Das, Saswati

Space exploration exposes astronauts to unique conditions such as microgravity and space radiation, potentially influencing gene expression and triggering carcinogenesis. Paradoxically, these extreme environments could uncover other pro-treatment aspects of cancer biology. Despite numerous reviews addressing these aspects in isolation, a comprehensive synthesis of the effects of space stressors on cancer development is incomplete. This scoping review aims to provide a holistic perspective on the influence of spaceflight and associated stressors—including gravitation (hyper- and microgravity), radiation, and vibration—on the potential for cancer development and altered cellular mechanisms. We adhered to the PRISMA-ScR checklist for our review. A multitiered search strategy was employed in English, starting with a preliminary keyword identification in Google Scholar and PubMed. Subsequently, the main search was conducted across five databases—Cochrane, Embase, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science—until 22 February 2024. All included studies were thoroughly assessed by two independent reviewers. Of the 15,553 identified articles, 158 were deemed eligible. The majority (92%) were experimental studies, predominantly cell-based (74.17%). Breast (15.19%), thyroid (13.92%), and hematopoietic (11.40%) cancers were the most frequently examined. Spaceflight stressors could affect different biological systems variably, with microgravity impacting spatial growth and metastasis, and cosmic radiation exerting both tumor-suppressive and mutagenic effects. Our findings highlight the need for large-scale, prolonged analog studies mimicking space conditions to enhance mission safety and shed light on the nuanced effects of space stressors on cancer. Additionally, further extensive studies need to be performed in the true weightlessness of spaceflight, both animal-based and on human tissue (cell cultures and potentially whole perfusion organ models), in addition to crew pre/intra/post-flight long-duration evaluations. Furthermore, this unique research avenue may reveal cancer cell sensitivities to these stressors, opening new pathways for innovative therapeutic strategies in cancer treatment.

Abstract Background The AACC Academy revised the reproductive testing section of the Laboratory Medicine Practice Guidelines: Evidence-Based Practice for Point-of-Care Testing (POCT) published in 2007. Methods A panel of Academy members with expertise in POCT and laboratory medicine was formed to develop guidance for the use of POCT in reproductive health, specifically ovulation, pregnancy, premature rupture of membranes (PROM), and high-risk deliveries. The committee was supplemented with clinicians having Emergency Medicine and Obstetrics/Gynecology training. Results Key recommendations include the following. First, urine luteinizing hormone (LH) tests are accurate and reliable predictors of ovulation. Studies have shown that the use of ovulation predicting kits may improve the likelihood of conception among healthy fertile women seeking pregnancy. Urinary LH point-of-care testing demonstrates a comparable performance among other ovulation monitoring methods for timing intrauterine insemination and confirming sufficient ovulation induction before oocyte retrieval during in vitro fertilization. Second, pregnancy POCT should be considered in clinical situations where rapid diagnosis of pregnancy is needed for treatment decisions, and laboratory analysis cannot meet the required turnaround time. Third, PROM testing using commercial kits alone is not recommended without clinical signs of rupture of membranes, such as leakage of amniotic fluid from the cervical opening. Finally, fetal scalp lactate is used more than fetal scalp pH for fetal acidosis due to higher success rate and low volume of sample required. Conclusions This revision of the AACC Academy POCT guidelines provides recommendations for best practice use of POCT in fertility and reproduction.