Meta-analysis of studies analyzing the role of human papillomavirus in the development of bladder carcinoma

PURPOSE We aimed to ascertain the degree of association between bladder cancer and human papillomavirus (HPV) infection. MATERIALS AND METHODS We performed a meta-analysis of observational studies with cases and controls with publication dates up to January 2011. The PubMed electronic database was searched by using the key words "bladder cancer and virus." Twenty-one articles were selected that met the required methodological criteria. We implemented an internal quality control system to verify the selected search method. We analyzed the pooled effect of all the studies and also analyzed the techniques used as follows: 1) studies with DNA-based techniques, among which we found studies with polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based techniques and 2) studies with non-PCR-based techniques, and studies with non-DNA-based techniques. RESULTS Taking into account the 21 studies that were included in the meta-analysis, we obtained a heterogeneity chi-squared value of Q(exp)=26.45 (p=0.383). The pooled odds ratio (OR) was 2.13 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.54 to 2.95), which points to a significant effect between HPV and bladder cancer. Twenty studies assessed the presence of DNA. The overall effect showed a significant relationship between virus presence and bladder cancer, with a pooled OR of 2.19 (95% CI, 1.40 to 3.43). Of the other six studies, four examined the virus's capsid antigen and two detected antibodies in serum by Western blot. The estimated pooled OR in this group was 2.11 (95% CI, 1.27 to 3.51), which confirmed the relationship between the presence of virus and cancer. CONCLUSIONS The pooled OR value showed a moderate relationship between viral infection and bladder tumors.

Why Public Health Agencies Cannot Depend on Good Laboratory Practices as a Criterion for Selecting Data: The Case of Bisphenol A

In their safety evaluations of bisphenol A (BPA), the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and a counterpart in Europe, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), have given special prominence to two industry-funded studies that adhered to standards defined by Good Laboratory Practices (GLP). These same agencies have given much less weight in risk assessments to a large number of independently replicated non-GLP studies conducted with government funding by the leading experts in various fields of science from around the world. OBJECTIVES: We reviewed differences between industry-funded GLP studies of BPA conducted by commercial laboratories for regulatory purposes and non-GLP studies conducted in academic and government laboratories to identify hazards and molecular mechanisms mediating adverse effects. We examined the methods and results in the GLP studies that were pivotal in the draft decision of the U.S. FDA declaring BPA safe in relation to findings from studies that were competitive for U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding, peer-reviewed for publication in leading journals, subject to independent replication, but rejected by the U.S. FDA for regulatory purposes. DISCUSSION: Although the U.S. FDA and EFSA have deemed two industry-funded GLP studies of BPA to be superior to hundreds of studies funded by the U.S. NIH and NIH counterparts in other countries, the GLP studies on which the agencies based their decisions have serious conceptual and methodologic flaws. In addition, the U.S. FDA and EFSA have mistakenly assumed that GLP yields valid and reliable scientific findings (i.e., "good science"). Their rationale for favoring GLP studies over hundreds of publically funded studies ignores the central factor in determining the reliability and validity of scientific findings, namely, independent replication, and use of the most appropriate and sensitive state-of-the-art assays, neither of which is an expectation of industry-funded GLP research. CONCLUSIONS: Public health decisions should be based on studies using appropriate protocols with appropriate controls and the most sensitive assays, not GLP. Relevant NIH-funded research using state-of-the-art techniques should play a prominent role in safety evaluations of chemicals.

Effectiveness of olive oil for the prevention of pressure ulcers caused in immobilized patients within the scope of primary health care: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND Pressure ulcers are considered an important issue, mainly affecting immobilized older patients. These pressure ulcers increase the care burden for the professional health service staff as well as pharmaceutical expenditure. There are a number of studies on the effectiveness of different products used for the prevention of pressure ulcers; however, most of these studies were carried out at a hospital level, basically using hyperoxygenated fatty acids (HOFA). There are no studies focused specifically on the use of olive-oil-based products and therefore this research is intended to find the most cost-effective treatment and achieve an alternative treatment. METHODS/DESIGN The main objective is to assess the effectiveness of olive oil, comparing it with HOFA, to treat immobilized patients at home who are at risk of pressure ulcers. As a secondary objective, the cost-effectiveness balance of this new application with regard to the HOFA will be assessed. The study is designed as a noninferiority, triple-blinded, parallel, multi-center, randomized clinical trial. The scope of the study is the population attending primary health centers in Andalucía (Spain) in the regional areas of Malaga, Granada, Seville, and Cadiz. Immobilized patients at risk of pressure ulcers will be targeted. The target group will be treated by application of an olive-oil-based formula whereas the control group will be treated by application of HOFA to the control group. The follow-up period will be 16 weeks. The main variable will be the presence of pressure ulcers in the patient. Secondary variables include sociodemographic and clinical information, caregiver information, and whether technical support exists. Statistical analysis will include the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, symmetry and kurtosis analysis, bivariate analysis using the Student's t and chi-squared tests as well as the Wilcoxon and the Man-Whitney U tests, ANOVA and multivariate logistic regression analysis. DISCUSSION The regular use of olive-oil-based formulas should be effective in preventing pressure ulcers in immobilized patients, thus leading to a more cost-effective product and an alternative treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01595347.