METHODS: Two cross-sectional studies were conducted in urban and rural areas of Yangon Region in 2013 and 2014 respectively, using the WHO STEPwise approach to surveillance of risk factors of NCDs. Through a multi-stage cluster sampling method, 1486 participants were recruited.
RESULTS: Age-standardized prevalence of the behavioral risk factors tended to be higher in the rural than urban areas for all included factors and significantly higher for alcohol drinking (19.9% vs. 13.9%; p = 0.040) and low fruit & vegetable consumption (96.7% vs. 85.1%; p = 0.001). For the metabolic risk factors, the tendency was opposite, with higher age-standardized prevalence estimates in urban than rural areas, significantly for overweight and obesity combined (40.9% vs. 31.2%; p = 0.023), obesity (12.3% vs.7.7%; p = 0.019) and diabetes (17.2% vs. 9.2%; p = 0.024). In sub-group analysis by gender, the prevalence of hypercholesterolemia and hypertriglyceridemia were significantly higher in urban than rural areas among males, 61.8% vs. 40.4%; p = 0.002 and 31.4% vs. 20.7%; p = 0.009, respectively. Mean values of age-standardized metabolic parameters showed higher values in urban than rural areas for both male and female. Based on WHO age-standardized Framingham risk scores, 33.0% (95% CI = 31.7-34.4) of urban dwellers and 27.0% (95% CI = 23.5-30.8) of rural dwellers had a moderate to high risk of developing CHD in the next 10 years.
CONCLUSION: The metabolic risk factors, as well as a moderate or high ten-year risk of CHD were more common among urban residents whereas behavioral risk factors levels were higher in among the rural people of Yangon Region. The high prevalences of NCD risk factors in both urban and rural areas call for preventive measures to reduce the future risk of NCDs in Myanmar.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of umeclidinium bromide versus placebo for people with stable COPD.
SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register (CAGR), ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization (WHO) trials portal, and the GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) Clinical Study Register, using prespecified terms, as well as the reference lists of all identified studies. Searches are current to April 2017.
SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of parallel design comparing umeclidinium bromide versus placebo in people with COPD, for at least 12 weeks.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures. If we noted significant heterogeneity in the meta-analyses, we subgrouped studies by umeclidinium dose.
MAIN RESULTS: We included four studies of 12 to 52 weeks' duration, involving 3798 participants with COPD. Mean age of participants ranged from 60.1 to 64.6 years; most were males with baseline mean smoking pack-years of 39.2 to 52.3. They had moderate to severe COPD and baseline mean post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) ranging from 44.5% to 55.1% of predicted normal. As all studies were systematically conducted according to prespecified protocols, we assessed risk of selection, performance, detection, attrition, and reporting biases as low.Compared with those given placebo, participants in the umeclidinium group had a lesser likelihood of developing moderate exacerbations requiring a short course of steroids, antibiotics, or both (odds ratio (OR) 0.61, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.46 to 0.80; four studies, N = 1922; GRADE: high), but not specifically requiring hospitalisations due to severe exacerbations (OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.25 to 2.92; four studies, N = 1922, GRADE: low). The number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) to prevent an acute exacerbation requiring steroids, antibiotics, or both was 18 (95% CI 13 to 37). Quality of life was better in the umeclidinium group (mean difference (MD) -4.79, 95% CI -8.84 to -0.75; three studies, N = 1119), and these participants had a significantly higher chance of achieving a minimal clinically important difference of at least four units in St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score compared with those in the placebo group (OR 1.45, 95% CI 1.16 to 1.82; three studies, N = 1397; GRADE: moderate). The NNTB to achieve one person with a clinically meaningful improvement was 11 (95% CI 7 to 29). The likelihood of all-cause mortality, non-fatal serious adverse events (OR 1.33; 95% CI 0.89 to 2.00; four studies, N = 1922, GRADE: moderate), and adverse events (OR 1.06, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.31; four studies, N = 1922; GRADE: moderate) did not differ between umeclidinium and placebo groups. The umeclidinium group demonstrated significantly greater improvement in change from baseline in trough FEV1 compared with the placebo group (MD 0.14, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.17; four studies, N = 1381; GRADE: high). Symptomatic improvement was more likely in the umeclidinium group than in the placebo group, as determined by Transitional Dyspnoea Index (TDI) focal score (MD 0.76, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.09; three studies, N = 1193), and the chance of achieving a minimal clinically important difference of at least one unit improvement was significantly higher with umeclidinium than with placebo (OR 1.71, 95% CI 1.37 to 2.15; three studies, N = 1141; GRADE: high). The NNTB to attain one person with clinically important symptomatic improvement was 8 (95% CI 5 to 14). The likelihood of rescue medication usage (change from baseline in the number of puffs per day) was significantly less for the umeclidinium group than for the placebo group (MD -0.45, 95% CI -0.76 to -0.14; four studies, N = 1531).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Umeclidinium reduced acute exacerbations requiring steroids, antibiotics, or both, although no evidence suggests that it decreased the risk of hospital admission due to exacerbations. Moreover, umeclidinium demonstrated significant improvement in quality of life, lung function, and symptoms, along with lesser use of rescue medications. Studies reported no differences in adverse events, non-fatal serious adverse events, or mortality between umeclidinium and placebo groups; however, larger studies would yield a more precise estimate for these outcomes.
METHODS: A historical review of official reports, news articles, and gray literature was undertaken to identify tobacco industry tactics and strategies to hamper government efforts in implementing stronger pictorial health warning regulations in four Asian jurisdictions (Cambodia, Hong Kong, Malaysia, and the Philippines).
RESULTS: Nineteen countries/jurisdictions in the WHO Western Pacific region currently require pictorial health warnings on cigarette packs, including some of the world's largest, in line with the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control Article 11 Guidelines. In the four jurisdictions examined, tobacco industry interference consisted of lobbying and misinformation of high-level government officers and policy-makers, distributing industry-friendly legislative drafts, taking government to court, challenging government timelines for law implementation, and mobilizing third parties. Strong political leadership and strategic advocacy enabled governments to successfully overcome this industry interference.
CONCLUSION: The tobacco industry uses similar tactics in different jurisdictions to derail, delay, and weaken the implementation of effective health warning policies. Identifying and learning from international experiences can help anticipate and defeat such challenges.
METHODS: From the list of movies released during 2015-2019, we selected the top 10 movies per year rated by the Malaysian Film Development Corporation. Two researchers coded tobacco imagery in each movie considering 5-minute time intervals as a unit. The 5-minute interval coding was adopted from previous research for comparability. Frequencies and the average occurrence of tobacco imagery were compared by movie language, genre, and age categorization.
RESULTS: In 50 movies analyzed, there were a total of 1037 five-minute intervals of which 26 (52%) movies and 277 (26.7%) of intervals tobacco imagery were present. Brand appearances were absent and health warnings about tobacco use were present in just one movie. The proportions of intervals containing actual use, paraphernalia, and implied use were 63.5%, 22.0%, and 14.5%. Tobacco imagery of actual use, paraphernalia, and implied use was present in 25, 20, and 10 movies, respectively. In those movies with tobacco imagery, the average number of occurrences of actual use, paraphernalia, and implied use was 3 (interquartile range [IQR] 2-11.5), 2.5 (IQR 1.3-4.0), and 1 (IQR 1-4), respectively. Movies classified as "p13" (median 6, IQR 6-13) and "18" (median 5, IQR 0-15) had higher average occurrences of tobacco imagery than "U" movies (median 0, IQR 0-2; p = .028).
CONCLUSIONS: The lack of health warnings despite the presence of tobacco imagery in Malaysian movies calls for measures to regulate tobacco-related content and reclassify such movies as "for adults-only."
IMPLICATIONS: Tobacco imagery was prevalent in Malaysian movies that are allowed viewing by individuals aged 13 years and above. A review of the age categorization of Malaysian movies and the placement of health warnings in movies is needed. A comprehensive implementation of the ban on tobacco advertisements, promotion, and sponsorship should also include a ban on tobacco imagery in movies.
METHODS: Cigarette and alcohol use was assessed in a large cross-sectional national sample aged 50 years and above from the Irish Longitudinal Study on Ageing (TILDA) (n = 6,576). The Brief Ageing Perceptions Questionnaire (BAPQ) assessed individual's views of their own ageing across five domains. Study hypothesis that stronger beliefs on each of the BAPQ domains would be related to drinking and smoking was examined using multinomial logit models (MNLM). Regression parameter estimates for all variables were estimated relative risk ratios (RRR).
RESULTS: More women were non-drinkers (30 % vs. 20 %) and men displayed significantly higher alcohol use patterns. One in five older Irish adults was a current smoker (16.8 % of women, 17 % of men), and smoking and harmful drinking were strongly associated (P
METHODS: The GBD 2019 comparative risk assessment framework was used to estimate cancer burden attributable to behavioural, environmental and occupational, and metabolic risk factors. A total of 82 risk-outcome pairs were included on the basis of the World Cancer Research Fund criteria. Estimated cancer deaths and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) in 2019 and change in these measures between 2010 and 2019 are presented.
FINDINGS: Globally, in 2019, the risk factors included in this analysis accounted for 4·45 million (95% uncertainty interval 4·01-4·94) deaths and 105 million (95·0-116) DALYs for both sexes combined, representing 44·4% (41·3-48·4) of all cancer deaths and 42·0% (39·1-45·6) of all DALYs. There were 2·88 million (2·60-3·18) risk-attributable cancer deaths in males (50·6% [47·8-54·1] of all male cancer deaths) and 1·58 million (1·36-1·84) risk-attributable cancer deaths in females (36·3% [32·5-41·3] of all female cancer deaths). The leading risk factors at the most detailed level globally for risk-attributable cancer deaths and DALYs in 2019 for both sexes combined were smoking, followed by alcohol use and high BMI. Risk-attributable cancer burden varied by world region and Socio-demographic Index (SDI), with smoking, unsafe sex, and alcohol use being the three leading risk factors for risk-attributable cancer DALYs in low SDI locations in 2019, whereas DALYs in high SDI locations mirrored the top three global risk factor rankings. From 2010 to 2019, global risk-attributable cancer deaths increased by 20·4% (12·6-28·4) and DALYs by 16·8% (8·8-25·0), with the greatest percentage increase in metabolic risks (34·7% [27·9-42·8] and 33·3% [25·8-42·0]).
INTERPRETATION: The leading risk factors contributing to global cancer burden in 2019 were behavioural, whereas metabolic risk factors saw the largest increases between 2010 and 2019. Reducing exposure to these modifiable risk factors would decrease cancer mortality and DALY rates worldwide, and policies should be tailored appropriately to local cancer risk factor burden.
FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.