METHODS: This retrospective study included all patients with CML, in chronic or accelerated phase, who were treated with imatinib at University of Malaya Medical Centre, Malaysia.
RESULTS: A total of 70 patients were analysed. The median follow-up duration was 74 months, and the cumulative percentages of patients with CCyR and MMR were 80.0% and 65.7%, respectively. Overall survival (OS) and event-free survival (EFS) at ten years were 94.3% and 92.9%, respectively. Patients who achieved CCyR and MMR had significantly better OS and EFS than those who did not. At six months, patients who had a BCR-ABL level ≤ 10% had significantly better OS and EFS than those who had a BCR-ABL level > 10%. The target milestone of CCyR at 12 months and MMR at 18 months showed no survival advantage in our patients.
CONCLUSION: Our data showed that imatinib is still useful as first-line therapy. However, vigilant monitoring of patients who have a BCR-ABL level > 10% at six months of treatment should be implemented so that prompt action can be taken to provide the best outcome for these patients.
DESIGN AND SETTING: Retrospective study at Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia (HUSM).
METHODS: This was an analysis based on medical records of adult patients at HUSM. Data regarding demographics, laboratory investigations, attributable causes and CKD stage were gathered.
RESULTS: A total of 851 eligible cases were included. The patients' mean age was 61.18 ± 13.37 years. CKD stage V was found in 333 cases (39.1%) whereas stages IV, IIIb, IIIa, and II were seen in 240 (28.2%), 186 (21.9%), 74 (8.7%) and 18 (2.1%), respectively. The percentage of CKD stage V patients receiving renal replacement therapy was 15.6%. The foremost attributable causes of CKD were diabetic nephropathy (DN) (44.9%), hypertension (HPT) (24.2%) and obstructive uropathy (9.2%). The difference in the prevalence of CKD due to DN, HPT and glomerulonephritis between patients ≤ 50 and > 50 years old was statistically significant.
CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that DN and HPT are the major attributable causes of CKD among patients at a Malaysian tertiary-care hospital. Furthermore, the results draw attention to the possibility that greater emphasis on primary prevention of diabetes and hypertension will have a great impact on reduction of hospital admissions due to CKD in Malaysia.
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.
METHODS: Blood donation data of 4120 donors, spanning from January to December 2020, were retrospectively reviewed. The blood were screened for TTI markers, including hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg), anti-hepatitis B core (anti-HBc), anti-hepatitis C virus (anti-HCV), anti-human immunodeficiency viruses 1 and 2 (anti-HIV1&2), anti-human T-lymphotropic virus types 1 and 2 (anti-HTLV-1&2), and syphilis antigen.
RESULTS: Positive TTI markers were detected in 10.9% of the donors. The most detected TTI marker was anti-HBc (8.9%), followed by HBsAg (0.7%). Other markers were individually detected in <1% of the donors. Anti-HBc-positive was significantly elevated among non-Saudi blood donors. There was an association between age groups and anti-HCV (p=0.002), anti-HTLV (p=0.004) and syphilis antigen (p=0.02) markers positivity. The AB positive blood group exhibited the most positivity for TTI markers, followed by O positive blood group. Similarly, association was found between ABO group and HBsAg (p=0.01), anti-HBc (p=0.001), and anti-HCV (p<0.001) markers positivity.
CONCLUSION: Emphasis on implementing robust screening measures for donated blood is underscored by this study. There is the need for future study to extensively evaluate TTI status to enhance our understanding of the trend in TTI.