MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study consisted of qualitative, semi-structured Focus Group Discussions (for students, n = 23) and in-depth interviews (for patients, n = 9); to phenomenologically describe the perceptions of participants involved in the VC. Each session was recorded with the participants' permission. The recorded session was transcribed verbatim and thematically analysed using the qualitative data analysis software, NVivo™.
RESULTS: The major themes that emerged were: (1) General opinions and experiences, (2) Content of VCs, (3) Remote access to counselling, (4) Patient-clinician relationships, (5) Technical issues, (6) Changes after VCs, and (7) Future application. Most students and patients were quite comfortable with VC as it is convenient, allowing students to be creative and avoid the hassle of transport and traffic. However, some of the students felt that it lacked the personal touch and guidance from lecturers who would normally be present during physical class.
CONCLUSION: Virtual counselling enables remote access to counselling, but it is also subjected to some limitations, especially regarding lack of clinical assessments, human touch and internet issues. Though participants were optimistic about adapting it in the future, multiple factors must be considered. Ultimately, the behavioural change will depend on the patient's motivation in making a difference.
RESULTS: Five repatriation missions performed was led by the National Agency for Disaster Management (NADMA) with the Ministry of Health providing technical expertise. A total of 432 citizens were repatriated from the missions. The operations were divided into four phases: the pre-boarding screening phase, the boarding and in-flight phase, the reception phase and the quarantine phase. The commercial aircraft used were from two different commercial airlines. Each mission had flight crew members between 10 and 17 people. There were 82 positive cases detected among the repatriated citizens. There was a single positive case of a healthcare worker involved in the mission, based on the sample taken on arrival of the flight. There were no infections involving flight team members.
CONCLUSION: Medical flight crew must be familiar with aircraft fittings that differ from one commercial airline to another as it influences infection control practices. A clear understanding of socio-political situation of a country, transmission routes of a pathogen, disease presentation, and knowledge of aviation procedures, aircraft engineering and design is of great importance in preparing for such missions. Our approach of multidiscipline team involvement managed to allow us to provide and execute the operations successfully.
METHODS: This was a multicenter, cross-sectional prevalence study on PD-L1 positivity among patients with advanced-stage TNBC in Malaysia. Patients were identified using medical records and were enrolled in the study if they met the inclusion criteria. PD-L1 evaluation was performed using archived formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue specimens. Demographic and clinical data were also obtained and summarized using descriptive statistics. The association of these parameters with PD-L1 positivity was assessed using chi-square and logistic regression analysis.
RESULTS: Three medical centers provided 138 complete cases for analysis. Of these 138 cases, 52 (37.7%; 95% confidence interval, 29.6%-46.3%) showed positive PD-L1 expression, defined as immune cell PD-L1 expression ≥ 1%. In a univariate analysis, stage III of the disease and tumor samples from resected specimens were significantly associated with a positive PD-L1 status. However, further assessment using a multivariate model revealed that only resected tumor samples remained significantly associated with PD-L1 positivity after controlling for disease staging.
CONCLUSION: The prevalence of PD-L1 positivity among patients with stage III or IV TNBC was 37.7%. A significant association was noted between PD-L1 positivity and the tumor tissue obtained from resected specimens. Although the mechanism and clinical significance of this association remain unclear, this finding indicates a possible disparity in the PD-L1 status of samples obtained using surgical resection or biopsy.