BRCA1 promoter methylation and clinical outcomes in ovarian cancer: an individual patient data meta-analysis

BACKGROUND BRCA1 methylation has been associated with homologous recombination deficiency, a biomarker of platinum sensitivity. Studies evaluating BRCA1-methylated tubal/ovarian cancer (OC) do not consistently support improved survival following platinum chemotherapy. We examine the characteristics of BRCA1-methylated OC in a meta-analysis of individual participant data. METHODS 2636 participants' data across 15 studies were analyzed. BRCA1-methylated tumors were defined according to their original study. Associations between BRCA1 methylation and clinico-pathological characteristics were evaluated. The effects of methylation on overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were examined using mixed-effects models. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS 430 (16.3%) tumors were BRCA1-methylated. BRCA1 methylation was associated with younger age and advanced-stage high-grade serous OC. There were no survival differences between BRCA1-methylated and non-BRCA1-methylated OC (median PFS = 20.0 vs 18.5 months, HR = 1.01, 95% CI = 0.87-1.16, P=0.98; median OS = 46.6 vs 48.0 months, HR = 1.02, 95% CI = 0.87-1.18, P=0.96). Where BRCA1/2 mutations were evaluated (n = 1248), BRCA1 methylation displayed no survival advantage over BRCA1/2 intact (BRCA1/2 wild type non-BRCA1-methylated) OC. Studies used different methods to define BRCA1 methylation. Where BRCA1 methylation was determined using methylation-specific PCR and gel electrophoresis (n = 834), it was associated with improved survival (PFS: HR = 0.80, 95% CI = 0.66-0.97, P=0.02; OS: HR = 0.80, 95% CI = 0.63-1.00, P=0.05) on mixed-effects modelling. CONCLUSION BRCA1-methylated OC displays similar clinico-pathological features to BRCA1-mutated OC, but is not associated with survival. Heterogeneity within BRCA1 methylation assays influences associations. Refining these assays may better identify cases with silenced BRCA1 function and improved patient outcomes

DE-PASS Best Evidence Statement (BESt): Modifiable determinants of physical activity and sedentary behaviour in children and adolescents aged 5-19 years-a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction Physical activity among children and adolescents remains insufficient, despite the substantial efforts made by researchers and policymakers. Identifying and furthering our understanding of potential modifiable determinants of physical activity behaviour (PAB) and sedentary behaviour (SB) is crucial for the development of interventions that promote a shift from SB to PAB. The current protocol details the process through which a series of systematic literature reviews and meta-analyses (MAs) will be conducted to produce a best-evidence statement (BESt) and inform policymakers. The overall aim is to identify modifiable determinants that are associated with changes in PAB and SB in children and adolescents (aged 5-19 years) and to quantify their effect on, or association with, PAB/SB. Methods and analysis A search will be performed in MEDLINE, SportDiscus, Web of Science, PsychINFO and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled trials (CTs) that investigate the effect of interventions on PAB/SB and longitudinal studies that investigate the associations between modifiable determinants and PAB/SB at multiple time points will be sought. Risk of bias assessments will be performed using adapted versions of Cochrane's RoB V.2.0 and ROBINS-I tools for RCTs and CTs, respectively, and an adapted version of the National Institute of Health's tool for longitudinal studies. Data will be synthesised narratively and, where possible, MAs will be performed using frequentist and Bayesian statistics. Modifiable determinants will be discussed considering the settings in which they were investigated and the PAB/SB measurement methods used. Ethics and dissemination No ethical approval is needed as no primary data will be collected. The findings will be disseminated in peer-reviewed publications and academic conferences where possible. The BESt will also be shared with policy makers within the DE-PASS consortium in the first instance. Systematic review registration CRD42021282874

Effectiveness of Traditional Strength vs. Power Training on Muscle Strength, Power and Speed with Youth: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Numerous national associations and multiple reviews have documented the safety and efficacy of strength training for children and adolescents. The literature highlights the significant training-induced increases in strength associated with youth strength training. However, the effectiveness of youth strength training programs to improve power measures is not as clear. This discrepancy may be related to training and testing specificity. Most prior youth strength training programs emphasized lower intensity resistance with relatively slow movements. Since power activities typically involve higher intensity, explosive-like contractions with higher angular velocities (e.g., plyometrics), there is a conflict between the training medium and testing measures. This meta-analysis compared strength (e.g., training with resistance or body mass) and power training programs (e.g., plyometric training) on proxies of muscle strength, power, and speed. A systematic literature search using a Boolean Search Strategy was conducted in the electronic databases PubMed, SPORT Discus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar and revealed 652 hits. After perusal of title, abstract, and full text, 107 studies were eligible for inclusion in this systematic review and meta-analysis. The meta-analysis showed small to moderate magnitude changes for training specificity with jump measures. In other words, power training was more effective than strength training for improving youth jump height. For sprint measures, strength training was more effective than power training with youth. Furthermore, strength training exhibited consistently large magnitude changes to lower body strength measures, which contrasted with the generally trivial, small and moderate magnitude training improvements of power training upon lower body strength, sprint and jump measures, respectively. Maturity related inadequacies in eccentric strength and balance might influence the lack of training specificity with the unilateral landings and propulsions associated with sprinting. Based on this meta-analysis, strength training should be incorporated prior to power training in order to establish an adequate foundation of strength for power training activities

Vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2 (VEGFR2) correlates with long-term survival in patients with advanced high-grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC): a study from the Tumor Bank Ovarian Cancer (TOC) Consortium

OBJECTIVE: The impact of angiogenesis on long-term survival of high-grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC) patients remains unclear. This study investigated whether angiogenic markers correlated with 5-year progression-free survival (PFS) in a large cohort of matched advanced HGSOC tissue samples. METHODS: Tumor samples from 124 primary HGSOC patients were retrospectively collected within the Tumor Bank Ovarian Cancer ( http://www.toc-network.de ). All patients were in advanced stages (FIGO stage III-IV). No patient had received anti-angiogenesis therapy. The cohort contains 62 long-term survivors and 62 controls matched by age and post-surgical tumor residuals. Long-term survivors were defined as patients with no relapse within 5 years after the end of first-line chemotherapy. Controls were patients who suffered from first relapse within 6-36 months after primary treatment. Samples were assessed for immunohistochemical expression of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) A and VEGF receptor 2 (VEGFR2). Expression profiles of VEGFA and VEGFR2 were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: Significant correlation between VEGFA and VEGFR2 expression was observed (p < 0.0001, Spearman coefficient 0.347). A high expression of VEGFR2 (VEGFR2high) was found more frequently in long-term survivors (77.4%, 48/62) than in controls (51.6%, 30/62, p = 0.001), independent of FIGO stage and VEGFA expression in multivariate analysis (p = 0.005). Also, VEGFR2high was found the most frequently in women with PFS ≥ 10 years (p = 0.001) among all 124 patients. However, no significant association was detected between VEGFA expression and 5-year PFS (p = 0.075). CONCLUSIONS: VEGFR2 overexpression significantly correlated with long-term PFS in HGSOC patients, independent of age, FIGO stage, tumor residual and VEGFA expression