrence was 3 times higher in patients with tumors >2 cm in size than in patients with smaller tumors, irrespective of the treatment radicality (19.4% vs 5.7%; hazard ratio, 2.982; 95% confidence interval, 1.383-6.431; P=.005). The recurrence risk in patients with tumors ≤2 cm in size did not differ between patients who underwent radical trachelectomy and patients who underwent nonradical (conization and simple trachelectomy) cervical procedures (P=.957), regardless of tumor size subcategory (<1 or 1-2 cm) or lymphovascular space invasion. Conclusion: Nonradical fertility-sparing cervical procedures were not associated with an increased risk of recurrence compared with radical procedures in patients with tumors ≤2 cm in size in this large, multicenter retrospective study. The risk of recurrence after any type of fertility-sparing procedure was significantly greater in patients with tumors >2 cm in size. Keywords: cervical cancer; conization; fertility-sparing treatment; recurrence; trachelectomy