BackgroundA number of studies have shown poorer survival among cancer patients with comorbidity. Several mechanisms may underlie this finding. In this review we summarize the current literature on the association between patient comorbidity and cancer prognosis. Prognostic factors examined include tumor biology, diagnosis, treatment, clinical quality, and adherence.MethodsAll English-language articles published during 2002–2012 on the association between comorbidity and survival among patients with colon cancer, breast cancer, and lung cancer were identified from PubMed, MEDLINE and Embase. Titles and abstracts were reviewed to identify eligible studies and their main results were then extracted.ResultsOur search yielded more than 2,500 articles related to comorbidity and cancer, but few investigated the prognostic impact of comorbidity as a primary aim. Most studies found that cancer patients with comorbidity had poorer survival than those without comorbidity, with 5-year mortality hazard ratios ranging from 1.1 to 5.8. Few studies examined the influence of specific chronic conditions. In general, comorbidity does not appear to be associated with more aggressive types of cancer or other differences in tumor biology. Presence of specific severe comorbidities or psychiatric disorders were found to be associated with delayed cancer diagnosis in some studies, while chronic diseases requiring regular medical visits were associated with earlier cancer detection in others. Another finding was that patients with comorbidity do not receive standard cancer treatments such as surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation therapy as often as patients without comorbidity, and their chance of completing a course of cancer treatment is lower. Postoperative complications and mortality are higher in patients with comorbidity. It is unclear from the literature whether the apparent undertreatment reflects appropriate consideration of greater toxicity risk, poorer clinical quality, patient preferences, or poor adherence among patients with comorbidity.ConclusionDespite increasing recognition of the importance of comorbid illnesses among cancer patients, major challenges remain. Both treatment effectiveness and compliance appear compromised among cancer patients with comorbidity. Data on clinical quality is limited.

Objective To examine clinical effectiveness and safety of apixaban 2.5 mg, dabigatran 110 mg, and rivaroxaban 15 mg compared with warfarin among patients with atrial fibrillation who had not previously taken an oral anticoagulant. Design Propensity weighted (inverse probability of treatment weighted) nationwide cohort study. Setting Individual linked data from three nationwide registries in Denmark. Participants Patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation filling a first prescription for an oral anticoagulant from August 2011 to February 2016. Patients who filled a prescription for a standard dose non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant (novel oral anticoagulants, NOACs) were excluded. To control for baseline differences in the population, a propensity score for receipt of either of the four treatment alternatives was calculated to apply an inverse probability treatment weight. Intervention Initiated anticoagulant treatment (dabigatran 110 mg, rivaroxaban 15 mg, apixaban 2.5 mg, and warfarin). Main outcome measures Patients were followed in the registries from onset of treatment for the primary effectiveness outcome of ischaemic stroke/systemic embolism and for the principal safety outcome of any bleeding events. Results Among 55 644 patients with atrial fibrillation who met inclusion criteria, the cohort was distributed according to treatment: apixaban n=4400; dabigatran n=8875; rivaroxaban n=3476; warfarin n=38 893. The overall mean age was 73.9 (SD 12.7), ranging from a mean of 71.0 (warfarin) to 83.9 (apixaban). During one year of follow-up, apixaban was associated with higher (weighted) event rate of ischaemic stroke/systemic embolism (4.8%), while dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and warfarin had event rates of 3.3%, 3.5%, and 3.7%, respectively. In the comparison between a non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant and warfarin in the inverse probability of treatment weighted analyses and investigation of the effectiveness outcome, the hazard ratios were 1.19 (95% confidence interval 0.95 to 1.49) for apixaban, 0.89 (0.77 to 1.03) for dabigatran, and 0.89 (0.69 to 1.16) for rivaroxaban. For the principal safety outcome versus warfarin, the hazard ratios were 0.96 (0.73 to 1.27) for apixaban, 0.80 (0.70 to 0.92) for dabigatran, and 1.06 (0.87 to 1.29) for rivaroxaban. Conclusion In this propensity weighted nationwide study of reduced dose non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant regimens, apixaban 2.5 mg twice a day was associated with a trend towards higher rates of ischaemic stroke/systemic embolism compared with warfarin, while rivaroxaban 15 mg once a day and dabigatran 110 mg twice a day showed a trend towards lower thromboembolic rates. The results were not significantly different. Rates of bleeding (the principal safety outcome) were significantly lower for dabigatran, but not significantly different for apixaban and rivaroxaban compared with warfarin.

Although the epidemiology of Staphylococcus aureus bloodstream infection (BSI) has been changing, international comparisons are lacking. We sought to determine the incidence of S. aureus BSI and assess trends over time and by region. Population-based surveillance was conducted nationally in Finland and regionally in Canberra, Australia, western Sweden, and three areas in each of Canada and Denmark during 2000-2008. Incidence rates were age-standardized and gender-standardized to the EU 27-country 2007 population. During 83 million person-years of surveillance, 18,430 episodes of S. aureus BSI were identified. The overall annual incidence rate for S. aureus BSI was 26.1 per 100,000 population, and those for methicillin-sensitive S. aureus (MSSA) and methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) were 24.2 and 1.9 per 100,000, respectively. Although the overall incidence of community-onset MSSA BSI (15.0 per 100,000) was relatively similar across regions, the incidence rates of hospital-onset MSSA (9.2 per 100,000), community-onset MRSA (1.0 per 100,000) and hospital-onset MRSA (0.8 per 100,000) BSI varied substantially. Whereas the overall incidence of S. aureus BSI did not increase over the study period, there was an increase in the incidence of MRSA BSI. Major changes in the occurrence of community-onset and hospital-onset MSSA and MRSA BSI occurred, but these varied significantly among regions, even within the same country. Although major changes in the epidemiology of community-onset and hospital-onset MSSA and MRSA BSIs are occurring, this multinational population-based study did not find that the overall incidence of S. aureus BSI is increasing.