Risk of COVID-19 death for people with a pre-existing cancer diagnosis prior to COVID-19-vaccination: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

While previous reviews found a positive association between pre-existing cancer diagnosis and COVID-19-related death, most early studies did not distinguish long-term cancer survivors from those recently diagnosed/treated, nor adjust for important confounders including age. We aimed to consolidate higher-quality evidence on risk of COVID-19-related death for people with recent/active cancer (compared to people without) in the pre-COVID-19-vaccination period. We searched the WHO COVID-19 Global Research Database (20 December 2021), and Medline and Embase (10 May 2023). We included studies adjusting for age and sex, and providing details of cancer status. Risk-of-bias assessment was based on the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Pooled adjusted odds or risk ratios (aORs, aRRs) or hazard ratios (aHRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated using generic inverse-variance random-effects models. Random-effects meta-regressions were used to assess associations between effect estimates and time since cancer diagnosis/treatment. Of 23 773 unique title/abstract records, 39 studies were eligible for inclusion (2 low, 17 moderate, 20 high risk of bias). Risk of COVID-19-related death was higher for people with active or recently diagnosed/treated cancer (general population: aOR = 1.48, 95% CI: 1.36-1.61, I2 = 0; people with COVID-19: aOR = 1.58, 95% CI: 1.41-1.77, I2 = 0.58; inpatients with COVID-19: aOR = 1.66, 95% CI: 1.34-2.06, I2 = 0.98). Risks were more elevated for lung (general population: aOR = 3.4, 95% CI: 2.4-4.7) and hematological cancers (general population: aOR = 2.13, 95% CI: 1.68-2.68, I2 = 0.43), and for metastatic cancers. Meta-regression suggested risk of COVID-19-related death decreased with time since diagnosis/treatment, for example, for any/solid cancers, fitted aOR = 1.55 (95% CI: 1.37-1.75) at 1 year and aOR = 0.98 (95% CI: 0.80-1.20) at 5 years post-cancer diagnosis/treatment. In conclusion, before COVID-19-vaccination, risk of COVID-19-related death was higher for people with recent cancer, with risk depending on cancer type and time since diagnosis/treatment.

Benefits and harms of cervical screening, triage and treatment strategies in women living with HIV.

To support a strategy to eliminate cervical cancer as a public health problem, the World Health Organisation (WHO) reviewed its guidelines for screening and treatment of cervical pre-cancerous lesions in 2021. Women living with HIV have 6-times the risk of cervical cancer compared to women in the general population, and we harnessed a model platform ('Policy1-Cervix-HIV') to evaluate the benefits and harms of a range of screening strategies for women living with HIV in Tanzania, a country with endemic HIV. Assuming 70% coverage, we found that 3-yearly primary HPV screening without triage would reduce age-standardised cervical cancer mortality rates by 72%, with a number needed to treat (NNT) of 38.7, to prevent a cervical cancer death. Triaging HPV positive women before treatment resulted in minimal loss of effectiveness and had more favorable NNTs (19.7-33.0). Screening using visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA) or cytology was less effective than primary HPV and, in the case of VIA, generated a far higher NNT of 107.5. These findings support the WHO 2021 recommendation that women living with HIV are screened with primary HPV testing in a screen-triage-and-treat approach starting at 25 years, with regular screening every 3-5 years.

Benefits, harms and cost-effectiveness of cervical screening, triage and treatment strategies for women in the general population.

In 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) launched a strategy to eliminate cervical cancer as a public health problem. To support the strategy, the WHO published updated cervical screening guidelines in 2021. To inform this update, we used an established modeling platform, Policy1-Cervix, to evaluate the impact of seven primary screening scenarios across 78 low- and lower-middle-income countries (LMICs) for the general population of women. Assuming 70% coverage, we found that primary human papillomavirus (HPV) screening approaches were the most effective and cost-effective, reducing cervical cancer age-standardized mortality rates by 63-67% when offered every 5 years. Strategies involving triaging women before treatment (with 16/18 genotyping, cytology, visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA) or colposcopy) had close-to-similar effectiveness to HPV screening without triage and fewer pre-cancer treatments. Screening with VIA or cytology every 3 years was less effective and less cost-effective than HPV screening every 5 years. Furthermore, VIA generated more than double the number of pre-cancer treatments compared to HPV. In conclusion, primary HPV screening is the most effective, cost-effective and efficient cervical screening option in LMICs. These findings have directly informed WHO's updated cervical screening guidelines for the general population of women, which recommend primary HPV screening in a screen-and-treat or screen-triage-and-treat approach, starting from age 30 years with screening every 5 years or 10 years.

Modelling Preferential Phagocytosis in Atherosclerosis: Delineating Timescales in Plaque Development.

Atherosclerotic plaques develop over a long time and can cause heart attacks and strokes. There are no simple mathematical models that capture the different timescales of rapid macrophage and lipid dynamics and slow plaque growth. We propose a simple ODE model for lipid dynamics that includes macrophage preference for ingesting apoptotic material and modified low-density lipoproteins (modLDL) over ingesting necrotic material. We use multiple timescale analysis to show that if the necrosis rate is small then the necrotic core in the model plaque may continue to develop slowly even when the lipid levels in plaque macrophages, apoptotic material and modLDL appear to have reached equilibrium. We use the model to explore the effect of macrophage emigration, apoptotic cell necrosis, total rate of macrophage phagocytosis and modLDL influx into the plaque on plaque lipid accumulation.

Comparison of hospital charges between robotic, laparoscopic stapled, and laparoscopic handsewn Roux-en-Y gastric bypass.

The feasibility and safety of laparoscopic and robotic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RRYGB) have been established. To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of robotic surgery we compared the hospital charges for robotic, laparoscopic stapled (SRYGB), and laparoscopic handsewn Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (HRYGB) at our institution. One hundred thirty-five consecutive patients undergoing Roux-en-Y gastric bypass at Stanford University Medical Center by handsewn, stapled or robotic techniques from 1 July 2005 to 31 December 2005 were evaluated. Medical records of these patients were retrospectively reviewed and the following variables were collected and analyzed: age, gender, body mass index (BMI), number of preoperative comorbidities, length of stay (LOS), operating and anesthesia times, postoperative complications, mortality, professional fees, and hospital and total charges. Twenty-one RRYGB, 78 SRYGB, and 36 HRYGB were performed during the study period. Comparison of the above three groups demonstrated no statistically significant differences in age, gender, BMI, number of preoperative comorbidities, LOS, operating and anesthesia times, postoperative complications, mortality or professional fees. Total charges were higher for RRYGB (US $77,820) when compared with SRYGB (US $66,153) but not when compared with HRYGB (US $68,814). RRYGB higher hospital charges resulted in higher total charges when compared with SRYGB and HRYGB. These differences do not reflect actual cost to the hospital.