Spatial-temporal trends in leprosy burden and its associations with socioeconomic and physical geographic factors: results from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of our study was to assess the multiscalar changes in leprosy burden and its associated risk factors over the last three decades. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted an in-depth examination of leprosy's spatial-temporal trends at multiple geographical scale (global, regional, and national), utilizing information from Global Burden of Disease, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD 2019). METHODS: Incidence and the estimated annual percentage change (EAPC) in age-standardized incidence rate (ASIR) of leprosy were determined, with countries categorized based on leprosy incidence changes. We examined socioeconomic and physical geography influences on leprosy incidence via Spearman correlation analysis, using ternary phase diagrams to reveal the synergetic effects on leprosy occurrence. RESULTS: Globally, incident cases of leprosy decreased by 27.86% from 1990 to 2019, with a reduction in ASIR (EAPC = -2.53), yet trends were not homogeneous across regions. ASIR and EAPC correlated positively with sociodemographic index (SDI), and an ASIR growth appeared in high SDI region (EAPC = 3.07). Leprosy burden was chiefly distributed in Tropical Latin America, Oceania, Central Sub-Saharan Africa, and South Asia. Negative correlations were detected between the incidence of leprosy and factors of SDI, GDP per capita, urban population to total population, and precipitation, whereas the number of refugee population, temperature, and elevation showed opposite positive results. CONCLUSIONS: Despite a global decline in leprosy over the past three decades, the disparities of disease occurrence at regional and national scales still persisted. Socioeconomic and physical geographic factors posed an obvious influence on the transmission risk of leprosy. The persistence and regional fluctuations of leprosy incidence necessitate the ongoing dynamic and multilayered control strategies worldwide in combating this ancient disease.

[Socioeconomic status and cecal adenocarcinoma mortality risk: an American population-based analysis].

OBJECTIVE: To explore the relationship between socioeconomic status (SES) and disease mortality in patients with cecal adenocarcinoma in America through the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End results (SEER) database. METHODS: The SEER database was queried for patients with cecal adenocarcinoma in America diagnosed from 2011 to 2015. Factor analysis, cluster analysis, and univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard models were used for data analysis. Five social security factors were identified: factor 1, economic and educational disadvantage; factor 2, characteristics related to immigration (language isolation and foreign birth); factor 3, high relocation rate in the county; factor 4, high intra-state relocation rate; and factor 5, high domestic relocation rate. Five clusters defined by SES were identified. RESULTS: The number of all-cause deaths among 17 185 patients was 5948, and the number of survivors was 11, 237. In the multivariate Cox regression analysis, with cluster 1 (low poverty rate and high education level) as the reference, the hazard ratio (HR) of cluster 3 (high intra-county mobility rate) was 1.13 (95% CI: 1.04-1.21, P < 0.05), and the risk was 13% higher than that of cluster 1. The HR of cluster 4 (low language isolation, foreign birth, housing overcrowding, and intra-country mobility rates) was 1.15 (95% CI: 1.07- 1.24, P < 0.001) with a 15% higher risk than cluster 1. The HR of cluster 5 (economic and educational disadvantages, immigration-related characteristics, and low intra-country mobility) was 1.11 (95% CI: 1.03-1.20, P < 0.01) with a 11% higher risk. The factors related to SES indicators were based on the mortality of patients with cecal adenocarcinoma, indicating that low economic and education levels are risk factors for cecal adenocarcinoma. CONCLUSION: Low socioeconomic status is associated with an increased risk of death in patients with cecal adenocarcinoma in the United States and show different distribution patterns based on population. Improving health insurance policies and strengthening psychotherapy can provide guidance for improving prognosis f cecal adenocarcinoma patients.

Biomarker assessment of the CBCSG006 trial: a randomized phase III trial of cisplatin plus gemcitabine compared with paclitaxel plus gemcitabine as first-line therapy for patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer.

Background: CBCSG006 trial reported the superior efficacy of cisplatin plus gemcitabine (GP) regimen than paclitaxel plus gemcitabine (GT) regimen as first-line treatment of metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC). This study focused on the updated survival data and the explorations of potential biomarkers for efficacy. Patients and methods: Germ-line mutations of homologous recombination (HR) panel, BRCA1/2 included, were evaluated in 55.9% (132/236) patients. PD-L1 expression was evaluated in 48.3% (114/236) patients. A nonparametric sliding-window subpopulation treatment effect pattern plot (STEPP) methodology was used to analyze the absolute survival benefits. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results: Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 7.73 [95% confidence interval (CI) 6.46-9.00] months for GP arm and 6.07 (95% CI 5.32-6.83) months for GT arm (P = 0.005). No significant difference in overall survival (OS) was observed. There was significant interaction between HR status and treatment for PFS and status of HR deficient significantly correlated with higher objective response rate (ORR) and longer PFS in GP arm than in GT arm (71.9% versus 38.7%, P = 0.008; 10.37 versus 4.30 months, P = 0.011). There was no significant interaction between germ-line BRCA1/2 (gBRCA1/2) status and treatment for PFS. Patients with gBRCA1/2 mutation had numerically higher ORR and prolonged PFS in GP arm than in GT arm (83.3% versus 37.5%, P = 0.086; 8.90 versus 3.20 months, P = 0.459). There was no significant interaction between PD-L1 status and treatment for PFS, and no significant differences in ORR, PFS or OS between two arms regardless of PD-L1 status. In STEPP analysis, patients with lower composite risks had more absolute benefits in PFS than those with higher composite risks. Conclusions: GP regimen has superior efficacy than GT regimen as first-line chemotherapy for mTNBC patients. Germ-line mutations of BRCA1/2 and HR panel are possible biomarkers for better performance of cisplatin-based regimens. A composite risk model was developed to guide patient selection for GP treatment in TNBC patients. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01287624.

[Cost-effectiveness of multiple screening modalities on breast cancer in Chinese women from Shanghai].

Objective: To determine the most cost-effective modality for breast cancer screening in women living in Shanghai. Methods: A Markov model for breast cancer was redeveloped based on true effect which was derived from a project for detection of women at high risk of breast cancer and an organized breast cancer screening program conducted simultaneously in Minhang district, Shanghai, during 2008 to 2012. Parameters of the model were derived from literatures. General principles related to cost-effectiveness analysis were used to compare the costs and effects of 12 different screening modalities in a simulated cohort involving 100 000 women aged 45 years. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was used to determine the most cost-effective modality. Sensitivity analysis was conducted to evaluate how these factors affected the estimated cost-effectiveness. Results: The modality of biennial CBE followed by ultrasonic and mammography among those with positive CBE was observed as the most cost-effective one. The costs appeared as 182 526 Yuan RMB per life year gained and 144 386 Yuan RMB per quality adjusted life-year (QALY) saved, which were within the threshold of 2-3 times of local per capita Gross Domestic Product. Results from sensitivity analysis showed that, due to higher incidence rate of breast cancer in Shanghai, the cost per QALY would be 64 836 Yuan RMB lower in Shanghai than the average level in China. Conclusion: Our research findings showed that the biennial CBE program followed by ultrasonic and mammography for those with positive CBE results might serve as the optimal breast cancer screening modality for Chinese women living in Shanghai, and thus be widely promoted in this population elsewhere.

[Clinical application and prognostic analysis of interventional treatment for cesarean scar pregnancy].

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the clinical value and prognosis of cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) treated by uterine artery embolization (UAE). METHODS: In the study, 492 cases of patients in Nanjing Maternal and Child Health Care Hospital Affiliated to Nanjing Medical University diagnosed as CSP between January 2011 and December 2014 were chosen, of which 283 were of high-risk group and 209 of low-risk group. According to whether to take UAE, the high-risk group was subdivided into high-risk UAE group(UAE+laparoscopic group), 167 cases, and high-risk non UAE group (chemotherapy+laparoscopic group), 116 cases, while the low-risk group was subdivided into low-risk UAE group (UAE+curettage group), 113 cases, and low-risk non UAE group(chemotherapy+curettage group), 96 cases. The differences of the intraoperative bleeding, length of stay, blood beta human chorionic gonadotropin (ß-HCG) dropped to normal time, menstruation recovery time and the hospitalization expenses were compared. And multivariate regression analysis was used to predict the recurrence risk of CSP. RESULTS: The high-risk UAE group was better than the high-risk non UAE group in comparison of intraoperative bleeding [(36.5±14.8) mL vs.(76.5±39.7) mL], length of stay [(5.9±0.9) d vs.(9.6±1.3) d], blood ß-HCG dropped to normal time [(17.9±8.7) d vs.(28.7±10.1) d] and menstruation recovery time [(18.1±1.6) d vs.(24.3±1.8) d],while the low-risk UAE group was better than the low-risk non UAE group in comparison of intraoperative bleeding [(93.2±43.3) mL vs.(284.8±110.5) mL], length of stay [(10.2±1.4) d vs. (30.7±9.6) d], blood ß-HCG dropped to normal time [(50.1±17.6)d vs.(67.5±22.9)d] and menstruation recovery time[(56.3±6.7)d vs.(65.9±9.3) d], all P<0.05. The high-risk UAE group was higher than the high-risk non UAE group in comparison of hospitalization expenses [(20 140±1 520 )Yuan vs.(13 510±1 013) Yuan], and the low-risk group UAE was also higher than the low-risk non UAE group in comparison of hospitalization expenses [(10 095±962 )Yuan vs.(3 890±457) Yuan], all P<0.01. Multivariate Logistic regression analysis showed that the treatment method was independent predictor of CSP recurrence risk (OR 2.407, 95%CI 1.176-5.092, P<0.05), and using the comprehensive treatment including UAE could reduce the risk of recurrent CSP. CONCLUSION: As the efficacy of interventional therapy for CSP was rapid and reliable, fewer complications, faster recovery and lower recurrence, hospitalization with good conditions, and particularly for those patients with CSP who want to fertility again, the comprehensive treatment including UAE treatment should be the first choice.

A multi-centre randomised trial comparing ultrasound vs mammography for screening breast cancer in high-risk Chinese women.

BACKGROUND: Chinese women tend to have small and dense breasts and ultrasound is a common method for breast cancer screening in China. However, its efficacy and cost comparing with mammography has not been evaluated in randomised trials. METHODS: At 14 breast centres across China during 2008-2010, 13 339 high-risk women aged 30-65 years were randomised to be screened by mammography alone, ultrasound alone, or by both methods at enrollment and 1-year follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 12 519 and 8692 women underwent the initial and second screenings, respectively. Among the 30 cancers (of which 15 were stage 0/I) detected, 5 (0.72/1000) were in the mammography group, 11 (1.51/1000) in the ultrasound group, and 14 (2.02/1000) in the combined group (P=0.12). In the combined group, ultrasound detected all the 14 cancers, whereas mammography detected 8, making ultrasound more sensitive (100 vs 57.1%, P=0.04) with a better diagnostic accuracy (0.999 vs 0.766, P=0.01). There was no difference between mammography and ultrasound in specificity (100 vs 99.9%, P=0.51) and positive predictive value (72.7 vs 70.0%; P=0.87). To detect one cancer, the costs of ultrasound, mammography, and combined modality were $7876, $45 253, and $21 599, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Ultrasound is superior to mammography for breast cancer screening in high-risk Chinese women.