Survival Rate and Prognostic Factors for Colorectal Cancer in Sabah, Borneo, Malaysia: A Retrospective Cohort of a Population-Based Study.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer is a major public health problem with significant number of cases and death in the population. This study aimed to determine the 5-year overall survival rate and the prognostic factors for colorectal cancer patients in Sabah. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study conducted using secondary data from Malaysian National Cancer Registry (MNCR) database. A 5-year overall survival and the median survival time were determined with Kaplan-Meier survival curve. Cox regression analysis was done to determine the prognostic factors on survival. RESULTS: A total of 1,152 patients were included in this study. The majority of the patients had colon cancer and presented at late stage (stage III and IV) as compared to early stage (stage I and II). From the analysis, the 5-year overall survival for colorectal cancer was 23.2% (95% CI: 21.8, 24.6) and the median survival time was 16 months (95% CI: 14.3, 17.7).  Higher survivals are seen in males (23.6%, 95% CI: 20.4, 24.7), aged 50-74 years old (24.2%, 95% CI: 22.4, 26.0), Chinese (25.5%, 95% CI: 23.0, 28.0), lived in Keningau (25.6%, 95% CI: 20.8, 30.4), colon as primary tumor site (24.5%, 95% CI: 22.5, 26.4), diagnosed with stage I (55.6%, 95% CI: 48.7, 62.5) and received surgery with chemotherapy or radiotherapy (31.3%, 95% CI: 27.8, 34.8). The significant prognostic factor was the stage at diagnosis. Patients with stage IV colorectal cancer (HR: 11.18; 95% CI: 3.48, 35.93) had eleven times risk of dying as compared to stage I. CONCLUSION: The survival rate for colorectal cancer patients in Sabah was comparatively lower than other states in Malaysia and in some Asian countries. Those patients who presented at later stage had poorer survival. Health promotion and community-based screening program should be emphasized in addition to encouraging early diagnosis to improve survival.

Prevalence of occupational injury and determination of safety climate in small scale manufacturing industry: A cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Occupational injuries are among the most important workplace issues. This study aims to determine the safety climate and prevalence of occupational injuries in the small-scale manufacturing industry. METHODS: A cross-sectional study with ten small scale manufacturers participated accounting for a total of 300 respondents. Data were collected from July to August 2020 using the NOSACQ-50 questionnaire. RESULTS: The prevalence of occupational injury for the past 12 months was at 18%. The most often injured body parts were hands and legs while among the most common injury types were open wound, burns and bleeding. The mean NOSACQ-50 scores for all dimensions are good. The associated factors are working hours per week, and compliance to SOP. There are differences in the mean scores of NOSACQ-50 between injured and non-injured workers across all dimensions. CONCLUSION: The safety climate among manufacturing industry employees is at a good level, while the prevalence of occupational injury is relatively low.

Relationship of self-reported body size and shape with risk for prostate cancer: A UK case-control study.

INTRODUCTION: Previous evidence has suggested a relationship between male self-reported body size and the risk of developing prostate cancer. In this UK-wide case-control study, we have explored the possible association of prostate cancer risk with male self-reported body size. We also investigated body shape as a surrogate marker for fat deposition around the body. As obesity and excessive adiposity have been linked with increased risk for developing a number of different cancers, further investigation of self-reported body size and shape and their potential relationship with prostate cancer was considered to be appropriate. OBJECTIVE: The study objective was to investigate whether underlying associations exist between prostate cancer risk and male self-reported body size and shape. METHODS: Data were collected from a large case-control study of men (1928 cases and 2043 controls) using self-administered questionnaires. Data from self-reported pictograms of perceived body size relating to three decades of life (20's, 30's and 40's) were recorded and analysed, including the pattern of change. The associations of self-identified body shape with prostate cancer risk were also explored. RESULTS: Self-reported body size for men in their 20's, 30's and 40's did not appear to be associated with prostate cancer risk. More than half of the subjects reported an increase in self-reported body size throughout these three decades of life. Furthermore, no association was observed between self-reported body size changes and prostate cancer risk. Using 'symmetrical' body shape as a reference group, subjects with an 'apple' shape showed a significant 27% reduction in risk (Odds ratio = 0.73, 95% C.I. 0.57-0.92). CONCLUSIONS: Change in self-reported body size throughout early to mid-adulthood in males is not a significant risk factor for the development of prostate cancer. Body shape indicative of body fat distribution suggested that an 'apple' body shape was protective and inversely associated with prostate cancer risk when compared with 'symmetrical' shape. Further studies which investigate prostate cancer risk and possible relationships with genetic factors known to influence body shape may shed further light on any underlying associations.

Clarifying the debate on population-based screening for breast cancer with mammography: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials on mammography with Bayesian meta-analysis and causal model.

BACKGROUND: The recent controversy about using mammography to screen for breast cancer based on randomized controlled trials over 3 decades in Western countries has not only eclipsed the paradigm of evidence-based medicine, but also puts health decision-makers in countries where breast cancer screening is still being considered in a dilemma to adopt or abandon such a well-established screening modality. METHODS: We reanalyzed the empirical data from the Health Insurance Plan trial in 1963 to the UK age trial in 1991 and their follow-up data published until 2015. We first performed Bayesian conjugated meta-analyses on the heterogeneity of attendance rate, sensitivity, and over-detection and their impacts on advanced stage breast cancer and death from breast cancer across trials using Bayesian Poisson fixed- and random-effect regression model. Bayesian meta-analysis of causal model was then developed to assess a cascade of causal relationships regarding the impact of both attendance and sensitivity on 2 main outcomes. RESULTS: The causes of heterogeneity responsible for the disparities across the trials were clearly manifested in 3 components. The attendance rate ranged from 61.3% to 90.4%. The sensitivity estimates show substantial variation from 57.26% to 87.97% but improved with time from 64% in 1963 to 82% in 1980 when Bayesian conjugated meta-analysis was conducted in chronological order. The percentage of over-detection shows a wide range from 0% to 28%, adjusting for long lead-time. The impacts of the attendance rate and sensitivity on the 2 main outcomes were statistically significant. Causal inference made by linking these causal relationships with emphasis on the heterogeneity of the attendance rate and sensitivity accounted for the variation in the reduction of advanced breast cancer (none-30%) and of mortality (none-31%). We estimated a 33% (95% CI: 24-42%) and 13% (95% CI: 6-20%) breast cancer mortality reduction for the best scenario (90% attendance rate and 95% sensitivity) and the poor scenario (30% attendance rate and 55% sensitivity), respectively. CONCLUSION: Elucidating the scenarios from high to low performance and learning from the experiences of these trials helps screening policy-makers contemplate on how to avoid errors made in ineffective studies and emulate the effective studies to save women lives.