The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) emerged in early 2020 and since, has brought about tremendous cost to economies and healthcare systems universally. Reports of pediatric patients with inherited conditions and COVID-19 infections are emerging. Specific risks for morbidity and mortality that this pandemic carries for different categories of genetic disorders are still mostly unknown. Thus, there are no specific recommendations for the diagnosis, management, and treatment of patients with genetic disorders during the COVID-19 or other pandemics. Emerging publications, from Upper-Middle Income countries (UMIC), discuss the recent experiences of genetic centers in the continuity of care for patients with genetic disorders in the context of this pandemic. Many measures to facilitate the plan to continuous genetic care in a well-developed health system, may not be applicable in Low and Middle Income countries (LMIC). With poorly structured health systems and with the lack of established genetic services, the COVID-19 pandemic will easily exacerbate the access to care for patients with genetic disease in these countries. This article focuses on the unique challenges of providing genetic healthcare services during emergency situations in LMIC countries and provides practical preparations for this and other pandemic situations.

No abstract

Introduction. Breast cancer is considered nowadays the most prevalent cancer worldwide. The molecular era has successfully divided breast cancer into subtypes based on the various hormonal receptors. These molecular subtypes play a major role in determining the neoadjuvant chemotherapy to be administered. It was noted that the use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy was associated with higher achievement of pathological complete response. The aim of the study was to determine the predictive role of breast cancer subtypes in the efficacy and prognosis of neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimens. Methods. Combining dose dense anthracycline-based, regular dose anthracycline-based, and nonanthracycline-based chemotherapy, we observed data from 87 patients with breast cancer who received surgery after administration of neoadjuvant chemotherapy at our institution between January 2015 and July 2018. The patients were classified into luminal A, luminal B, HER2 overexpression, and triple negative breast cancer as well as low Ki67 (≤14%) and high Ki67 (>14%) expression groups using immunohistochemistry. Pathologic complete response was the only neoadjuvant chemotherapy outcome parameter. To evaluate variables associated with pathologic complete response, we used univariate analyses followed by multivariate logistic regression. Results. 87 patients with breast cancer were classified into different subtypes according to the 12th St. Gallen International Breast Cancer Conference. The response rate to neoadjuvant chemotherapy was significantly different ( p = 0.046 ) between the subgroups. There were significant correlations between pathological complete response (pCR) and ER status ( p < 0.0001 ), HER2 ( p = 0.013 ), molecular subtypes ( p = 0.018 ), T stage ( p = 0.024 ), N stage before chemotherapy ( p = 0.04 ), and type of chemotherapy ( p = 0.029 ). Luminal B type patients had the lowest pCR, followed by luminal A type patients. Conclusion. Evaluating molecular subtype’s significance in breast cancer prognosis warrants additional studies in our region with extensive data about patient-specific neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimens. Our study was able to reproduce results complementary to those present in the literature in other outcomes.