Nonpharmaceutical interventions reduce the incidence and mortality of COVID-19: A study based on the survey from the International COVID-19 Research Network (ICRN).

The recently emerged novel coronavirus, "severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2)," caused a highly contagious disease called coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). It has severely damaged the world's most developed countries and has turned into a major threat for low- and middle-income countries. Since its emergence in late 2019, medical interventions have been substantial, and most countries relied on public health measures collectively known as nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs). We aimed to centralize the accumulative knowledge of NPIs against COVID-19 for each country under one worldwide consortium. International COVID-19 Research Network collaborators developed a cross-sectional online survey to assess the implications of NPIs and sanitary supply on the incidence and mortality of COVID-19. The survey was conducted between January 1 and February 1, 2021, and participants from 92 countries/territories completed it. The association between NPIs, sanitation supplies, and incidence and mortality were examined by multivariate regression, with the log-transformed value of population as an offset value. The majority of countries/territories applied several preventive strategies, including social distancing (100.0%), quarantine (100.0%), isolation (98.9%), and school closure (97.8%). Individual-level preventive measures such as personal hygiene (100.0%) and wearing facial masks (94.6% at hospitals; 93.5% at mass transportation; 91.3% in mass gathering facilities) were also frequently applied. Quarantine at a designated place was negatively associated with incidence and mortality compared to home quarantine. Isolation at a designated place was also associated with reduced mortality compared to home isolation. Recommendations to use sanitizer for personal hygiene reduced incidence compared to the recommendation to use soap. Deprivation of masks was associated with increased incidence. Higher incidence and mortality were found in countries/territories with higher economic levels. Mask deprivation was pervasive regardless of economic level. NPIs against COVID-19 such as using sanitizer, quarantine, and isolation can decrease the incidence and mortality of COVID-19.

The first Middle East and North Africa expert consensus recommendations for management of advanced gastric cancer.

Gastric cancer (GC) ranks as the fifth most prevalent cancer and the fourth deadliest cancer worldwide. In the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region, GC represents about 4.8% of cancer cases with more than 35,000 new cases in 2020. To strengthen and improve the management of this cancer in the region, a group of MENA experts in the field of GC developed the first MENA consensus recommendations for the management of advanced GC. A total of 28 statements were drafted, discussed and voted on, using a modified Delphi process, during a virtual consensus meeting. The statements addressed the areas of epidemiology, biomarkers and treatment.

The global case fatality rate of coronavirus disease 2019 by continents and national income: A meta-analysis.

The aim of this study is to provide a more accurate representation of COVID-19's case fatality rate (CFR) by performing meta-analyses by continents and income, and by comparing the result with pooled estimates. We used multiple worldwide data sources on COVID-19 for every country reporting COVID-19 cases. On the basis of data, we performed random and fixed meta-analyses for CFR of COVID-19 by continents and income according to each individual calendar date. CFR was estimated based on the different geographical regions and levels of income using three models: pooled estimates, fixed- and random-model. In Asia, all three types of CFR initially remained approximately between 2.0% and 3.0%. In the case of pooled estimates and the fixed model results, CFR increased to 4.0%, by then gradually decreasing, while in the case of random-model, CFR remained under 2.0%. Similarly, in Europe, initially, the two types of CFR peaked at 9.0% and 10.0%, respectively. The random-model results showed an increase near 5.0%. In high-income countries, pooled estimates and fixed-model showed gradually increasing trends with a final pooled estimates and random-model reached about 8.0% and 4.0%, respectively. In middle-income, the pooled estimates and fixed-model have gradually increased reaching up to 4.5%. in low-income countries, CFRs remained similar between 1.5% and 3.0%. Our study emphasizes that COVID-19 CFR is not a fixed or static value. Rather, it is a dynamic estimate that changes with time, population, socioeconomic factors, and the mitigatory efforts of individual countries.

Molecular Spectra and Frequency Patterns of Somatic Mutations in Arab Women with Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The role of somatic mutations in breast cancer prognosis and management continues to be recognized. However, data on the molecular profiles of Arab women are limited. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study based on medical chart review of all Arab women diagnosed with breast cancer at a single institution between 2010 and 2018 who underwent next-generation sequencing with Ampliseq 46-Gene or 50-Gene. RESULTS: A total of 78 Arab women were identified, with a median age at diagnosis of 52.3 years (range: 37-82 years; 38.5% ≤50 years). The majority of patients had stage III or IV disease (74.4%). Next-generation sequencing revealed the following somatic mutation rates: TP53, 23.1%; ATM, 2.6%; IDH1, 2.6%; IDH2, 3.8%; PTEN, 7.7%; PIK3CA, 15.4%; APC, 7.7%; NPM1, 2.5%; MPL, 1.3%; JAK2, 2.5%; KIT, 7.7%; KRAS, 3.8%; and NRAS, 3.8%. CONCLUSION: Our study illustrates frequencies of somatic mutations in Arab women with breast cancer and suggests potential variations from estimates reported in the Western population. These data calls for larger epidemiologic studies considering the evolving role of such mutations in prognostication and personalized management.

A Practical Approach to the Management of Cancer Patients During the Novel Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic: An International Collaborative Group.

The outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has rapidly spread globally since being identified as a public health emergency of major international concern and has now been declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO). In December 2019, an outbreak of atypical pneumonia, known as COVID-19, was identified in Wuhan, China. The newly identified zoonotic coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), is characterized by rapid human-to-human transmission. Many cancer patients frequently visit the hospital for treatment and disease surveillance. They may be immunocompromised due to the underlying malignancy or anticancer therapy and are at higher risk of developing infections. Several factors increase the risk of infection, and cancer patients commonly have multiple risk factors. Cancer patients appear to have an estimated twofold increased risk of contracting SARS-CoV-2 than the general population. With the WHO declaring the novel coronavirus outbreak a pandemic, there is an urgent need to address the impact of such a pandemic on cancer patients. This include changes to resource allocation, clinical care, and the consent process during a pandemic. Currently and due to limited data, there are no international guidelines to address the management of cancer patients in any infectious pandemic. In this review, the potential challenges associated with managing cancer patients during the COVID-19 infection pandemic will be addressed, with suggestions of some practical approaches. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The main management strategies for treating cancer patients during the COVID-19 epidemic include clear communication and education about hand hygiene, infection control measures, high-risk exposure, and the signs and symptoms of COVID-19. Consideration of risk and benefit for active intervention in the cancer population must be individualized. Postponing elective surgery or adjuvant chemotherapy for cancer patients with low risk of progression should be considered on a case-by-case basis. Minimizing outpatient visits can help to mitigate exposure and possible further transmission. Telemedicine may be used to support patients to minimize number of visits and risk of exposure. More research is needed to better understand SARS-CoV-2 virology and epidemiology.

Impact of Integrating Insulin-Like Growth Factor 1 Levels into Model for End-Stage Liver Disease Score for Survival Prediction in Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patients.

BACKGROUND: Liver reserve affects survival in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score is used to predict overall survival (OS) and to prioritize HCC patients on the transplantation waiting list, but more accurate models are needed. We hypothesized that integrating insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1) levels into MELD score (MELD-IGF-1) improves OS prediction as compared to MELD. METHODS: We measured plasma IGF-1 levels in training (n = 310) and validation (n = 155) HCC cohorts and created MELD-IGF-1 score. Cox models were used to determine the association of MELD and MELD-IGF-1 with OS. Harrell's c-index was used to compare the predictive capacity. RESULTS: IGF-1 was significantly associated with OS in both cohorts. Patients with an IGF-1 level of ≤26 ng/mL in the training cohort and in the validation cohorts had significantly higher hazard ratios than patients with the same MELD but IGF-1 >26 ng/mL. In both cohorts, MELD-IGF-1 scores had higher c-indices (0.60 and 0.66) than MELD scores (0.58 and 0.60) (p < 0.001 in both cohorts). Overall, 26% of training and 52.9% of validation cohort patients were reclassified into different risk groups by MELD-IGF-1 (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: After independent validation, the MELD-IGF-1 could be used to risk-stratify patients in clinical trials and for priority assignment for patients on liver transplantation waiting list.

Challenges for cancer patients returning home during SARS-COV-19 pandemic after medical tourism - a consensus report by the emirates oncology task force.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has caused a global health crisis. Numerous cancer patients from non-Western countries, including the United Arab Emirates (UAE), seek cancer care outside their home countries and many are sponsored by their governments for treatment. Many patients interrupted their cancer treatment abruptly and so returned to their home countries with unique challenges. In this review we will discuss practical challenges and recommendations for all cancer patients returning to their home countries from treatment abroad. METHOD: Experts from medical, surgical and other cancer subspecialties in the UAE were invited to form a taskforce to address challenges and propose recommendations for patients returning home from abroad after medical tourism during the SARS-COV-19 Pandemic. RESULTS: The taskforce which consisted of experts from medical oncology, hematology, surgical oncology, radiation oncology, pathology, radiology and palliative care summarized the current challenges and suggested a practical approaches to address these specific challenges to improve the returning cancer patients care. Lack of medical documentation, pathology specimens and radiology images are one of the major limitations on the continuation of the cancer care for returning patients. Difference in approaches and treatment recommendations between the existing treating oncologists abroad and receiving oncologists in the UAE regarding the optimal management which can be addressed by early and empathic communications with patients and by engaging the previous treating oncologists in treatment planning based on the available resources and expertise in the UAE. Interruption of curative radiotherapy (RT) schedules which can potentially increase risk of treatment failure has been a major challenge, RT dose-compensation calculation should be considered in these circumstances. CONCLUSION: The importance of a thorough clinical handover cannot be overstated and regulatory bodies are needed to prevent what can be considered unethical procedure towards returning cancer patients with lack of an effective handover. Clear communication is paramount to gain the trust of returning patients and their families. This pandemic may also serve as an opportunity to encourage patients to receive treatment locally in their home country. Future studies will be needed to address the steps to retain cancer patients in the UAE rather than seeking cancer treatment abroad.

Virtual Management of Patients With Cancer During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Web-Based Questionnaire Study.

BACKGROUND: During the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, patients with cancer in rural settings and distant geographical areas will be affected the most by curfews. Virtual management (telemedicine) has been shown to reduce health costs and improve access to care. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this survey is to understand oncologists' awareness of and views on virtual management, challenges, and preferences, as well as their priorities regarding the prescribing of anticancer treatments during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We created a self-administrated electronic survey about the virtual management of patients with cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated its clinical sensibility and pilot tested the instrument. We surveyed practicing oncologists in Gulf and Arab countries using snowball sampling via emails and social media networks. Reminders were sent 1 and 2 weeks later using SurveyMonkey. RESULTS: We received 222 responses from validated oncologists from April 2-22, 2020. An awareness of virtual clinics, virtual multidisciplinary teams, and virtual prescriptions was reported by 182 (82%), 175 (79%), and 166 (75%) respondents, respectively. Reported challenges associated with virtual management were the lack of physical exam (n=134, 60%), patients' awareness and access (n=131, 59%), the lack of physical attendance of patients (n=93, 42%), information technology (IT) support (n=82, 37%), and the safety of virtual management (n=78, 35%). Overall, 111 (50%) and 107 (48%) oncologists did not prefer the virtual prescription of chemotherapy and novel immunotherapy, respectively. However, 188 (85%), 165 (74%), and 127 (57%) oncologists preferred the virtual prescription of hormonal therapy, bone modifying agents, and targeted therapy, respectively. In total, 184 (83%), 183 (83%), and 176 (80%) oncologists preferred to continue neoadjuvant, adjuvant, and perioperative treatments, respectively. Overall, 118 (53%) respondents preferred to continue first-line palliative treatment, in contrast to 68 (30%) and 47 (21%) respondents indicating a preference to interrupt second- and third-line palliative treatment, respectively. For administration of virtual prescriptions, all respondents preferred the oral route and 118 (53%) preferred the subcutaneous route. In contrast, 193 (87%) did not prefer the intravenous route for virtual prescriptions. Overall, 102 (46%) oncologists responded that they would "definitely" prefer to manage patients with cancer virtually. CONCLUSIONS: Oncologists have a high level of awareness of virtual management. Although their survey responses indicated that second- and third-line palliative treatments should be interrupted, they stated that neoadjuvant, adjuvant, perioperative, and first-line palliative treatments should continue. Our results confirm that oncologists' views on the priority of anticancer treatments are consistent with the evolving literature during the COVID-19 pandemic. Challenges to virtual management should be addressed to improve the care of patients with cancer.

Update on the Treatment of Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma.

Platinum-based combination chemotherapy has been the standard of care in the first-line treatment of metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC). Treatment of metastatic disease following progression on platinum-based regimens has evolved significantly in the last few years. Clinical trials are currently ongoing to determine how best to use and sequence these treatments. In this minireview, we will review current first-line treatment options in both cisplatin fit and cisplatin unfit patients and advances in first- and second-line treatments including chemotherapy and immunotherapy. This review reports key findings from the clinical trials especially highlighting the importance of PD-1 and PD-L1 inhibitors in the treatment of bladder/urothelial carcinomas.

Natural History of T1N0M0 Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Large-Scale Study in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) prognosis depends on clinicopathological features in addition to the treatment provided. We aimed to assess the natural history of TNM stage I HCC tumors which received different treatment over a period of 20 years. METHODS: Between 1992 and 2011, a total of 397 stage I HCC patients were included. Detailed information was retrieved from MD Anderson Cancer Center patients' medical records. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to calculate patients' overall survival (OS). Cox regression analysis was used to calculate the estimated hazard ratio and 95% confidence interval of different prognostic factors. RESULTS: Out of 397 patients, 67.5% were males, 42.8% had hepatitis-related HCC, and 59.7% had underlying cirrhosis. After adjustment for confounding factors, we found that all therapeutic modalities were associated with a significant mortality rate reduction with an OS of 63, 42.03, 34.3, and 22.1 months among patients treated with surgery, ablation, local, and systemic therapy, respectively. A restricted analysis of cirrhotic and noncirrhotic patients showed that ablative and local therapy were significantly associated with a longer OS compared to systemic therapy. CONCLUSION: TNM stage I HCC patients have a favorable prognosis regardless of the type of treatment. Notably, ablative and local therapy significantly improved OS compared to systemic therapy.

Geographic differences in lung cancer: focus on carcinogens, genetic predisposition, and molecular epidemiology.

Lung cancer poses a global health challenge and stands as the leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide. However, its incidence, mortality, and characteristics are not uniform across all regions worldwide. Understanding the factors contributing to this diversity is crucial in a prevalent disease where most cases are diagnosed in advanced stages. Hence, prevention and early diagnosis emerge as the most efficient strategies to enhance outcomes. In Western societies, tobacco consumption constitutes the primary risk factor for lung cancer, accounting for up to 90% of cases. In other geographic locations, different significant factors play a fundamental role in disease development, such as individual genetic predisposition, or exposure to other carcinogens such as radon gas, environmental pollution, occupational exposures, or specific infectious diseases. Comprehensive clinical and molecular characterization of lung cancer in recent decades has enabled us to distinguish different subtypes of lung cancer with distinct phenotypes, genotypes, immunogenicity, treatment responses, and survival rates. The ultimate goal is to prevent and individualize lung cancer management in each community and improve patient outcomes.

Recommended approaches for screening and early detection of lung cancer in the Middle East and Africa (MEA) region: a consensus statement.

Background: The prevalence of lung cancer in the Middle East and Africa (MEA) region has steadily increased in recent years and is generally associated with a poor prognosis due to the late detection of most of the cases. We explored the factors leading to delayed diagnoses, as well as the challenges and gaps in the early screening, detection, and referral framework for lung cancer in the MEA. Methods: A steering committee meeting was convened in October 2022, attended by a panel of ten key external experts in the field of oncology from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, South Africa, Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan, and Turkey, who critically and extensively analyzed the current unmet needs and challenges in the screening and early diagnosis of lung cancer in the region. Results: As per the experts' opinion, lack of awareness about disease symptoms, misdiagnosis, limited screening initiatives, and late referral to specialists were the primary reasons for delayed diagnoses emphasizing the need for national-level lung cancer screening programs in the MEA region. Screening guidelines recommend low-dose computerized tomography (LDCT) for lung cancer screening in patients with a high risk of malignancy. However, high cost and lack of awareness among the public as well as healthcare providers prevented the judicious use of LDCT in the MEA region. Well-established screening and referral guidelines were available in only a few of the MEA countries and needed to be implemented in others to identify suspected cases early and provide timely intervention thus improving patient outcomes. Conclusions: There is a great need for large-scale screening programs, preferably integrated with tobacco-control programs and awareness programs for physicians and patients, which may facilitate higher adherence to lung cancer screening and improve survival outcomes.

BRCA testing and management of BRCA-mutated early-stage breast cancer: a comprehensive statement by expert group from GCC region.

BReast CAncer (BRCA)1 and BRCA2 gene pathogenic variants account for most hereditary breast cancers (BC). Identification of BRCA mutations can significantly influence both prognosis and treatment outcomes. Furthermore, it enables the identification of individuals who are at heightened risk of developing BC due to inherited genetic mutations. Many developing countries rely on western guidelines for BRCA testing and BC management; however, there exist wide disparities in the prevalence of risk factors, availability of medical resources, and practice patterns. Guidelines tailored to specific regions can help mitigate healthcare variations, promote consistency in treatment, and aid healthcare providers in identifying effective therapies for improving patient outcomes. Hence, oncologists from the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) congregated virtually in March 2023 and reviewed existing data on the epidemiology of BC, BRCA mutations, practices and challenges associated with BRCA testing and management of BRCA mutated early-stage BC in the GCC region. They also provided insights on the real-world diagnostic and treatment practices and challenges in the GCC region in the BRCA-mutated early-stage BC domain and suggested some variations to international guidelines to aid their uptake in this region.

Association of proton pump inhibitor use with survival and adverse effects outcomes in patients with multiple myeloma: pooled analysis of three clinical trials.

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are commonly used in cancer patients, but their impact on treatment outcomes in multiple myeloma (MM) patients remains unclear. This study investigated the association of PPI use with survival and adverse effects in MM patients across three randomized-control trials initiating daratumumab, lenalidomide, or bortezomib combination treatments. Cox proportional hazard analysis and logistic regression were employed to assess the associations with treatment outcomes, while adjusting for age, sex, weight, MM international staging system stage, ECOG-performance status, comorbidity count, and presence of gastrointestinal disorders. Pooled data involving 1804 patients revealed that 557 (32%) used PPIs at baseline. PPI use was independently associated with worse overall survival (adjusted HR [95% CI] 1.32 [1.08-1.62], P = 0.007) and grade ≥ 3 adverse events (adjusted OR [95% CI] 1.39 [1.03-1.88], P = 0.030). However, the association with progression-free survival did not reach statistical significance (adjusted HR [95% CI] 1.14 [0.97-1.33], P = 0.112). Findings were consistent across trials and treatment arms. PPI use was identified as a negative prognostic factor in MM patients, potentially enhancing clinical decisions regarding its use. Further research is needed to fully comprehend the impacts and safety of PPI use in MM patients.

Cancer research in the United Arab Emirates from birth to present: A bibliometric analysis.

Background: Accumulating evidence indicates that the incidence of cancer is increasing in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). This analysis aimed to determine the current cancer research output in the UAE to guide future national research. Methods: The Scopus database was searched for cancer-related bibliographic data from the UAE. The number of publications, citation analysis, co-authorship of the author, institution, and country, keyword co-occurrence, and reference co-citations were analyzed using the R-studio bibliometrics package and VOSviewer software. Results: A total of 1678 journal articles were retrieved from 1981 to 2022. Cancer research in the UAE (UCR) is increasing at a rate of 14.64% (R-squared = 0.75; F = 46.477; P<0.001). The UAE had a 0.06% participation rate in terms of the number of original articles. The rate of international co-authorship is 40.23%. The U.S.A., U.K., Egypt, Saudi Arabia, India, and Canada had more than 100 co-authored documents from 156 countries that collaborated with the U.A.E. Conclusions: Compared to other nations, the UAE has fewer publications on cancer, although the number is growing. The current report provides an up-to-date and in-depth summary of the trends in UCR. This project is an excellent place for researchers interested in conducting data-mapping work in this field.

Current Status of Management of Hepatocellular Carcinoma in The Gulf Region: Challenges and Recommendations.

The burden of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is on the rise in the Gulf region, with most patients being diagnosed in the intermediate or advanced stages. Surgery is a treatment option for only a few, and the majority of patients receive either locoregional treatment (percutaneous ethanol injection, radiofrequency ablation, transarterial chemoembolization [TACE], radioembolization, radiotherapy, or transarterial radioembolization) or systemic therapy (for those ineligible for locoregional treatments or who do not benefit from TACE). The recent emergence of novel immunotherapies such as immune checkpoint inhibitors has begun to change the landscape of systemic HCC treatment in the Gulf. The combination of atezolizumab and bevacizumab is currently the preferred first-line therapy in patients not at risk of bleeding. Additionally, the HIMALAYA trial has demonstrated the superiority of the durvalumab plus tremelimumab combination (STRIDE regimen) therapy in efficacy and safety compared with sorafenib in patients with unresectable HCC. However, there is a lack of data on post-progression treatment after first-line therapy with either atezolizumab plus bevacizumab or durvalumab plus tremelimumab regimens, highlighting the need for better-designed studies for improved management of patients with unresectable HCC in the Gulf region.