Comprehensively evaluating cancer survival in children with birth defects: a population-based assessment

Cancer Causes & Control - Congenital malformations are strong risk factors for childhood cancer. Our objective was to determine whether cancer survival differs by birth defect status among...     

COVID-19 as a trigger of irritable bowel syndrome: A review of potential mechanisms

In December 2019 a novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), started spreading from Wuhan city of Chinese Hubei province and rapidly became a global pandemic. Clinical symptoms of the disease range from paucisymptomatic disease to a much more severe disease. Typical symptoms of the initial phase include fever and cough, with possible progression to acute respiratory distress syndrome. Gastrointestinal manifestations such as diarrhoea, vomiting and abdominal pain are reported in a considerable number of affected individuals and may be due to the SARS-CoV-2 tropism for the peptidase angiotensin receptor 2. The intestinal homeostasis and microenvironment appear to play a major role in the pathogenesis of COVID-19 and in the enhancement of the systemic inflammatory responses. Long-term consequences of COVID-19 include respiratory disturbances and other disabling manifestations, such as fatigue and psychological impairment. To date, there is a paucity of data on the gastrointestinal sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Since COVID-19 can directly or indirectly affect the gut physiology in different ways, it is plausible that functional bowel diseases may occur after the recovery because of potential pathophysiological alterations (dysbiosis, disruption of the intestinal barrier, mucosal microinflammation, post-infectious states, immune dysregulation and psychological stress). In this review we speculate that COVID-19 can trigger irritable bowel syndrome and we discuss the potential mechanisms.     

Social support is linked to mental health,quality of life,and motor function in multiple sclerosis

Journal of Neurology - To investigate associations of social support to psychological well-being, cognition, and motor functioning in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS). Secondarily, we were...     

EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer—2020 Update. Part 1: Screening,Diagnosis, and Local Treatment with Curative Intent

ObjectiveTo present a summary of the 2020 version of the European Association of Urology (EAU)-European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM)-European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO)-European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR)-International Society of Geriatric Oncology (SIOG) guidelines on screening, diagnosis, and local treatment of clinically localised prostate cancer (PCa).Evidence acquisitionThe panel performed a literature review of new data, covering the time frame between 2016 and 2020. The guidelines were updated and a strength rating for each recommendation was added based on a systematic review of the evidence.Evidence synthesisA risk-adapted strategy for identifying men who may develop PCa is advised, generally commencing at 50 yr of age and based on individualised life expectancy. Risk-adapted screening should be offered to men at increased risk from the age of 45 yr and to breast cancer susceptibility gene (BRCA) mutation carriers, who have been confirmed to be at risk of early and aggressive disease (mainly BRAC2), from around 40 yr of age. The use of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in order to avoid unnecessary biopsies is recommended. When a biopsy is performed, a combination of targeted and systematic biopsies must be offered. There is currently no place for the routine use of tissue-based biomarkers. Whilst prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography computed tomography is the most sensitive staging procedure, the lack of outcome benefit remains a major limitation. Active surveillance (AS) should always be discussed with low-risk patients, as well as with selected intermediate-risk patients with favourable International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) 2 lesions. Local therapies are addressed, as well as the AS journey and the management of persistent prostate-specific antigen after surgery. A strong recommendation to consider moderate hypofractionation in intermediate-risk patients is provided. Patients with cN1 PCa should be offered a local treatment combined with long-term hormonal treatment.ConclusionsThe evidence in the field of diagnosis, staging, and treatment of localised PCa is evolving rapidly. The 2020 EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG guidelines on PCa summarise the most recent findings and advice for their use in clinical practice. These PCa guidelines reflect the multidisciplinary nature of PCa management.Patient summaryUpdated prostate cancer guidelines are presented, addressing screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent. These guidelines rely on the available scientific evidence, and new insights will need to be considered and included on a regular basis. In some cases, the supporting evidence for new treatment options is not yet strong enough to provide a recommendation, which is why continuous updating is important. Patients must be fully informed of all relevant options and, together with their treating physicians, decide on the most optimal management for them.     

Global colorectal cancer research, 2007-2021: Outputs and funding

The purpose of this study was to provide an evidence base for colorectal cancer research activity that might influence policy, mainly at the national level. Improvements in healthcare delivery have lengthened life expectancy, but within a situation of increased cancer incidence. The disease burden of CRC has risen significantly, particularly in Africa, Asia and Latin America. Research is key to its control and reduction, but few studies have delineated the volume and funding of global research on CRC. We identified research papers in the Web of Science (WoS) from 2007 to 2021, and determined the contributions of the leading countries, the research domains studied, and their sources of funding. We identified 62 716 papers, representing 5.7% of all cancer papers. This percentage was somewhat disproportionate to the disease burden (7.7% in 2015), especially in Eastern Europe. International collaboration increased over the time period in almost all countries except in China. Genetics, surgery and prognosis were the leading research domains. However, research on palliative care and quality-of-life in CRC was lacking. In Western Europe, the main funding source was the charity sector, particularly in the UK, but in most other countries government played the leading role, especially in China and the USA. There was little support from industry. Several Asian countries provided minimal contestable funding, which may have reduced the impact of their CRC research. Certain countries must perform more CRC research overall, especially in domains such as screening, palliative care and quality-of-life. The private-non-profit sector should be an alternative source of support.