METHODS: In the first part of the analysis costs attributable to cervical cancer and precancerous lesions were estimated; epidemiologic data were sourced from the WHO GLOBOCAN database and Malaysian national data sources. In the second part, a prevalence-based model was used to estimate the potential annual number of cases of cervical cancer and precancerous lesions that could be prevented and subsequent HPV-related treatment costs averted with the bivalent (HPV 16/18) and the quadrivalent (HPV 16/18/6/11) vaccines, at the population level, at steady state. A vaccine efficacy of 98% was assumed against HPV types included in both vaccines. Effectiveness against other oncogenic HPV types was based on the latest results from each vaccine's respective clinical trials.
RESULTS: In Malaysia there are an estimated 4,696 prevalent cases of cervical cancer annually and 1,372 prevalent cases of precancerous lesions, which are associated with a total direct cost of RM 39.2 million with a further RM 12.4 million in indirect costs owing to lost productivity. At steady state, vaccination with the bivalent vaccine was estimated to prevent 4,199 cervical cancer cases per year versus 3,804 cases for the quadrivalent vaccine. Vaccination with the quadrivalent vaccine was projected to prevent 1,721 cases of genital warts annually, whereas the annual number of cases remained unchanged with the bivalent vaccine. Furthermore, vaccination with the bivalent vaccine was estimated to avert RM 45.4 million in annual HPV-related treatment costs (direct+indirect) compared with RM 42.9 million for the quadrivalent vaccine.
CONCLUSION: This analysis showed that vaccination against HPV 16/18 can reduce the clinical and economic burden of cervical cancer and precancerous lesions in Malaysia. The greatest potential economic benefit was observed using the bivalent vaccine in preference to the quadrivalent vaccine.
METHODS: Screening periodontal examinations were carried out on all eligible Malay pregnant women in the second trimester of pregnancy attending two randomly selected community maternal and child health clinics in Kota Bharu, Kelantan. Patients with four or more sites with pocket depth 4 mm or higher, and clinical attachment loss 3 mm or higher at the same site with presence of bleeding on probing were diagnosed as having periodontitis in this study. Using this definition, systematic random sampling was utilized for selection of 250 subjects for each exposed and non-exposed group. Of 500 subjects enrolled in the study, 28 (5.6%) were either dropped or lost to follow-up. Of the remaining 472 subjects, 232 with periodontitis were in the exposed group and 240 with healthy periodontium were in the nonexposed group.
RESULTS: The incidence of LBW was 14.2% (95% CI: 9.70-18.75) in women with periodontitis, and 3.3% (95% CI: 1.05-5.62) in women without periodontitis. The relative risk of having LBW infants was 4.27 times higher for women with periodontitis compared with those without periodontitis (95% CI: 2.01-9.04). After adjustment for potential confounders using multiple logistic regression analysis, significant association was found between maternal periodontitis and LBW (OR = 3.84; 95% CI: 1.34-11.05).
CONCLUSION: The results of this study provide additional evidence that pregnant women with periodontitis are at a significantly higher risk of delivering LBW infants.
METHODS: Data on demography, diabetes status, management and complications were collected via medical records, interview and laboratory assessments. HbA(1c) was analysed by a central laboratory prospectively.
RESULTS: Patient profile was similar in the 1998 (N = 21,838) and 2003 cohorts (N = 15,549): 95% were diagnosed as type 2 diabetes mellitus and were obese (BMI approximately 25 kg/m(2)). Glycaemic control was unsatisfactory in many patients (mean HbA(1c) approximately 8%; fasting glucose approximately 9 mmol/L). Lipids were well-controlled but hypertension was not. The incidence of neuropathy ( approximately 33%) and cataract ( approximately 27%) were high. The majority ( approximately 71%) of patients in both cohorts were treated with oral antidiabetic drug (OAD) monotherapy; approximately 24% were on insulin therapy. Approximately half of the 2003 cohort reported a healthy state of well-being. Quality of life did not appear to have suffered as a result of having diabetes. However, many patients were worried about hypoglycaemic risk (53.9%) or worsening of diabetes (45.8%) and insulin initiation (64.5%).
CONCLUSIONS: Although both cohorts were separate cross-sectional studies of diabetes management status in Asia, the results showed that the demography profile, glycaemic control and cardiovascular risk factors were remarkably similar in both cohorts 5 years after the first survey. More concerted efforts are needed to increase diabetes awareness and education.