Morbidity and aging in HIV-infected persons: the Swiss HIV cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Patterns of morbidity and mortality among human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected individuals taking antiretroviral therapy are changing as a result of immune reconstitution and improved survival. We studied the influence of aging on the epidemiology of non-AIDS diseases in the Swiss HIV Cohort Study. METHODS: The Swiss HIV Cohort Study is a prospective observational cohort established in 1988 with continuous enrollment. We determined the incidence of clinical events (per 1000 person-years) from January 2008 (when a new questionnaire on non-AIDS-related morbidity was introduced) through December 2010. Differences across age groups were analyzed using Cox regression, adjusted for CD4 cell count, viral load, sex, injection drug use, smoking, and years of HIV infection. RESULTS: Overall, 8444 (96%) of 8848 participants contributed data from 40,720 semiannual visits; 2233 individuals (26.4%) were aged 50-64 years, and 450 (5.3%) were aged ≥65 years. The median duration of HIV infection was 15.4 years (95% confidence interval [CI], 9.59-22.0 years); 23.2% had prior clinical AIDS. We observed 994 incident non-AIDS events in the reference period: 201 cases of bacterial pneumonia, 55 myocardial infarctions, 39 strokes, 70 cases of diabetes mellitus, 123 trauma-associated fractures, 37 fractures without adequate trauma, and 115 non-AIDS malignancies. Multivariable hazard ratios for stroke (17.7; CI, 7.06-44.5), myocardial infarction (5.89; 95% CI, 2.17-16.0), diabetes mellitus (3.75; 95% CI, 1.80-7.85), bone fractures without adequate trauma (10.5; 95% CI, 3.58-30.5), osteoporosis (9.13; 95% CI, 4.10-20.3), and non-AIDS-defining malignancies (6.88; 95% CI, 3.89-12.2) were elevated for persons aged ≥65 years. CONCLUSIONS: Comorbidity and multimorbidity because of non-AIDS diseases, particularly diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular disease, non-AIDS-defining malignancies, and osteoporosis, become more important in care of HIV-infected persons and increase with older age.

How reliable is the monitoring of permanent vegetation plots? A test with multiple observers

Questions: A multiple plot design was developed for permanent vegetation plots. How reliable are the different methods used in this design and which changes can we measure? Location: Alpine meadows (2430 m a.s.l.) in the Swiss Alps. Methods: Four inventories were obtained from 40 m(2) plots: four subplots (0.4 m(2)) with a list of species, two 10m transects with the point method (50 points on each), one subplot (4 m2) with a list of species and visual cover estimates as a percentage and the complete plot (40 m(2)) with a list of species and visual estimates in classes. This design was tested by five to seven experienced botanists in three plots. Results: Whatever the sampling size, only 45-63% of the species were seen by all the observers. However, the majority of the overlooked species had cover < 0.1%. Pairs of observers overlooked 10-20% less species than single observers. The point method was the best method for cover estimate, but it took much longer than visual cover estimates, and 100 points allowed for the monitoring of only a very limited number of species. The visual estimate as a percentage was more precise than classes. Working in pairs did not improve the estimates, but one botanist repeating the survey is more reliable than a succession of different observers. Conclusion: Lists of species are insufficient for monitoring. It is necessary to add cover estimates to allow for subsequent interpretations in spite of the overlooked species. The choice of the method depends on the available resources: the point method is time consuming but gives precise data for a limited number of species, while visual estimates are quick but allow for recording only large changes in cover. Constant pairs of observers improve the reliability of the records.

Global surveillance of cancer survival 1995-2009 : analysis of individual data for 25 676 887 patients from 279 population-based registries in 67 countries (CONCORD-2)

BACKGROUND: Worldwide data for cancer survival are scarce. We aimed to initiate worldwide surveillance of cancer survival by central analysis of population-based registry data, as a metric of the effectiveness of health systems, and to inform global policy on cancer control. METHODS: Individual tumour records were submitted by 279 population-based cancer registries in 67 countries for 25·7 million adults (age 15-99 years) and 75 000 children (age 0-14 years) diagnosed with cancer during 1995-2009 and followed up to Dec 31, 2009, or later. We looked at cancers of the stomach, colon, rectum, liver, lung, breast (women), cervix, ovary, and prostate in adults, and adult and childhood leukaemia. Standardised quality control procedures were applied; errors were corrected by the registry concerned. We estimated 5-year net survival, adjusted for background mortality in every country or region by age (single year), sex, and calendar year, and by race or ethnic origin in some countries. Estimates were age-standardised with the International Cancer Survival Standard weights. FINDINGS: 5-year survival from colon, rectal, and breast cancers has increased steadily in most developed countries. For patients diagnosed during 2005-09, survival for colon and rectal cancer reached 60% or more in 22 countries around the world; for breast cancer, 5-year survival rose to 85% or higher in 17 countries worldwide. Liver and lung cancer remain lethal in all nations: for both cancers, 5-year survival is below 20% everywhere in Europe, in the range 15-19% in North America, and as low as 7-9% in Mongolia and Thailand. Striking rises in 5-year survival from prostate cancer have occurred in many countries: survival rose by 10-20% between 1995-99 and 2005-09 in 22 countries in South America, Asia, and Europe, but survival still varies widely around the world, from less than 60% in Bulgaria and Thailand to 95% or more in Brazil, Puerto Rico, and the USA. For cervical cancer, national estimates of 5-year survival range from less than 50% to more than 70%; regional variations are much wider, and improvements between 1995-99 and 2005-09 have generally been slight. For women diagnosed with ovarian cancer in 2005-09, 5-year survival was 40% or higher only in Ecuador, the USA, and 17 countries in Asia and Europe. 5-year survival for stomach cancer in 2005-09 was high (54-58%) in Japan and South Korea, compared with less than 40% in other countries. By contrast, 5-year survival from adult leukaemia in Japan and South Korea (18-23%) is lower than in most other countries. 5-year survival from childhood acute lymphoblastic leukaemia is less than 60% in several countries, but as high as 90% in Canada and four European countries, which suggests major deficiencies in the management of a largely curable disease. INTERPRETATION: International comparison of survival trends reveals very wide differences that are likely to be attributable to differences in access to early diagnosis and optimum treatment. Continuous worldwide surveillance of cancer survival should become an indispensable source of information for cancer patients and researchers and a stimulus for politicians to improve health policy and health-care systems. FUNDING: Canadian Partnership Against Cancer (Toronto, Canada), Cancer Focus Northern Ireland (Belfast, UK), Cancer Institute New South Wales (Sydney, Australia), Cancer Research UK (London, UK), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (Atlanta, GA, USA), Swiss Re (London, UK), Swiss Cancer Research foundation (Bern, Switzerland), Swiss Cancer League (Bern, Switzerland), and University of Kentucky (Lexington, KY, USA).