Displaying publications 281 - 288 of 288 in total

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Daoulah A, Alshehri M, Panduranga P, Aloui HM, Yousif N, Arabi A, et al.
    Shock, 2024 Aug 12.
    PMID: 39158570 DOI: 10.1097/SHK.0000000000002433
    BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of data regarding acute myocardial infarction (MI) complicated by cardiogenic shock (AMI-CS) in the Gulf region. This study addressed this knowledge gap by examining patients experiencing AMI-CS in the Gulf region and analyzing hospital and short-term follow-up mortality.

    METHODS: The Gulf-CS registry included 1,513 patients with AMI-CS diagnosed between January 2020 and December 2022.

    RESULTS: The incidence of AMI-CS was 4.1% (1513/37379). The median age was 60 years. The most common presentation was ST-elevation MI (73.83%). In-hospital mortality was 45.5%. Majority of patients were in SCAI stage D and E (68.94%). Factors associated with hospital mortality were previous coronary artery bypass graft (OR:2.49; 95%CI: 1.321-4.693), cerebrovascular accident (OR:1.621, 95%CI: 1.032-2.547), chronic kidney disease (OR:1.572; 95%CI1.158-2.136), non-ST-elevation MI (OR:1.744; 95%CI: 1.058-2.873), cardiac arrest (OR:5.702; 95%CI: 3.640-8.933), SCAI stage D and E (OR:19.146; 95CI%: 9.902-37.017), prolonged QRS (OR:10.012; 95%CI: 1.006-1.019), right ventricular dysfunction (OR:1.679; 95%CI: 1.267-2.226) and ventricular septal rupture (OR:6.008; 95%CI: 2.256-15.998). Forty percent had invasive hemodynamic monitoring, 90.02% underwent revascularization, and 45.80% received mechanical circulatory support (41.31% had Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump and 14.21% had Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation/Impella devices). Survival at 12 months was 51.49% (95% CI: 46.44- 56.29%).

    CONCLUSIONS: The study highlighted the significant burden of AMI-CS in this region, with high in-hospital mortality. The study identified several key risk factors associated with increased hospital mortality. Despite the utilization of invasive hemodynamic monitoring, revascularization, and mechanical circulatory support in a substantial proportion of patients, the 12-month survival rate remained relatively low.

  2. Ashraf S, Ashraf S, Akmal R, Ashraf M, Kalsoom L, Maqsood A, et al.
    Trials, 2021 Sep 15;22(1):618.
    PMID: 34526081 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-021-05510-3
    OBJECTIVES: Considering the therapeutic potential of honey and Nigella sativa (HNS) in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients, the objective of the study is defined to evaluate the prophylactic role of HNS.

    TRIAL DESIGN: The study is a randomized, placebo-controlled, adaptive clinical trial with parallel group design, superiority framework with an allocation ratio of 1:1 among experimental (HNS) and placebo group. An interim analysis will be done when half of the patients have been recruited to evaluate the need to adapt sample size, efficacy, and futility of the trial.

    PARTICIPANTS: All asymptomatic patients with hospital or community based COVID-19 exposure will be screened if they have had 4 days exposure to a confirmed case. Non-pregnant adults with significant exposure level will be enrolled in the study High-risk exposure (<6 feet distance for >10min without face protection) Moderate exposure (<6 feet distance for >10min with face protection) Subjects with acute or chronic infection, COVID-19 vaccinated, and allergy to HNS will be excluded from the study. Recruitment will be done at Shaikh Zayed Post-Graduate Medical Institute, Ali Clinic and Doctors Lounge in Lahore (Pakistan).

    INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: In this clinical study, patients will receive either raw natural honey (0.5 g) and encapsulated organic Nigella sativa seeds (40 mg) per kg body weight per day or empty capsule with and 30 ml of 5% dextrose water as a placebo for 14 days. Both the natural products will be certified for standardization by Government College University (Botany department). Furthermore, each patient will be given standard care therapy according to version 3.0 of the COVID-19 clinical management guidelines by the Ministry of National Health Services of Pakistan.

    MAIN OUTCOMES: Primary outcome will be Incidence of COVID-19 cases within 14 days of randomisation. Secondary endpoints include incidence of COVID-19-related symptoms, hospitalizations, and deaths along with the severity of COVID-19-related symptoms till 14th day of randomization.

    RANDOMISATION: Participants will be randomized into experimental and control groups (1:1 allocation ratio) via the lottery method. There will be stratification based on high risk and moderate risk exposure.

    BLINDING (MASKING): Quadruple blinding will be ensured for the participants, care providers and outcome accessors. Data analysts will also be blinded to avoid conflict of interest. Site principal investigator will be responsible for ensuring masking.

    NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): 1000 participants will be enrolled in the study with 1:1 allocation.

    TRIAL STATUS: The final protocol version 1.4 was approved by institutional review board of Shaikh Zayed Post-Graduate Medical Complex on February 15, 2021. The trial recruitment was started on March 05, 2021, with a trial completion date of February 15, 2022.

    TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trial was registered on February 23, 2021, www.clinicaltrials.gov with registration ID NCT04767087 .

    FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). With the intention of expediting dissemination of this trial, the conventional formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol. The study protocol has been reported in accordance with the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Clinical Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) guidelines.

  3. Yoon SY, Wong SW, Lim J, Ahmad S, Mariapun S, Padmanabhan H, et al.
    J Med Genet, 2022 Mar;59(3):220-229.
    PMID: 33526602 DOI: 10.1136/jmedgenet-2020-107416
    BACKGROUND: Identifying patients with BRCA mutations is clinically important to inform on the potential response to treatment and for risk management of patients and their relatives. However, traditional referral routes may not meet clinical needs, and therefore, mainstreaming cancer genetics has been shown to be effective in some high-income and high health-literacy settings. To date, no study has reported on the feasibility of mainstreaming in low-income and middle-income settings, where the service considerations and health literacy could detrimentally affect the feasibility of mainstreaming.

    METHODS: The Mainstreaming Genetic Counselling for Ovarian Cancer Patients (MaGiC) study is a prospective, two-arm observational study comparing oncologist-led and genetics-led counselling. This study included 790 multiethnic patients with ovarian cancer from 23 sites in Malaysia. We compared the impact of different method of delivery of genetic counselling on the uptake of genetic testing and assessed the feasibility, knowledge and satisfaction of patients with ovarian cancer.

    RESULTS: Oncologists were satisfied with the mainstreaming experience, with 95% indicating a desire to incorporate testing into their clinical practice. The uptake of genetic testing was similar in the mainstreaming and genetics arm (80% and 79%, respectively). Patient satisfaction was high, whereas decision conflict and psychological impact were low in both arms of the study. Notably, decisional conflict, although lower than threshold, was higher for the mainstreaming group compared with the genetics arm. Overall, 13.5% of patients had a pathogenic variant in BRCA1 or BRCA2, and there was no difference between psychosocial measures for carriers in both arms.

    CONCLUSION: The MaGiC study demonstrates that mainstreaming cancer genetics is feasible in low-resource and middle-resource Asian setting and increased coverage for genetic testing.

  4. Nguyen TN, Qureshi MM, Klein P, Yamagami H, Abdalkader M, Mikulik R, et al.
    J Stroke, 2022 May;24(2):256-265.
    PMID: 35677980 DOI: 10.5853/jos.2022.00752
    BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Recent studies suggested an increased incidence of cerebral venous thrombosis (CVT) during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. We evaluated the volume of CVT hospitalization and in-hospital mortality during the 1st year of the COVID-19 pandemic compared to the preceding year.

    METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional retrospective study of 171 stroke centers from 49 countries. We recorded COVID-19 admission volumes, CVT hospitalization, and CVT in-hospital mortality from January 1, 2019, to May 31, 2021. CVT diagnoses were identified by International Classification of Disease-10 (ICD-10) codes or stroke databases. We additionally sought to compare the same metrics in the first 5 months of 2021 compared to the corresponding months in 2019 and 2020 (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04934020).

    RESULTS: There were 2,313 CVT admissions across the 1-year pre-pandemic (2019) and pandemic year (2020); no differences in CVT volume or CVT mortality were observed. During the first 5 months of 2021, there was an increase in CVT volumes compared to 2019 (27.5%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 24.2 to 32.0; P<0.0001) and 2020 (41.4%; 95% CI, 37.0 to 46.0; P<0.0001). A COVID-19 diagnosis was present in 7.6% (132/1,738) of CVT hospitalizations. CVT was present in 0.04% (103/292,080) of COVID-19 hospitalizations. During the first pandemic year, CVT mortality was higher in patients who were COVID positive compared to COVID negative patients (8/53 [15.0%] vs. 41/910 [4.5%], P=0.004). There was an increase in CVT mortality during the first 5 months of pandemic years 2020 and 2021 compared to the first 5 months of the pre-pandemic year 2019 (2019 vs. 2020: 2.26% vs. 4.74%, P=0.05; 2019 vs. 2021: 2.26% vs. 4.99%, P=0.03). In the first 5 months of 2021, there were 26 cases of vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT), resulting in six deaths.

    CONCLUSIONS: During the 1st year of the COVID-19 pandemic, CVT hospitalization volume and CVT in-hospital mortality did not change compared to the prior year. COVID-19 diagnosis was associated with higher CVT in-hospital mortality. During the first 5 months of 2021, there was an increase in CVT hospitalization volume and increase in CVT-related mortality, partially attributable to VITT.

  5. GBD 2019 Lip, Oral, and Pharyngeal Cancer Collaborators, Cunha ARD, Compton K, Xu R, Mishra R, Drangsholt MT, et al.
    JAMA Oncol, 2023 Oct 01;9(10):1401-1416.
    PMID: 37676656 DOI: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2023.2960
    IMPORTANCE: Lip, oral, and pharyngeal cancers are important contributors to cancer burden worldwide, and a comprehensive evaluation of their burden globally, regionally, and nationally is crucial for effective policy planning.

    OBJECTIVE: To analyze the total and risk-attributable burden of lip and oral cavity cancer (LOC) and other pharyngeal cancer (OPC) for 204 countries and territories and by Socio-demographic Index (SDI) using 2019 Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors (GBD) Study estimates.

    EVIDENCE REVIEW: The incidence, mortality, and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) due to LOC and OPC from 1990 to 2019 were estimated using GBD 2019 methods. The GBD 2019 comparative risk assessment framework was used to estimate the proportion of deaths and DALYs for LOC and OPC attributable to smoking, tobacco, and alcohol consumption in 2019.

    FINDINGS: In 2019, 370 000 (95% uncertainty interval [UI], 338 000-401 000) cases and 199 000 (95% UI, 181 000-217 000) deaths for LOC and 167 000 (95% UI, 153 000-180 000) cases and 114 000 (95% UI, 103 000-126 000) deaths for OPC were estimated to occur globally, contributing 5.5 million (95% UI, 5.0-6.0 million) and 3.2 million (95% UI, 2.9-3.6 million) DALYs, respectively. From 1990 to 2019, low-middle and low SDI regions consistently showed the highest age-standardized mortality rates due to LOC and OPC, while the high SDI strata exhibited age-standardized incidence rates decreasing for LOC and increasing for OPC. Globally in 2019, smoking had the greatest contribution to risk-attributable OPC deaths for both sexes (55.8% [95% UI, 49.2%-62.0%] of all OPC deaths in male individuals and 17.4% [95% UI, 13.8%-21.2%] of all OPC deaths in female individuals). Smoking and alcohol both contributed to substantial LOC deaths globally among male individuals (42.3% [95% UI, 35.2%-48.6%] and 40.2% [95% UI, 33.3%-46.8%] of all risk-attributable cancer deaths, respectively), while chewing tobacco contributed to the greatest attributable LOC deaths among female individuals (27.6% [95% UI, 21.5%-33.8%]), driven by high risk-attributable burden in South and Southeast Asia.

    CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this systematic analysis, disparities in LOC and OPC burden existed across the SDI spectrum, and a considerable percentage of burden was attributable to tobacco and alcohol use. These estimates can contribute to an understanding of the distribution and disparities in LOC and OPC burden globally and support cancer control planning efforts.

  6. Nguyen TN, Qureshi MM, Klein P, Yamagami H, Mikulik R, Czlonkowska A, et al.
    Neurology, 2023 Jan 24;100(4):e408-e421.
    PMID: 36257718 DOI: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000201426
    BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Declines in stroke admission, IV thrombolysis (IVT), and mechanical thrombectomy volumes were reported during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. There is a paucity of data on the longer-term effect of the pandemic on stroke volumes over the course of a year and through the second wave of the pandemic. We sought to measure the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the volumes of stroke admissions, intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), IVT, and mechanical thrombectomy over a 1-year period at the onset of the pandemic (March 1, 2020, to February 28, 2021) compared with the immediately preceding year (March 1, 2019, to February 29, 2020).

    METHODS: We conducted a longitudinal retrospective study across 6 continents, 56 countries, and 275 stroke centers. We collected volume data for COVID-19 admissions and 4 stroke metrics: ischemic stroke admissions, ICH admissions, IVT treatments, and mechanical thrombectomy procedures. Diagnoses were identified by their ICD-10 codes or classifications in stroke databases.

    RESULTS: There were 148,895 stroke admissions in the 1 year immediately before compared with 138,453 admissions during the 1-year pandemic, representing a 7% decline (95% CI [95% CI 7.1-6.9]; p < 0.0001). ICH volumes declined from 29,585 to 28,156 (4.8% [5.1-4.6]; p < 0.0001) and IVT volume from 24,584 to 23,077 (6.1% [6.4-5.8]; p < 0.0001). Larger declines were observed at high-volume compared with low-volume centers (all p < 0.0001). There was no significant change in mechanical thrombectomy volumes (0.7% [0.6-0.9]; p = 0.49). Stroke was diagnosed in 1.3% [1.31-1.38] of 406,792 COVID-19 hospitalizations. SARS-CoV-2 infection was present in 2.9% ([2.82-2.97], 5,656/195,539) of all stroke hospitalizations.

    DISCUSSION: There was a global decline and shift to lower-volume centers of stroke admission volumes, ICH volumes, and IVT volumes during the 1st year of the COVID-19 pandemic compared with the prior year. Mechanical thrombectomy volumes were preserved. These results suggest preservation in the stroke care of higher severity of disease through the first pandemic year.

    TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION: This study is registered under NCT04934020.

  7. Global Burden of Disease 2019 Cancer Collaboration, Kocarnik JM, Compton K, Dean FE, Fu W, Gaw BL, et al.
    JAMA Oncol, 2022 Mar 01;8(3):420-444.
    PMID: 34967848 DOI: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2021.6987
    IMPORTANCE: The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2019 (GBD 2019) provided systematic estimates of incidence, morbidity, and mortality to inform local and international efforts toward reducing cancer burden.

    OBJECTIVE: To estimate cancer burden and trends globally for 204 countries and territories and by Sociodemographic Index (SDI) quintiles from 2010 to 2019.

    EVIDENCE REVIEW: The GBD 2019 estimation methods were used to describe cancer incidence, mortality, years lived with disability, years of life lost, and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) in 2019 and over the past decade. Estimates are also provided by quintiles of the SDI, a composite measure of educational attainment, income per capita, and total fertility rate for those younger than 25 years. Estimates include 95% uncertainty intervals (UIs).

    FINDINGS: In 2019, there were an estimated 23.6 million (95% UI, 22.2-24.9 million) new cancer cases (17.2 million when excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer) and 10.0 million (95% UI, 9.36-10.6 million) cancer deaths globally, with an estimated 250 million (235-264 million) DALYs due to cancer. Since 2010, these represented a 26.3% (95% UI, 20.3%-32.3%) increase in new cases, a 20.9% (95% UI, 14.2%-27.6%) increase in deaths, and a 16.0% (95% UI, 9.3%-22.8%) increase in DALYs. Among 22 groups of diseases and injuries in the GBD 2019 study, cancer was second only to cardiovascular diseases for the number of deaths, years of life lost, and DALYs globally in 2019. Cancer burden differed across SDI quintiles. The proportion of years lived with disability that contributed to DALYs increased with SDI, ranging from 1.4% (1.1%-1.8%) in the low SDI quintile to 5.7% (4.2%-7.1%) in the high SDI quintile. While the high SDI quintile had the highest number of new cases in 2019, the middle SDI quintile had the highest number of cancer deaths and DALYs. From 2010 to 2019, the largest percentage increase in the numbers of cases and deaths occurred in the low and low-middle SDI quintiles.

    CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The results of this systematic analysis suggest that the global burden of cancer is substantial and growing, with burden differing by SDI. These results provide comprehensive and comparable estimates that can potentially inform efforts toward equitable cancer control around the world.

  8. Klionsky DJ, Abdel-Aziz AK, Abdelfatah S, Abdellatif M, Abdoli A, Abel S, et al.
    Autophagy, 2021 Jan;17(1):1-382.
    PMID: 33634751 DOI: 10.1080/15548627.2020.1797280
    In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field.
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator (afdal@afpm.org.my)

External Links