Background Surgery is the main modality of cure for solid cancers and was prioritised to continue during COVID-19 outbreaks. This study aimed to identify immediate areas for system strengthening by comparing the delivery of elective cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic in periods of lockdown versus light restriction. Methods This international, prospective, cohort study enrolled 20 006 adult (≥18 years) patients from 466 hospitals in 61 countries with 15 cancer types, who had a decision for curative surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic and were followed up until the point of surgery or cessation of follow-up (Aug 31, 2020). Average national Oxford COVID-19 Stringency Index scores were calculated to define the government response to COVID-19 for each patient for the period they awaited surgery, and classified into light restrictions (index <20), moderate lockdowns (20–60), and full lockdowns (>60). The primary outcome was the non-operation rate (defined as the proportion of patients who did not undergo planned surgery). Cox proportional-hazards regression models were used to explore the associations between lockdowns and non-operation. Intervals from diagnosis to surgery were compared across COVID-19 government response index groups. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT04384926 . Findings Of eligible patients awaiting surgery, 2003 (10·0%) of 20 006 did not receive surgery after a median follow-up of 23 weeks (IQR 16–30), all of whom had a COVID-19-related reason given for non-operation. Light restrictions were associated with a 0·6% non-operation rate (26 of 4521), moderate lockdowns with a 5·5% rate (201 of 3646; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·77–0·84; p<0·0001), and full lockdowns with a 15·0% rate (1775 of 11 827; HR 0·51, 0·50–0·53; p<0·0001). In sensitivity analyses, including adjustment for SARS-CoV-2 case notification rates, moderate lockdowns (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·80–0·88; p<0·001), and full lockdowns (0·57, 0·54–0·60; p<0·001), remained independently associated with non-operation. Surgery beyond 12 weeks from diagnosis in patients without neoadjuvant therapy increased during lockdowns (374 [9·1%] of 4521 in light restrictions, 317 [10·4%] of 3646 in moderate lockdowns, 2001 [23·8%] of 11 827 in full lockdowns), although there were no differences in resectability rates observed with longer delays. Interpretation Cancer surgery systems worldwide were fragile to lockdowns, with one in seven patients who were in regions with full lockdowns not undergoing planned surgery and experiencing longer preoperative delays. Although short-term oncological outcomes were not compromised in those selected for surgery, delays and non-operations might lead to long-term reductions in survival. During current and future periods of societal restriction, the resilience of elective surgery systems requires strengthening, which might include...
AD neuropathology at autopsy is not associated with the trajectory of cognitive performance in the 3 years before death in oldest-old without dementia. Despite the presence of AD neuropathology at death, oldest-old without dementia display learning effects on cognitive tests. Further research is necessary to understand factors other than AD neuropathology that may affect cognition in the oldest-old.
The “oldest-old” comprise the fastest growing segment of the population in much of the world. Rates of dementia are extremely high in this age group and will present a major public health burden as the numbers of these individuals quadruple by the middle of the century. Studies in this age group are rare and frequently have small numbers of participants. In research studies and the clinic, the diagnosis of dementia and determination of the etiology of the disorder are challenging. In this review, we include some of our experiences in a population-based longitudinal investigation, The 90+ Study. Oldest-old individuals are more likely to suffer from medical comorbidities and have high rates of sensory loss, psychoactive medication usage, frailty and fatigue. Moreover, social and cultural expectations affect the reporting and interpretation of behavioral changes. These and other factors make it difficult to determine the relative contributions of cognitive losses and non-cognitive losses in the development of functional disability. Contributing further to the complexities of diagnosis, current research suggests that dementia in the oldest-old, compared to younger people, is more likely to be related to mixed disease pathologies. Frequent cerebral neuropathologies include Alzheimer’s disease neurodegeneration, small and large vessel vascular disease, and hippocampal sclerosis. More research is necessary in the oldest-old to better understand the etiologies of dementia in this age group, and factors that may affect the expression of disease as we age.
Specialty centers improve care for patients with Down syndrome. The cohort of adults with Down syndrome is increasing, but the capacity for specialty centers to meet their medical care needs is unknown. Electronic survey of staff of specialty clinics for adults with Down syndrome was conducted. Review of online clinic listings, and calculation of the number of adults with Down syndrome were performed. Analysis identified the percent of adults with Down syndrome who could have their medical care needs met in a current specialty clinic. Fourteen specialty clinics report providing care for 4038 adults with Down syndrome. Respondents reported gaps in care including: limitations of existing clinics, need for additional clinics, and knowledgeable health professionals in Down syndrome. Survey‐respondent clinic capacity would meet needs of 3% of adults with Down syndrome. Twenty‐five clinics for adults with Down syndrome were listed online with capacity to care for 6517 adults with Down syndrome meeting the needs of 5% of the population. Additional clinic capacity is needed to meet the needs of adults with Down syndrome. Survey of existing clinics provides guidance to create additional clinics, including: must‐have team members, current sources of clinic financial support, and gaps in current clinical care.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.