Background: Energy drinks are one of the most popular packaged beverage products consumed within the United States (US). Energy drinks are considered a functional beverage, a category that also includes sports drinks and nutraceutical beverages. Purpose: The focus of the current study was to examine the nutrition fact panels of the top selling commercially available energy drink and energy shot products within the US to characterize common ingredient profiles to help establish a standard definition and ingredient profile of energy drinks and energy shots for consumers, health care practitioners, and researchers. Methods: The top 75 commercially available energy drinks and shots were identified and compiled from multiple commercial retail websites as of September 2021. For the purpose of this study, an energy drink must have met the following criteria: (A) marketed as an energy drink; (B) purported to improve energy, focus, or alertness; (C) not sold as a dietary supplement (no supplement fact panels); (D) manufactured as a pre-packaged and ready-to-drink beverage; and (E) contains at least three of (1) caffeine, (2) B-vitamins, (3) sugar, (4) taurine, (5) creatine, (6) quercetin, (7) guarana, (8) ginseng, (9) coenzyme Q10, or (10) branched chain amino acids. Energy shots must have met similar criteria to be included: (A) marketed as an energy shot; (B) purported to improve energy, focus, or alertness; (C) sold as a dietary supplement; (D) manufactured as a pre-packaged beverage with a small volume (<3.5 mL); and (E) contains at least three of the ingredients stated above. Results: Twenty energy shots and fifty-five energy drinks were included in this analysis. The number of ingredients per product (mean ± SD) was 18.2 ± 5.7, with 15 products containing proprietary blends with undisclosed ingredient amounts. The relative prevalence and average amounts of the top ingredients were as follows: caffeine (100%; 174.4 ± 81.1 mg), vitamin B6 (72%; 366.9 ± 648.1 percent daily value (%DV)), vitamin B3 (67%; 121.44 ± 69.9% DV), vitamin B12 (67%; 5244.5 ± 10,474.6% DV), vitamin B5 (37.3%; 113.6 ± 76.6% DV), and taurine (37.3%; amounts undisclosed). Conclusions: Our findings suggest a high prevalence of caffeine and B-vitamins in these energy products, with many of the formulations containing well above the recommended daily value of B-vitamins.
Research quantifying the unique workload demands of starters and reserves in training and match settings throughout a season in collegiate soccer is limited. Purpose: The purpose of the current study is to compare accumulated workloads between starters and reserves in collegiate soccer. Methods: Twenty-two NCAA Division III female soccer athletes (height: 1.67 ± 0.05 m; body mass: 65.42 ± 6.33 kg; fat-free mass: 48.99 ± 3.81 kg; body fat %: 25.22 ± 4.78%) were equipped with wearable global positioning systems with on-board inertial sensors, which assessed a proprietary training load metric and distance covered for each practice and 22 matches throughout an entire season. Nine players were classified as starters (S), defined as those playing >50% of playing time throughout the entire season. The remaining 17 were reserves (R). Goalkeepers were excluded. A one-way ANOVA was used to determine the extent of differences in accumulated training load throughout the season by player status. Results: Accumulated training load and total distance covered for starters were greater than reserves ((S: 9431 ± 1471 vs. R: 6310 ± 2263 AU; p < 0.001) and (S: 401.7 ± 31.9 vs. R: 272.9 ± 51.4 km; p < 0.001), respectively) throughout the season. Conclusions: Starters covered a much greater distance throughout the season, resulting in almost double the training load compared to reserves. It is unknown if the high workloads experienced by starters or the low workloads of the reserves is more problematic. Managing player workloads in soccer may require attention to address potential imbalances that emerge between starters and reserves throughout a season.
Spinal Muscular Atrophy (SMA) is a genetic disease that causes weakness and wasting in the voluntary muscles of infants and children. SMA has been the leading inherited cause of infant death. More specifically, SMA is caused by the absence of the SMN1 gene. In May 2019, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved onasemnogene abeparvovec, SMN1 gene replacement therapy, for all children with SMA younger than two years of age, without end-stage weakness. The objective of the study is to review the safety and efficacy of a novel gene therapy, onasemnogene abeparvovec (Zolgensma), for SMA and assess current challenges for gene therapy. For this, we have conducted a literature search on PubMed, MEDLINE, and Ovid (2019 to 2022) in the English language using the terms SMA, onasemnogene, and gene therapy. The search included articles, websites, and published papers from reputable health organizations, hospitals, and global organizations dedicated to bringing awareness to Spinal Muscular Atrophy. We found the first gene therapy for SMA to be onasemnogene, directly providing the survival motor neuron 1 (SMN1) gene to produce the survival motor neuron (SMN) protein. Onasemnogene is approved by the Food and Drug Administration and has the added benefit of being a one-time dose. On the downside, a major side effect of this treatment is hepatotoxicity. There is substantial evidence that the efficacy of therapy is increased when administered early to children under three months of age. Therefore, we concluded that onasemnogene appears to be an efficacious therapy for younger pediatric patients with SMA type 1. Drug cost and potential hepatotoxicity are major concerns. Long-term benefits and risks have not been determined, but it is more cost-effective and requires less time of treatment compared to the other used drug, nusinersen. Therefore, the combined safety, cost, and effectiveness of onasemnogene abeparvovec make it a reliable treatment option for treating SMA Type 1.
The aim of this evidence-based study is to narrate and evaluate the current evidence on recommendations for practicing physicians and other healthcare providers regarding integrative approaches to managing pain in patients with cancer. This review will assess the guideline recommendations and analyze the role of integrative medicine in addressing cancer pain in patients. The literature search highlights relevant studies that will inform evidence-based recommendations for practicing physicians, highlighting their relevance and weaknesses. Acupuncture, massage, and hypnosis have intermediate-strength evidence quality and are moderately recommended for various types of cancer pain. Most of the evidence points to acupuncture being recommended for aromatase inhibitor-related joint pain, hypnosis for procedural pain, and massage for palliative care pain. Other practices with lower-quality evidence include yoga and guided imagery with progressive muscle relaxation, mostly recommended for general cancer pain or musculoskeletal pain. Additionally, music therapy is recommended for procedural or surgical pain. Low-quality or inconclusive evidence was found for other mind-body interventions or natural products. Similarly, there is insufficient evidence to provide recommendations for pediatric patients. Further research is required to enhance our understanding of the role of integrative medicine interventions in caring for cancer patients.
This study investigates the predicting factors of the biochemical response and survival of patients with advanced metastatic prostate cancer who underwent therapy with radioligand lutetium-177 ( 177 Lu)prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA), often referred to as [ 177 Lu]Lu-PSMA. This study is a review of the previous literature. This study included articles published in the last 10 years in the English language.According to the literature review, treatment with [ 177 Lu]Lu-PSMA has a positive impact on prostatespecific antigen (PSA) within the first cycle and a negative impact on lymph node metastasis. There is a plausible positive impact on PSA after multiple cycles and performance status and a negative impact on visceral metastasis. In conclusion, the reviews show that treatment with [ 177 Lu]Lu-PSMA in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer is beneficial in reducing PSA and metastasis.
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.