Displaying all 10 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Guaraldi G, Milic J, Martinez E, Kamarulzaman A, Mussini C, Waters L, et al.
    Clin Infect Dis, 2020 Dec 19.
    PMID: 33340037 DOI: 10.1093/cid/ciaa1864
    The COVID-19 pandemic is an unprecedented global challenge that substantially risks reversing the progress in ending HIV. At the same time, it may offer the opportunity for a new era of HIV management. This viewpoint presents the impact of COVID-19 on HIV care, including the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) "three 90s" targets. It outlines how to enhance a patient-centered care approach, now known as the "fourth 90," by integrating face-to-face patient-physician and telemedicine encounters. It suggests a framework for prevention and treatment of multimorbidity and frailty, to achieve a good health-related quality of life and preserve intrinsic capacity in all people living with HIV.
  2. Lazarus JV, Wyka K, White TM, Picchio CA, Gostin LO, Larson HJ, et al.
    Nat Med, 2023 Feb;29(2):366-375.
    PMID: 36624316 DOI: 10.1038/s41591-022-02185-4
    Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) continued to mutate and spread in 2022 despite the introduction of safe, effective vaccines and medications. Vaccine hesitancy remains substantial, fueled in part by misinformation. Our third study of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine hesitancy among 23,000 respondents in 23 countries (Brazil, Canada, China, Ecuador, France, Germany, Ghana, India, Italy, Kenya, Mexico, Nigeria, Peru, Poland, Russia, Singapore, South Africa, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States), surveyed from 29 June to 10 July 2022, found willingness to accept vaccination at 79.1%, up 5.2% from June 2021. Hesitancy increased in eight countries, however, ranging from 1.0% (United Kingdom) to 21.1% (South Africa). Almost one in eight (12.1%) vaccinated respondents are hesitant about booster doses. Overall support for vaccinating children under 18 years of age increased slightly but declined among parents who were personally hesitant. Almost two in five (38.6%) respondents reported paying less attention to new COVID-19 information than previously, and support for vaccination mandates decreased. Almost a quarter (24%) of those who became ill reported taking medications to combat COVID-19 symptoms. Vaccination remains a cornerstone of the COVID-19 pandemic response, but broad public support remains elusive. These data can be used by health system decisionmakers, practitioners, advocates and researchers to address COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy more effectively.
  3. Lazarus JV, Han H, Mark HE, Alqahtani SA, Schattenberg JM, Soriano JB, et al.
    Hepatology, 2023 Sep 01;78(3):911-928.
    PMID: 37595128 DOI: 10.1097/HEP.0000000000000361
    BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Fatty liver disease is highly prevalent, resulting in overarching wellbeing and economic costs. Addressing it requires comprehensive and coordinated multisectoral action. We developed a fatty liver disease Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) country score to provide insights into country-level preparedness to address fatty liver disease through a whole-of-society lens.

    APPROACH AND RESULTS: We developed 2 fatty liver disease-SDG score sets. The first included 6 indicators (child wasting, child overweight, noncommunicable disease mortality, a universal health coverage service coverage index, health worker density, and education attainment), covering 195 countries and territories between 1990 and 2017. The second included the aforementioned indicators plus an urban green space indicator, covering 60 countries and territories for which 2017 data were available. To develop the fatty liver disease-SDG score, indicators were categorized as "positive" or "negative" and scaled from 0 to 100. Higher scores indicate better preparedness levels. Fatty liver disease-SDG scores varied between countries and territories (n = 195), from 14.6 (95% uncertainty interval: 8.9 to 19.4) in Niger to 93.5 (91.6 to 95.3) in Japan; 18 countries and territories scored > 85. Regionally, the high-income super-region had the highest score at 88.8 (87.3 to 90.1) in 2017, whereas south Asia had the lowest score at 44.1 (42.4 to 45.8). Between 1990 and 2017, the fatty liver disease-SDG score increased in all super-regions, with the greatest increase in south Asia, but decreased in 8 countries and territories.

    CONCLUSIONS: The fatty liver disease-SDG score provides a strategic advocacy tool at the national and global levels for the liver health field and noncommunicable disease advocates, highlighting the multisectoral collaborations needed to address fatty liver disease, and noncommunicable diseases overall.

  4. Schröeder SE, Pedrana A, Scott N, Wilson D, Kuschel C, Aufegger L, et al.
    Liver Int, 2019 Oct;39(10):1818-1836.
    PMID: 31433902 DOI: 10.1111/liv.14222
    Viral hepatitis is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide, but has long been neglected by national and international policymakers. Recent modelling studies suggest that investing in the global elimination of viral hepatitis is feasible and cost-effective. In 2016, all 194 member states of the World Health Organization endorsed the goal to eliminate viral hepatitis as a public health threat by 2030, but complex systemic and social realities hamper implementation efforts. This paper presents eight case studies from a diverse range of countries that have invested in responses to viral hepatitis and adopted innovative approaches to tackle their respective epidemics. Based on an investment framework developed to build a global investment case for the elimination of viral hepatitis by 2030, national activities and key enablers are highlighted that showcase the feasibility and impact of concerted hepatitis responses across a range of settings, with different levels of available resources and infrastructural development. These case studies demonstrate the utility of taking a multipronged, public health approach to: (a) evidence-gathering and planning; (b) implementation; and (c) integration of viral hepatitis services into the Agenda for Sustainable Development. They provide models for planning, investment and implementation strategies for other countries facing similar challenges and resource constraints.
  5. Sachs JD, Karim SSA, Aknin L, Allen J, Brosbøl K, Colombo F, et al.
    Lancet, 2022 Oct 08;400(10359):1224-1280.
    PMID: 36115368 DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(22)01585-9
  6. Lazarus JV, Safreed-Harmon K, Kamarulzaman A, Anderson J, Leite RB, Behrens G, et al.
    Nat Commun, 2021 07 16;12(1):4450.
    PMID: 34272399 DOI: 10.1038/s41467-021-24673-w
    Health systems have improved their abilities to identify, diagnose, treat and, increasingly, achieve viral suppression among people living with HIV (PLHIV). Despite these advances, a higher burden of multimorbidity and poorer health-related quality of life are reported by many PLHIV in comparison to people without HIV. Stigma and discrimination further exacerbate these poor outcomes. A global multidisciplinary group of HIV experts developed a consensus statement identifying key issues that health systems must address in order to move beyond the HIV field's longtime emphasis on viral suppression to instead deliver integrated, person-centered healthcare for PLHIV throughout their lives.
  7. Lazarus JV, Romero D, Kopka CJ, Karim SA, Abu-Raddad LJ, Almeida G, et al.
    Nature, 2022 Nov;611(7935):332-345.
    PMID: 36329272 DOI: 10.1038/s41586-022-05398-2
    Despite notable scientific and medical advances, broader political, socioeconomic and behavioural factors continue to undercut the response to the COVID-19 pandemic1,2. Here we convened, as part of this Delphi study, a diverse, multidisciplinary panel of 386 academic, health, non-governmental organization, government and other experts in COVID-19 response from 112 countries and territories to recommend specific actions to end this persistent global threat to public health. The panel developed a set of 41 consensus statements and 57 recommendations to governments, health systems, industry and other key stakeholders across six domains: communication; health systems; vaccination; prevention; treatment and care; and inequities. In the wake of nearly three years of fragmented global and national responses, it is instructive to note that three of the highest-ranked recommendations call for the adoption of whole-of-society and whole-of-government approaches1, while maintaining proven prevention measures using a vaccines-plus approach2 that employs a range of public health and financial support measures to complement vaccination. Other recommendations with at least 99% combined agreement advise governments and other stakeholders to improve communication, rebuild public trust and engage communities3 in the management of pandemic responses. The findings of the study, which have been further endorsed by 184 organizations globally, include points of unanimous agreement, as well as six recommendations with >5% disagreement, that provide health and social policy actions to address inadequacies in the pandemic response and help to bring this public health threat to an end.
  8. Younossi ZM, Alqahtani SA, Alswat K, Yilmaz Y, Keklikkiran C, Funuyet-Salas J, et al.
    J Hepatol, 2024 Mar;80(3):419-430.
    PMID: 37984709 DOI: 10.1016/j.jhep.2023.11.004
    BACKGROUND & AIMS: Patients with fatty liver disease may experience stigma from the disease or comorbidities. In this cross-sectional study, we aimed to understand stigma among patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD)/nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) and healthcare providers.

    METHODS: Members of the Global NASH Council created two surveys about experiences/attitudes toward NAFLD and related diagnostic terms: a 68-item patient and a 41-item provider survey.

    RESULTS: Surveys were completed by 1,976 patients with NAFLD across 23 countries (51% Middle East/North Africa [MENA], 19% Europe, 17% USA, 8% Southeast Asia, 5% South Asia) and 825 healthcare providers (67% gastroenterologists/hepatologists) across 25 countries (39% MENA, 28% Southeast Asia, 22% USA, 6% South Asia, 3% Europe). Of all patients, 48% ever disclosed having NAFLD/NASH to family/friends; the most commonly used term was "fatty liver" (88% at least sometimes); "metabolic disease" or "MAFLD" were rarely used (never by >84%). Regarding various perceptions of diagnostic terms by patients, there were no substantial differences between "NAFLD", "fatty liver disease (FLD)", "NASH", or "MAFLD". The most popular response was being neither comfortable nor uncomfortable with either term (56%-71%), with slightly greater discomfort with "FLD" among the US and South Asian patients (47-52% uncomfortable). Although 26% of patients reported stigma related to overweight/obesity, only 8% reported a history of stigmatization or discrimination due to NAFLD. Among providers, 38% believed that the term "fatty" was stigmatizing, while 34% believed that "nonalcoholic" was stigmatizing, more commonly in MENA (43%); 42% providers (gastroenterologists/hepatologists 45% vs. 37% other specialties, p = 0.03) believed that the name change to metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (or MASLD) might reduce stigma. Regarding the new nomenclature, the percentage of providers reporting "steatotic liver disease" as stigmatizing was low (14%).

    CONCLUSIONS: The perception of NAFLD stigma varies among patients, providers, geographic locations and sub-specialties.

    IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS: Over the past decades, efforts have been made to change the nomenclature of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) to better align with its underlying pathogenetic pathways and remove any potential stigma associated with the name. Given the paucity of data related to stigma in NAFLD, we undertook this global comprehensive survey to assess stigma in NAFLD among patients and providers from around the world. We found there is a disconnect between physicians and patients related to stigma and related nomenclature. With this knowledge, educational programs can be developed to better target stigma in NAFLD among all stakeholders and to provide a better opportunity for the new nomenclature to address the issues of stigma.

  9. Younossi ZM, AlQahtani SA, Funuyet-Salas J, Romero-Gómez M, Yilmaz Y, Keklikkiran C, et al.
    JHEP Rep, 2024 Jul;6(7):101066.
    PMID: 39022387 DOI: 10.1016/j.jhepr.2024.101066
    BACKGROUND & AIMS: Patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD)/metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) face a multifaceted disease burden which includes impaired health-related quality of life (HRQL) and potential stigmatization. We aimed to assess the burden of liver disease in patients with NAFLD and the relationship between experience of stigma and HRQL.

    METHODS: Members of the Global NASH Council created a survey about disease burden in NAFLD. Participants completed a 35-item questionnaire to assess liver disease burden (LDB) (seven domains), the 36-item CLDQ-NASH (six domains) survey to assess HRQL and reported their experience with stigmatization and discrimination.

    RESULTS: A total of 2,117 patients with NAFLD from 24 countries completed the LDB survey (48% Middle East and North Africa, 18% Europe, 16% USA, 18% Asia) and 778 competed CLDQ-NASH. Of the study group, 9% reported stigma due to NAFLD and 26% due to obesity. Participants who reported stigmatization due to NAFLD had substantially lower CLDQ-NASH scores (all p <0.0001). In multivariate analyses, experience with stigmatization or discrimination due to NAFLD was the strongest independent predictor of lower HRQL scores (beta from -5% to -8% of score range size, p <0.02). Experience with stigmatization due to obesity was associated with lower Activity, Emotional Health, Fatigue, and Worry domain scores, and being uncomfortable with the term "fatty liver disease" with lower Emotional Health scores (all p <0.05). In addition to stigma, the greatest disease burden as assessed by LDB was related to patients' self-blame for their liver disease.

    CONCLUSIONS: Stigmatization of patients with NAFLD, whether it is caused by obesity or NAFLD, is strongly and independently associated with a substantial impairment of their HRQL. Self-blame is an important part of disease burden among patients with NAFLD.

    IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS: Patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), recently renamed metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD), may experience impaired health-related quality of life and stigmatization. Using a specifically designed survey, we found that stigmatization of patients with NAFLD, whether it is caused by obesity or the liver disease per se, is strongly and independently associated with a substantial impairment of their quality of life. Physicians treating patients with NAFLD should be aware of the profound implications of stigma, the high prevalence of self-blame in the context of this disease burden, and that providers' perception may not adequately reflect patients' perspective and experience with the disease.

  10. Global Burden of Disease Cancer Collaboration, Fitzmaurice C, Abate D, Abbasi N, Abbastabar H, Abd-Allah F, et al.
    JAMA Oncol, 2019 Dec 01;5(12):1749-1768.
    PMID: 31560378 DOI: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2019.2996
    IMPORTANCE: Cancer and other noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) are now widely recognized as a threat to global development. The latest United Nations high-level meeting on NCDs reaffirmed this observation and also highlighted the slow progress in meeting the 2011 Political Declaration on the Prevention and Control of Noncommunicable Diseases and the third Sustainable Development Goal. Lack of situational analyses, priority setting, and budgeting have been identified as major obstacles in achieving these goals. All of these have in common that they require information on the local cancer epidemiology. The Global Burden of Disease (GBD) study is uniquely poised to provide these crucial data.

    OBJECTIVE: To describe cancer burden for 29 cancer groups in 195 countries from 1990 through 2017 to provide data needed for cancer control planning.

    EVIDENCE REVIEW: We used the GBD study estimation methods to describe cancer incidence, mortality, years lived with disability, years of life lost, and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs). Results are presented at the national level as well as by Socio-demographic Index (SDI), a composite indicator of income, educational attainment, and total fertility rate. We also analyzed the influence of the epidemiological vs the demographic transition on cancer incidence.

    FINDINGS: In 2017, there were 24.5 million incident cancer cases worldwide (16.8 million without nonmelanoma skin cancer [NMSC]) and 9.6 million cancer deaths. The majority of cancer DALYs came from years of life lost (97%), and only 3% came from years lived with disability. The odds of developing cancer were the lowest in the low SDI quintile (1 in 7) and the highest in the high SDI quintile (1 in 2) for both sexes. In 2017, the most common incident cancers in men were NMSC (4.3 million incident cases); tracheal, bronchus, and lung (TBL) cancer (1.5 million incident cases); and prostate cancer (1.3 million incident cases). The most common causes of cancer deaths and DALYs for men were TBL cancer (1.3 million deaths and 28.4 million DALYs), liver cancer (572 000 deaths and 15.2 million DALYs), and stomach cancer (542 000 deaths and 12.2 million DALYs). For women in 2017, the most common incident cancers were NMSC (3.3 million incident cases), breast cancer (1.9 million incident cases), and colorectal cancer (819 000 incident cases). The leading causes of cancer deaths and DALYs for women were breast cancer (601 000 deaths and 17.4 million DALYs), TBL cancer (596 000 deaths and 12.6 million DALYs), and colorectal cancer (414 000 deaths and 8.3 million DALYs).

    CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The national epidemiological profiles of cancer burden in the GBD study show large heterogeneities, which are a reflection of different exposures to risk factors, economic settings, lifestyles, and access to care and screening. The GBD study can be used by policy makers and other stakeholders to develop and improve national and local cancer control in order to achieve the global targets and improve equity in cancer care.

Related Terms
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator ([email protected])

External Links