METHODS: This retrospective population-based analysis estimated crude and standardized incidences of VLD and NLD in twelve hospitals in Brazil (n = 3), Mexico (n = 3), and Malaysia (n = 6) over a 1-year period before the introduction of the tetravalent dengue vaccine. Catchment areas were estimated using publicly available population census information and administrative data. The denominator population for incidence rates was calculated, and sensitivity analyses assessed the impact of important assumptions.
RESULTS: Total cases adjudicated as definite VLD were 5, 57, and 56 in Brazil, Mexico, and Malaysia, respectively. Total cases adjudicated as definite NLD were 103, 29, and 26 in Brazil, Mexico, and Malaysia, respectively. Crude incidence rates of cases adjudicated as definite VLD in Brazil, Mexico, and Malaysia were 1.17, 2.60, and 1.48 per 100,000 person-years, respectively. Crude incidence rates of cases adjudicated as definite NLD in Brazil, Mexico, and Malaysia were 4.45, 1.32, and 0.69 per 100,000 person-years, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Background incidence estimates of VLD and NLD obtained in Mexico, Brazil, and Malaysia could provide context for cases occurring after the introduction of the tetravalent dengue vaccine.
METHODS: We reanalyzed the empirical data from the Health Insurance Plan trial in 1963 to the UK age trial in 1991 and their follow-up data published until 2015. We first performed Bayesian conjugated meta-analyses on the heterogeneity of attendance rate, sensitivity, and over-detection and their impacts on advanced stage breast cancer and death from breast cancer across trials using Bayesian Poisson fixed- and random-effect regression model. Bayesian meta-analysis of causal model was then developed to assess a cascade of causal relationships regarding the impact of both attendance and sensitivity on 2 main outcomes.
RESULTS: The causes of heterogeneity responsible for the disparities across the trials were clearly manifested in 3 components. The attendance rate ranged from 61.3% to 90.4%. The sensitivity estimates show substantial variation from 57.26% to 87.97% but improved with time from 64% in 1963 to 82% in 1980 when Bayesian conjugated meta-analysis was conducted in chronological order. The percentage of over-detection shows a wide range from 0% to 28%, adjusting for long lead-time. The impacts of the attendance rate and sensitivity on the 2 main outcomes were statistically significant. Causal inference made by linking these causal relationships with emphasis on the heterogeneity of the attendance rate and sensitivity accounted for the variation in the reduction of advanced breast cancer (none-30%) and of mortality (none-31%). We estimated a 33% (95% CI: 24-42%) and 13% (95% CI: 6-20%) breast cancer mortality reduction for the best scenario (90% attendance rate and 95% sensitivity) and the poor scenario (30% attendance rate and 55% sensitivity), respectively.
CONCLUSION: Elucidating the scenarios from high to low performance and learning from the experiences of these trials helps screening policy-makers contemplate on how to avoid errors made in ineffective studies and emulate the effective studies to save women lives.
METHODS: Stool samples were collected prospectively from symptomatic adults who had elective colonoscopy from September 2014 to January 2016 and were analyzed with the ScheBo M2-PK Quick test and laboratory detection of fecal hemoglobin.
RESULTS: The results were correlated to the colonoscopy findings and/or histopathology report. Eighty-five subjects (age of 56.8 ± 15.3 years [mean ± standard deviation]) were recruited with a total of 17 colorectal cancer (20.0%) and 10 colorectal adenoma patients (11.8%). The sensitivity of M2-PK test in colorectal cancer detection was higher than gFOBT (100% vs. 64.7%). M2-PK test had a lower specificity when compared to gFOBT (72.5% vs. 88.2%) in colorectal cancer detection. The positive and negative predictive values were 47.2% and 100% for M2-PK test and 57.9% and 90.9% for gFOBT.
CONCLUSION: Fecal M2-PK Quick test has a high sensitivity for detection of colorectal cancer when compared to gFOBT, making it the potential choice for colorectal tumor screening biomarker in the future.
METHODS: From October 2011 to June 2015, 1,778 asymptomatic women, aged 40-74 years, underwent subsidised mammographic screening. All patients had a clinical breast examination before mammographic screening, and women with mammographic abnormalities were referred to a surgeon. The cancer detection rate and variables associated with a recommendation for adjunct ultrasonography were determined.
RESULTS: The mean age for screening was 50.8 years and seven cancers (0.39%) were detected. The detection rate was 0.64% in women aged 50 years and above, and 0.12% in women below 50 years old. Adjunct ultrasonography was recommended in 30.7% of women, and was significantly associated with age, menopausal status, mammographic density and radiologist's experience. The main reasons cited for recommendation of an adjunct ultrasound was dense breasts and mammographic abnormalities.
DISCUSSION: The cancer detection rate is similar to population-based screening mammography programmes in high-income Asian countries. Unlike population-based screening programmes in Caucasian populations where the adjunct ultrasonography rate is 2-4%, we report that 3 out of 10 women attending screening mammography were recommended for adjunct ultrasonography. This could be because Asian women attending screening are likely premenopausal and hence have denser breasts. Radiologists who reported more than 360 mammograms were more confident in reporting a mammogram as normal without adjunct ultrasonography compared to those who reported less than 180 mammograms.
CONCLUSION: Our subsidised opportunistic mammographic screening programme is able to provide equivalent cancer detection rates but the high recall for adjunct ultrasonography would make screening less cost-effective.
Methods: A cross-sectional study was carried out in two general paediatric wards in a public hospital. SGNA and STAMP were performed on 82 children (52 boys and 30 girls) of age 1-7 years. The scores from both methods were compared against Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics/American Society of Parental and Enteral Nutrition Consensus Statement for identification of paediatric malnutrition. The objective measurements include anthropometry (weight, height and mid-arm circumference), dietary intake and biochemical markers (C-reactive protein, total lymphocytes and serum albumin). Kappa agreement between methods, sensitivity, specificity and cross-classification were computed.
Results: SGNA and STAMP identified 45% and 79% of the children to be at risk of malnutrition, respectively. Using a compendium of objective parameters, 46% of the children were confirmed to be malnourished. The agreement between SGNA and objective measurements (k = 0.337) was stronger than between STAMP and objective measurements (k = 0.052) in evaluating the nutritional status of hospitalized children. SGNA also has a 4-fold higher specificity (70.45%) than STAMP (18.18%) in detecting children who are malnourished.
Conclusion: SGNA is a valid nutrition assessment tool in diagnosing malnutrition status among hospitalized children in Malaysia. The discrepancy in specificity values between the two methods explains the distinguished roles between SGNA and STAMP. The use of STAMP will have to be followed up with a more valid tool such as SGNA to verify the actual nutrition status of the paediatric population.
METHOD: A group of 19 advisors across different specialties from 11 Asian countries, met on a virtual Steering Committee meeting, to discuss and recommend the most affordable and accessible lung cancer screening modalities and their implementation, for the Asian population.
RESULTS: Significant risk factors identified for lung cancer in smokers in Asia include age 50 to 75 years and smoking history of more than or equal to 20 pack-years. Family history is the most common risk factor for nonsmokers. Low-dose computed tomography screening is recommended once a year for patients with screening-detected abnormality and persistent exposure to risk factors. However, for high-risk heavy smokers and nonsmokers with risk factors, reassessment scans are recommended at an initial interval of 6 to 12 months with subsequent lengthening of reassessment intervals, and it should be stopped in patients more than 80 years of age or are unable or unwilling to undergo curative treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: Asian countries face several challenges in implementing low-dose computed tomography screening, such as economic limitations, lack of efforts for early detection, and lack of specific government programs. Various strategies are suggested to overcome these challenges in Asia.