Prioritising prevention strategies for patients in antiretroviral treatment programmes in resource-limited settings

Expanded access to antiretroviral therapy (ART) offers opportunities to strengthen HIV prevention in resource-limited settings. We invited 27 ART programmes from urban settings in Africa, Asia and South America to participate in a survey, with the aim to examine what preventive services had been integrated in ART programmes. Twenty-two programmes participated; eight (36%) from South Africa, two from Brazil, two from Zambia and one each from Argentina, India, Thailand, Botswana, Ivory Coast, Malawi, Morocco, Uganda and Zimbabwe and one occupational programme of a brewery company included five countries (Nigeria, Republic of Congo, Democratic Republic of Congo, Rwanda and Burundi). Twenty-one sites (96%) provided health education and social support, and 18 (82%) provided HIV testing and counselling. All sites encouraged disclosure of HIV infection to spouses and partners, but only 11 (50%) had a protocol for partner notification. Twenty-one sites (96%) supplied male condoms, seven (32%) female condoms and 20 (91%) provided prophylactic ART for the prevention of mother-to child transmission. Seven sites (33%) regularly screened for sexually transmitted infections (STI). Twelve sites (55%) were involved in activities aimed at women or adolescents, and 10 sites (46%) in activities aimed at serodiscordant couples. Stigma and discrimination, gender roles and funding constraints were perceived as the main obstacles to effective prevention in ART programmes. We conclude that preventive services in ART programmes in lower income countries focus on health education and the provision of social support and male condoms. Strategies that might be equally or more important in this setting, including partner notification, prompt diagnosis and treatment of STI and reduction of stigma in the community, have not been implemented widely.

Population based screening - the difficulty of how to do more good than harm and how to achieve it

Screening people without symptoms of disease is an attractive idea. Screening allows early detection of disease or elevated risk of disease, and has the potential for improved treatment and reduction of mortality. The list of future screening opportunities is set to grow because of the refinement of screening techniques, the increasing frequency of degenerative and chronic diseases, and the steadily growing body of evidence on genetic predispositions for various diseases. But how should we decide on the diseases for which screening should be done and on recommendations for how it should be implemented? We use the examples of prostate cancer and genetic screening to show the importance of considering screening as an ongoing population-based intervention with beneficial and harmful effects, and not simply the use of a test. Assessing whether screening should be recommended and implemented for any named disease is therefore a multi-dimensional task in health technology assessment. There are several countries that already use established processes and criteria to assess the appropriateness of screening. We argue that the Swiss healthcare system needs a nationwide screening commission mandated to conduct appropriate evidence-based evaluation of the impact of proposed screening interventions, to issue evidence-based recommendations, and to monitor the performance of screening programmes introduced. Without explicit processes there is a danger that beneficial screening programmes could be neglected and that ineffective, and potentially harmful, screening procedures could be introduced.

CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials

Overwhelming evidence shows the quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is not optimal. Without transparent reporting, readers cannot judge the reliability and validity of trial findings nor extract information for systematic reviews. Recent methodological analyses indicate that inadequate reporting and design are associated with biased estimates of treatment effects. Such systematic error is seriously damaging to RCTs, which are considered the gold standard for evaluating interventions because of their ability to minimise or avoid bias. A group of scientists and editors developed the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) statement to improve the quality of reporting of RCTs. It was first published in 1996 and updated in 2001. The statement consists of a checklist and flow diagram that authors can use for reporting an RCT. Many leading medical journals and major international editorial groups have endorsed the CONSORT statement. The statement facilitates critical appraisal and interpretation of RCTs. During the 2001 CONSORT revision, it became clear that explanation and elaboration of the principles underlying the CONSORT statement would help investigators and others to write or appraise trial reports. A CONSORT explanation and elaboration article was published in 2001 alongside the 2001 version of the CONSORT statement. After an expert meeting in January 2007, the CONSORT statement has been further revised and is published as the CONSORT 2010 Statement. This update improves the wording and clarity of the previous checklist and incorporates recommendations related to topics that have only recently received recognition, such as selective outcome reporting bias. This explanatory and elaboration document-intended to enhance the use, understanding, and dissemination of the CONSORT statement-has also been extensively revised. It presents the meaning and rationale for each new and updated checklist item providing examples of good reporting and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies. Several examples of flow diagrams are included. The CONSORT 2010 Statement, this revised explanatory and elaboration document, and the associated website (www.consort-statement.org) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of randomised trials.

Long-term antibiotic treatment for Crohn's disease: systematic review and meta-analysis of placebo-controlled trials

We investigated the effectiveness of long-term antibiotic treatment in patients with Crohn's disease.

Incident cancer burden attributable to excess body mass index in 30 European countries

Excess adiposity is associated with increased risks of developing adult malignancies. To inform public health policy and guide further research, the incident cancer burden attributable to excess body mass index (BMI >or= 25 kg/m(2)) across 30 European countries were estimated. Population attributable risks (PARs) were calculated using European- and gender-specific risk estimates from a published meta-analysis and gender-specific mean BMI estimates from a World Health Organization Global Infobase. Country-specific numbers of new cancers were derived from Globocan2002. A ten-year lag-period between risk exposure and cancer incidence was assumed and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated in Monte Carlo simulations. In 2002, there were 2,171,351 new all cancer diagnoses in the 30 countries of Europe. Estimated PARs were 2.5% (95% CI 1.5-3.6%) in men and 4.1% (2.3-5.9%) in women. These collectively corresponded to 70,288 (95% CI 40,069-100,668) new cases. Sensitivity analyses revealed estimates were most influenced by the assumed shape of the BMI distribution in the population and cancer-specific risk estimates. In a scenario analysis of a plausible contemporary (2008) population, the estimated PARs increased to 3.2% (2.1-4.3%) and 8.6% (5.6-11.5%), respectively, in men and women. Endometrial, post-menopausal breast and colorectal cancers accounted for 65% of these cancers. This analysis quantifies the burden of incident cancers attributable to excess BMI in Europe. The estimates reported here provide a baseline for future modelling, and underline the need for research into interventions to control weight in the context of endometrial, breast and colorectal cancer.

Body Mass Index and Cancer Risk: The Evidence for Causal Association

Increased body mass index (BMI), as an approximation of body adiposity, is a risk factor for developing several adult malignancies. To quantify these risks, we reported a comprehensive systematic review (Lancet 2008; 371: 569-78) of prospective observational studies determining associations between BMI and risk of incident cancer for 20 cancer types. We demonstrated that associations are: (i) sex-specific; (ii) exist for a wider range of malignancies than previously thought; and (iii) are broadly consistent across geographic populations. In the present paper, we tested these data against the Bradford-Hill criteria of causal association, and argue that the available data support strength of association, consistency, specificity, temporality, biological gradient, plausibility, coherence and probably analogy. However, the experimental evidence supporting reversibility is currently lacking, though indirect evidence from longitudinal data in cohort studies and long-term follow-up post-bariatric surgery is emerging. We additionally assessed these data against appropriate adjustment for available confounding factors; measurement error and study design; and residual confounding; and found lack of alternative explanations. We conclude that there is considerable evidence to support a causal association between BMI and risk for many cancer types, but in order to establish the role of weight control in cancer prevention, there is a need to develop trial frameworks in which to better test reversibility.

Source of funding in experimental studies of mobile phone use on health: Update of systematic review

A previous review showed that among 59 studies published in 1995–2005, industry-funded studies were least likely to report effects of controlled exposure to mobile phone radiation on health-related outcomes. We updated literature searches in 2005–2009 and extracted data on funding, conflicts of interest and results. Of 75 additional studies 12% were industry-funded, 44% had public and 19% mixed funding; funding was unclear in 25%. Previous findings were confirmed: industry-sponsored studies were least likely to report results suggesting effects. Interestingly, the proportion of studies indicating effects declined in 1995–2009, regardless of funding source. Source of funding and conflicts of interest are important in this field of research.

A randomized trial of effects of health risk appraisal combined with group sessions or home visits on preventive behaviors in older adults

Background. To explore effects of a health risk appraisal for older people (HRA-O) program with reinforcement, we conducted a randomized controlled trial in 21 general practices in Hamburg, Germany. Methods. Overall, 2,580 older patients of 14 general practitioners trained in reinforcing recommendations related to HRA-O-identified risk factors were randomized into intervention (n = 878) and control (n = 1,702) groups. Patients (n = 746) of seven additional matched general practitioners who did not receive this training served as a comparison group. Patients allocated to the intervention group, and their general practitioners, received computer-tailored written recommendations, and patients were offered the choice between interdisciplinary group sessions (geriatrician, physiotherapist, social worker, and nutritionist) and home visits (nurse). Results. Among the intervention group, 580 (66%) persons made use of personal reinforcement (group sessions: 503 [87%], home visits: 77 [13%]). At 1-year follow-up, persons in the intervention group had higher use of preventive services (eg, influenza vaccinations, adjusted odds ratio 1.7; 95% confidence interval 1.4–2.1) and more favorable health behavior (eg, high fruit/fiber intake, odds ratio 2.0; 95% confidence interval 1.6–2.6), as compared with controls. Comparisons between intervention and comparison group data revealed similar effects, suggesting that physician training alone had no effect. Subgroup analyses indicated favorable effects for HRA-O with personal reinforcement, but not for HRA-O without reinforcement. Conclusions. HRA-O combined with physician training and personal reinforcement had favorable effects on preventive care use and health behavior.

Systems medicine and integrated care to combat chronic noncommunicable diseases

We propose an innovative, integrated, cost-effective health system to combat major non-communicable diseases (NCDs), including cardiovascular, chronic respiratory, metabolic, rheumatologic and neurologic disorders and cancers, which together are the predominant health problem of the 21st century. This proposed holistic strategy involves comprehensive patient-centered integrated care and multi-scale, multi-modal and multi-level systems approaches to tackle NCDs as a common group of diseases. Rather than studying each disease individually, it will take into account their intertwined gene-environment, socio-economic interactions and co-morbidities that lead to individual-specific complex phenotypes. It will implement a road map for predictive, preventive, personalized and participatory (P4) medicine based on a robust and extensive knowledge management infrastructure that contains individual patient information. It will be supported by strategic partnerships involving all stakeholders, including general practitioners associated with patient-centered care. This systems medicine strategy, which will take a holistic approach to disease, is designed to allow the results to be used globally, taking into account the needs and specificities of local economies and health systems.