Background Hurricane Maria struck Puerto Rico on Sept 20, 2017, devastating the island. Controversy surrounded the official death toll, fuelled by estimates of excess mortality from academics and investigative journalists. We analysed all-cause excess mortality following the storm. Methods We did a time-series analysis in Puerto Rico from September, 2017, to February, 2018. Mortality data were from the Puerto Rico Vital Statistics System. We developed two counterfactual scenarios to establish the population at risk. In the first scenario, the island's population was assumed to track the most recent census estimates. In the second scenario, we accounted for the large-scale population displacement. Expected mortality was projected for each scenario through over-dispersed log-linear regression from July, 2010, to August, 2017, taking into account changing distributions of age, sex, and municipal socioeconomic development, as well as both long-term and seasonal trends in mortality. Excess mortality was calculated as the difference between observed and expected deaths.

We conclude that radiographically ascertained vertebral fractures are common in Latin America. Health authorities in the region should be aware and consider implementing measures to prevent vertebral fractures.

BackgroundLimited knowledge on the prevalence and distribution of risk factors impairs the planning and implementation of cardiovascular prevention programs in the Latin American and Caribbean (LAC) region.Methods and FindingsPrevalence of hypertension, diabetes mellitus, abnormal lipoprotein levels, obesity, and smoking were estimated from individual-level patient data pooled from population-based surveys (1998–2007, n = 31,009) from eight LAC countries and from a national survey of the United States (US) population (1999–2004) Age and gender specific prevalence were estimated and age-gender adjusted comparisons between both populations were conducted. Prevalence of diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and low high-density lipoprotein (HDL)-cholesterol in LAC were 5% (95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 3.4, 7.9), 20.2% (95% CI: 12.5, 31), and 53.3% (95% CI: 47, 63.4), respectively. Compared to LAC region’s average, the prevalence of each risk factor tended to be lower in Peru and higher in Chile. LAC women had higher prevalence of obesity and low HDL-cholesterol than men. Obesity, hypercholesterolemia, and hypertriglyceridemia were more prevalent in the US population than in LAC population (31 vs. 16.1%, 16.8 vs. 8.9%, and 36.2 vs. 26.5%, respectively). However, the prevalence of low HDL-cholesterol was higher in LAC than in the US (53.3 vs. 33.7%).ConclusionsMajor cardiovascular risk factors are highly prevalent in LAC region, in particular low HDL-cholesterol. In addition, marked differences do exist in this prevalence profile between LAC and the US. The observed patterns of obesity-related risk factors and their current and future impact on the burden of cardiovascular diseases remain to be explained.

BackgroundPrevious studies have found a link between a low DNA repair capacity (DRC) level and increased cancer risk. Our aim was to assess the statistical association of DRC level and breast cancer (BC) using a case–control epidemiological study in a Hispanic community.MethodsWe conducted a comparative observational study to assess the validity of DRC in detecting BC in 824 women throughout Puerto Rico. Over a 6-year period, we compared 285 women newly diagnosed with BC to 539 without BC. DRC levels were measured in lymphocytes by means of a host-cell reactivation assay. We assessed the sensitivity, specificity, and association using the receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. Multiple logistic regression-adjusted odds ratios were estimated with 95% confidence level to measure the strength of the association of DRC and BC after adjusting for all confounders simultaneously.ResultsCompared to women without cancer, women with BC showed an average decrease of 60% in their DRC levels (p < 0.001). Validity of the association of DRC as a measure of BC risk showed a sensitivity of 83.2% and specificity of 77.6% (p < 0.0001).ConclusionsOur results support the usefulness of DRC level as a measure of BC risk. Additional studies in other populations are needed to further verify its usefulness.

No abstract