METHODS: The two entities organised a combined symposium and post-meeting interactions among representatives of major cancer centres from seventeen Asian countries to outlining major challenges and countermeasures.

RESULTS: Participating stakeholders distilled five big questions. 1) "Will there be an explosion of late-stage cancers after the pandemic?" To address and recover from perceived delayed prevention, screening, treatment and care challenges, collaboration of key stakeholders in the region and alignment in cancer care management, policy intervention and cancer registry initiatives would be of essential value. 2) "Operations and Finance" The pandemic has resulted in significant material and financial casualties. Flagged acute challenges (shortages of supplies, imposition of lockdown) as well as longer-standing reduction of financial revenue, manpower, international collaboration, and training should also be addressed. 3) "Will telemedicine and technological innovations revolutionize cancer care?" Deploying and implementing telemedicine such as teleconsultation and virtual tumour boards were considered invaluable. These innovations could become a new regular practice, leading to expansion of tele-collaboration through collaboration of institutions in the region. 4) "Will virtual conferences continue after the pandemic?" Virtual conferences during the pandemic have opened new doors for knowledge sharing, especially for representatives of low- and middle-income countries in the region, while saving time and costs of travel. 5) "How do we prepare for the next pandemic or international emergency?" Roadmaps for action to improve access to appropriate patient care and research were identified and scrutinised.

Methods: The price of different brands of the same anticancer medicines available in the hospital pharmacies of two cancer hospitals was assessed. Prices of different dosage forms such as a single tablet, capsule and vial were calculated. The difference in the maximum and minimum price of the same drug manufactured by different pharmaceutical industries was determined, and the percentage variation in price was calculated. The prices of medicines (brands) were also compared with the price determined by the government where available.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: All women with breast cancer treated at SJMC between 2008 and 2012 were enrolled for this observational cohort study. Mortality outcome was ascertained through record linkage with national death register, linkage with hospital registration system and finally through direct contact by phone or home visits.

RESULTS: A total of 675 patients treated between 2008 and 2012 were included in the present survival analysis, 65% with early breast cancer, 20% with locally advanced breast cancer (LABC) and 4% with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). The overall relative survival (RS) at 5 years was 88%. RS for stage I was 100% and for stage II, III and IV disease was 95%, 69% and 36% respectively.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of centralisation of care for patients with gynaecological cancer.

SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Group Trials Register, CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library, Issue 4, 2010), MEDLINE, and EMBASE up to November 2010. We also searched registers of clinical trials, abstracts of scientific meetings, and reference lists of included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, controlled before-and-after studies, interrupted time series studies, and observational studies that examined centralisation of services for gynaecological cancer, and used multivariable analysis to adjust for baseline case mix.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three review authors independently extracted data, and two assessed risk of bias. Where possible, we synthesised the data on survival in a meta-analysis.

MAIN RESULTS: Five studies met our inclusion criteria; all were retrospective observational studies and therefore at high risk of bias.Meta-analysis of three studies assessing over 9000 women suggested that institutions with gynaecologic oncologists on site may prolong survival in women with ovarian cancer, compared to community or general hospitals: hazard ratio (HR) of death was 0.90 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82 to 0.99). Similarly, another meta-analysis of three studies assessing over 50,000 women, found that teaching centres or regional cancer centres may prolong survival in women with any gynaecological cancer compared to community or general hospitals (HR 0.91; 95% CI 0.84 to 0.99). The largest of these studies included all gynaecological malignancies and assessed 48,981 women, so the findings extend beyond ovarian cancer. One study compared community hospitals with semi-specialised gynaecologists versus general hospitals and reported non-significantly better disease-specific survival in women with ovarian cancer (HR 0.89; 95% CI 0.78 to 1.01). The findings of included studies were highly consistent. Adverse event data were not reported in any of the studies.

METHODS: Head and neck cancer patients were recruited from July 2016 till March 2017 at National Cancer Institute, Ministry of Health, Malaysia. All study participants continued their standard oncology surveillance. Treatment group participants additionally received Chinese herbal treatment. The assessments included unstimulated salivary flow rate (USFR), stimulated salivary flow rate (SSFR), and QoL questionnaire.

RESULTS: Of 42 recruited participants, 28 were in the treatment group and 14 were in the control group. Participants were mainly Chinese (71.4%), stage III cancer (40.5%), and had nasopharynx cancer (76.2%). The commonly used single herbs were Wu Mei, San Qi, and Tian Hua Fen. Sha Shen Mai Dong Tang, Liu Wei Di Huang Wan, and Gan Lu Yin were the frequently prescribed herbal formulas. The baseline characteristics, USFR, SSFR, and QoL between control and treatment groups were comparable (p > 0.05). USFR between control and treatment groups were similar throughout the 6-month study period. SSFR for the treatment group significantly improved from 0.15 ± 0.28 ml/min (baseline) to 0.32 ± 0.22 ml/min (p = 0.04; at the 3rd month) and subsequently achieved 0.46 ± 0.23 ml/min (p = 0.001; at the 6th month). The treatment group had better QoL in terms of speech (p = 0.005), eating (p = 0.02), and head and neck pain (p = 0.04) at the 6th month.

STUDY DESIGN: An observational study.

PLACE AND DURATION OF STUDY: Pediatric Oncology Ward, Shaukat Khanum Cancer Hospital, Lahore, from January 2015 to July 2017.

METHODOLOGY: Patients aged 1-15 years, diagnosed with ALL, were included. Studied variables were cytogenetic type and MRD outcome in patients with ALL. Patients under one year of age and more than 15 years, or those having comorbidities, were excluded.

RESULTS: Total 150 patients' data were retrieved from the Hospital database. One hundred and thirty-three belonged to age 1 to 5 years group (89%) and 17 (11%) were in 5 to 10 years group. The mean age of the patient was 4.3 +3.1 years. One hundred and two (68%) were males; whereas, 48 (32%) were females. Pre B acute lymphoblastic leukemia was diagnosed in 139 (93%) patients and 11(7%) were diagnosed with Pre T acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Standard risk was observed in 120 (80%) patients and 30 (20%) patients were on high risk as per National Cancer Institute (NCI) Guidelines. Regimen A was used in 125 (83.3%), Regimen B in 16 (10.7%), and Regimen C in 9 (6%) patients. BCR-ABL was positive in 2 (1.30%), TEL-AML in 68 (45%), MLL in 5 (3.30%), and normal in 54 (36%). MRD at day 29 was negative in 40 (93%) and positive in 3 (7%). The karyotyping was done in 128 (85%) patients, out of which 68 (53%) were hyperploids, 41 (32%) euploid, and 19 (15%) were hypoploid. Death was observed in 22 (15%) patients. Nineteen (86%) deaths were due to fungal and bacterial sepsis; and disease-related deaths were noted in 3 (14%) patients.