METHODOLOGY: A guided, structured interview was employed to explore opinions on the current status, barriers, and strategies for implementing SCID NBS in Malaysia. All 13 invited experts participated in this study, indicating complete participation from the entire Malaysian immunology fraternity (consisting of eight clinical immunologists and five immunopathologists).
KEY FINDINGS: Several initiatives are ongoing to establish SCID NBS in Malaysia. Hindrances such as low immunologist-to-patient ratio, unequal placements of immunologists throughout Malaysia, society's low disease awareness, national health prioritization, lack of stakeholder engagement, and inadequacy of local study/data were highlighted. Pilot research on SCID NBS, advocacy workshops, and promotion materials are among the ongoing activities outlined in the blueprint, paving the way for this nationwide NBS program to be achievable in the near future.
CONCLUSION: This article provides recommendations to policymakers in mandating SCID NBS. Strategies by key stakeholders are underway, particularly in advocacy programs and efforts to increase awareness among clinicians and the public.
METHODS: 28 experts from 11 countries reviewed the evidence and modified the statements using the Delphi method, with consensus level predefined as ≥80% of agreement on each statement. The Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was followed.
RESULTS: Consensus was reached in 26 statements. At an individual level, eradication of H. pylori reduces the risk of GC in asymptomatic subjects and is recommended unless there are competing considerations. In cohorts of vulnerable subjects (eg, first-degree relatives of patients with GC), a screen-and-treat strategy is also beneficial. H. pylori eradication in patients with early GC after curative endoscopic resection reduces the risk of metachronous cancer and calls for a re-examination on the hypothesis of 'the point of no return'. At the general population level, the strategy of screen-and-treat for H. pylori infection is most cost-effective in young adults in regions with a high incidence of GC and is recommended preferably before the development of atrophic gastritis and intestinal metaplasia. However, such a strategy may still be effective in people aged over 50, and may be integrated or included into national healthcare priorities, such as colorectal cancer screening programmes, to optimise the resources. Reliable locally effective regimens based on the principles of antibiotic stewardship are recommended. Subjects at higher risk of GC, such as those with advanced gastric atrophy or intestinal metaplasia, should receive surveillance endoscopy after eradication of H. pylori.
CONCLUSION: Evidence supports the proposal that eradication therapy should be offered to all individuals infected with H. pylori. Vulnerable subjects should be tested, and treated if the test is positive. Mass screening and eradication of H. pylori should be considered in populations at higher risk of GC.