METHODS: A systematic search was conducted through Pubmed, CINAHL, EMBASE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Additional articles were located through cross-checking of the references list and bibliography citations of the included studies and previous review papers. We included intervention studies with controlled or baseline comparison groups that were conducted in primary care practices or the community, targeted at adult populations (randomized controlled trials, non-randomized trials with controlled groups and pre- and post-intervention studies). The interventions were targeted either at individuals, communities, health care professionals or the health-care system. The main outcome of interest was the relative risk (RR) of screening uptake rates due to the intervention.
RESULTS: We included 21 studies in the meta-analysis. The risk of bias for randomization was low to medium in the randomized controlled trials, except for one, and high in the non-randomized trials. Two analyses were performed; optimistic (using the highest effect sizes) and pessimistic (using the lowest effect sizes). Overall, interventions were shown to increase the uptake of screening for CVD risk factors (RR 1.443; 95% CI 1.264 to 1.648 for pessimistic analysis and RR 1.680; 95% CI 1.420 to 1.988 for optimistic analysis). Effective interventions that increased screening participation included: use of physician reminders (RR ranged between 1.392; 95% CI 1.192 to 1.625, and 1.471; 95% CI 1.304 to 1.660), use of dedicated personnel (RR ranged between 1.510; 95% CI 1.014 to 2.247, and 2.536; 95% CI 1.297 to 4.960) and provision of financial incentives for screening (RR 1.462; 95% CI 1.068 to 2.000). Meta-regression analysis showed that the effect of CVD risk factors screening uptake was not associated with study design, types of population nor types of interventions.
CONCLUSIONS: Interventions using physician reminders, using dedicated personnel to deliver screening, and provision of financial incentives were found to be effective in increasing CVD risk factors screening uptake.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 7476 patients with routine health check-up data who underwent prostate biopsies from January 2008 to December 2021 in eight referral centres in Asia were screened. After data pre-processing and cleaning, 5037 patients and 117 features were analyzed. Seven AI-based algorithms were tested for feature selection and seven AI-based algorithms were tested for classification, with the best combination applied for model construction. The APAC score was established in the CH cohort and validated in a multi-centre cohort and in each validation cohort to evaluate its generalizability in different Asian regions. The performance of the models was evaluated using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC), calibration plot, and decision curve analyses.
RESULTS: Eighteen features were involved in the APCA score predicting HGPCa, with some of these markers not previously used in prostate cancer diagnosis. The area under the curve (AUC) was 0.76 (95% CI:0.74-0.78) in the multi-centre validation cohort and the increment of AUC (APCA vs. PSA) was 0.16 (95% CI:0.13-0.20). The calibration plots yielded a high degree of coherence and the decision curve analysis yielded a higher net clinical benefit. Applying the APCA score could reduce unnecessary biopsies by 20.2% and 38.4%, at the risk of missing 5.0% and 10.0% of HGPCa cases in the multi-centre validation cohort, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: The APCA score based on routine health check-ups could reduce unnecessary prostate biopsies without additional examinations in Asian populations. Further prospective population-based studies are warranted to confirm these results.
METHODS: This retrospective cohort study includes adult patients of two tertiary hospitals in Malaysia. Potential study subjects were identified using pharmacy supply database or novel oral anticoagulant (NOAC) registry. Demographics, clinical data and laboratory test results were extracted from the medical records of the patients or electronic databases. The main outcome measure is the occurrence of a bleeding event. Bleeding events were classified into major bleeding, clinically relevant non-major bleeding, or minor bleeding, according to the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis criteria. We consider clinically relevant non-major bleeding events or major bleeding events as clinically relevant bleeding events. An occurrence of any bleeding event was recorded from the initiation of NOAC therapy until the death of a patient, or the date of permanent discontinuation of NOAC use, or the last day of data collection. The predicted rate of dabigatran-induced bleeding events per 100 patient-years was estimated.
RESULTS: During a median follow-up period of 18 months, 73 patients experienced 90 bleeding events. Among these patients, 25 including 4 fatal cases, experienced major bleeding events. The predicted rate per 100 patient-years of follow-up of any bleeding events was 9.0 [95% CI 6.9 to 11.1]; clinically relevant bleeding events 6.0 [95% CI 4.8 to 8.3], and major bleeding events 3.0 [95% CI 1.9 to 4.2]. The independent risk factor for clinically relevant bleeding events is prior bleeding. While prior bleeding or congestive heart failure is linked with major bleeding events.
CONCLUSIONS: The predicted rate for dabigatran-induced major bleeding episodes is low but these adverse events carry a high fatality risk. Preventive measures should target older patients who have prior bleeding or congestive heart failure. This article is open to POST-PUBLICATION REVIEW. Registered readers (see "For Readers") may comment by clicking on ABSTRACT on the issue's contents page.