METHODS AND RESULTS: For 12 years, we followed a prospective nationwide cohort of 15 151 patients (aged 22-101 years, median age 63 years; 72.3% male; 66.7% Chinese, 19.8% Malay, 13.5% Indian) who were hospitalized for acute myocardial infarction between 2000 and 2005. There were 6463 deaths (4534 cardiovascular, 1929 noncardiovascular). Compared with men, women had a higher risk of cardiovascular death (age-adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.3, 95% CI 1.2-1.4) but a similar risk of noncardiovascular death (HR 0.9, 95% CI 0.8-1.0). Sex differences in cardiovascular death varied by ethnicity, age, and time. Compared with Chinese women, Malay women had the greatest increased hazard of cardiovascular death (HR 1.4, 95% CI 1.2-1.6) and a marked imbalance in death due to heart failure or cardiomyopathy (HR 3.4 [95% CI 1.9-6.0] versus HR 1.5 [95% CI 0.6-3.6] for Indian women). Compared with same-age Malay men, Malay women aged 22 to 49 years had a 2.5-fold (95% CI 1.6-3.8) increased hazard of cardiovascular death. Sex disparities in cardiovascular death tapered over time, least among Chinese patients and most among Indian patients; the HR comparing cardiovascular death of Indian women and men decreased from 1.9 (95% CI 1.5-2.4) at 30 days to 0.9 (95% CI 0.5-1.6) at 10 years.
CONCLUSION: Age, ethnicity, and time strongly influence the association between sex and specific cardiovascular causes of mortality, suggesting that health care policy to reduce sex disparities in acute myocardial infarction outcomes must consider the complex interplay of these 3 major modifying factors.
METHODS: Retrospective data on serum calcium and infusion rates was collected from 2011-2015. The relationship between peak calcium efflux (PER) and time was determined using a scatterplot and linear regression. A comparison between regimens was made based on treatment efficacy (hypocalcaemia duration, total infusion amount and time) and calcium excursions (outside target range, peak and trough calcium) using bar charts and an unpaired t-test.
RESULTS: Fifty-one and 34 patients on the original and new regimens respectively were included. Mean PER was lower (2.16 vs 2.56 mmol/h; P = 0.03) and occurred earlier (17.6 vs 23.2 h; P = 0.13) for the new regimen. Both scatterplot and regression showed a large correlation between PER and time (R-square 0.64, SE 1.53, P
METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted among clinical oncologists and medical oncologists in Malaysia between January 2020 and February 2021 using a structured 31-item questionnaire.
RESULTS: Among the 121 oncologists registered in the country, 36 responded (response rate = 30%). A total of 64% of the respondents prescribed biosimilars either often or always. Most oncologists (72%) agreed or strongly agreed that switching will not have a significant effect on the treatment benefit, with lower percentages saying that they agreed or strongly agreed that it will not lead to the emergence of additional adverse effects (56%) or harmful immunogenicity (64%). Patients' preferences (40%) and the non-availability of biosimilars in hospitals (34%) are the major barriers cited to the prescribing of biosimilars. Cost differences and robust pharmacovigilance activities are the two most important factors that would influence the prescribing of biosimilars. The mean score of knowledge in biosimilar among respondents was 3.81 (± 0.86) out of a maximum possible score of 6.
CONCLUSIONS: The identified gap in prescribing and the use of biosimilars among Malaysian oncologists warrant educational intervention and robust pharmacovigilance activities to facilitate the prescribing of biosimilars and ultimately increase the accessibility to biologics in cancer treatment.