METHODS: The retrospective arm (2011-2014) included adults with metastatic colorectal cancer who had initiated first-line therapy with ≥1 post-baseline visit and survival data. The prospective arm (2014-2019) enrolled newly diagnosed patients with histologically proven metastatic colorectal cancer with ≥1 measurable lesion per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, and tissue availability for biomarker analysis. Data look-back and follow-up were 2 years; the rate of RAS mutation was evaluated.
RESULTS: RAS testing was ordered for patients in retrospective (326/417) and prospective (407/500) studies. In the former, testing was typically prescribed after first-line treatment initiation, significantly more in patients with stage IV disease (P < .005), resulting in the addition of targeted therapy (41.8% anti-epidermal growth factor receptor, 30.2% anti-vascular endothelial growth factor) in wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer, and significantly impacted the treatment of left-sided tumors (P = .037). In the latter, 58.4% were RAS wild-type; 41.6% were RAS mutant. Non-prescription of RAS testing was attributed to test unavailability, financial, or medical rea sons; predictors of testing prescription were older age, primary tumor in ascending colon, and high tumor grade. RAS status knowledge resulted in the addition of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (20.4%) or anti-epidermal growth factor receptor therapy (21.2%).
CONCLUSION: Before 2014, RAS testing in patients with colorectal cancer in the Middle East and North Africa was often performed after first-line treatment. Testing is more routine in newly diagnosed patients, potentially shifting early treatment patterns.
Methods: a cross-sectional study was conducted, using the Kedah audit samples data extracted from the National Diabetes Registry (NDR) from the year 2014 to 2018. A total of 25,062 registered type 2 diabetes mellitus patients were selected using the inclusion and exclusion criteria from the registry. Only patients with complete data on their HbA1C, lipid profile, waist circumference and BMI were analysed using SPSS version 21.
Results: the means for the age, BMI and waist circumference of the samples were 61.5 (±10.85) years, 27.3 (±5.05) kg/m2 and 89.46 (±13.58) cm, respectively. Poor glycaemic control (HbA1c>6.5%) was observed in 72.7% of the patients, with females having poorer glycaemic control. The BMI and waist circumference were found to be significantly associated with glycaemic control (P<0.001). The total cholesterol, triglycerides and low-density lipoproteins values showed positive correlation with glycaemic control (r = 0.178, 0.157, 0.145, p<0.001), while high-density lipoproteins values are negatively correlated (r = -0.019, p<0.001).
Conclusion: implementing lifestyle changes such as physical activity and dietary modifications are important in the management of BMI, waist circumference and body lipids, which in turn results in improved glycaemic control.