Multiple Dot-in-Rod PbS/CdS heterostructures with high photoluminescence quantum yield in the near-infrared

Pb cations in PbS quantum rods made from CdS quantum rods by successive complete cationic exchange reactions are partially re-exchanged for Cd cations. Using STEM-HAADF, we show that this leads to the formation of unique multiple dot-in-rod PbS/CdS heteronanostructures, with a photoluminescence quantum yield of 45-55%. We argue that the formation of multiple dot-in-rods is related to the initial polycrystallinity of the PbS quantum rods, where each PbS crystallite transforms in a separate PbS/CdS dot-in-dot. Effective mass modeling indicates that electronic coupling between the different PbS conduction band states is feasible for the multiple dot-in-rod geometries obtained, while the hole states remain largely uncoupled

Role of Artificial Intelligence in Colonoscopy Detection of Advanced Neoplasias. A Randomized Trial.

Background: The role of computer-aided detection in identifying advanced colorectal neoplasia is unknown. Objective: To evaluate the contribution of computer-aided detection to colonoscopic detection of advanced colorectal neoplasias as well as adenomas, serrated polyps, and nonpolypoid and right-sided lesions. Design: Multicenter, parallel, randomized controlled trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04673136) Setting: Spanish colorectal cancer screening program. Participants: 3213 persons with a positive fecal immunochemical test. Intervention: Enrollees were randomly assigned to colonoscopy with or without computer-aided detection. Measurements: Advanced colorectal neoplasia was defined as advanced adenoma and/or advanced serrated polyp. Results: The 2 comparison groups showed no significant difference in advanced colorectal neoplasia detection rate (34.8% with intervention vs. 34.6% for controls; adjusted risk ratio [aRR], 1.01 [95% CI, 0.92 to 1.10]) or the mean number of advanced colorectal neoplasias detected per colonoscopy (0.54 [SD, 0.95] with intervention vs. 0.52 [SD, 0.95] for controls; adjusted rate ratio, 1.04 [99.9% CI, 0.88 to 1.22]). Adenoma detection rate also did not differ (64.2% with intervention vs. 62.0% for controls; aRR, 1.06 [99.9% CI, 0.91 to 1.23]). Computer-aided detection increased the mean number of nonpolypoid lesions (0.56 [SD, 1.25] vs. 0.47 [SD, 1.18] for controls; adjusted rate ratio, 1.19 [99.9% CI, 1.01 to 1.41]), proximal adenomas (0.94 [SD, 1.62] vs. 0.81 [SD, 1.52] for controls; adjusted rate ratio, 1.17 [99.9% CI, 1.03 to 1.33]), and lesions of 5 mm or smaller (polyps in general and adenomas and serrated lesions in particular) detected per colonoscopy. Limitations: The high adenoma detection rate in the control group may limit the generalizability of the findings to endoscopists with low detection rates. Conclusion: Computer-aided detection did not improve colonoscopic identification of advanced colorectal neoplasias. Primary Funding Source: Medtronic

High-risk symptoms and quantitative faecal immunochemical test accuracy: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND The quantitative faecal immunochemical test for haemoglobin (FIT) has been revealed to be highly accurate for colorectal cancer (CRC) detection not only in a screening setting, but also in the assessment of patients presenting lower bowel symptoms. Therefore, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence has recommended the adoption of FIT in primary care to guide referral for suspected CRC in low-risk symptomatic patients using a 10 µg Hb/g faeces threshold. Nevertheless, it is unknown whether FIT´s accuracy remains stable throughout the broad spectrum of possible symptoms. AIM To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess FIT accuracy for CRC detection in different clinical settings. METHODS A systematic literature search was performed using MEDLINE and EMBASE databases from inception to May 2018 to conduct a meta-analysis of prospective studies including symptomatic patients that evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of quantitative FIT for CRC detection. Studies were classified on the basis of brand, threshold of faecal haemoglobin concentration for a positive test result, percentage of reported symptoms (solely symptomatic, mixed cohorts) and CRC prevalence (< 2.5%, ≥ 2.5%) to limit heterogeneity and perform subgroup analysis to assess the influence of clinical spectrum on FIT´s accuracy to detect CRC. RESULTS Fifteen cohorts including 13073 patients (CRC prevalence 0.4% to 16.8%) were identified. Pooled estimates of sensitivity for studies using OC-Sensor at 10 µg Hb/g faeces threshold (n = 10400) was 89.6% [95% confidence interval (CI): 82.7% to 94.0%). However, pooled estimates of sensitivity for studies formed solely by symptomatic patients (n = 4035) and mixed cohorts (n = 6365) were 94.1% (95%CI: 90.0% to 96.6%) and 85.5% (95%CI: 76.5% to 91.4%) respectively (P < 0.01), while there were no statistically significant differences between pooled sensitivity of studies with CRC prevalence < 2.5% (84.9%, 95%CI: 73.4% to 92.0%) and ≥ 2.5% (91.7%, 95%CI: 83.3% to 96.1%) (P = 0.25). At the same threshold, OC-Sensor® sensitivity to rule out any significant colonic lesion was 78.6% (95%CI: 75.6% to 81.4%). We found substantial heterogeneity especially when assessing specificity. CONCLUSION The results of this meta-analysis confirm that, regardless of CRC prevalence, quantitative FIT is highly sensitive for CRC detection. However, FIT ability to rule out CRC is higher in studies solely including symptomatic patient

Effect of the Nutraceutical Micodigest 2.0 on the Complication Rate of Colorectal Cancer Surgery With Curative Intent: Protocol for a Placebo-Controlled Double-blind Randomized Clinical Trial

BackgroundMost colorectal cancer patients diagnosed are candidates for surgical resection with curative intent, although colorectal surgery is associated with some complications that could be life-threatening. Antibiotic prophylaxis is commonly used for the prevention of infectious postoperative complications. However, this intervention can change the composition of intestinal microbiota and promote adverse inflammatory outcomes in colorectal cancer patients. The combination of different fungal extracts could be beneficial because of their role in gut microbiota modulation and their anti-inflammatory activity. ObjectiveBased on this hypothesis, we have designed a double-bind, randomized clinical trial to evaluate the effect of the nutraceutical fungal extract Micodigest 2.0 on complications of surgery for colorectal cancer resection. MethodsColorectal cancer candidates for surgery will be considered for inclusion in the study. After evaluation by the multidisciplinary tumor board, patients who meet selection criteria will be screened, stratified according to tumor location, and randomly allocated to be treated with Micodigest 2.0 or placebo. Treatment will be continued until admission for surgery (4-6 weeks). Participants will undergo a medical and clinical evaluation including baseline and preadmission quality of life, microbiome composition, inflammatory and nutritional status, adverse events, and adherence assessments. The main end point of the study is the surgery complication rate. We will evaluate complications using the Clavien-Dindo classification. It will be necessary to recruit 144 patients to find a relevant clinical difference. We will also evaluate the effect of the nutraceutical on microbiome composition, inflammatory response, nutritional status, and quality of life, as well as the effect of these variables on surgical complications. ResultsThis study was funded in 2020 by the Center for Industrial Technology Development. Recruitment began in September 2021 and is expected to be completed in September 2022. Data will be analyzed and the results will be disseminated in 2023. ConclusionsThe results of this protocol study could help to reduce surgery complications in patients with colorectal cancer using the new treatment Micodigest. This study could also identify new features associated with colorectal surgery complications. In summary, this study trial could improve the management of colorectal cancer patients. Trial RegistrationClinical Trials.gov NCT04821258; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04821258 International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)DERR1-10.2196/3429