Reference lists of included studies were scanned and trials registers were searched to identify additional unpublished data. Last searches were run in December 2009.\n\nSelection criteria\n\nRandomised controlled trials comparing the efficacy of antidepressants and placebo in the treatment of depression in adults with a physical illness. Depression included diagnoses of Major Depression, Adjustment Disorder and Dysthymia based on standardised criteria.\n\nData collection and analysis\n\nThe primary HM781-36B datasheet outcome was

efficacy 6-8 weeks after randomisation. Data were also extracted at three additional time-points (4-5 weeks, 9-18 weeks, > 18 weeks). Acceptability and tolerability were assessed by comparing the number of drop-outs and adverse events. Odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals were calculated for dichotomous data (response to treatment). Standardised mean differences with 95% CI were calculated for continuous data (mean depression score). Data were pooled using a random effects model.\n\nMain results\n\nFifty-one TH-302 order studies including 3603 participants were included in the review. Forty-four studies including 3372 participants contributed data towards the efficacy analyses. Pooled efficacy data for the primary outcome provided an OR of 2.33, CI 1.80-3.00, p<0.00001 (25 studies, 1674 patients) favouring antidepressants. Antidepressants were also more efficacious than placebo

at the other time-points. At 6-8 weeks, fewer patients receiving placebo GSK3235025 supplier dropped out compared to patients treated

with an antidepressant. Dry mouth and sexual dysfunction were more common in patients treated with an antidepressant.\n\nAuthors’ conclusions\n\nThis review provides evidence that antidepressants are superior to placebo in treating depression in physical illness. However, it is likely that publication and reporting biases exaggerated the effect sizes obtained. Further research is required to determine the comparative efficacy and acceptability of particular antidepressants in this population.”
“A case-control study of the association of miR-499A>G rs3746444 with risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) was conducted. Patients with HCC and healthy control subjects were recruited for genotyping of miR-499A>G using duplex polymerase-chain-reaction with confronting-two-pair primer(PCR-RFLP) analysis. The MiR-499 GG genotype was associated with a decreased risk of HCC as compared with the miR-499 AA genotype (adjusted OR=0.74, 95% CI=0.24-0.96). Similarly, the GG genotype showed a 0.45-fold decreased HCC risk in a recessive model. The MiR-499 G allele was significantly associated with decreased risk of HCC among patients infected with HBV in a dominant model (OR=0.09, 95% CI=0.02-0.29). In conclusion, the MiR-499A>G rs3746444 polymorphism is associated with HCC risk in the Chinese population, and may be useful predictive marker for CAD susceptibility.