MATERIALS AND METHODS: Mean SF-36 scores were calculated for 24 population subgroups (categorised by age, gender, ethnicity and questionnaire language) and for subjects with self-reported co-morbid conditions using data from a community-based survey in Singapore.
RESULTS: The English and Chinese SF-36 was completed by 4122 and 1381 subjects, respectively, 58% (n = 3188) of whom had self-reported co-morbid conditions. SF-36 scores varied in subgroups differing in age, gender and ethnicity. In general, subjects with self-reported co-morbid conditions had lower SF-36 scores than those without these conditions, the magnitude of which exceeded 20 points in several instances. A method for calculation of SF-36 scores adjusted for age, gender, ethnicity and questionnaire language is described.
CONCLUSION: We present norms for English and Chinese SF-36 versions in Singapore and describe potential uses for these data in assessing HRQOL in Singapore.
METHODS: This prospective, randomized controlled, open-label trial evaluated 50 women with insulin-treated GDM randomized to either retrospective CGM (6-day sensor) at 28, 32 and 36 weeks' gestation (Group 1, CGM, n = 25) or usual antenatal care without CGM (Group 2, control, n = 25). All women performed seven-point capillary blood glucose (CBG) profiles at least 3 days per week and recorded hypoglycaemic events (symptomatic and asymptomatic CBG
METHODS: This retrospective, cross-sectional analysis included adults with T2DM from 11 Asian countries/regions prospectively enrolled in the Joint Asian Diabetes Evaluation (JADE) Register (2007-2019) with available EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D-3L) data.
RESULTS: Of 47,895 included patients, 42,813 were treated with OGLDs + lifestyle modifications (LSM) and 5,082 with LSM only. Among those treated with OGLDs, 60% received sulphonylureas (SUs), of whom 47% received gliclazide. The OGLD + LSM group had a lower mean EQ-5D-3L index score than the LSM-only group (p
SUBJECTS/METHODS: Nested within the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC-IBD), incident UC and CD cases and matched controls where included. At recruitment, participants completed validated food frequency and lifestyle questionnaires. Alcohol consumption was classified as either: non-use, former, light (⩽0.5 and 1 drink per week), below the recommended limits (BRL) (⩽1 and 2 drinks per day), moderate (⩽2.5 and 5 drinks per day), or heavy use (>2.5 and >5 drinks per day) for women and men, respectively; and was expressed as consumption at enrolment and during lifetime. Conditional logistic regression was applied adjusting for smoking and education, taking light users as the reference.
RESULTS: Out of 262 451 participants in six countries, 198 UC incident cases/792 controls and 84 CD cases/336 controls were included. At enrolment, 8%/27%/32%/23%/11% UC cases and 7%/29%/40%/19%/5% CD cases were: non-users, light, BRL, moderate and heavy users, respectively. The corresponding figures for lifetime non-use, former, light, BRL, moderate and heavy use were: 3%/5%/23%/44%/19%/6% and 5%/2%/25%/44%/23%/1% for UC and CD cases, respectively. There were no associations between any categories of alcohol consumption and risk of UC or CD in the unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios.
CONCLUSION: There was no evidence of associations between alcohol use and the odds of developing either UC or CD.
METHOD: A cross-sectional survey was completed by national representatives in all ASEAN countries (Brunei, Cambodia, East Timor, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam).
RESULTS: Overall facilities for initial epilepsy pre-surgical evaluation are available in most countries, but further non-invasive and invasive investigations are limited. Three countries (Brunei, Cambodia, and East Timor) have no epilepsy center, and 2 countries (Laos, Myanmar) have level 2 centers doing tumor surgery only. Level-3 epilepsy centers are available in 6 countries (Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippine, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam); only 5 countries (Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippine, Singapore, Thailand) has at least one level-4 epilepsy care facility. Indonesia with 261 million population only has one level 3 and another level 4 center. The costs of presurgical evaluation and brain surgery vary within and among the countries. The main barriers towards epilepsy surgery in ASEAN include lack of expertise, funding and facilities.
CONCLUSIONS: Epilepsy surgery is underutilized in ASEAN with low number of level 3 centers, and limited availability of advanced presurgical evaluation. Lack of expertise, facilities and funding may be the key factors contributing to the underutilization.
METHODS: This was an international, multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled study. After providing informed consent, consecutive adult patients referred for EUS-FNTA for solid lesions larger than 2 cm were randomized to a MOSE arm or to a conventional arm without ROSE. A designated cytopathologist from each center performed all cytopathological examinations for that center and was blinded to the randomization results. The primary outcome measure was the diagnostic yield, and the secondary outcomes included sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, diagnostic accuracy, and the rate of procedure-related complications.
RESULTS: 244 patients (122 conventional, 122 MOSE) were enrolled during the study period. No significant differences between the two arms were found in procedure time or rate of procedure-related adverse events. The diagnostic yield for the MOSE technique (92.6 %) was similar to that for the conventional technique (89.3 %; P = 0.37), with significantly fewer passes made (median: conventional 3, MOSE 2; P
METHODS: The APODDC set up a group of experts in the field of clinical cancer genomics to (i) understand the current NGS landscape for metastatic cancers in the Asia-Pacific (APAC) region; (ii) discuss key challenges in the adoption of NGS testing in clinical practice; and (iii) adapt/modify the European Society for Medical Oncology guidelines for local use. Nine cancer types [breast cancer (BC), gastric cancer (GC), nasopharyngeal cancer (NPC), ovarian cancer (OC), prostate cancer, lung cancer, and colorectal cancer (CRC) as well as cholangiocarcinoma and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC)] were identified, and the applicability of NGS was evaluated in daily practice and/or clinical research. Asian ethnicity, accessibility of NGS testing, reimbursement, and socioeconomic and local practice characteristics were taken into consideration.
RESULTS: The APODDC recommends NGS testing in metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Routine NGS testing is not recommended in metastatic BC, GC, and NPC as well as cholangiocarcinoma and HCC. The group suggested that patients with epithelial OC may be offered germline and/or somatic genetic testing for BReast CAncer gene 1 (BRCA1), BRCA2, and other OC susceptibility genes. Access to poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors is required for NGS to be of clinical utility in prostate cancer. Allele-specific PCR or a small-panel multiplex-gene NGS was suggested to identify key alterations in CRC.
CONCLUSION: This document offers practical guidance on the clinical utility of NGS in specific cancer indications from an Asian perspective.