[Effect of HBV DNA load on the safety and prognosis of systematic therapy in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma]

Objective: To study the effect of hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection on the occurrence of liver damage, HBV reactivation (HBVr) and the influence of HBVr on the prognosis of patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) receiving systemic therapy. Methods: The clinical data of 403 patients with HBV-related HCC at the Department of Infectious Diseases, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University et al, from July 2018 to December 2020 were collected. The incidence of liver damage and HBVr during systematic therapy, and the influence of HBVr on survival prognosis were analyzed. Results: Of the 403 patients, 89.1% were male (n=359), with a median age of 51 years (51.5±12.1). Before propensity score matching (PSM), the proportion of patients with cirrhosis, TNM and advanced BCLC stage was higher in high HBV-DNA (baseline HBV-DNA>1000 U/ml, n=147) group comparing with the low HBV-DNA (baseline HBV DNA≤1000 u/ml, n=256) group (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in baseline indexes between the two groups after PSM. In 290 patients after PSM, there was no significant difference in the incidence of liver damage and HBVr between high HBV-DNA group and low HBV-DNA group (P>0.05). Survival analysis was performed on 169 patients with survival data, the median overall survival (OS) was found to be 11.49 months (95%CI: 7.77-12.89) and 16.65 months (95%CI: 10.54-21.99, P=0.008) in the high and low HBV-DNA groups, respectively. And median progression-free survival (PFS) was 7.41 months (95%CI: 5.06-8.67) and 10.55 months (95%CI: 6.72-13.54, P=0.038), respectively, with a statistically significant difference. There were no differences in overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) between patients with and without HBVr and those with or without liver damage (P>0.05). Conclusions: HBV-DNA levels above 1 000 U/ml before systemic therapy do not increase the risk of liver damage or HBVr during systemic therapy in patients with HBV-related hepatocellular carcinoma, and such patients can safely receive systemic therapy.

Study of the f_{0}(980) and f_{0}(500) Scalar Mesons through the Decay D_{s}^{+}→π^{+}π^{-}e^{+}ν_{e}

Using e^{+}e^{-} collision data corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 7.33  fb^{-1} recorded by the BESIII detector at center-of-mass energies between 4.128 and 4.226 GeV, we present an analysis of the decay D_{s}^{+}→π^{+}π^{-}e^{+}ν_{e}, where the D_{s}^{+} is produced via the process e^{+}e^{-}→D_{s}^{*±}D_{s}^{∓}. We observe the f_{0}(980) in the π^{+}π^{-} system and the branching fraction of the decay D_{s}^{+}→f_{0}(980)e^{+}ν_{e} with f_{0}(980)→π^{+}π^{-} measured to be (1.72±0.13_{stat}±0.10_{syst})×10^{-3}, where the uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively. The dynamics of the D_{s}^{+}→f_{0}(980)e^{+}ν_{e} decay are studied with the simple pole parametrization of the hadronic form factor and the Flatté formula describing the f_{0}(980) in the differential decay rate, and the product of the form factor f_{+}^{f_{0}}(0) and the c→s Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa matrix element |V_{cs}| is determined for the first time to be f_{+}^{f_{0}}(0)|V_{cs}|=0.504±0.017_{stat}±0.035_{syst}. Furthermore, the decay D_{s}^{+}→f_{0}(500)e^{+}ν_{e} is searched for the first time but no signal is found. The upper limit on the branching fraction of D_{s}^{+}→f_{0}(500)e^{+}ν_{e}, f_{0}(500)→π^{+}π^{-} decay is set to be 3.3×10^{-4} at 90% confidence level.

Observation of D^{+}→K_{S}^{0}a_{0}(980)^{+} in the Amplitude Analysis of D^{+}→K_{S}^{0}π^{+}η

We perform for the first time an amplitude analysis of the decay D^{+}→K_{S}^{0}π^{+}η and report the observation of the decay D^{+}→K_{S}^{0}a_{0}(980)^{+} using 2.93  fb^{-1} of e^{+}e^{-} collision data taken at a center-of-mass energy of 3.773 GeV with the BESIII detector. As the only W-annihilation-free decay among D to a_{0}(980) pseudoscalar, D^{+}→K_{S}^{0}a_{0}(980)^{+} is the ideal decay in extracting the contributions of the W-emission amplitudes involving a_{0}(980) and to study the final-state interactions. The absolute branching fraction of D^{+}→K_{S}^{0}π^{+}η is measured to be (1.27±0.04_{stat}±0.03_{syst})%. The branching fractions of intermediate processes D^{+}→K_{S}^{0}a_{0}(980)^{+} with a_{0}(980)^{+}→π^{+}η and D^{+}→π^{+}K[over ¯]_{0}^{*}(1430)^{0} with K[over ¯]_{0}^{*}(1430)^{0}→K_{S}^{0}η are measured to be (1.33±0.05_{stat}±0.04_{syst})% and (0.14±0.03_{stat}±0.01_{syst})%, respectively.

Observation of Significant Flavor-SU(3) Breaking in the Kaon Wave Function at 12<Q^{2}<25 GeV^{2} and Discovery of the Charmless Decay ψ(3770)→K_{S}^{0}K_{L}^{0}

We present cross sections for the reaction e^{+}e^{-}→K_{S}^{0}K_{L}^{0} at center-of-mass energies ranging from 3.51 to 4.95 GeV using data samples collected in the BESIII experiment, corresponding to a total integrated luminosity of 26.5  fb^{-1}. The ratio of neutral-to-charged kaon form factors at large momentum transfers (12 Collapse

Key Words Collapse

MESH Headings Collapse

Grants Collapse

Affiliation(s)

M Ablikim Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
M N Achasov Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics SB RAS (BINP), Novosibirsk 630090, Russia
P Adlarson Uppsala University, Box 516, SE-75120 Uppsala, Sweden
X C Ai Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, People's Republic of China
R Aliberti Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
A Amoroso University of Turin and INFN, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
M R An Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, People's Republic of China
Q An State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Y Bai Southeast University, Nanjing 211100, People's Republic of China
O Bakina Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, 141980 Dubna, Moscow region, Russia
I Balossino INFN Sezione di Ferrara, INFN Sezione di Ferrara, I-44122 Ferrara, Italy
Y Ban Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
H-R Bao University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
V Batozskaya Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China National Centre for Nuclear Research, Warsaw 02-093, Poland
K Begzsuren Institute of Physics and Technology, Peace Avenue 54B, Ulaanbaatar 13330, Mongolia
N Berger Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
M Berlowski National Centre for Nuclear Research, Warsaw 02-093, Poland
M Bertani INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, I-00044 Frascati, Italy
D Bettoni INFN Sezione di Ferrara, INFN Sezione di Ferrara, I-44122 Ferrara, Italy
F Bianchi University of Turin and INFN, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
E Bianco University of Turin and INFN, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
A Bortone University of Turin and INFN, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
I Boyko Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, 141980 Dubna, Moscow region, Russia
R A Briere Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213, USA
A Brueggemann University of Muenster, Wilhelm-Klemm-Strasse 9, 48149 Muenster, Germany
H Cai Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, People's Republic of China
X Cai Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
A Calcaterra INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, I-00044 Frascati, Italy
G F Cao Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
N Cao Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
S A Cetin Turkish Accelerator Center Particle Factory Group, Istinye University, 34010 Istanbul, Turkey
J F Chang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
T T Chang Xinyang Normal University, Xinyang 464000, People's Republic of China
W L Chang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
G R Che Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
G Chelkov Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, 141980 Dubna, Moscow region, Russia
C Chen Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
Chao Chen Soochow University, Suzhou 215006, People's Republic of China
G Chen Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H S Chen Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
M L Chen Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
S J Chen Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
S L Chen North China Electric Power University, Beijing 102206, People's Republic of China
S M Chen Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, People's Republic of China
T Chen Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X R Chen Institute of Modern Physics, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X T Chen Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y B Chen Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Y Q Chen Jilin University, Changchun 130012, People's Republic of China
Z J Chen Hunan University, Changsha 410082, People's Republic of China
S K Choi Chung-Ang University, Seoul, 06974, Republic of Korea
X Chu Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
G Cibinetto INFN Sezione di Ferrara, INFN Sezione di Ferrara, I-44122 Ferrara, Italy
S C Coen Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
F Cossio INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
J J Cui Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
H L Dai Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
J P Dai Yunnan University, Kunming 650500, People's Republic of China
A Dbeyssi Helmholtz Institute Mainz, Staudinger Weg 18, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
R E de Boer Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
D Dedovich Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, 141980 Dubna, Moscow region, Russia
Z Y Deng Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
A Denig Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
I Denysenko Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, 141980 Dubna, Moscow region, Russia
M Destefanis University of Turin and INFN, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
F De Mori University of Turin and INFN, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
B Ding Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Jinan, Jinan 250022, People's Republic of China
X X Ding Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
Y Ding Liaoning University, Shenyang 110036, People's Republic of China
Y Ding Jilin University, Changchun 130012, People's Republic of China
J Dong Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
L Y Dong Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
M Y Dong Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X Dong Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, People's Republic of China
M C Du Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
S X Du Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, People's Republic of China
Z H Duan Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
P Egorov Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, 141980 Dubna, Moscow region, Russia
Y H Fan North China Electric Power University, Beijing 102206, People's Republic of China
J Fang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
S S Fang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
W X Fang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y Fang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y Q Fang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
R Farinelli INFN Sezione di Ferrara, INFN Sezione di Ferrara, I-44122 Ferrara, Italy
L Fava University of Eastern Piedmont, I-15121 Alessandria, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
F Feldbauer Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
G Felici INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, I-00044 Frascati, Italy
C Q Feng State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
J H Feng Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
K Fischer University of Oxford, Keble Road, Oxford OX13RH, United Kingdom
M Fritsch Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
C D Fu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J L Fu University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y W Fu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H Gao University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y N Gao Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
Yang Gao State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
S Garbolino INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
I Garzia INFN Sezione di Ferrara, INFN Sezione di Ferrara, I-44122 Ferrara, Italy University of Ferrara, I-44122 Ferrara, Italy
P T Ge Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, People's Republic of China
Z W Ge Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
C Geng Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
E M Gersabeck University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, United Kingdom
A Gilman University of Oxford, Keble Road, Oxford OX13RH, United Kingdom
K Goetzen GSI Helmholtzcentre for Heavy Ion Research GmbH, D-64291 Darmstadt, Germany
L Gong Liaoning University, Shenyang 110036, People's Republic of China
W X Gong Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
W Gradl Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
S Gramigna INFN Sezione di Ferrara, INFN Sezione di Ferrara, I-44122 Ferrara, Italy University of Ferrara, I-44122 Ferrara, Italy
M Greco University of Turin and INFN, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
M H Gu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Y T Gu Guangxi University, Nanning 530004, People's Republic of China
C Y Guan Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Z L Guan Henan University of Technology, Zhengzhou 450001, People's Republic of China
A Q Guo Institute of Modern Physics, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
L B Guo Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing 210023, People's Republic of China
M J Guo Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
R P Guo Shandong Normal University, Jinan 250014, People's Republic of China
Y P Guo Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
A Guskov Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, 141980 Dubna, Moscow region, Russia
J Gutierrez Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 47405, USA
T T Han Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
W Y Han Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, People's Republic of China
X Q Hao Henan Normal University, Xinxiang 453007, People's Republic of China
F A Harris University of Hawaii, Honolulu, Hawaii 96822, USA
K K He Soochow University, Suzhou 215006, People's Republic of China
K L He Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
F H H Heinsius Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
C H Heinz Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
Y K Heng Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
C Herold Suranaree University of Technology, University Avenue 111, Nakhon Ratchasima 30000, Thailand
T Holtmann Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
P C Hong Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
G Y Hou Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X T Hou Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y R Hou University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Z L Hou Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
B Y Hu Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
H M Hu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J F Hu South China Normal University, Guangzhou 510006, People's Republic of China
T Hu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y Hu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
G S Huang State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
K X Huang Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
L Q Huang Institute of Modern Physics, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X T Huang Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
Y P Huang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
T Hussain University of the Punjab, Lahore-54590, Pakistan
N Hüsken Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 47405, USA Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
N In der Wiesche University of Muenster, Wilhelm-Klemm-Strasse 9, 48149 Muenster, Germany
M Irshad State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
J Jackson Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 47405, USA
S Jaeger Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
S Janchiv Institute of Physics and Technology, Peace Avenue 54B, Ulaanbaatar 13330, Mongolia
J H Jeong Chung-Ang University, Seoul, 06974, Republic of Korea
Q Ji Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Q P Ji Henan Normal University, Xinxiang 453007, People's Republic of China
X B Ji Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X L Ji Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Y Y Ji Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
X Q Jia Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
Z K Jia State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
H J Jiang Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, People's Republic of China
P C Jiang Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
S S Jiang Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, People's Republic of China
T J Jiang Hangzhou Normal University, Hangzhou 310036, People's Republic of China
X S Jiang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y Jiang University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J B Jiao Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
Z Jiao Huangshan College, Huangshan 245000, People's Republic of China
S Jin Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
Y Jin University of Jinan, Jinan 250022, People's Republic of China
M Q Jing Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X M Jing University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
T Johansson Uppsala University, Box 516, SE-75120 Uppsala, Sweden
X Kui Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
S Kabana Instituto de Alta Investigación, Universidad de Tarapacá, Casilla 7D, Arica 1000000, Chile
N Kalantar-Nayestanaki University of Groningen, NL-9747 AA Groningen, The Netherlands
X L Kang China University of Geosciences, Wuhan 430074, People's Republic of China
X S Kang Liaoning University, Shenyang 110036, People's Republic of China
M Kavatsyuk University of Groningen, NL-9747 AA Groningen, The Netherlands
B C Ke Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, People's Republic of China
V Khachatryan Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 47405, USA
A Khoukaz University of Muenster, Wilhelm-Klemm-Strasse 9, 48149 Muenster, Germany
R Kiuchi Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
R Kliemt GSI Helmholtzcentre for Heavy Ion Research GmbH, D-64291 Darmstadt, Germany
O B Kolcu Turkish Accelerator Center Particle Factory Group, Istinye University, 34010 Istanbul, Turkey
B Kopf Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
M Kuessner Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
A Kupsc National Centre for Nuclear Research, Warsaw 02-093, Poland Uppsala University, Box 516, SE-75120 Uppsala, Sweden
W Kühn Justus-Liebig-Universitaet Giessen, II. Physikalisches Institut, Heinrich-Buff-Ring 16, D-35392 Giessen, Germany
J J Lane University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, United Kingdom
P Larin Helmholtz Institute Mainz, Staudinger Weg 18, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
A Lavania Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai 600036, India
L Lavezzi University of Turin and INFN, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
T T Lei State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Z H Lei State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
H Leithoff Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
M Lellmann Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
T Lenz Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
C Li Qufu Normal University, Qufu 273165, People's Republic of China
C Li Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
C H Li Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, People's Republic of China
Cheng Li State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
D M Li Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, People's Republic of China
F Li Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
G Li Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H Li State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
H B Li Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H J Li Henan Normal University, Xinxiang 453007, People's Republic of China
H N Li South China Normal University, Guangzhou 510006, People's Republic of China
Hui Li Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
J R Li Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, People's Republic of China
J S Li Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
J W Li Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
Ke Li Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
L J Li Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
L K Li Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Lei Li Renmin University of China, Beijing 100872, People's Republic of China
M H Li Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
P R Li Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
Q X Li Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
S X Li Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
T Li Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
W D Li Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
W G Li Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X H Li State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
X L Li Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
Xiaoyu Li Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y G Li Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
Z J Li Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
Z X Li Guangxi University, Nanning 530004, People's Republic of China
C Liang Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
H Liang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H Liang State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Y F Liang Sichuan University, Chengdu 610064, People's Republic of China
Y T Liang Institute of Modern Physics, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
G R Liao Guangxi Normal University, Guilin 541004, People's Republic of China
L Z Liao Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
Y P Liao Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J Libby Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai 600036, India
A Limphirat Suranaree University of Technology, University Avenue 111, Nakhon Ratchasima 30000, Thailand
D X Lin Institute of Modern Physics, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
T Lin Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
B J Liu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
B X Liu Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, People's Republic of China
C Liu Jilin University, Changchun 130012, People's Republic of China
C X Liu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
F H Liu Shanxi University, Taiyuan 030006, People's Republic of China
Fang Liu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Feng Liu Central China Normal University, Wuhan 430079, People's Republic of China
G M Liu South China Normal University, Guangzhou 510006, People's Republic of China
H Liu Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
H B Liu Guangxi University, Nanning 530004, People's Republic of China
H M Liu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Huanhuan Liu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Huihui Liu Henan University of Science and Technology, Luoyang 471003, People's Republic of China
J B Liu State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
J Y Liu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
K Liu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
K Y Liu Liaoning University, Shenyang 110036, People's Republic of China
Ke Liu Henan University of Technology, Zhengzhou 450001, People's Republic of China
L Liu State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
L C Liu Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
Lu Liu Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
M H Liu Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
P L Liu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Q Liu University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
S B Liu State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
T Liu Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
W K Liu Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
W M Liu State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
X Liu Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
Y Liu Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
Y Liu Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, People's Republic of China
Y B Liu Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
Z A Liu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Z Q Liu Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
X C Lou Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
F X Lu Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
H J Lu Huangshan College, Huangshan 245000, People's Republic of China
J G Lu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
X L Lu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y Lu Central South University, Changsha 410083, People's Republic of China
Y P Lu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Z H Lu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
C L Luo Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing 210023, People's Republic of China
M X Luo Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310027, People's Republic of China
T Luo Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
X L Luo Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
X R Lyu University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y F Lyu Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
F C Ma Liaoning University, Shenyang 110036, People's Republic of China
H Ma Yunnan University, Kunming 650500, People's Republic of China
H L Ma Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J L Ma Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
L L Ma Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
M M Ma Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Q M Ma Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
R Q Ma Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X Y Ma Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Y Ma Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
Y M Ma Institute of Modern Physics, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
F E Maas Helmholtz Institute Mainz, Staudinger Weg 18, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
M Maggiora University of Turin and INFN, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
S Malde University of Oxford, Keble Road, Oxford OX13RH, United Kingdom
Q A Malik University of the Punjab, Lahore-54590, Pakistan
A Mangoni INFN Sezione di Perugia, I-06100 Perugia, Italy
Y J Mao Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
Z P Mao Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
S Marcello University of Turin and INFN, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
Z X Meng University of Jinan, Jinan 250022, People's Republic of China
J G Messchendorp GSI Helmholtzcentre for Heavy Ion Research GmbH, D-64291 Darmstadt, Germany University of Groningen, NL-9747 AA Groningen, The Netherlands
G Mezzadri INFN Sezione di Ferrara, INFN Sezione di Ferrara, I-44122 Ferrara, Italy
H Miao Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
T J Min Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
R E Mitchell Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 47405, USA
X H Mo Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
B Moses Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 47405, USA
N Yu Muchnoi Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics SB RAS (BINP), Novosibirsk 630090, Russia
J Muskalla Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
Y Nefedov Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, 141980 Dubna, Moscow region, Russia
F Nerling Helmholtz Institute Mainz, Staudinger Weg 18, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
I B Nikolaev Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics SB RAS (BINP), Novosibirsk 630090, Russia
Z Ning Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
S Nisar COMSATS University Islamabad, Lahore Campus, Defence Road, Off Raiwind Road, 54000 Lahore, Pakistan
Q L Niu Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
W D Niu Soochow University, Suzhou 215006, People's Republic of China
Y Niu Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
S L Olsen University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Q Ouyang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
S Pacetti INFN Sezione di Perugia, I-06100 Perugia, Italy University of Perugia, I-06100 Perugia, Italy
X Pan Soochow University, Suzhou 215006, People's Republic of China
Y Pan Southeast University, Nanjing 211100, People's Republic of China
A Pathak Jilin University, Changchun 130012, People's Republic of China
P Patteri INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, I-00044 Frascati, Italy
Y P Pei State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
M Pelizaeus Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
H P Peng State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Y Y Peng Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
K Peters GSI Helmholtzcentre for Heavy Ion Research GmbH, D-64291 Darmstadt, Germany
J L Ping Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing 210023, People's Republic of China
R G Ping Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
S Plura Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
V Prasad Instituto de Alta Investigación, Universidad de Tarapacá, Casilla 7D, Arica 1000000, Chile
F Z Qi Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H Qi State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
H R Qi Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, People's Republic of China
M Qi Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
T Y Qi Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
S Qian Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
W B Qian University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
C F Qiao University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J J Qin University of South China, Hengyang 421001, People's Republic of China
L Q Qin Guangxi Normal University, Guilin 541004, People's Republic of China
X S Qin Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
Z H Qin Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
J F Qiu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
S Q Qu Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, People's Republic of China
C F Redmer Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
K J Ren Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, People's Republic of China
A Rivetti INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
M Rolo INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
G Rong Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Ch Rosner Helmholtz Institute Mainz, Staudinger Weg 18, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
S N Ruan Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
N Salone National Centre for Nuclear Research, Warsaw 02-093, Poland
A Sarantsev Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, 141980 Dubna, Moscow region, Russia
Y Schelhaas Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
K Schoenning Uppsala University, Box 516, SE-75120 Uppsala, Sweden
M Scodeggio INFN Sezione di Ferrara, INFN Sezione di Ferrara, I-44122 Ferrara, Italy University of Ferrara, I-44122 Ferrara, Italy
K Y Shan Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
W Shan Hunan Normal University, Changsha 410081, People's Republic of China
X Y Shan State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
J F Shangguan Soochow University, Suzhou 215006, People's Republic of China
L G Shao Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
M Shao State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
C P Shen Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
H F Shen Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
W H Shen University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X Y Shen Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
B A Shi University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H C Shi State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
J L Shi Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
J Y Shi Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Q Q Shi Soochow University, Suzhou 215006, People's Republic of China
R S Shi Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X Shi Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
J J Song Henan Normal University, Xinxiang 453007, People's Republic of China
T Z Song Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
W M Song Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China Jilin University, Changchun 130012, People's Republic of China
Y J Song Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
Y X Song Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
S Sosio University of Turin and INFN, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
S Spataro University of Turin and INFN, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
F Stieler Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
Y J Su University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
G B Sun Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, People's Republic of China
G X Sun Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H Sun University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H K Sun Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J F Sun Henan Normal University, Xinxiang 453007, People's Republic of China
K Sun Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, People's Republic of China
L Sun Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, People's Republic of China
S S Sun Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
T Sun Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200240, People's Republic of China
W Y Sun Jilin University, Changchun 130012, People's Republic of China
Y Sun China University of Geosciences, Wuhan 430074, People's Republic of China
Y J Sun State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Y Z Sun Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Z T Sun Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
Y X Tan State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
C J Tang Sichuan University, Chengdu 610064, People's Republic of China
G Y Tang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J Tang Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
Y A Tang Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, People's Republic of China
L Y Tao University of South China, Hengyang 421001, People's Republic of China
Q T Tao Hunan University, Changsha 410082, People's Republic of China
M Tat University of Oxford, Keble Road, Oxford OX13RH, United Kingdom
J X Teng State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
V Thoren Uppsala University, Box 516, SE-75120 Uppsala, Sweden
W H Tian Shanxi Normal University, Linfen 041004, People's Republic of China
W H Tian Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
Y Tian Institute of Modern Physics, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Z F Tian Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, People's Republic of China
I Uman Near East University, Nicosia, North Cyprus, 99138, Mersin 10, Turkey
Y Wan Soochow University, Suzhou 215006, People's Republic of China
S J Wang Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
B Wang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
B L Wang University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Bo Wang State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
C W Wang Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
D Y Wang Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
F Wang University of South China, Hengyang 421001, People's Republic of China
H J Wang Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
J P Wang Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
K Wang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
L L Wang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
M Wang Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
Meng Wang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
N Y Wang University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
S Wang Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
S Wang Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
T Wang Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
T J Wang Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
W Wang Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
W Wang University of South China, Hengyang 421001, People's Republic of China
W P Wang State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
X Wang Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
X F Wang Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
X J Wang Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, People's Republic of China
X L Wang Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
Y Wang Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, People's Republic of China
Y D Wang North China Electric Power University, Beijing 102206, People's Republic of China
Y F Wang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y L Wang Henan Normal University, Xinxiang 453007, People's Republic of China
Y N Wang North China Electric Power University, Beijing 102206, People's Republic of China
Y Q Wang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Yaqian Wang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China Hebei University, Baoding 071002, People's Republic of China
Yi Wang Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, People's Republic of China
Z Wang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Z L Wang University of South China, Hengyang 421001, People's Republic of China
Z Y Wang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Ziyi Wang University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
D Wei University of Science and Technology Liaoning, Anshan 114051, People's Republic of China
D H Wei Guangxi Normal University, Guilin 541004, People's Republic of China
F Weidner University of Muenster, Wilhelm-Klemm-Strasse 9, 48149 Muenster, Germany
S P Wen Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
C W Wenzel Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
U Wiedner Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
G Wilkinson University of Oxford, Keble Road, Oxford OX13RH, United Kingdom
M Wolke Uppsala University, Box 516, SE-75120 Uppsala, Sweden
L Wollenberg Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
C Wu Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, People's Republic of China
J F Wu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China China Center of Advanced Science and Technology, Beijing 100190, People's Republic of China
L H Wu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
L J Wu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X Wu Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
X H Wu Jilin University, Changchun 130012, People's Republic of China
Y Wu University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Y H Wu Soochow University, Suzhou 215006, People's Republic of China
Y J Wu Institute of Modern Physics, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
Z Wu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
L Xia State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
X M Xian Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, People's Republic of China
T Xiang Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
D Xiao Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
G Y Xiao Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
S Y Xiao Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y L Xiao Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
Z J Xiao Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing 210023, People's Republic of China
C Xie Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
X H Xie Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
Y Xie Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
Y G Xie Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Y H Xie Central China Normal University, Wuhan 430079, People's Republic of China
Z P Xie State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
T Y Xing Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
C F Xu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
C J Xu Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
G F Xu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H Y Xu University of Jinan, Jinan 250022, People's Republic of China
Q J Xu Hangzhou Normal University, Hangzhou 310036, People's Republic of China
Q N Xu Inner Mongolia University, Hohhot 010021, People's Republic of China
W Xu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
W L Xu University of Jinan, Jinan 250022, People's Republic of China
X P Xu Soochow University, Suzhou 215006, People's Republic of China
Y C Xu Yantai University, Yantai 264005, People's Republic of China
Z P Xu Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
Z S Xu University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
F Yan Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
L Yan Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
W B Yan State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
W C Yan Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, People's Republic of China
X Q Yan Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H J Yang Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200240, People's Republic of China
H L Yang Jilin University, Changchun 130012, People's Republic of China
H X Yang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Tao Yang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y Yang Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
Y F Yang Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
Y X Yang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Yifan Yang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Z W Yang Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
Z P Yao Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
M Ye Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
M H Ye China Center of Advanced Science and Technology, Beijing 100190, People's Republic of China
J H Yin Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Z Y You Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
B X Yu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
C X Yu Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
G Yu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J S Yu Hunan University, Changsha 410082, People's Republic of China
T Yu University of South China, Hengyang 421001, People's Republic of China
X D Yu Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
C Z Yuan Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
L Yuan Beihang University, Beijing 100191, People's Republic of China
S C Yuan Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y Yuan Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Z Y Yuan Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
C X Yue Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, People's Republic of China
A A Zafar University of the Punjab, Lahore-54590, Pakistan
F R Zeng Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
S H Zeng University of South China, Hengyang 421001, People's Republic of China
X Zeng Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
Y Zeng Hunan University, Changsha 410082, People's Republic of China
Y J Zeng Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X Y Zhai Jilin University, Changchun 130012, People's Republic of China
Y C Zhai Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
Y H Zhan Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
A Q Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
B L Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
B X Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
D H Zhang Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
G Y Zhang Henan Normal University, Xinxiang 453007, People's Republic of China
H Zhang University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
H C Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H H Zhang Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
H H Zhang Jilin University, Changchun 130012, People's Republic of China
H Q Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H Y Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
J Zhang Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
J Zhang Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, People's Republic of China
J J Zhang Shanxi Normal University, Linfen 041004, People's Republic of China
J L Zhang Henan University, Kaifeng 475004, People's Republic of China
J Q Zhang Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing 210023, People's Republic of China
J W Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J X Zhang Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
J Y Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J Z Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Jianyu Zhang University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
L M Zhang Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, People's Republic of China
L Q Zhang Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
Lei Zhang Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
P Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Q Y Zhang Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, People's Republic of China Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, People's Republic of China
Shuihan Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Shulei Zhang Hunan University, Changsha 410082, People's Republic of China
X D Zhang North China Electric Power University, Beijing 102206, People's Republic of China
X M Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X Y Zhang Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
Y Zhang University of South China, Hengyang 421001, People's Republic of China
Y Zhang University of Oxford, Keble Road, Oxford OX13RH, United Kingdom
Y T Zhang Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, People's Republic of China
Y H Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Yan Zhang State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Yao Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Z D Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Z H Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Z L Zhang Jilin University, Changchun 130012, People's Republic of China
Z Y Zhang Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
Z Y Zhang Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, People's Republic of China
G Zhao Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J Y Zhao Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J Z Zhao Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Lei Zhao State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Ling Zhao Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
M G Zhao Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
R P Zhao University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
S J Zhao Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, People's Republic of China
Y B Zhao Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Y X Zhao Institute of Modern Physics, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Z G Zhao State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
A Zhemchugov Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, 141980 Dubna, Moscow region, Russia
B Zheng University of South China, Hengyang 421001, People's Republic of China
J P Zheng Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
W J Zheng Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y H Zheng University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
B Zhong Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing 210023, People's Republic of China
X Zhong Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
H Zhou Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
L P Zhou Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X Zhou Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, People's Republic of China
X K Zhou Central China Normal University, Wuhan 430079, People's Republic of China
X R Zhou State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
X Y Zhou Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, People's Republic of China
Y Z Zhou Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
J Zhu Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
K Zhu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
K J Zhu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
L Zhu Jilin University, Changchun 130012, People's Republic of China
L X Zhu University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
S H Zhu University of Science and Technology Liaoning, Anshan 114051, People's Republic of China
S Q Zhu Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
T J Zhu Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
W J Zhu Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
Y C Zhu State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Z A Zhu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J H Zou Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J Zu State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China

Collapse

Investigation of the ΔI=1/2 Rule and Test of CP Symmetry through the Measurement of Decay Asymmetry Parameters in Ξ^{-} Decays

Using (10087±44)×10^{6}  J/ψ events collected with the BESIII detector, numerous Ξ^{-} and Λ decay asymmetry parameters are simultaneously determined from the process J/ψ→Ξ^{-}Ξ[over ¯]^{+}→Λ(pπ^{-})π^{-}Λ[over ¯](n[over ¯]π^{0})π^{+} and its charge-conjugate channel. The precisions of α_{Λ0} for Λ→nπ^{0} and α[over ¯]_{Λ0} for Λ[over ¯]→n[over ¯]π^{0} compared to world averages are improved by factors of 4 and 1.7, respectively. The ratio of decay asymmetry parameters of Λ→nπ^{0} to that of Λ→pπ^{-}, ⟨α_{Λ0}⟩/⟨α_{Λ-}⟩, is determined to be 0.873±0.012_{-0.010}^{+0.011}, where the first and the second uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively. The ratio is smaller than unity more than 5σ, which signifies the existence of the ΔI=3/2 transition in Λ for the first time. Besides, we test for CP symmetry in Ξ^{-}→Λπ^{-} and in Λ→nπ^{0} with the best precision to date.

Observation of D_{s}^{+}→η^{'}μ^{+}ν_{μ}, Precision Test of Lepton Flavor Universality with D_{s}^{+}→η^{(')}l^{+}ν_{l}, and First Measurements of D_{s}^{+}→η^{(')}μ^{+}ν_{μ} Decay Dynamics

By analyzing 7.33  fb^{-1} of e^{+}e^{-} annihilation data collected at center-of-mass energies between 4.128 and 4.226 GeV with the BESIII detector, we report the observation of the semileptonic decay D_{s}^{+}→η^{'}μ^{+}ν_{μ}, with a statistical significance larger than 10σ, and the measurements of the D_{s}^{+}→ημ^{+}ν_{μ} and D_{s}^{+}→η^{'}μ^{+}ν_{μ} decay dynamics for the first time. The branching fractions of D_{s}^{+}→ημ^{+}ν_{μ} and D_{s}^{+}→η^{'}μ^{+}ν_{μ} are determined to be (2.235±0.051_{stat}±0.052_{syst})% and (0.801±0.055_{stat}±0.028_{syst})%, respectively, with precision improved by factors of 6.0 and 6.6 compared to the previous best measurements. Combined with the results for the decays D_{s}^{+}→ηe^{+}ν_{e} and D_{s}^{+}→η^{'}e^{+}ν_{e}, the ratios of the decay widths are examined both inclusively and in several ℓ^{+}ν_{ℓ} four-momentum transfer ranges. No evidence for lepton flavor universality violation is found within the current statistics. The products of the hadronic form factors f_{+,0}^{η^{(')}}(0) and the c→s Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa matrix element |V_{cs}| are determined. The results based on the two-parameter series expansion are f_{+,0}^{η}(0)|V_{cs}|=0.452±0.010_{stat}±0.007_{syst} and f_{+,0}^{η^{'}}(0)|V_{cs}|=0.504±0.037_{stat}±0.012_{syst}, which help to constrain present models on f_{+,0}^{η^{(')}}(0). The forward-backward asymmetries are determined to be ⟨A_{FB}^{η}⟩=-0.059±0.031_{stat}±0.005_{syst} and ⟨A_{FB}^{η^{'}}⟩=-0.064±0.079_{stat}±0.006_{syst} for the first time, which are consistent with the theoretical calculation.

Identification of ferroptosis-related diagnostic markers in primary Sjögren's syndrome based on machine learning

BACKGROUND

Primary Sjogren's syndrome (pSS) is a common autoimmune disorder that affects up to 0.3-3% of the global population. Ferroptosis has recently been identified to play a significant role in autoimmune diseases. However, the molecular mechanisms of ferroptosis in the initiation and progression of pSS remains unclear.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

To investigate the molecular mechanisms underlying the occurrence and progression of pSS, we utilized a comprehensive approach by integrating data obtained from the Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) database with data from the FerrDb database to identify the ferroptosis-related differentially expressed genes (DEGs). Furthermore, we implemented an innovative transcriptomic analysis method utilizing a computer-aided algorithm to establish a network between hub genes associated with ferroptosis and the immune microenvironment in pSS patients.

RESULTS

Our results revealed significant differences in the gene expression profiles of pSS samples compared to normal tissues, with 1,830 significantly up-regulated genes and 1,310 significantly down-regulated genes. In addition, our results showed a significant increase in the proportions of B cells and CD4+ T cells in pSS samples compared to normal tissues. AND then, our analysis revealed that a combination of six ferroptosis-related genes, including TBK1, SLC1A4, PIK3CA, ENO3, EGR1, and ATG5, could serve as optimal markers for the diagnosis of pSS. The combined analysis of these six genes accurately diagnosed the occurrence of pSS.

CONCLUSIONS

This study offers valuable insights into the pathogenesis of pSS and highlights the importance of targeting ferroptosis-related DEGs, which suggests a novel treatment strategy for pSS.

Determination of the Σ^{+} Timelike Electromagnetic Form Factors

Based on data samples collected with the BESIII detector at the BEPCII collider, the process e^{+}e^{-}→Σ^{+}Σ[over ¯]^{-} is studied at center-of-mass energies sqrt[s]=2.3960, 2.6454, and 2.9000 GeV. Using a fully differential angular description of the final state particles, both the relative magnitude and phase information of the Σ^{+} electromagnetic form factors in the timelike region are extracted. The relative phase between the electric and magnetic form factors is determined to be sinΔΦ=-0.67±0.29(stat)±0.18(syst) at sqrt[s]=2.3960  GeV, ΔΦ=55°±19°(stat)±14°(syst) at sqrt[s]=2.6454  GeV, and 78°±22°(stat)±9°(syst) at sqrt[s]=2.9000  GeV. For the first time, the phase of the hyperon electromagnetic form factors is explored in a wide range of four-momentum transfer. The evolution of the phase along with four-momentum transfer is an important input for understanding its asymptotic behavior and the dynamics of baryons.

[Multi-omics combined test performance effectiveness on opportunistic screening of high-risk liver cancer population]

Objective: To validate the performance of a multi-omics combined test for early screening of high-risk liver cancer populations. Methods: 173 high-risk patients with liver cancer were prospectively screened in a real-world setting, and 164 cases were finally enrolled. B-ultrasound, alpha-fetoprotein (AFP), and HCC screens were conducted in all patients. A multi-omics early screening test was performed for liver cancer in combination with multi-gene methylation, TP53/TERT/CTNNB1 mutations, AFP, and abnormal prothrombin (PIVKA-II). Differences in rates were compared using the chi-square test, adjusted chi-square test, or Fisher's exact probability method for count data. A non-parametric rank test (Mann-Whitney) was used to compare the differences between the two groups of data. Results: The HCCscreen detection had a sensitivity of 100% for liver cancer screening, 93.8% for liver cancer and precancerous diseases, 34.1% for positive predictive value, 99.2% for negative predictive value, and 0.89 for an area under the curve (AUC). Parallel detection of AFP, AFP+B-ultrasound, and methylation+mutation had a sensitivity/specificity and AUC of 31.3%/88.5% (AUC=0.78), 56.3%/88.2% (AUC=0.86), and 81.3%/82.4 % (AUC=0.84). At the same time, the disease severity range was significantly correlated with the methylation+mutation score, HCCscreen score, or positive detection rate (PDR). There was no significant correlation between AFP serum levels and methylation+mutation or HCCscreen scores, while there was a significant linear correlation between methylation+mutation scores and HCCscreen scores (r = 0.73, P < 0.001). Conclusion: In real-world settings, HCCscreen shows high sensitivity for screening opportunistic, high-risk liver cancer populations. Furthermore, it may efficaciously detect liver cancer and precancerous diseases, with superior performance to AFP and AFP+ultrasound. Hence, HCCscreen has the potential to become an effective screening tool that is superior to existing screening methods for high-risk liver cancer populations.

First Measurement of the Decay Asymmetry in the Pure W-Boson-Exchange Decay Λ_{c}^{+}→Ξ^{0}K^{+}

Based on 4.4  fb^{-1} of e^{+}e^{-} annihilation data collected at the center-of-mass energies between 4.60 and 4.70 GeV with the BESIII detector at the BEPCII collider, the pure W-boson-exchange decay Λ_{c}^{+}→Ξ^{0}K^{+} is studied with a full angular analysis. The corresponding decay asymmetry is measured for the first time to be α_{Ξ^{0}K^{+}}=0.01±0.16(stat)±0.03(syst). This result reflects the noninterference effect between the S- and P-wave amplitudes. The phase shift between S- and P-wave amplitudes has two solutions, which are δ_{p}-δ_{s}=-1.55±0.25(stat)±0.05(syst)  rad or 1.59±0.25(stat)±0.05(syst)  rad.

Test of CP Symmetry in Hyperon to Neutron Decays

The quantum entangled J/ψ→Σ^{+}Σ[over ¯]^{-} pairs from (1.0087±0.0044)×10^{10}  J/ψ events taken by the BESIII detector are used to study the nonleptonic two-body weak decays Σ^{+}→nπ^{+} and Σ[over ¯]^{-}→n[over ¯]π^{-}. The CP-odd weak decay parameters of the decays Σ^{+}→nπ^{+} (α_{+}) and Σ[over ¯]^{-}→n[over ¯]π^{-} (α[over ¯]_{-}) are determined to be 0.0481±0.0031_{stat}±0.0019_{syst} and -0.0565±0.0047_{stat}±0.0022_{syst}, respectively. The decay parameter α[over ¯]_{-} is measured for the first time, and the accuracy of α_{+} is improved by a factor of 4 compared to the previous results. The simultaneously determined decay parameters allow the first precision CP symmetry test for any hyperon decay with a neutron in the final state with the measurement of A_{CP}=(α_{+}+α[over ¯]_{-})/(α_{+}-α[over ¯]_{-})=-0.080±0.052_{stat}±0.028_{syst}. Assuming CP conservation, the average decay parameter is determined as ⟨α_{+}⟩=(α_{+}-α[over ¯]_{-})/2=-0.0506±0.0026_{stat}±0.0019_{syst}, while the ratios α_{+}/α_{0} and α[over ¯]_{-}/α[over ¯]_{0} are -0.0490±0.0032_{stat}±0.0021_{syst} and -0.0571±0.0053_{stat}±0.0032_{syst}, where α_{0} and α[over ¯]_{0} are the decay parameters of the decays Σ^{+}→pπ^{0} and Σ[over ¯]^{-}→p[over ¯]π^{0}, respectively.

Measurement of Energy-Dependent Pair-Production Cross Section and Electromagnetic Form Factors of a Charmed Baryon

We study the process e^{+}e^{-}→Λ_{c}^{+}Λ[over ¯]_{c}^{-} at twelve center-of-mass energies from 4.6119 to 4.9509 GeV using data samples collected by the BESIII detector at the BEPCII collider. The Born cross sections and effective form factors (|G_{eff}|) are determined with unprecedented precision after combining the single and double-tag methods based on the decay process Λ_{c}^{+}→pK^{-}π^{+}. Flat cross sections around 4.63 GeV are obtained and no indication of the resonant structure Y(4630), as reported by Belle, is found. In addition, no oscillatory behavior is discerned in the |G_{eff}| energy dependence of Λ_{c}^{+}, in contrast to what is seen for the proton and neutron cases. Analyzing the cross section together with the polar-angle distribution of the Λ_{c}^{+} baryon at each energy point, the moduli of electric and magnetic form factors (|G_{E}| and |G_{M}|) are extracted and separated. For the first time, the energy dependence of the form factor ratio |G_{E}/G_{M}| is observed, which can be well described by an oscillatory function.

Determination of Spin-Parity Quantum Numbers for the Narrow Structure near the pΛ[over ¯] Threshold in e^{+}e^{-}→pK^{-}Λ[over ¯]+c.c

A narrow structure in the pΛ[over ¯] system near the mass threshold, named as X(2085), is observed in the process e^{+}e^{-}→pK^{-}Λ[over ¯] with a statistical significance greater than 20σ. Its spin and parity are determined for the first time to be J^{P}=1^{+} in an amplitude analysis, with a statistical significance greater than 5σ over other quantum numbers (0^{-},1^{-} and 2^{+}). The pole positions of X(2085) are measured to be M_{pole}=(2084_{-2}^{+4}±9)  MeV and Γ_{pole}=(58_{-3}^{+4}±25)  MeV, where the first uncertainties are statistical and the second ones are systematic. The analysis is based on the study of the process e^{+}e^{-}→pK^{-}Λ[over ¯] and uses the data samples collected with the BESIII detector at the center-of-mass energies sqrt[s]=4.008, 4.178, 4.226, 4.258, 4.416, and 4.682 GeV with a total integrated luminosity of 8.35  fb^{-1}.

Precise Measurement of the e^{+}e^{-}→D_{s}^{*+}D_{s}^{*-} Cross Sections at Center-of-Mass Energies from Threshold to 4.95 GeV

The process e^{+}e^{-}→D_{s}^{*+}D_{s}^{*-} is studied with a semi-inclusive method using data samples at center-of-mass energies from threshold to 4.95 GeV collected with the BESIII detector operating at the Beijing Electron Positron Collider. The Born cross sections of the process are measured for the first time with high precision in this energy region. Two resonance structures are observed in the energy-dependent cross sections around 4.2 and 4.4 GeV. By fitting the cross sections with a coherent sum of three Breit-Wigner amplitudes and one phase-space amplitude, the two significant structures are assigned masses of (4186.8±8.7±30) and (4414.6±3.4±6.1)  MeV/c^{2}, widths of (55±15±53) and (122.5±7.5±8.1)  MeV, where the first errors are statistical and the second ones are systematic. The inclusion of a third Breit-Wigner amplitude is necessary to describe a structure around 4.79 GeV.

First Experimental Study of the Purely Leptonic Decay D_{s}^{*+}→e^{+}ν_{e}

Using 7.33  fb^{-1} of e^{+}e^{-} collision data taken with the BESIII detector at the BEPCII collider, we report the first experimental study of the purely leptonic decay D_{s}^{*+}→e^{+}ν_{e}. Our data contain a signal of this decay with a statistical significance of 2.9σ. The branching fraction of D_{s}^{*+}→e^{+}ν_{e} is measured to be (2.1_{-0.9_{stat}}^{+1.2}±0.2_{syst})×10^{-5}, corresponding to an upper limit of 4.0×10^{-5} at the 90% confidence level. Taking the total width of the D_{s}^{*+} [(0.070±0.028)  keV] predicted with the radiative D_{s}^{*+} decay from the lattice QCD calculation as input, the decay constant of the D_{s}^{*+} is determined to be f_{D_{s}^{*+}}=(214_{-46_{stat}}^{+61}±44_{syst})  MeV, corresponding to an upper limit of 354 MeV at the 90% confidence level.

Emerging role of interactions between tumor angiogenesis and cancer stem cells

Tumor angiogenesis and cancer stem cells (CSCs) are two major hallmarks of solid tumors. They have long received attention for their critical roles in tumor progression, metastasis and recurrence. Meanwhile, plenty of evidence indicates the close association between CSCs and tumor vasculature. CSCs are proven to promote tumor angiogenesis, and the highly vascularized tumor microenvironment further maintains CSCs growth in return, thereby forming a hard-breaking vicious circle to promote tumor development. Hence, though monotherapy targeting tumor vasculature or CSCs has been extensively studied over the past decades, the poor prognosis has been limiting the clinical application. This review summarizes the crosstalk between tumor vasculature and CSCs with emphasis on small-molecule compounds and the associated biological signaling pathways. We also highlight the importance of linking tumor vessels to CSCs to disrupt the CSCs-angiogenesis vicious circle. More precise treatment regimens targeting tumor vasculature and CSCs are expected to benefit future tumor treatment development.

Risk factors for recurrent wheezing after bronchiolitis

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to determine whether there was an association between certain factors in patients with bronchiolitis and recurrent wheezing in childhood.

METHOD

In 2021 we tracked children hospitalized for bronchiolitis at Chengdu Women's and Children's Central Hospital in 2017. The patients were classified into recurrent wheezing group (RWG) and non-recurrent wheezing group (NRWG). Possible risk factors including maternal age, school-age siblings, allergic history, atopic dermatitis, allergic rhinitis, atopic family history, severity of the condition, duration of hospitalization, nasopharyngeal secretions culture, blood eosinophil counts, FeNO and skin prick test were compared between the two groups. Continuous variables were analyzed by independent sample t-test for normal distribution and Mann-Whitney U-test for non-normal distribution. Categorical variables were tested using chi-square tests. Multifactor analysis was conducted by stepwise logistics regression analysis.

RESULTS

In total 167 participants were included, of which 26 and 141 were in RWG and NRWG respectively. In RWG children represented higher maternal age (P = 0.02) and greater probability of allergic history, atopic dermatitis, allergic rhinitis, atopic family history (odds ratio [OR] = 4.0,3.7, 7.8, 10.9 respectively, P < 0.01). However, school-age siblings, severity of the condition, duration of hospitalization, blood eosinophil counts, fractional exhaled nitric oxide and skin prick test results seemed unrelated to recurrent wheezing. In the subgroup analysis of nasopharyngeal secretion culture, there were more Moraxella catarrhalis-positive in RWG(P = 0.043). Atopic dermatitis, allergic rhinitis and atopic family history were identified as independent risk factors for recurrent wheezing.

CONCLUSION

Some children with bronchiolitis will develop recurrent wheezing, and the risk factors are allergic history, Moraxella catarrhalis infection or colonization, atopic dermatitis, allergic rhinitis and atopic family history; the latter three are independent risk factors.

First Study of Reaction Ξ^{0}n→Ξ^{-}p Using Ξ^{0}-Nucleus Scattering at an Electron-Positron Collider

Using (1.0087±0.0044)×10^{10}  J/ψ events collected with the BESIII detector at the BEPCII storage ring, the process Ξ^{0}n→Ξ^{-}p is studied, where the Ξ^{0} baryon is produced in the process J/ψ→Ξ^{0}Ξ[over ¯]^{0} and the neutron is a component of the ^{9}Be, ^{12}C, and ^{197}Au nuclei in the beam pipe. A clear signal is observed with a statistical significance of 7.1σ. The cross section of the reaction Ξ^{0}+^{9}Be→Ξ^{-}+p+^{8}Be is determined to be σ(Ξ^{0}+^{9}Be→Ξ^{-}+p+^{8}Be)=(22.1±5.3_{stat}±4.5_{sys})  mb at the Ξ^{0} momentum of 0.818  GeV/c, where the first uncertainty is statistical and the second is systematic. No significant H-dibaryon signal is observed in the Ξ^{-}p final state. This is the first study of hyperon-nucleon interactions in electron-positron collisions and opens up a new direction for such research.

Measurements of Normalized Differential Cross Sections of Inclusive π^{0} and K_{S}^{0} Production in e^{+}e^{-} Annihilation at Energies from 2.2324 to 3.6710 GeV

Based on electron positron collision data collected with the BESIII detector operating at the BEPCII storage rings, the differential cross sections of inclusive π^{0} and K_{S}^{0} production as a function of hadron momentum, normalized by the total cross section of the e^{+}e^{-}→hadrons process, are measured at six center-of-mass energies from 2.2324 to 3.6710 GeV. Our results, which cover a relative hadron energy range from 0.1 to 0.9, significantly deviate from several theoretical calculations based on existing fragmentation functions.

Precision Measurement of the Decay Σ^{+}→pγ in the Process J/ψ→Σ^{+}Σ[over ¯]^{-}

Using (10 087±44)×10^{6} J/ψ events collected with the BESIII detector, the radiative hyperon decay Σ^{+}→pγ is studied at an electron-positron collider experiment for the first time. The absolute branching fraction is measured to be (0.996±0.021_{stat}±0.018_{syst})×10^{-3}, which is lower than its world average value by 4.2 standard deviations. Its decay asymmetry parameter is determined to be -0.652±0.056_{stat}±0.020_{syst}. The branching fraction and decay asymmetry parameter are the most precise to date, and the accuracies are improved by 78% and 34%, respectively.

Measurements of the Electric and Magnetic Form Factors of the Neutron for Timelike Momentum Transfer

We present the first measurements of the electric and magnetic form factors of the neutron in the timelike (positive q^{2}) region as function of four-momentum transfer. We explored the differential cross sections of the reaction e^{+}e^{-}→n[over ¯]n with data collected with the BESIII detector at the BEPCII accelerator, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 354.6  pb^{-1} in total at twelve center-of-mass energies between sqrt[s]=2.0-2.95  GeV. A relative uncertainty of 18% and 12% for the electric and magnetic form factors, respectively, is achieved at sqrt[s]=2.3935  GeV. Our results are comparable in accuracy to those from electron scattering in the comparable spacelike region of four-momentum transfer. The electromagnetic form factor ratio R_{em}≡|G_{E}|/|G_{M}| is within the uncertainties close to unity. We compare our result on |G_{E}| and |G_{M}| to recent model predictions, and the measurements in the spacelike region to test the analyticity of electromagnetic form factors.

Observation of a New X(3872) Production Process e^{+}e^{-}→ωX(3872)

Using 4.7  fb^{-1} of e^{+}e^{-} collision data at center-of-mass energies from 4.661 to 4.951 GeV collected by the BESIII detector at the BEPCII collider, we observe the X(3872) production process e^{+}e^{-}→ωX(3872) for the first time. The significance is 7.8σ, including both the statistical and systematic uncertainties. The e^{+}e^{-}→ωX(3872) Born cross section and the corresponding upper limit at 90% confidence level at each energy point are reported. The line shape of the cross section indicates that the ωX(3872) signals may be from the decays of some nontrivial structures.

Observation of Three Charmoniumlike States with J^{PC}=1^{--} in e^{+}e^{-}→D^{*0}D^{*-}π^{+}

The Born cross sections of the process e^{+}e^{-}→D^{*0}D^{*-}π^{+} at center-of-mass energies from 4.189 to 4.951 GeV are measured for the first time. The data samples used correspond to an integrated luminosity of 17.9  fb^{-1} and were collected by the BESIII detector operating at the BEPCII storage ring. Three enhancements around 4.20, 4.47, and 4.67 GeV are visible. The resonances have masses of 4209.6±4.7±5.9  MeV/c^{2}, 4469.1±26.2±3.6  MeV/c^{2}, and 4675.3±29.5±3.5  MeV/c^{2} and widths of 81.6±17.8±9.0  MeV, 246.3±36.7±9.4  MeV, and 218.3±72.9±9.3  MeV, respectively, where the first uncertainties are statistical and the second systematic. The first and third resonances are consistent with the ψ(4230) and ψ(4660) states, respectively, while the second one is compatible with the ψ(4500) observed in the e^{+}e^{-}→K^{+}K^{-}J/ψ process. These three charmoniumlike ψ states are observed in the e^{+}e^{-}→D^{*0}D^{*-}π^{+} process for the first time.

[Study on the relationship between indexes of different abnormal weight and dyslipidemia in adults in Beijing City]

Objective: To analyze the relationship and consistency between indexes of different abnormal weight and dyslipidemia in adults in Beijing City. Methods: From August to December of 2017, 4 975 residents aged 18 to 79 years old in 5 districts of Beijing were randomly selected as subjects by using a multi-stage stratified cluster sampling method. Questionnaire, physical examination and laboratory tests were conducted. The prevalence of overweight/obesity, high body fat rate, central obesity, and high waist-to-height ratio was calculated. Partial correlation was used to analyze the correlation of blood lipid with body mass index (BMI), body fat rate, waist circumference and waist-height ratio. Logistic regression analysis for complex sampling was used to analyze the relationship between indexes of different abnormal weight and dyslipidemia after controlling for relevant risk factors, including age, sex, smoking status, drinking, insufficiency intake of vegetable and fruit, physical inactivity. Kappa value was computed to analyze the consistency between indexes of different abnormal weight. Results: The weighted prevalence of dyslipidemia was 30.48%, and it was higher in men than that in women (40.16% vs. 20.52%, P<0.01). The weighted rate of overweight/obesity, high body fat rate, central obesity, and high waist-to-height ratio was 56.65%, 47.52%, 42.48% and 59.45%, respectively. BMI, body fat rate, waist circumference and waist-to-height ratio were positively correlated with the level of total cholesterol, triglyceride, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and negatively correlated with high-density lipoprotein cholesterol. Logistic regression analysis for complex sampling showed that the high body fat rate (OR=1.67, 95%CI: 1.35-2.07), overweight/obesity (OR=1.65, 95%CI: 1.26-2.14) and high waist-to-height ratio (OR=1.46, 95%CI: 1.09-1.96) were associated with dyslipidemias. Kappa values of high body fat rate with overweight/obesity, high waist-to-height ratio and central obesity were 0.65, 0.53 and 0.58, respectively (P<0.05). Conclusion: In 2017, the prevalence of dyslipidemia in adults in Beijing City is high, especially in men. Overweight/obesity, high body fat rate and high waist-to-height ratio are associated with dyslipidemia. The high body fat rate is most associated with dyslipidemia.

Evidence for the Cusp Effect in η' Decays into ηπ^{0}π^{0}

Using a sample of 4.3×10^{5} η^{'}→ηπ^{0}π^{0} events selected from the ten billion J/ψ event dataset collected with the BESIII detector, we study the decay η^{'}→ηπ^{0}π^{0} within the framework of nonrelativistic effective field theory. Evidence for a structure at π^{+}π^{-} mass threshold is observed in the invariant mass spectrum of π^{0}π^{0} with a statistical significance of around 3.5σ, which is consistent with the cusp effect as predicted by the nonrelativistic effective field theory. After introducing the amplitude for describing the cusp effect, the ππ scattering length combination a_{0}-a_{2} is determined to be 0.226±0.060_{stat}±0.013_{syst}, which is in good agreement with theoretical calculation of 0.2644±0.0051.

The effect of surgical repair of hiatal hernia (HH) on pulmonary function: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Hiatal hernia is renowned for the symptom of reflux, and few physicians associate a hiatal hernia with pulmonary issues. It is widely acknowledged that a hiatal hernia can be treated with surgery. However, less is known about how the surgical procedure would benefit pulmonary function. Thus, the aim of this study was to determine whether surgical repair can improve pulmonary function in patients with hiatal hernias.

METHODS

We registered the protocol on the PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews) platform (no. CRD42022369949). We searched the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases for cohort studies that reported on the pulmonary function of patients with hiatal hernias. The quality of each cohort study was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS). We then calculated mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals for these continuous outcomes. Each study's consistency was appraised using the I² statistic. The sensitivity analysis was performed using the trim-and-fill method. Publication bias was confirmed using the funnel plot visually and Egger regression test statistically.

RESULTS

A total of 262 patients from 5 cohorts were included in the meta-analysis. The quality evaluation revealed that, of these 5 papers, 3 received 8 NOS stars out of 9 stars, 1 received 9, and the other received 7, meaning all included cohort studies were of high quality. The results showed that surgical repair for a hiatal hernia significantly improved forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1; weighted mean difference [WMD]:0.200; 95% CI 0.047-0.353; I² = 71.6%; P = 0.010), forced vital capacity (FVC; WMD: 0.242; 95% CI 0.161-0.323; I² = 7.1%; P = 0.000), and total lung capacity (TLC; WMD: 0.223; 95% CI 0.098-0.348; I² = 0.0%; P = 0.000) but had little effect on residual volume (RV; WMD: -0.028; 95% CI -0.096 to 0.039; I² = 8.7%; P = 0.411) and the diffusing capacity carbon monoxide (DLCO; WMD: 0.234; 95% CI -0.486 to 0.953; I² = 0.0%; P = 0.524).

CONCLUSION

For individuals with hiatal hernias, surgical repair is an efficient technique to improve respiratory function as measured by FEV1, FVC, and TLC.

[Immune checkpoint inhibitors induced pituitary immune-related adverse events: diagnosis and management]

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have been used in treating a wide variety of cancers, but they challenge clinicians with a series of special immune related adverse events (irAEs) resulting from activated immune system. Since June 2018, when the first programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) inhibitor, nivolumab, was approved by the National Medical Products Administration (NMPA), abundant experience has been accumulated in coping with irAEs from PD-1 and PD-1 ligand 1 (PD-L1) blockade therapies. In October 2021, the first CTLA-4 inhibitor, ipilimumab, which has a different spectrum of irAEs was also approved by NMPA. The discrepancy in clinical features of pituitary irAEs is obvious between these two types of ICIs. Pituitary irAEs include hypophysitis and hypopituitarism. In this review of latest literature, we have summarized the incidence, possible mechanisms, time of onset, clinical presentations, hormone test, pituitary imaging, treatment strategies and recovery patterns of pituitary irAEs. By referring to domestic and foreign clinical guidelines, we have proposed practical suggestions for screening, diagnosing and treating pituitary irAEs.

Study of the Semileptonic Decay Λ_{c}^{+}→Λe^{+}ν_{e}

The study of the Cabibbo-favored semileptonic decay Λ_{c}^{+}→Λe^{+}ν_{e} is reported using a 4.5  fb^{-1} data sample of e^{+}e^{-} annihilations collected at center-of-mass energies ranging from 4.600 GeV to 4.699 GeV with the BESIII detector at the BEPCII collider. The branching fraction of the decay is measured to be B(Λ_{c}^{+}→Λe^{+}ν_{e})=(3.56±0.11_{stat}±0.07_{syst})%, which is the most precise measurement to date. Furthermore, we perform an investigation of the internal dynamics in Λ_{c}^{+}→Λe^{+}ν_{e}. We provide the first direct comparisons of the differential decay rate and form factors with those predicted from lattice quantum chromodynamics (LQCD) calculations. Combining the measured branching fraction with a q^{2}-integrated rate predicted by LQCD, we determine |V_{cs}|=0.936±0.017_{B}±0.024_{LQCD}±0.007_{τ_{Λ_{c}}}.

Cardiopulmonary exercise testing excludes significant disease in patients recovering from COVID-19

Objective

Post-COVID-19 syndrome presents a health and economic challenge affecting ~10% of patients recovering from COVID-19. Accurate assessment of patients with post-COVID-19 syndrome is complicated by health anxiety and coincident symptomatic autonomic dysfunction. We sought to determine whether either symptoms or objective cardiopulmonary exercise testing could predict clinically significant findings.

Methods

113 consecutive military patients were assessed in a comprehensive clinical pathway. This included symptom reporting, history, examination, spirometry, echocardiography and cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) in all, with chest CT, dual-energy CT pulmonary angiography and cardiac MRI where indicated. Symptoms, CPET findings and presence/absence of significant pathology were reviewed. Data were analysed to identify diagnostic strategies that may be used to exclude significant disease.

Results

7/113 (6%) patients had clinically significant disease adjudicated by cardiothoracic multidisciplinary team (MDT). These patients had reduced fitness (V̇O226.7 (±5.1) vs 34.6 (±7.0) mL/kg/min; p=0.002) and functional capacity (peak power 200 (±36) vs 247 (±55) W; p=0.026) compared with those without significant disease. Simple CPET criteria (oxygen uptake (V̇O2) >100% predicted and minute ventilation (VE)/carbon dioxide elimination (V̇CO2) slope <30.0 or VE/V̇CO2slope <35.0 in isolation) excluded significant disease with sensitivity and specificity of 86% and 83%, respectively (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) 0.89). The addition of capillary blood gases to estimate alveolar–arterial gradient improved diagnostic performance to 100% sensitivity and 78% specificity (AUC 0.92). Symptoms and spirometry did not discriminate significant disease.

Conclusions

In a population recovering from SARS-CoV-2, there is reassuringly little organ pathology. CPET and functional capacity testing, but not reported symptoms, permit the exclusion of clinically significant disease.

Measurement of the Absolute Branching Fraction and Decay Asymmetry of Λ→nγ

The radiative hyperon decay Λ→nγ is studied using (10087±44)×10^{6}  J/ψ events collected with the BESIII detector operating at BEPCII. The absolute branching fraction of the decay Λ→nγ is determined to be (0.832±0.038_{stat}±0.054_{syst})×10^{-3}, which is a factor of 2.1 lower and 5.6 standard deviations different than the previous measurement. By analyzing the joint angular distribution of the decay products, the first determination of the decay asymmetry α_{γ} is reported with a value of -0.16±0.10_{stat}±0.05_{syst}.

Observation of an a_{0}-like State with Mass of 1.817 GeV in the Study of D_{s}^{+}→K_{S}^{0}K^{+}π^{0} Decays

Using e^{+}e^{-} annihilation data corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 6.32  fb^{-1} collected at center-of-mass energies between 4.178 and 4.226 GeV with the BESIII detector, we perform the first amplitude analysis of the decay D_{s}^{+}→K_{S}^{0}K^{+}π^{0} and determine the relative branching fractions and phases for intermediate processes. We observe an a_{0}-like state with mass of 1.817 GeV in its decay to K_{S}^{0}K^{+} for the first time. In addition, we measure the ratio {B[D_{s}^{+}→K[over ¯]^{*}(892)^{0}K^{+}]/B[D_{s}^{+}→K[over ¯]^{0}K^{*}(892)^{+}]} to be 2.35_{-0.23stat}^{+0.42}±0.10_{syst}. Finally, we provide a precision measurement of the absolute branching fraction B(D_{s}^{+}→K_{S}^{0}K^{+}π^{0})=(1.46±0.06_{stat}±0.05_{syst})%.

Therapeutic Implementation of Oncolytic Viruses for Cancer Immunotherapy: Review of Challenges and Current Clinical Trials

The development of cancer therapeutics has evolved from general targets with radiation and chemotherapy and shifted toward treatments with a more specific mechanism of action such as small molecule kinase inhibitors, monoclonal antibodies against tumor antigens, or checkpoint inhibitors. Recently, oncolytic viruses (OVs) have come to the forefront as a viable option for cancer immunotherapy, especially for "cold" tumors, which are known to inhabit an immunologically suppressive tumor microenvironment. Desired characteristics of viruses are selected through genetic attenuation of uncontrolled virulence, and some genes are replaced with ones that enhance conditional viral replication within tumor cells. Treatment with OVs must overcome various hurdles such as premature viral suppression by the host's immune system and the dense stromal barrier. Currently, clinical studies investigate the efficacy of OVs in conjunction with various anti-cancer therapeutics, including radiotherapy, chemotherapy, immune checkpoint inhibitors, and monoclonal antibodies. Thus, future research should explore how cancer therapeutics work synergistically with certain OVs in order to create more effective combination therapies and improve patient outcomes.

Constructing custom-made radiotranscriptomic signatures from CT angiograms: an application in COVID-19 vascular inflammation

Background

Advances in computational methodologies have enabled processing of large datasets originating from imaging studies. However, most imaging biomarkers suffer from a lack of direct links with underlying biology, as they are only observationally correlated with pathophysiology.

Purpose

To develop and validate a novel AI-assisted image analysis platform, by applying quantitative radiotranscriptomics that quantifies cytokine-driven vascular inflammation from routine CT angiograms (CTA) performed as part of clinical care in COVID-19.

Methods

We used this platform to train the radiotranscriptomic signature C19-RS, derived from the perivascular space around the aorta and the internal mammary artery in routine chest CTAs, to best describe cytokine-driven vascular inflammation, defined using transcriptomic profiles from RNA sequencing data from human arterial biopsies (A). This signature was validated externally in 358 clinically indicated CT pulmonary angiograms from patients with or without COVID-19 from 3 different geographical regions.

Results

First, 22 patients who had a CTA before the pandemic underwent repeat CTA <6 months post COVID-19 infection (B). Compared with 22 controls (matched for age, gender, and BMI) C19-RS was increased only in the COVID-19 group (C). Next, C19-RS was calculated in a cohort of 331 patients hospitalised during the pandemic, and was higher in COVID-19 positives (adjusted OR=2.97 [95% CI: 1.43–6.27], p=0.004, D). C19-RS had prognostic value for in-hospital mortality in COVID-19, with HR=3.31 ([95% CI: 1.49–7.33], p=0.003) and 2.58 ([95% CI: 1.10–6.05], p=0.028) in two testing cohorts respectively (E, F), adjusted for clinical factors and biochemical biomarkers of inflammation and myocardial injury. The corrected HR for in-hospital mortality was 8.24 [95% CI: 2.16–31.36], p=0.002 for those who received no treatment with dexamethasone, but only 2.27 [95% CI: 0.69–7.55], p=0.18 in those who received dexamethasone subsequently to the C19-RS based image analysis, suggesting that vascular inflammation may have been a therapeutic target of dexamethasone in COVID-19. Finally, C19-RS was strongly associated (r=0.61, p=0.0003) with a whole blood transcriptional module representing dysregulation of coagulation and platelet aggregation pathways.

Conclusion

We present the first proof of concept study that combines transcriptomics with radiomics to provide a platform for the development of machine learning derived radiotranscriptomics analysis of routine clinical CT scans for the development of non-invasive imaging biomarkers. Application in COVID-19 produced C19-RS, a marker of cytokine-driven inflammation driving systemic activation of coagulation, that predicts in-hospital mortality and identifies people who will have better response to anti-inflammatory treatments, allowing targeted therapy. This AI-assisted image analysis platform may have applications across a wide range of vascular diseases, from infections to autoimmune diseases.

Funding Acknowledgement

Type of funding sources: Foundation. Main funding source(s): EPSRC, British Heart Foundation, NIHR

Precise Measurements of Decay Parameters and CP Asymmetry with Entangled Λ-Λ[over ¯] Pairs

Based on 10 billion J/ψ events collected at the BESIII experiment, a search for CP violation in Λ decay is performed in the difference between CP-odd decay parameters α_{-} for Λ→pπ^{-} and α_{+} for Λ[over ¯]→p[over ¯]π^{+} by using the process e^{+}e^{-}→J/ψ→ΛΛ[over ¯]. With a five-dimensional fit to the full angular distributions of the daughter baryon, the most precise values for the decay parameters are determined to be α_{-}=0.7519±0.0036±0.0024 and α_{+}=-0.7559±0.0036±0.0030, respectively. The Λ and Λ[over ¯] averaged value of the decay parameter is extracted to be α_{avg}=0.7542±0.0010±0.0024 with unprecedented accuracy. The CP asymmetry A_{CP}=(α_{-}+α_{+})/(α_{-}-α_{+}) is determined to be -0.0025±0.0046±0.0012, which is one of the most precise measurements in the baryon sector. The reported results for the decay parameter will play an important role in the studies of the polarizations and CP violations for the strange, charmed and beauty baryons.

Evidence for a Neutral Near-Threshold Structure in the K_{S}^{0} Recoil-Mass Spectra in e^{+}e^{-}→K_{S}^{0}D_{s}^{+}D^{*-} and e^{+}e^{-}→K_{S}^{0}D_{s}^{*+}D^{-}

We study the processes e^{+}e^{-}→K_{S}^{0}D_{s}^{+}D^{*-} and e^{+}e^{-}→K_{S}^{0}D_{s}^{*+}D^{-}, as well as their charge conjugated processes, at five center-of-mass energies between 4.628 and 4.699 GeV, using data samples corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 3.8  fb^{-1} collected by the BESIII detector at the BEPCII storage ring. Based on a partial reconstruction technique, we find evidence of a structure near the thresholds for D_{s}^{+}D^{*-} and D_{s}^{*+}D^{-} production in the K_{S}^{0} recoil-mass spectrum, which we refer to as the Z_{cs}(3985)^{0}. Fitting with a Breit-Wigner line shape, we find the mass of the structure to be (3992.2±1.7±1.6)  MeV/c^{2} and the width to be (7.7_{-3.8}^{+4.1}±4.3)  MeV, where the first uncertainties are statistical and the second are systematic. The significance of the Z_{cs}(3985)^{0} signal is found to be 4.6σ including both the statistical and systematic uncertainty. We report the Born cross section multiplied by the branching fraction at different energy points. The mass of the Z_{cs}(3985)^{0} is close to that of the Z_{cs}(3985)^{+}. Assuming SU(3) symmetry, the cross section of the neutral channel is consistent with that of the charged one. Hence, we conclude that the Z_{cs}(3985)^{0} is the isospin partner of the Z_{cs}(3985)^{+}.

Observation of Resonance Structures in e^{+}e^{-}→π^{+}π^{-}ψ_{2}(3823) and Mass Measurement of ψ_{2}(3823)

Using a data sample corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 11.3  fb^{-1} collected at center-of-mass energies from 4.23 to 4.70 GeV with the BESIII detector, we measure the product of the e^{+}e^{-}→π^{+}π^{-}ψ_{2}(3823) cross section and the branching fraction B[ψ_{2}(3823)→γχ_{c1}]. For the first time, resonance structure is observed in the cross section line shape of e^{+}e^{-}→π^{+}π^{-}ψ_{2}(3823) with significances exceeding 5σ. A fit to data with two coherent Breit-Wigner resonances modeling the sqrt[s]-dependent cross section yields M(R_{1})=4406.9±17.2±4.5  MeV/c^{2}, Γ(R_{1})=128.1±37.2±2.3  MeV, and M(R_{2})=4647.9±8.6±0.8  MeV/c^{2}, Γ(R_{2})=33.1±18.6±4.1  MeV. Though weakly disfavored by the data, a single resonance with M(R)=4417.5±26.2±3.5  MeV/c^{2}, Γ(R)=245±48±13  MeV is also possible to interpret data. This observation deepens our understanding of the nature of the vector charmoniumlike states. The mass of the ψ_{2}(3823) state is measured as (3823.12±0.43±0.13)  MeV/c^{2}, which is the most precise measurement to date.

LB0005 ORELABRUTINIB, AN IRREVERSIBLE INHIBITOR OF BRUTON’S TYROSINE KINASE (BTK), FOR THE TREATMENT OF SYSTEMIC LUPUS ERYTHEMATOSUS (SLE): RESULTS OF A RANDOMIZED, DOUBLE-BLIND, PLACEBO-CONTROLLED, PHASE IB/IIA DOSE-FINDING STUDY

Background

Orelabrutinib is an oral, highly-selective, irreversible inhibitor of Bruton’s tyrosine kinase (BTK). Orelabrutinib has been approved for the treatment of B cell malignancies in China. Two distinct lupus animal models showed significant efficacy of orelabrutinib in reducing disease activity, which supported the clinical development of orelabrutinib in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE).

Objectives

This phase Ib/IIa, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-finding study aimed to evaluate the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD), preliminary efficacy and biomarkers of orelabrutinib in patients with mild to moderate SLE who received standard of care (SoC) therapy.

Methods

Patients diagnosed with SLE by the ACR classification criteria for ≥ 6 months, who had a SLEDAI-2K score ≥5 at screening, and were autoantibody-positive, were randomized 1:1:1:1 to receive oral orelabrutinib at 50mg, 80mg, 100mg or placebo once daily for 12 weeks, respectively.

Results

This study randomized 60 patients with 55 patients who completed 12-week treatment. Age at baseline was 33.7±9.8 years and 96.7% were female. Baseline disease characteristics were generally balanced across treatment groups. Adverse events (AEs) were reported in 80%, 93.3% and 100% of orelabrutinib treated patients at doses of 50mg, 80mg and 100mg QD respectively versus 85.5% in placebo group. AEs were mostly mild or moderate. Treatment-related SAEs were reported in 3 patients treated with orelabrutinib, only 1 of which was grade 3. No deaths were reported. The plasma exposure of orelabrutinib (AUC and Cmax) was proportionally increased with doses. Nearly complete BTK occupancy was achieved at all dose levels, and the occupancy lasted for 24 hours without any decrease compared to that at 4 hour post-dosing. In all evaluable patients, the SLE Response Index (SRI)-4 response rates at week 12 were 50.0%, 61.5% and 64.3% in patients treated with orelabrutinib at 50mg (n=14), 80mg (n=13) and 100mg (n=14) respectively, compared with 35.7% in patients treated with placebo (n=14), which indicated the trend of dose-dependent improvement. Among the subgroup of patients with SLEDAI-2K≥8 at screening, SRI-4 response occurred in 70%, 70% and 66.7% of patients treated with orelabrutinib at 50mg (n=10), 80mg (n=10) and 100mg (n=9), respectively, compared with 30% who received placebo (n=10). Trends of reduced proteinuria, anti-dsDNA and IgG, total B cells and increased complements C4 were also observed following orelabrutinib treatment.

Conclusion

Orelabrutinib was generally safe and well tolerated in patients with SLE. Preliminary results also suggested encouraging efficacy which supports further development of orelabrutinib in larger and longer trials for SLE.

Table 1.

Efficacy results at week 12.

All Evaluable PatientsPlaceboOrelabrutinibOrelabrutinibOrelabrutinib50 mg80 mg100 mgN=5514141314SRI-4 response, n (%)5 (35.7%)7 (50.0%)8 (61.5%)9 (64.3%)Treatment difference vs. PBO (%)14.3%25.8%28.6%SLEDAI-2K≥8, N=391010109SRI-4 response, n (%)3 (30.0%)7 (70.0%)7 (70.0%)6 (66.7%)Treatment difference vs. PBO (%)40.0%40.0%36.7%

Note: All evaluable patients at week 12 efficacy data were included in the efficacy analysis.

Figure 1.

SRI-4 response rates at week 12.

Disclosure of Interests

Ru Li: None declared, Xiaoxia Zhu: None declared, Shengyun Liu: None declared, Xiao Zhang: None declared, Changhao Xie: None declared, Zili Fu: None declared, Anbin Huang: None declared, Lingyun Sun: None declared, Dongzhou Liu: None declared, Jinxia Zhao: None declared, Lin Wu: None declared, Zhoushuai Qin Employee of: InnoCare Pharma Limited., Sichen Li Employee of: InnoCare pharma Limited., Yaorong Liu Employee of: InnoCare pharma Limited., Zhanguo Li: None declared

[Current status of regular exercise and influencing factors in 18-64 year old labor force population in Beijing]

Objective: To understand the regular exercise status and influencing factors in 18-64 year-old labor force population in Beijing, and provide evidences for behavioral intervention. Methods: Data were collected from Beijing Adult Non-communicable and Chronic Diseases and Risk Factors Surveillance Program from August to December, 2017. The stratified cluster sampling method was used to select 13 240 survey subjects throughout the city. The valid sample size included in this study were 11 604 persons aged 18 to 64 years. Questionnaire was used to collection the information about basic demographic characteristics, chronic disease history and physical activity prevalence of the study subjects. The body height and weight were measured by standard methods. Fasting venous blood samples were collected for the detection of fasting blood glucose, blood lipids and other biochemical indicators. Software SPSS 20.0 was used fort complex sampling sample weighting and data analysis. Results: The proportions of the study subjects who did regular exercise and never had leisure-time activity in 18-64 year-old labor force population in Beijing were 23.74% (95%CI: 21.51%-26.12%) and 64.34% (95%CI: 61.66%-66.94%) respectively; The average daily physical activity time was 23.44 min (95%CI: 21.16-25.71), and the total daily sedentary behavior time was 6.96 hours (95%CI: 6.80-7.13). With the increase of age, the proportions of the study subjects who did regular exercise and never had leisure-time activity increased (P=0.006, P<0.001). With the increase of educational level, the proportion of those who did regular exercise increased (P<0.001), and the proportion of those who never had leisure-time activity decreased (P<0.001); the higher the level of physical activity, the higher the regular exercise proportion (P<0.001); the proportions of employed people who did regular exercise was lower than those in unemployed people (P<0.001); the proportions of women never had leisure-time activity was higher than those in men (P=0.024). The results of multivariate analysis showed that older age and higher education level were positive factors for regular exercise (35- years old: OR=0.653, 95%CI: 0.530-0.804, P<0.001; 50-64 years old: OR=0.695, 95%CI: 0.560-0.864, P=0.001; high school/technical secondary school/technical School: OR=0.679, 95%CI: 0.593-0.777, P<0.001; college graduation: OR=0.478, 95%CI: 0.387-0.590, P<0.001; bachelor degree and above: OR=0.435, 95%CI: 0.347-0.546, P<0.001), while employment (OR=1.631, 95%CI: 1.330-2.000, P<0.001) and married/cohabitation (OR=1.340, 95%CI: 1.093-1.644, P=0.038) were negative factors for regular exercise. Conclusions: The rate of regular exercise in 18-64 year-old labor force population in Beijing needs to be improved. Older age and high educational level were positive factors for regular exercise, while being married and employed were negative factors for it.

[Investigation on knowledge, attitude and behavior of salt reduction in adults of Beijing in 2017]

Objective: To explore the knowledge, attitude and behavior of salt reduction in adults of Beijing in 2017. Methods: Based on the monitoring data of chronic diseases and corresponding risk factors in adults of Beijing in 2017, the indicators of salt reduction knowledge, attitude and behavior of 13 240 participants aged 18-79 years old were analyzed. The awareness rate, attitude support rate and behavior rate were calculated by complex weighting method, and compared among different age groups, genders, residential areas, and history of hypertension. The proportion of people taking various salt reduction measures to the total number of people was compared. Results: The awareness rate of recommended daily salt intake, the awareness of hypertension caused or aggravated by more salt intake, the attitude support rate and behavior rate of adults were 31.77%, 88.56%, 90.27% and 53.86%, respectively. After weighted adjustment, the awareness rate of recommended daily salt intake was 31.08%, which increased with age (χ²_trend=431.56, P<0.001) and education level (χ²_trend=95.44, P<0.001). The awareness rate of women was higher than that of men (χ²=118.89, P<0.001), and the awareness rate of population in urban areas was higher than that of population in suburban areas (χ²=34.09, P=0.001). The awareness rate of hypertension caused or aggravated by eating more salt was 86.73%. The support rate of salt reduction attitude was 90.45%. The rate of salt-reducing behavior was 54.05%. Among different salt reduction measures, reducing salt when cooking was the most common measure (52.41%), while the least common one (35.22%) was using low sodium salt. Logistic regression model analysis showed that the gender, age, education level, self-reported history of hypertension, awareness of salt recommendation, awareness of hypertension caused or aggravated by eating more salt, and salt reduction attitude were significantly associated with salt reduction behavior. Conclusion: In 2017, adults in Beijing have a basic understanding of the impact of high-salt diet on health and support salt reduction, but the rate of salt reduction behavior is still relatively low. There are obvious gender and age differences, and the salt reduction measure is simple. Targeted measures should be taken to promote the formation of salt reduction behavior.

[Analysis of the current status and related factors of oral nutritional supplements intake among 18-79 years old in Beijing in 2017]

Objective: To understand the current status of taking nutrient supplements for residents aged 18 to 79 years old in Beijing and its related factors. Methods: Data were gathered from the 2017 Beijing Non-communicable and Chronic Disease Surveillance Program. Multiple classified cluster sampling method was used, and participants aged 18-79 were sampled from 16 districts. The questionnaire included chronic diseases and related risk factors, health knowledge, and oral nutritional supplements within 12 months. Multivariate logistic regression models were established to analyze associated factors that affect the intake of nutrient supplements. Results: The weighted prevalence of supplements use was 13.1% among 12 696 subjects within the past 12 months. The proportions of multivitamins (4.7%), B vitamins (4.5%), and folic acid (3.2%) were higher. The prevalence of supplement use of young people (18-39 years old) and the elderly (60-79 years old) was higher than middle-aged people (40-59 years old) (χ²=54.09, P<0.001). Except for the age group of 70-79 years old, the consumption rate of women was significantly higher than that of men (P<0.05). After adjusting age and sex, among patients with hypertension, diabetes, or dyslipidemia, the control rates of blood pressure, glucose and lipids of patients who take nutrient supplements were higher than those who do not (P<0.05). And participants who took nutrient supplements had a more heightened awareness rate of health knowledge, such as the hazards of smoking and second-hand smoke, and recommended amount of salt per day (P<0.001). The multi-factor logistic analysis found that nutrient supplement-related factors include women, old age, higher education level, living in urban, insufficient physical activity, sleeping problems, active physical examination, blood pressure control among patients, and health knowledge (P<0.05). Conclusions: The factors of nutrient supplements use were related to sex, age, education level, health status, and health literacy. We should pay attention to key populations and guide them to establish the correct concept of taking nutrient supplements.

[HBx promotes ubiquitination and degradation of ZO1 and increases the migration and invasion of liver cancer cells]

Objective: To study the effect of hepatitis B virus X protein (HBx) expression level on migration and invasion of zonula occludens protein-1 (ZO-1) in HepG2 liver cancer cells. Methods: Liver cancer cells were transfected with HBV full gene plasmid (pcDNA3.1-HBV1. 1 or pcDNA3.1-HBV1.3), empty plasmid (pcDNA3.1) and HBV-encoded protein plasmids (pHBc, pHBs, pHBp and pHBx), respectively. Western blot and RT-PCR were used to detect ZO1 protein and mRNA levels. Immunoprecipitation was used to detect transfected pHBx. Western blot was used to detect ZO1 ubiquitination levels. Transwell chambers were used to assess cell migration and invasion. Cell proliferation and lactate dehydrogenase assay was used to detect siRNA transfecting targeting ZO1. Flow cytometry was used to detect cell apoptosis and cycle. The data was compared between two and multiple groups by using an independent sample t-test and one-way analysis of variance. Results: Compared with the empty plasmid, ZO1 protein level in HepG2 cells after transiently transfected with pHBV1.1 and pHBV1.3 was decreased by 42.99% ± 6.8% and 55.0% 5 ± 4.56%, respectively, and their mRNA levels did not change significantly. ZO1 protein level in Huh7 cells was decreased by 17.46% ± 4.94% and 47.53% ± 3.38%, respectively. ZO1 protein level after transfection with pHBx was decreased by 47.02% ± 3.4%, while the ZO1 protein level after transfection with pHBc, pHBs and pHBp did not change significantly. ZO1 mRNA level was unaffected with pHBx transfection. ZO1 ubiquitin level and cell migration and invasion ability in HepG2 cells was significantly increased with transfected pHBx. HepG2 cells proliferation, apoptosis and cycle after transfection with ZO1-targeted siRNA did not change significantly, but the migration and invasion ability were significantly increased. Conclusion: HBx can increase the migration and invasion of liver cancer cells by promoting the ubiquitination and degradation of ZO1 protein level.

Parenchymal involvement on CT pulmonary angiography in SARS-CoV-2 Alpha variant infection and correlation of COVID-19 CT severity score with clinical disease severity and short-term prognosis in a UK cohort

AIM

To determine if there is a difference in radiological, biochemical, or clinical severity between patients infected with Alpha-variant SARS-CoV-2 compared with those infected with pre-existing strains, and to determine if the computed tomography (CT) severity score (CTSS) for COVID-19 pneumonitis correlates with clinical severity and can prognosticate outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Blinded CTSS scoring was applied to 137 hospital patients who had undergone both CT pulmonary angiography (CTPA) and whole-genome sequencing of SARS-CoV-2 within 14 days of CTPA between 1/12/20–5/1/21.

RESULTS

There was no evidence of a difference in imaging severity on CTPA, viral load, clinical parameters of severity, or outcomes between Alpha and preceding variants. CTSS on CTPA strongly correlates with clinical and biochemical severity at the time of CTPA, and with patient outcomes. Classifying CTSS into a binary value of “high” and “low”, with a cut-off score of 14, patients with a high score have a significantly increased risk of deterioration, as defined by subsequent admission to critical care or death (multivariate hazard ratio [HR] 2.76, p<0.001), and hospital length of stay (17.4 versus 7.9 days, p<0.0001).

CONCLUSION

There was no evidence of a difference in radiological severity of Alpha variant infection compared with pre-existing strains. High CTSS applied to CTPA is associated with increased risk of COVID-19 severity and poorer clinical outcomes and may be of use particularly in settings where CT is not performed for diagnosis of COVID-19 but rather is used following clinical deterioration.

Laboratory Analysis of Antiphospholipid Antibodies with Clinical Correlation: A Hospital-Based 10 Year Study

Introduction/Objective

Antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) is an autoimmune disorder and its diagnosis requires both laboratory evaluation of antiphospholipid antibodies (APAs) and clinical correlation. This study focused on the laboratory analysis of APS with clinical correlation in a hospital-based patient population.

Methods/Case Report

From 2010-2020, immunological studies for APAs were performed at Department of Pathology, William Beaumont Hospital – Troy, Michigan and patients with positive results were selected for further analysis. Four APAs were included: IgG and IgM beta-2 glycoprotein I antibodies (IgG B2GA and IgM B2GA), and IgG and IgM anticardiolipin antibodies (IgG ACA and IgM ACA). Clinical information was collected from hospital electronic medical chart with focus on thromboembolism and abortion history, autoimmune disorders, antithrombotic therapies and other studies.

Results (if a Case Study enter NA)

There were 167 patients, 136 females and 31 males (F/M=4.4). The median age for females was 50 and for males, 57. Overall, B2GA was present more than ACA (102/81) in females, and ACA was present slightly more than B2GA (20/17) in males. IgM APAs were much more common than IgG APAs; IgM B2GA/IgG B2GA: 87/32 (p&lt;0.01) and IgM ACA/IgG ACA: 81/20 (p&lt;0.01). Most APAs were at the low-intermediate titer range and increased APAs titer correlated with decreased positive rate: APAs titer at 20-40, 41-80 and &gt;80 with positive results at 115, 61 and 44 respectively. In addition to documented autoimmune disorders, pregnancy miscarriage was a common clinical condition (24/66) in females at age &lt;45. But for females at age &gt;45, vascular thrombosis became more common (18/70). Vascular thrombosis was a common clinical disease in males (16/31) followed by autoimmune disorders (10/31). Most patients with vascular thrombosis received antithrombotic therapies.

Conclusion

Female patients positive for APAs was significantly more and younger than males in this study. IgM B2GA was the most common type of APAs followed by IgM ACA. IgG B2GA and IgG ACA were much less common. In younger female patients autoimmune disorders and abortion were the most common clinical conditions. In older female and male patients, autoimmune disorders and vascular thrombosis were the most common clinical conditions. The titer of APAs detected was at low-intermediate range in most patients. The relationship between the titer of APAs and clinical conditions needs further study.

Bone infection: a clinical priority for clinicians, scientists and educators

Bone infection has received increasing attention in recent years as one of the main outstanding clinical problems in orthopaedic-trauma surgery that has not been successfully addressed. In fact, infection may develop across a spectrum of patient types regardless of the level of perioperative management, including antibiotic prophylaxis. Some of the main unknown factors that may be involved, and the main targets for future intervention, include more accurate and less invasive diagnostic options, more thorough and accurate debridement protocols, and more potent and targeted antimicrobials. The underlying biology dominates the clinical management of bone infections, with features such as biofilm formation, osteolysis and vascularisation being particularly influential. Based on the persistence of this problem, an improved understanding of the basic biology is deemed necessary to enable innovation in the field. Furthermore, from the clinical side, better evidence, documentation and outreach will be required to translate these innovations to the patient. This review presents the findings and progress of the AO Trauma Clinical Priority Program on the topic of bone infection.

Longitudinal trajectory of cardiac magnetic resonance and cardiopulmonary exercise testing findings in moderate to severe COVID-19 and association with symptoms

Background

Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) and cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) have provided important insights into the prevalence of early cardiopulmonary abnormalities in COVID-19 patients. It is currently unknown whether such abnormalities persist over time and relate to ongoing symptoms.

Purpose

To describe the longitudinal trajectory of cardiopulmonary abnormalities on CMR and CPET in moderate to severe COVID-19 patients and assess their relationship with ongoing symptoms.

Methods

Fifty-eight previously hospitalised COVID-19 patients and 30 age, sex, body mass index, comorbidity-matched controls underwent CMR, CPET and a symptom-based questionnaire at 2–3 months (2–3m). Repeat assessments (including gas transfer) were performed in 46 patients at 6 months (6m).

Results

During admission, 1/3rd of patients needed ventilation or intensive care (Table 1) and three (5%) had a raised troponin.

On CMR, patients had preserved left (LV) and right ventricular (RV) volumes and function at 2–3m from infection. By 6m, LV function did not change but RV end diastolic volume decreased (mean difference −4.3 mls/m2, p=0.005) and RV function increased (mean difference +3.2%, p&lt;0.001, Fig. 1A).

Patients had higher native T1 (a marker of fibroinflammation) at 2–3m compared to controls (Table 1, Fig. 1B), which normalised by 6m. Extracellular volume was normal and improved by 6m. Native T2, a marker of myocardial oedema, did not differ between patients and controls on serial CMR. At 2–3m, late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) was higher in patients (p=0.023) but became comparable to controls by 6m (p=0.62). Six (12%) patients had LGE in a myocarditis pattern and one (2%) had myocardial infarction. None had active myocarditis using the Modified Lake Louise Criteria.

Lung imaging (T2-weighted) revealed parenchymal abnormalities in 2/3rds of patients at 2–3 and 6 months. The extent of abnormalities improved on serial imaging (Table 1). Gas transfer (DLco) was worse in those with lung abnormalities (77% vs 91% of predicted, p=0.009).

CPET revealed reduced peak oxygen consumption (pVO2) in patients at 2–3m, which normalised by 6m (80.5% to 93.3% of predicted, p=0.001) (Table 1, Fig. 1C). At 2–3m, 49% of patients had submaximal tests (respiratory exchange ratio &lt;1.1), reducing to 25% by 6m (p=0.057). VE/VCO2 slope, a marker of lung efficiency, was abnormal in patients but improved on serial CPET (Table 1, Fig. 1D).

Cardiac symptoms (chest pain, dyspnoea, palpitations, dizziness or syncope) were present in 83% of patients at 2–3m, reducing to 52% by 6m (p&lt;0.001). There was no significant association between CMR or CPET parameters and persistent cardiac symptoms at 6m (Fig. 1E).

Conclusions

Cardiopulmonary parameters (on CMR and CPET) improved in moderate-severe COVID-19 patients from 2–3 to 6 months post infection. Despite this, patients continued to experience cardiac symptoms which had no relationship with measured parameters.

Funding Acknowledgement

Type of funding sources: Foundation. Main funding source(s): 1. NIHR Oxford and Oxford Health Biomedical Research Centre, Oxford British Heart Foundation (BHF) Centre of Research Excellence (RE/18/3/34214), United Kingdom Research Innovation and Wellcome Trust2. Medical Research Council and Department of Health and Social Care/National Institute for Health Research Grant (MR/V027859/1) ISRCTN number 10980107 Table 1Figure 1

Frequency and predictors of thin-cap fibroatheroma progression: a comprehensive and dynamic in-vivo OCT study

Purpose

To assess the evolution of thin-cap fibroatheroma (TCFA) and to explore predictors for its progression by using optical coherence tomography (OCT) in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS).

Methods

We enrolled ACS patients with non-culprit TCFA at baseline and corresponding OCT images at follow-up of 9 to 15 months. Clinical, angiographic and OCT data were collected and analyzed according to established methods. TCFA was defined as a lipid plaque with maximum lipid arc &gt;90° and fibrous cap thickness &lt;65μm. Considering the resolution of OCT, the regression of TCFA was defined as an increase of fibrous cap thickness &gt;10μm. Inversely, TCFA progression was defined as a decrease, constant or ≤10μm increase of fibrous cap thickness.

Results

41 patients with 55 non-culprit TCFAs were taken into final analysis. 17 patients (41.5%) had patient-level progression and 22 TCFAs (40.0%) progressed at plaque-level with a median follow-up duration of 371 days. 11 (20.0%) of the 55 TCFAs happened subclinical rupture at follow-up, including 10 with the formation a new layer and 1 without the detection of the new layer. Besides, another patient suffered re-myocardial infarction because of the rupture of TCFA induced acute thrombosis and lumen occlusion during follow-up. The baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics were similar between the two cohorts. The progression group had a significantly higher prevalence of macrophage infiltration and vasa vasorum at baseline than the non-progression group (Figure 1). Multivariate analysis identified macrophage infiltration (odds ratio [OR]: 5.30; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01 to 27.91; p=0.049]) as the independent predictor of TCFA progression. When it came to the evolution of lesion morphology and lipid components, the progression cohort had a higher percent change of lumen stenosis and lipid length (Figure 2).

Conclusions

About 40% of non-culprit TCFAs in ACS patients progressed in fibrous cap thickness at a median interval of 1 year. Macrophage infiltration was the independent predictor of non-culprit TCFA progression. The progression of fibrous cap thickness was usually accompanied with an aggressive evolution of other lesion characteristics.

Funding Acknowledgement

Type of funding sources: Foundation. Main funding source(s): the National Key R&D Program of China Baseline OCT characteristicsPercent change of lesion morphology