AIMS: This study was to study the frequency of drug-induced hepatotoxicity and to find the common drugs causing hepatotoxicity.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was conducted at a tertiary care hospital in rural India. It is a study based on case series analysis. All patients with an abnormal liver function report, between July 2006 and July 2007, were included in the study
RESULTS: The study included 411 patients. Among them 141 patients were females and 270 males. The common cause for abnormal liver function was alcoholic liver disease (30.4%) followed by drug-induced hepatotoxicity (15.8%) and malaria (15.3%). Drug-induced hepatotoxicity was seen in 65 patients. It was common in males (55%) compared to females (44%). The mean age of the patients with drug-induced hepatotoxicity was 43±15.9. Antitubercular drugs were the commonly encountered drugs (44%) causing hepatotoxicity followed by lipid lowering agents (41%). The others drugs included antiretroviral drugs (6%),steroids (5%) and chlorpromazine (2%).
CONCLUSION: A thorough history of drug intake must be taken in all patients presenting with abnormal hepatic function.
METHODS/FINDINGS: A total of 550 children participated, comprising 520 (94.5%) school children aged 7 to 12 years old, 30 (5.5%) young children aged 1 to 6 years old, 254 (46.2%) boys and 296 (53.8%) girls. Of the 550 children, 26.2% were anaemic, 54.9% iron deficient and 16.9% had iron deficiency anaemia (IDA). The overall prevalence of helminths was 76.5% comprising Trichuris trichiura (71.5%), Ascaris lumbricoides (41.6%) and hookworm infection (13.5%). It was observed that iron deficiency was significantly higher in girls (p = 0.032) compared to boys. Univariate analysis demonstrated that low level of mother's education (OR = 2.52; 95% CI = 1.38-4.60; p = 0.002), non working parents (OR = 2.18; 95% CI = 2.06-2.31; p = 0.013), low household income (OR = 2.02; 95% CI = 1.14-3.59; p = 0.015), T. trichiura (OR = 2.15; 95% CI = 1.21-3.81; p = 0.008) and A. lumbricoides infections (OR = 1.63; 95% CI = 1.04-2.55; p = 0.032) were significantly associated with the high prevalence of IDA. Multivariate analysis confirmed that low level of mother's education (OR = 1.48; 95 CI% = 1.33-2.58; p<0.001) was a significant predictor for IDA in these children.
CONCLUSION: It is crucial that a comprehensive primary health care programme for these communities that includes periodic de-worming, nutrition supplement, improved household economy, education, sanitation status and personal hygiene are taken into consideration to improve the nutritional status of these children.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of centralisation of care for patients with gynaecological cancer.
SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Group Trials Register, CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library, Issue 4, 2010), MEDLINE, and EMBASE up to November 2010. We also searched registers of clinical trials, abstracts of scientific meetings, and reference lists of included studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, controlled before-and-after studies, interrupted time series studies, and observational studies that examined centralisation of services for gynaecological cancer, and used multivariable analysis to adjust for baseline case mix.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three review authors independently extracted data, and two assessed risk of bias. Where possible, we synthesised the data on survival in a meta-analysis.
MAIN RESULTS: Five studies met our inclusion criteria; all were retrospective observational studies and therefore at high risk of bias.Meta-analysis of three studies assessing over 9000 women suggested that institutions with gynaecologic oncologists on site may prolong survival in women with ovarian cancer, compared to community or general hospitals: hazard ratio (HR) of death was 0.90 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82 to 0.99). Similarly, another meta-analysis of three studies assessing over 50,000 women, found that teaching centres or regional cancer centres may prolong survival in women with any gynaecological cancer compared to community or general hospitals (HR 0.91; 95% CI 0.84 to 0.99). The largest of these studies included all gynaecological malignancies and assessed 48,981 women, so the findings extend beyond ovarian cancer. One study compared community hospitals with semi-specialised gynaecologists versus general hospitals and reported non-significantly better disease-specific survival in women with ovarian cancer (HR 0.89; 95% CI 0.78 to 1.01). The findings of included studies were highly consistent. Adverse event data were not reported in any of the studies.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found low quality, but consistent evidence to suggest that women with gynaecological cancer who received treatment in specialised centres had longer survival than those managed elsewhere. The evidence was stronger for ovarian cancer than for other gynaecological cancers.Further studies of survival are needed, with more robust designs than retrospective observational studies. Research should also assess the quality of life associated with centralisation of gynaecological cancer care. Most of the available evidence addresses ovarian cancer in developed countries; future studies should be extended to other gynaecological cancers within different healthcare systems.