Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
Add more filters











Publication year range
1.
Cancer Treat Res Commun ; 39: 100797, 2024.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38367413

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To identify the differences between early- (EOCRC) and late-onset colorectal cancer (LOCRC), and to evaluate the determinants of one-year all-cause mortality among advanced-stage patients. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was carried out. CRC patients ≥ 18 years old were included. Chi-Square test was applied to compare both groups. Uni- and multivariate regressions were performed to evaluate the determinants of one-year all-cause mortality in all advanced-stage patients regardless of age of onset. RESULTS: A total of 416 patients were enrolled; 53.1 % were female. Ninety cases (21.6 %) had EOCRC and 326 (78.4 %) had LOCRC. EOCRC cases were predominantly sporadic (88.9 %). Histology of carcinoma other than adenocarcinoma (p= 0.044) and rectum tumors (p= 0.039) were more prevalent in EOCRC. LOCRC patients were more likely to have smoking history (p < 0.001) and right colon tumors (p = 0.039). Alcohol consumption history (odds ratio [OR]: 3.375, 95 %CI: 1.022-11.150) and stage IV (OR: 12.632, 95 %CI: 3.506-45.513) were associated with higher one-year all-cause mortality among advanced-stage patients, the opposite was noted with left colon tumors (OR: 0.045, 95 %CI: 0.003-0.588). CONCLUSION: EOCRC was predominantly sporadic and had more cases of uncommon histological subtypes and rectal tumors. LOCRC was characterized by a higher prevalence of smoking history. Multivariate regression revealed an association between higher one-year all-cause mortality and alcohol consumption history and stage IV in advanced-stage patients. CRC exhibited differences based on age of onset. The evaluated factors associated with CRC mortality provide valuable insights for healthcare professionals, emphasizing the importance of adequate clinical assessment and early CRC diagnosis.


Subject(s)
Age of Onset , Colorectal Neoplasms , Colorectal Neoplasms/complications , Colorectal Neoplasms/epidemiology , Colorectal Neoplasms/mortality , Colorectal Neoplasms/pathology , Humans , Colombia , Retrospective Studies , Cohort Studies , Male , Female , Adult , Middle Aged , Aged , Neoplasm Staging , Comorbidity , Carcinoma/epidemiology , Carcinoma/mortality , Carcinoma/pathology , Adenocarcinoma/epidemiology , Adenocarcinoma/mortality , Adenocarcinoma/pathology , Smoking/epidemiology
2.
Colomb Med (Cali) ; 51(2): e4266, 2020 Jun 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33012884

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The best scientific evidence is required to design effective Non-pharmaceutical interventions to help policymakers to contain COVID-19. AIM: To describe which Non-pharmaceutical interventions used different countries and a when they use them. It also explores how Non-pharmaceutical interventions impact the number of cases, the mortality, and the capacity of health systems. METHODS: We consulted eight web pages of transnational organizations, 17 of international media, 99 of government institutions in the 19 countries included, and besides, we included nine studies (out of 34 identified) that met inclusion criteria. RESULT: Some countries are focused on establishing travel restrictions, isolation of identified cases, and high-risk people. Others have a combination of mandatory quarantine and other drastic social distancing measures. The timing to implement the interventions varied from the first fifteen days after detecting the first case to more than 30 days. The effectiveness of isolated non-pharmaceutical interventions may be limited, but combined interventions have shown to be effective in reducing the transmissibility of the disease, the collapse of health care services, and mortality. When the number of new cases has been controlled, it is necessary to maintain social distancing measures, self-isolation, and contact tracing for several months. The policy decision-making in this time should be aimed to optimize the opportunities of saving lives, reducing the collapse of health services, and minimizing the economic and social impact over the general population, but principally over the most vulnerable. The timing of implementing and lifting interventions could have a substantial effect on those objectives.


Antecedentes: Se requiere la mejor evidencia científica para diseñar intervenciones no farmacológicas efectivas para ayudar a los formuladores de políticas a contener COVID-19. OBJETIVO: Describir qué intervenciones no farmacológicas utilizaron diferentes países y cuándo las implementaron. También explora cómo las intervenciones no farmacológicas afectan el número de casos, la mortalidad y la capacidad de los sistemas de salud. MÉTODOS: Consultamos ocho páginas web de organizaciones transnacionales, 17 de medios internacionales, 99 de instituciones gubernamentales en los 19 países incluidos, y además, incluimos nueve estudios (de 34 identificados) que cumplían con los criterios de inclusión. RESULTADOS: Algunos países implementaron restricciones de viaje, aislamiento de casos identificados y personas de alto riesgo. Otros combinaron varias medidas más drásticas de distanciamiento social. El tiempo para implementar las intervenciones varió desde los primeros quince días después de detectar el primer caso hasta más de 30 días. La efectividad de las intervenciones no farmacológicas combinadas ha demostrado ser efectivas para reducir la transmisibilidad de la enfermedad, el colapso de los servicios de salud y la mortalidad. Cuando se controle el número de casos nuevos, es necesario mantener medidas de distanciamiento social, autoaislamiento y rastreo de contactos durante varios meses. La toma de decisiones políticas en este momento debe tener como objetivo optimizar las oportunidades de salvar vidas, reducir el colapso de los servicios de salud y minimizar el impacto económico y social sobre la población en general, pero principalmente sobre los más vulnerables.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Health Policy , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Policy Making , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/mortality , Delivery of Health Care/organization & administration , Humans , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Quarantine , Social Isolation , Time Factors
3.
Colomb. med ; 51(2): e4266, Apr.-June 2020. tab, graf
Article in English | LILACS | ID: biblio-1124618

ABSTRACT

Abstract Background: The best scientific evidence is required to design effective Non-pharmaceutical interventions to help policymakers to contain COVID-19. Aim: To describe which Non-pharmaceutical interventions used different countries and a when they use them. It also explores how Non-pharmaceutical interventions impact the number of cases, the mortality, and the capacity of health systems. Methods: We consulted eight web pages of transnational organizations, 17 of international media, 99 of government institutions in the 19 countries included, and besides, we included nine studies (out of 34 identified) that met inclusion criteria. Result: Some countries are focused on establishing travel restrictions, isolation of identified cases, and high-risk people. Others have a combination of mandatory quarantine and other drastic social distancing measures. The timing to implement the interventions varied from the first fifteen days after detecting the first case to more than 30 days. The effectiveness of isolated non-pharmaceutical interventions may be limited, but combined interventions have shown to be effective in reducing the transmissibility of the disease, the collapse of health care services, and mortality. When the number of new cases has been controlled, it is necessary to maintain social distancing measures, self-isolation, and contact tracing for several months. The policy decision-making in this time should be aimed to optimize the opportunities of saving lives, reducing the collapse of health services, and minimizing the economic and social impact over the general population, but principally over the most vulnerable. The timing of implementing and lifting interventions could have a substantial effect on those objectives.


Resumen Antecedentes: Se requiere la mejor evidencia científica para diseñar intervenciones no farmacológicas efectivas para ayudar a los formuladores de políticas a contener COVID-19. Objetivo: Describir qué intervenciones no farmacológicas utilizaron diferentes países y cuándo las implementaron. También explora cómo las intervenciones no farmacológicas afectan el número de casos, la mortalidad y la capacidad de los sistemas de salud. Métodos: Consultamos ocho páginas web de organizaciones transnacionales, 17 de medios internacionales, 99 de instituciones gubernamentales en los 19 países incluidos, y además, incluimos nueve estudios (de 34 identificados) que cumplían con los criterios de inclusión. Resultados: Algunos países implementaron restricciones de viaje, aislamiento de casos identificados y personas de alto riesgo. Otros combinaron varias medidas más drásticas de distanciamiento social. El tiempo para implementar las intervenciones varió desde los primeros quince días después de detectar el primer caso hasta más de 30 días. La efectividad de las intervenciones no farmacológicas combinadas ha demostrado ser efectivas para reducir la transmisibilidad de la enfermedad, el colapso de los servicios de salud y la mortalidad. Cuando se controle el número de casos nuevos, es necesario mantener medidas de distanciamiento social, autoaislamiento y rastreo de contactos durante varios meses. La toma de decisiones políticas en este momento debe tener como objetivo optimizar las oportunidades de salvar vidas, reducir el colapso de los servicios de salud y minimizar el impacto económico y social sobre la población en general, pero principalmente sobre los más vulnerables.


Subject(s)
Humans , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Policy Making , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Pandemics/prevention & control , Health Policy , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Social Isolation , Time Factors , Quarantine , Coronavirus Infections/mortality , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Delivery of Health Care/organization & administration , COVID-19
4.
Rev. colomb. ciencias quim. farm ; 49(1): 114-136, Jan.-Apr. 2020. graf
Article in Spanish | LILACS-Express | LILACS | ID: biblio-1144342

ABSTRACT

RESUMEN El diseño eficiente de compuestos aprovechando las características estructurales de las moléculas y la búsqueda eficiente de dianas terapéuticas, ha proporcionado herramientas efectivas en la investigación de nuevos tratamientos cuando esta se enfoca en mecanismos celulares de la enfermedad. Los cambios fenotípicos producidos por la interacción in vitro entre molécula-diana, pueden controlarse cuantitativamente mediante imagenología de células vivas. Para garantizar una interacción adecuada, es necesario considerar diferentes elementos cruciales: 1. Las características estructurales y la dinámica molecular del compuesto a evaluar. 2. La relevancia del blanco para la fisiopatología de interés. Sin embargo, el desconocimiento del panorama general en el descubrimiento de fármacos, desde problemáticas estructurales y celulares, ha enlentecido la búsqueda de nuevos tratamientos. Esta revisión descriptiva de tema presenta algunos aspectos estructurales importantes para la caracterización de compuestos como candidatos terapéuticos, y aproximaciones experimentales para desarrollo de sistemas celulares. Los tópicos discutidos se enfocan en la monitorización por imagenología de células vivas y así mismo proporcionamos ejemplos relevantes. La monitorización de efectos fenotípicos producidos por interacciones entre candidato químico y blanco terapéutico en un sistema celular puede favorecer la búsqueda eficiente de moléculas potencialmente terapéuticas.


SUMMARY The efficient compounds' design taking advantage of the molecule's structural characteristics and efficient search for therapeutic targets has provided effective tools for the research of new treatments when this is focused on disease cellular mechanisms. Phenotypic changes produced by in vitro interaction between molecules and targets can be monitored quantitatively by live cell imaging. To guarantee adequate interaction, it is necessary to consider different crucial elements: 1. Structural characteristics and molecular dynamics of the evaluated compound. 2. Target relevance for the concern physiopathology. However, overview's ignorance of the drug discovery, from structural and cellular problems, has slowed the new treatments research. This literature review presents some important structural aspects for compounds' characterization as therapeutic candidates and experimental approaches for cellular systems development. Subjects discussed are focused on live cell imaging and we also provide relevant examples. Phenotypic monitoring of interactions' produced effects between the chemical candidate and therapeutic target in a cellular system can favor the efficient search of potentially therapeutic molecules.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL