[Reducing the impact of COVID-19 on radiation oncology units of developing countries: A rapid review and expert consensus]. / Reduciendo el impacto de COVID-19 sobre la radioterapia oncológica en países en desarrollo: revisión rápida y consenso de expertos.

OBJECTIVE: To generate recommendations on the management of radiotherapeutic treatments during the pandemic, adapted to a country with limited health resources. METHODS: We did a rapid review of the literature, searching for papers that describe any measures to reduce the risk of COVID-19 infection, as well as management guidelines to reduce the workload, in radiotherapy units. The following conditions were included in the scope of this review: gynecological tumors, breast cancer, gastrointestinal tumors, genitourinary tumors, head and neck tumors, skin cancer, tumors of the central nervous system, and lymphomas. An expert group discussed online the extracted data and drafted the recommendations. Using a modified Delphi method, the consensus was reached among 14 certificated radio-oncologists. The quality of the evidence that supported the recommendations on treatment schedules was assessed. RESULTS: A total of 57 documents were included. Of these, 25 provided strategies to reduce the risk of infection. Recommendations for each condiction were extracted from the remaining documents. The recommendations aim to establish specific parameters where treatments can be omitted, deferred, prioritized, and shortened. Treatment schemes are recommended for each condition, prioritizing hypo-fractionated schemes whenever possible. CONCLUSIONS: We propose strategies for the management of radiotherapy services to guarantee the continuity of high-quality treatments despite the health crisis caused by COVID-19.

OBJETIVO: Establecer recomendaciones para la toma de decisiones de manejo en radioterapia durante la pandemia de COVID-19, adaptadas a un país con recursos de salud limitados. MÉTODOS: A través de una revisión rápida de la literatura se buscaron publicaciones que describieran medidas para reducir el riesgo de infección por COVID-19, así como también pautas de manejo para reducir la carga de trabajo en las unidades de radioterapia. Se incluyeron en el alcance de esta revisión las siguientes patologías: tumores ginecológicos, cáncer de mama, tumores gastrointestinales, tumores genitourinarios, tumores de cabeza y cuello, cáncer de piel, tumores del sistema nervioso central y linfomas. Un grupo de expertos discutió en línea los datos extraídos y redactó las recomendaciones. Mediante un método Delphi modificado, se evaluó el consenso entre 14 radio-oncólogos certificados. Se evaluó la calidad de la evidencia que sustentó las recomendaciones sobre esquemas de tratamiento. RESULTADOS: Se incluyeron un total de 57 documentos. De 25 trabajos se extrajeron las estrategias para reducir el riesgo de infección. De los restantes, se obtuvieron las recomendaciones para cada patología. Las recomendaciones están orientadas a establecer escenarios específicos donde se pueden omitir, diferir, priorizar y acortar los tratamientos. En el ítem de acortar se recomiendan esquemas de tratamiento para cada patología, priorizando los esquemas hipofraccionados cuando fue posible. CONCLUSIÓN: Se plantean estrategias para la gestión de los servicios de radioterapia con el objetivo de garantizar que los tratamientos de alta calidad para pacientes oncológicos sigan entregándose, pese a la crisis sanitaria ocasionada por COVID-19.

Therapeutic use of cannabis and cannabinoids: an evidence mapping and appraisal of systematic reviews.

BACKGROUND: Although cannabis and cannabinoids are widely used with therapeutic purposes, their claimed efficacy is highly controversial. For this reason, medical cannabis use is a broad field of research that is rapidly expanding. Our objectives are to identify, characterize, appraise, and organize the current available evidence surrounding therapeutic use of cannabis and cannabinoids, using evidence maps. METHODS: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library and CINAHL, to identify systematic reviews (SRs) published from their inception up to December 2017. Two authors assessed eligibility and extracted data independently. We assessed methodological quality of the included SRs using the AMSTAR tool. To illustrate the extent of use of medical cannabis, we organized the results according to identified PICO questions using bubble plots corresponding to different clinical scenarios. RESULTS: A total of 44 SRs published between 2001 and 2017 were included in this evidence mapping with data from 158 individual studies. We extracted 96 PICO questions in the following medical conditions: multiple sclerosis, movement disorders (e.g. Tourette Syndrome, Parkinson Disease), psychiatry conditions, Alzheimer disease, epilepsy, acute and chronic pain, cancer, neuropathic pain, symptoms related to cancer (e.g. emesis and anorexia related with chemotherapy), rheumatic disorders, HIV-related symptoms, glaucoma, and COPD. The evidence about these conditions is heterogeneous regarding the conclusions and the quality of the individual primary studies. The quality of the SRs was moderate to high according to AMSTAR scores. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence on medical uses of cannabis is broad. However, due to methodological limitations, conclusions were weak in most of the assessed comparisons. Evidence mapping methodology is useful to perform an overview of available research, since it is possible to systematically describe the extent and distribution of evidence, and to organize scattered data.

Reduciendo el impacto de COVID-19 sobre la radioterapia oncológica en países en desarrollo: revisión rápida y consenso de expertos / Reducing the impact of COVID-19 on radiation oncology units of developing countries: a rapid review and expert consensus

OBJETIVO: Establecer recomendaciones para la toma de decisiones de manejo en radioterapia durante la pandemia de COVID-19, adaptadas a un país con recursos de salud limitados. MÉTODOS: A través de una revisión rápida de la literatura se buscaron publicaciones que describieran medidas para reducir el riesgo de infección por COVID-19, así como también pautas de manejo para reducir la carga de trabajo en las unidades de radioterapia. Se incluyeron en el alcance de esta revisión las siguientes patologías: tumores ginecológicos, cáncer de mama, tumores gastrointestinales, tumores genitourinarios, tumores de cabeza y cuello, cáncer de piel, tumores del sistema nervioso central y linfomas. Un grupo de expertos discutió en línea los datos extraídos y redactó las recomendaciones. Mediante un método Delphi modificado, se evaluó el consenso entre 14 radio-oncólogos certificados. Se evaluó la calidad de la evidencia que sustentó las recomendaciones sobre esquemas de tratamiento. RESULTADOS: Se incluyeron un total de 57 documentos. De 25 trabajos se extrajeron las estrategias para reducir el riesgo de infección. De los restantes, se obtuvieron las recomendaciones para cada patología. Las recomendaciones están orientadas a establecer escenarios específicos donde se pueden omitir, diferir, priorizar y acortar los tratamientos. En el ítem de acortar se recomiendan esquemas de tratamiento para cada patología, priorizando los esquemas hipofraccionados cuando fue posible. CONCLUSIÓN: Se plantean estrategias para la gestión de los servicios de radioterapia con el objetivo de garantizar que los tratamientos de alta calidad para pacientes oncológicos sigan entregándose, pese a la crisis sanitaria ocasionada por COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: To generate recommendations on the management of radiotherapeutic treatments during the pandemic, adapted to a country with limited health resources. METHODS: We did a rapid review of the literature, searching for papers that describe any measures to reduce the risk of COVID-19 infection, as well as management guidelines to reduce the workload, in radiotherapy units. The following conditions were included in the scope of this review: gynecological tumors, breast cancer, gastrointestinal tumors, genitourinary tumors, head and neck tumors, skin cancer, tumors of the central nervous system, and lymphomas. An expert group discussed online the extracted data and drafted the recommendations. Using a modified Delphi method, the consensus was reached among 14 certificated radio-oncologists. The quality of the evidence that supported the recommendations on treatment schedules was assessed. RESULTS: A total of 57 documents were included. Of these, 25 provided strategies to reduce the risk of infection. Recommendations for each condiction were extracted from the remaining documents. The recommendations aim to establish specific parameters where treatments can be omitted, deferred, prioritized, and shortened. Treatment schemes are recommended for each condition, prioritizing hypo-fractionated schemes whenever possible. CONCLUSIONS: We propose strategies for the management of radiotherapy services to guarantee the continuity of high-quality treatments despite the health crisis caused by COVID-19.

Plasma interleukin-6 concentration for the diagnosis of sepsis in critically ill adults.

BACKGROUND: The definition of sepsis has evolved over time, along with the clinical and scientific knowledge behind it. For years, sepsis was defined as a systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) in the presence of a documented or suspected infection. At present, sepsis is defined as a life-threatening organ dysfunction resulting from a dysregulated host response to infection. Even though sepsis is one of the leading causes of mortality in critically ill patients, and the World Health Organization (WHO) recognizes it as a healthcare priority, it still lacks an accurate diagnostic test. Determining the accuracy of interleukin-6 (IL-6) concentrations in plasma, which is proposed as a new biomarker for the diagnosis of sepsis, might be helpful to provide adequate and timely management of critically ill patients, and thus reduce the morbidity and mortality associated with this condition. OBJECTIVES: To determine the diagnostic accuracy of plasma interleukin-6 (IL-6) concentration for the diagnosis of bacterial sepsis in critically ill adults. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, and Web of Science on 25 January 2019. We screened references in the included studies to identify additional studies. We did not apply any language restriction to the electronic searches. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included diagnostic accuracy studies enrolling critically ill adults aged 18 years or older under suspicion of sepsis during their hospitalization, where IL-6 concentrations were evaluated by serological measurement. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened the references to identify relevant studies and extracted data. We assessed the methodological quality of studies using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool. We estimated a summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve by fitting a hierarchical summary ROC (HSROC) non-linear mixed model. We explored sources of heterogeneity using the HSROC model parameters. We conducted all analyses in the SAS statistical software package and R software. MAIN RESULTS: We included 23 studies (n = 4192) assessing the accuracy of IL-6 for the diagnosis of sepsis in critically ill adults. Twenty studies that were available as conference proceedings only are awaiting classification. The included participants were heterogeneous in terms of their distribution of age, gender, main diagnosis, setting, country, positivity threshold, sepsis criteria, year of publication, and origin of infection, among other factors. Prevalence of sepsis greatly varied across studies, ranging from 12% to 78%. We considered all studies to be at high risk of bias due to issues related to the index test domain in QUADAS-2. The SROC curve showed a great dispersion in individual studies accuracy estimates (21 studies, 3650 adult patients), therefore the considerable heterogeneity in the collected data prevented us from calculating formal accuracy estimates. Using a fixed prevalence of sepsis of 50% and a fixed specificity of 74%, we found a sensitivity of 66% (95% confidence interval 60 to 72). If we test a cohort 1000 adult patients under suspicion of sepsis with IL-6, we will find that 330 patients would receive appropriate and timely antibiotic therapy, while 130 patients would be wrongly considered to have sepsis. In addition, 370 out of 1000 patients would avoid unnecessary antibiotic therapy, and 170 patients would have been undiagnosed of sepsis. This numerical approach should be interpreted with caution due to the limitations described above. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Our evidence assessment of plasma interleukin-6 concentrations for the diagnosis of sepsis in critically ill adults reveals several limitations. High heterogeneity of collected evidence regarding the main diagnosis, setting, country, positivity threshold, sepsis criteria, year of publication, and the origin of infection, among other factors, along with the potential number of misclassifications, remain significant constraints for its implementation. The 20 conference proceedings assessed as studies awaiting classification may alter the conclusions of the review once they are fully published and evaluated. Further studies about the accuracy of interleukin-6 for the diagnosis of sepsis in adults that apply rigorous methodology for conducting diagnostic test accuracy studies are needed. The conclusions of the review will likely change once the 20 studies pending publication are fully published and included.

The remarkable geographical pattern of gastric cancer mortality in Ecuador.

AIM: This study was aimed to describe the gastric cancer mortality trend, and to analyze the spatial distribution of gastric cancer mortality in Ecuador, between 2004 and 2015. METHODS: Data were collected from the National Institute of Statistics and Census (INEC) database. Crude gastric cancer mortality rates, standardized mortality ratios (SMRs) and indirect standardized mortality rates (ISMRs) were calculated per 100,000 persons. For time trend analysis, joinpoint regression was used. The annual percentage rate change (APC) and the average annual percent change (AAPC) was computed for each province. Spatial age-adjusted analysis was used to detect high risk clusters of gastric cancer mortality, from 2010 to 2015, using Kulldorff spatial scan statistics. RESULTS: In Ecuador, between 2004 and 2015, gastric cancer caused a total of 19,115 deaths: 10,679 in men and 8436 in women. When crude rates were analyzed, a significant decline was detected (AAPC: -1.8%; p<0.001). ISMR also decreased, but this change was not statistically significant (APC: -0.53%; p=0.36). From 2004 to 2007 and from 2008 to 2011 the province with the highest ISMR was Carchi; and, from 2012 to 2015, was Cotopaxi. The most likely high occurrence cluster included Bolívar, Los Ríos, Chimborazo, Tungurahua, and Cotopaxi provinces, with a relative risk of 1.34 (p<0.001). CONCLUSION: There is a substantial geographic variation in gastric cancer mortality rates among Ecuadorian provinces. The spatial analysis indicates the presence of high occurrence clusters throughout the Andes Mountains.