Auriculotherapy for pain management: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

OBJECTIVES: Side-effects of standard pain medications can limit their use. Therefore, nonpharmacologic pain relief techniques such as auriculotherapy may play an important role in pain management. Our aim was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies evaluating auriculotherapy for pain management. DESIGN: MEDLINE,(®) ISI Web of Science, CINAHL, AMED, and Cochrane Library were searched through December 2008. Randomized trials comparing auriculotherapy to sham, placebo, or standard-of-care control were included that measured outcomes of pain or medication use and were published in English. Two (2) reviewers independently assessed trial eligibility, quality, and abstracted data to a standardized form. Standardized mean differences (SMD) were calculated for studies using a pain score or analgesic requirement as a primary outcome. RESULTS: Seventeen (17) studies met inclusion criteria (8 perioperative, 4 acute, and 5 chronic pain). Auriculotherapy was superior to controls for studies evaluating pain intensity (SMD, 1.56 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.85, 2.26]; 8 studies). For perioperative pain, auriculotherapy reduced analgesic use (SMD, 0.54 [95% CI: 0.30, 0.77]; 5 studies). For acute pain and chronic pain, auriculotherapy reduced pain intensity (SMD for acute pain, 1.35 [95% CI: 0.08, 2.64], 2 studies; SMD for chronic pain, 1.84 [95% CI: 0.60, 3.07], 5 studies). Removal of poor quality studies did not alter the conclusions. Significant heterogeneity existed among studies of acute and chronic pain, but not perioperative pain. CONCLUSIONS: Auriculotherapy may be effective for the treatment of a variety of types of pain, especially postoperative pain. However, a more accurate estimate of the effect will require further large, well-designed trials.

Integrated pathway and epistasis analysis reveals interactive effect of genetic variants at TERF1 and AFAP1L2 loci on melanoma risk.

Genome-wide association studies (GWASs) have characterized 13 loci associated with melanoma, which only account for a small part of melanoma risk. To identify new genes with too small an effect to be detected individually but which collectively influence melanoma risk and/or show interactive effects, we used a two-step analysis strategy including pathway analysis of genome-wide SNP data, in a first step, and epistasis analysis within significant pathways, in a second step. Pathway analysis, using the gene-set enrichment analysis (GSEA) approach and the gene ontology (GO) database, was applied to the outcomes of MELARISK (3,976 subjects) and MDACC (2,827 subjects) GWASs. Cross-gene SNP-SNP interaction analysis within melanoma-associated GOs was performed using the INTERSNP software. Five GO categories were significantly enriched in genes associated with melanoma (false discovery rate ≤ 5% in both studies): response to light stimulus, regulation of mitotic cell cycle, induction of programmed cell death, cytokine activity and oxidative phosphorylation. Epistasis analysis, within each of the five significant GOs, showed significant evidence for interaction for one SNP pair at TERF1 and AFAP1L2 loci (pmeta-int  = 2.0 × 10(-7) , which met both the pathway and overall multiple-testing corrected thresholds that are equal to 9.8 × 10(-7) and 2.0 × 10(-7) , respectively) and suggestive evidence for another pair involving correlated SNPs at the same loci (pmeta-int  = 3.6 × 10(-6) ). This interaction has important biological relevance given the key role of TERF1 in telomere biology and the reported physical interaction between TERF1 and AFAP1L2 proteins. This finding brings a novel piece of evidence for the emerging role of telomere dysfunction into melanoma development.

The effectiveness of low-level laser therapy for nonspecific chronic low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: In recent decades, low-level laser therapy (LLLT) has been widely used to relieve pain caused by different musculoskeletal disorders. Though widely used, its reported therapeutic outcomes are varied and conflicting. Results similarly conflict regarding its usage in patients with nonspecific chronic low back pain (NSCLBP). This study investigated the efficacy of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) for the treatment of NSCLBP by a systematic literature search with meta-analyses on selected studies. METHOD: MEDLINE, EMBASE, ISI Web of Science and Cochrane Library were systematically searched from January 2000 to November 2014. Included studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) written in English that compared LLLT with placebo treatment in NSCLBP patients. The efficacy effect size was estimated by the weighted mean difference (WMD). Standard random-effects meta-analysis was used, and inconsistency was evaluated by the I-squared index (I(2)). RESULTS: Of 221 studies, seven RCTs (one triple-blind, four double-blind, one single-blind, one not mentioning blinding, totaling 394 patients) met the criteria for inclusion. Based on five studies, the WMD in visual analog scale (VAS) pain outcome score after treatment was significantly lower in the LLLT group compared with placebo (WMD = -13.57 [95 % CI = -17.42, -9.72], I(2) = 0 %). No significant treatment effect was identified for disability scores or spinal range of motion outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that LLLT is an effective method for relieving pain in NSCLBP patients. However, there is still a lack of evidence supporting its effect on function.