Sexual dysfunction is highly prevalent in the general population and associated with psychological distress and impaired sexual satisfaction. Psychological interventions are promising treatment options, as sexual dysfunction is frequently caused by and deteriorates because of psychological factors. However, research into the efficacy of psychological interventions is rather scarce and an up-to-date review of outcome studies is currently lacking. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of all available studies from 1980 to 2009 to examine the efficacy of psychological interventions for patients with sexual dysfunction. A total of 20 randomized controlled studies comparing a psychological intervention with a wait-list were included in the meta-analysis. The overall post-treatment effect size for symptom severity was d = 0.58 (95% CI: 0.40 to 0.77) and for sexual satisfaction d = 0.47 (95% CI: 0.27 to 0.70). Psychological interventions were shown to especially improve symptom severity for women with Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder and orgasmic disorder. Our systematic review of 14 studies comparing at least two active interventions head-to-head revealed that very few comparative studies are available with large variability in effect sizes across studies (d between -0.69 and 2.29 for symptom severity and -0.56 and 14.02 for sexual satisfaction). In conclusion, psychological interventions are effective treatment options for sexual dysfunction. However, evidence varies considerably across single disorders. Good evidence exists to date for female hypoactive sexual desire disorder and female orgasmic disorder. Further research is needed on psychological interventions for other sexual dysfunctions, their long-term and comparative effects.
Introduction Erectile dysfunction (ED) is an increasing health problem that demands effective treatment. There is evidence that phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors (PDE5-Is) and psychological intervention (PI) are effective treatment options; however, little is known about their comparative efficacy and the efficacy of combined treatments. Aim The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to evaluate the comparative efficacy of PI, PDE5-Is, and their combination in the treatment of ED. Main Outcome Measures Primary outcome was ED symptoms, and secondary outcome was sexual satisfaction of the patient. Methods A systematic literature search was conducted in order to identify relevant articles published between 1998 and 2012. We included randomized controlled trials and controlled trials comparing PI with PDE5-I treatment or one of them against a combination of both. Results Eight studies with a total number of 562 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The results of the included studies are inconclusive, though they show a trend towards a larger effect of combined treatment compared with PI or PDE5-I treatment alone. The meta-analysis found that, overall, combined treatment was more efficacious for ED symptoms than PDE5-I treatment or PI alone. Combined treatment was more efficacious than PDE5-I use alone on sexual satisfaction. No differences were found between PDE5-Is and PI as stand-alone treatments. None of the moderators (treatment duration, methodological quality, or researcher allegiance) altered the effects. Conclusions The combination of PI and PDE5-Is is a promising strategy for a favorable outcome in ED and can be considered as a first-choice option for ED patients. Stronger RCTs are required to confirm this initial finding.
The BRAF gene and the TERT promoter are among the most frequently altered genomic loci in low-grade (LGG) and high-grade-glioma (HGG), respectively. The coexistence of BRAF and TERT promoter aberrations characterizes a subset of aggressive glioma. Therefore, we investigated interactions between those alterations in malignant glioma. We analyzed co-occurrence of BRAF V600E and TERT promoter mutations in our clinical data ( n = 8) in addition to published datasets ( n = 103) and established a BRAF V600E -positive glioma cell panel ( n = 9) for in vitro analyses. We investigated altered gene expression, signaling events and TERT promoter activity upon BRAF- and E-twenty-six (ETS)-factor inhibition by qRT-PCR, chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP), Western blots and luciferase reporter assays. TERT promoter mutations were significantly enriched in BRAF V600E -mutated HGG as compared to BRAF V600E -mutated LGG. In vitro, BRAF V600E /TERT promoter double-mutant glioma cells showed exceptional sensitivity towards BRAF-targeting agents. Remarkably, BRAF-inhibition attenuated TERT expression and TERT promoter activity exclusively in double-mutant models, while TERT expression was undetectable in BRAF V600E -only cells. Various ETS-factors were broadly expressed, however, only ETS1 expression and phosphorylation were consistently downregulated following BRAF-inhibition. Knock-down experiments and ChIP corroborated the notion of a functional role for ETS1 and, accordingly, all double-mutant tumor cells were highly sensitive towards the ETS-factor inhibitor YK-4-279. In conclusion, our data suggest that concomitant BRAF V600E and TERT promoter mutations synergistically support cancer cell proliferation and immortalization. ETS1 links these two driver alterations functionally and may represent a promising therapeutic target in this aggressive glioma subgroup. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s40478-019-0775-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.