RESULTS: An overall of 1839 diabetes patients participated in the study. The results have shown that direct and indirect costs are positively associated with the participants' socio-demographic characteristics, except for household income and educational status. The annual total cost of diabetes care was USD 740.1, amongst which the share of the direct cost was USD 646.7, and the indirect cost was USD 93.65. Most direct costs comprised medicine (USD 274.5) and hospitalization (USD 319.7). In contrast, the productivity loss of the patients had the highest contribution to the indirect cost (USD 81.36).

METHODS: We defined high CVD risk as the presence of any of the following: hypertension, coronary artery disease, stroke, smoker, diabetes or age >55 years. Availability and affordability of blood pressure lowering drugs, antiplatelets and statins were obtained from pharmacies. Participants were categorised: group 1-all three drug types were available and affordable, group 2-all three drugs were available but not affordable and group 3-all three drugs were not available. We used multivariable Cox proportional hazard models with nested clustering at country and community levels, adjusting for comorbidities, sociodemographic and economic factors.

RESULTS: Of 163 466 participants, there were 93 200 with high CVD risk from 21 countries (mean age 54.7, 49% female). Of these, 44.9% were from group 1, 29.4% from group 2 and 25.7% from group 3. Compared with participants from group 1, the risk of MACEs was higher among participants in group 2 (HR 1.19, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.31), and among participants from group 3 (HR 1.25, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.50).

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The prevalence of diabetes, defined as self-reported or fasting glycemia ≥7 mmol/L, was documented in 119,666 adults from three high-income (HIC), seven upper-middle-income (UMIC), four lower-middle-income (LMIC), and four low-income (LIC) countries. Relationships between diabetes and its risk factors within these country groupings were assessed using multivariable analyses.

RESULTS: Age- and sex-adjusted diabetes prevalences were highest in the poorer countries and lowest in the wealthiest countries (LIC 12.3%, UMIC 11.1%, LMIC 8.7%, and HIC 6.6%; P < 0.0001). In the overall population, diabetes risk was higher with a 5-year increase in age (odds ratio 1.29 [95% CI 1.28-1.31]), male sex (1.19 [1.13-1.25]), urban residency (1.24 [1.11-1.38]), low versus high education level (1.10 [1.02-1.19]), low versus high physical activity (1.28 [1.20-1.38]), family history of diabetes (3.15 [3.00-3.31]), higher waist-to-hip ratio (highest vs. lowest quartile; 3.63 [3.33-3.96]), and BMI (≥35 vs. <25 kg/m(2); 2.76 [2.52-3.03]). The relationship between diabetes prevalence and both BMI and family history of diabetes differed in higher- versus lower-income country groups (P for interaction < 0.0001). After adjustment for all risk factors and ethnicity, diabetes prevalences continued to show a gradient (LIC 14.0%, LMIC 10.1%, UMIC 10.9%, and HIC 5.6%).

METHODS: The authors conducted a qualitative study using in-depth interviews and focus group discussions with 98 participants representing 23 LMICs in Eastern Europe, Central Asia, East and Southern Africa, and Latin America.

RESULTS: Despite geographic, cultural, and socioeconomic differences, the common themes that emerged from the data across the 3 regions are strikingly similar: trust, knowledge gaps, stigma, sharing experiences, and sustainability. The authors identified common facilitators (training/education, relationship building/networking, third-party facilitators, and communication) and barriers (mistrust, stigma, organizational fragility, difficulty translating HIC strategies) to establishing trust, collaboration, and advancing cancer advocacy efforts. To the authors' knowledge, the current study is the first to describe the role that coalitions and regional networks play in advancing breast cancer advocacy in LMICs across multiple regions.