Search

Background: Childhood cancer patients are at increased risk of second primary neoplasms (SPNs). We assessed incidence and risk factors for early SPNs with a focus on cancer predisposition syndromes (CPSs). Patients and methods: This cohort study used data from the Swiss Childhood Cancer Registry. We included patients with first primary neoplasms (FPNs) diagnosed before age 21 years from 1986 to 2015 and identified SPNs occurring before age 21. We calculated standardised incidence ratios (SIRs) and absolute excess risks (AERs) using Swiss population cancer incidence data, and cumulative incidence of SPNs. We calculated hazard ratios (HRs) of risk factors for SPNs using Fine and Gray competing risk regression. Results: Among 8074 childhood cancer patients, 304 (4%) were diagnosed with a CPS and 94 (1%) developed early SPNs. The incidence of SPNs was more than 10-fold higher in childhood cancer patients than the incidence of neoplasms in the general population (SIR = 10.6, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 8.7-13.1) and the AER was 179/100,000 person-years (CI: 139-219). Cumulative incidence of SPNs 20 years after FPN diagnosis was 23% in patients with CPSs (CI: 12-41%) and 2.7% in those without (CI: 2.0-3.6%). Risk factors for SPNs were CPSs (HR = 7.8, CI: 4.8-12.7), chemotherapy (HR = 2.2, CI: 1.1-4.6), radiotherapy (HR = 1.9, CI = 1.2-2.9), haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HR = 1.8, CI: 1-3.3), and older age (15-20 years) at FPN diagnosis (HR = 1.9, CI: 1.1-3.2). Conclusion: CPSs are associated with a high risk of SPNs before age 21 years. Identification of CPSs is important for appropriate cancer surveillance and targeted screening.

BackgroundChildhood cancer patients are at increased risk of second primary neoplasms (SPNs). We assessed incidence and risk factors for early SPNs with a focus on cancer predisposition syndromes (CPSs).Patients and methodsThis cohort study used data from the Swiss Childhood Cancer Registry. We included patients with first primary neoplasms (FPN) until age 21 years from 1986 to 2015 and identified SPNs occurring before age 21. We calculated standardized incidence ratios (SIR) and absolute excess risks (AER) using Swiss population cancer incidence data and cumulative incidence of SPNs. We calculated hazard ratios (HR) of risk factors for SPNs using Fine and Gray competing risk regression.ResultsAmong 8,074 childhood cancer patients, 304 (4%) were diagnosed with a CPS and 94 (1%) developed early SPNs. The incidence of SPNs was more than 10-fold increased in childhood cancer patients compared to neoplasms in the general population (SIR 10.6, 95%-confidence interval [CI] 8.7-13.1) and the AER was 179/100,000 person-years (CI 139-219). Cumulative incidence of SPNs 20 years after FPN diagnosis was 23% in patients with CPSs and 3% in those without. Risk factors for SPNs were CPSs (HR 7.8, CI 4.8-12.7), chemotherapy (HR 2.2, CI 1.1-4.6), radiotherapy (HR 1.9, CI 1.2-2.9), hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HR 1.8, CI 1-3.3), and older age (15-20 years) at FPN diagnosis (HR 1.9, CI 1.1-3.2).ConclusionCPSs are associated with a high risk of SPNs before age 21 years. Identification of CPSs is important for appropriate cancer surveillance and targeted screening.

Simpler schedules for human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine delivery could improve vaccine coverage and the effectiveness of cervical cancer prevention. The objective of this study was to systematically review evidence about the effects of two-dose compared with three-dose schedules for human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine and to describe the uptake of two-dose HPV vaccination schedules globally. We searched PubMed, the Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials, trials registers, and manufacturers' databases from their earliest date to February 2016. We selected randomised controlled trials and controlled clinical trials that directly compared HPV vaccine schedules with two or three doses. We extracted data on immunological and clinical outcomes and used meta-analysis where appropriate. We also described the use of two-dose HPV vaccine schedules globally. We screened 1464 items and included seven eligible noninferiority trials in 11 countries. In randomised comparisons amongst adolescent girls (three trials), geometric mean concentrations (GMC) of antibodies against HPV16 and HPV18 were non-inferior or inconclusive, up to 24months after a two-dose compared with a three-dose schedule. One trial with a clinical outcome found no persistent HPV infections occurred after either two or three doses. In non-randomised comparisons, GMC were non-inferior or superior in adolescent girls receiving the two-dose schedule compared with women receiving the three-dose schedule for at least 21months after vaccination. By February 2017, 23 low and middle income and 25 high income countries had adopted a two-dose HPV vaccination schedule. A two-dose HPV vaccine schedule provides satisfactory immunological outcomes in adolescent girls, but uptake globally is limited, particularly in countries with the highest burden of cervical cancer.

Objectives To identify factors associated with discrepant outcome reporting in randomized drug trials. Study Design and Setting Cohort study of protocols submitted to a Swiss ethics committee 1988–1998: 227 protocols and amendments were compared with 333 matching articles published during 1990–2008. Discrepant reporting was defined as addition, omission, or reclassification of outcomes. Results Overall, 870 of 2,966 unique outcomes were reported discrepantly (29.3%). Among protocol-defined primary outcomes, 6.9% were not reported (19 of 274), whereas 10.4% of reported outcomes (30 of 288) were not defined in the protocol. Corresponding percentages for secondary outcomes were 19.0% (284 of 1,495) and 14.1% (334 of 2,375). Discrepant reporting was more likely if P values were P ≥ 0.05 [adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 1.38; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.07, 1.78], more likely for efficacy compared with harm outcomes (aOR: 2.99; 95% CI: 2.08, 4.30) and more likely for composite than for single outcomes (aOR: 1.48; 95% CI: 1.00, 2.20). Cardiology (aOR: 2.34; 95% CI: 1.44, 3.79) and infectious diseases (aOR: 1.77; 95% CI: 1.01, 3.13) had more discrepancies compared with all specialties combined. Conclusion Discrepant reporting was associated with statistical significance of results, type of outcome, and specialty area. Trial protocols should be made freely available, and the publications should describe and justify any changes made to protocol-defined outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Accurate information about the prevalence of Chlamydia trachomatis is needed to assess national prevention and control measures. METHODS: We systematically reviewed population-based cross-sectional studies that estimated chlamydia prevalence in European Union/European Economic Area (EU/EEA) Member States and non-European high income countries from January 1990 to August 2012. We examined results in forest plots, explored heterogeneity using the I² statistic, and conducted random effects meta-analysis if appropriate. Meta-regression was used to examine the relationship between study characteristics and chlamydia prevalence estimates. RESULTS: We included 25 population-based studies from 11 EU/EEA countries and 14 studies from five other high income countries. Four EU/EEA Member States reported on nationally representative surveys of sexually experienced adults aged 18-26 years (response rates 52-71%). In women, chlamydia point prevalence estimates ranged from 3.0-5.3%; the pooled average of these estimates was 3.6% (95% CI 2.4, 4.8, I² 0%). In men, estimates ranged from 2.4-7.3% (pooled average 3.5%; 95% CI 1.9, 5.2, I² 27%). Estimates in EU/EEA Member States were statistically consistent with those in other high income countries (I² 0% for women, 6% for men). There was statistical evidence of an association between survey response rate and estimated chlamydia prevalence; estimates were higher in surveys with lower response rates, (p = 0.003 in women, 0.018 in men). CONCLUSIONS: Population-based surveys that estimate chlamydia prevalence are at risk of participation bias owing to low response rates. Estimates obtained in nationally representative samples of the general population of EU/EEA Member States are similar to estimates from other high income countries Background: Accurate information about the prevalence of Chlamydia trachomatis is needed to assess national prevention and control measures.Methods: We systematically reviewed population-based cross-sectional studies that estimated chlamydia prevalence in European Union/European Economic Area (EU/EEA) Member States and non-European high income countries from January 1990 to August 2012. We examined results in forest plots, explored heterogeneity using the I2 statistic, and conducted random effects meta-analysis if appropriate. Meta-regression was used to examine the relationship between study characteristics and chlamydia prevalence estimates.Results: We included 25 population-based studies from 11 EU/EEA countries and 14 studies from five other high income countries. Four EU/EEA Member States reported on nationally representative surveys of sexually experienced adults aged 18–26 years (response rates 52–71%). In women, chlamydia point prevalence estimates ranged from 3.0–5.3%; the pooled average of these estimates was 3.6% (95% CI 2.4, 4.8, I2 0%). In men, estimates ranged from 2.4–7.3% (pooled average 3.5%; 95% CI 1.9, 5.2, I2 27%). Estimates in EU/EEA Member States were statistically consistent with those in other high income countries (I2 0% for women, 6% for men). There was statistical evidence of an association between survey response rate and estimated chlamydia prevalence; estimates were higher in surveys with lower response rates, (p = 0.003 in women, 0.018 in men).

BACKGROUND: Genital infections caused by Chlamydia trachomatis are the most prevalent bacterial sexually transmitted infection worldwide. Screening of sexually active young adults to detect and treat asymptomatic infections might reduce chlamydia transmission and prevent reproductive tract morbidity, particularly pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) in women, which can cause tubal infertility and ectopic pregnancy.OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects and safety of chlamydia screening versus standard care on chlamydia transmission and infection complications in pregnant and non-pregnant women and in men.SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Sexually Transmitted Infections Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, CINAHL, DARE, PsycINFO and Web of Science electronic databases up to 14 February 2016, together with World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry (ICTRP) and ClinicalTrials.gov. We also handsearched conference proceedings, contacted trial authors and reviewed the reference lists of retrieved studies.SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in adult women (non-pregnant and pregnant) and men comparing a chlamydia screening intervention with usual care and reporting on a primary outcome (C. trachomatis prevalence, PID in women, epididymitis in men or incidence of preterm delivery). We included non-randomised controlled clinical trials if there were no RCTs for a primary outcome.DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. We resolved disagreements by consensus or adjudication by a third reviewer. We described results in forest plots and conducted meta-analysis where appropriate using a fixed-effect model to estimate risk ratios (RR with 95% confidence intervals, CI) in intervention vs control groups. We conducted a pre-specified sensitivity analysis of the primary outcome, PID incidence, according to the risks of selection and detection bias.MAIN RESULTS: We included six trials involving 359,078 adult women and men. One trial was at low risk of bias in all six specific domains assessed. Two trials examined the effect of multiple rounds of chlamydia screening on C. trachomatis transmission. A cluster-controlled trial in women and men in the general population in the Netherlands found no change in chlamydia test positivity after three yearly invitations (intervention 4.1% vs control 4.3%, RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.09, 1 trial, 317,304 participants at first screening invitation, low quality evidence). Uptake of the intervention was low (maximum 16%). A cluster-randomised trial in female sex workers in Peru found a reduction in chlamydia prevalence after four years (adjusted RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.98, 1 trial, 4465 participants, low quality evidence).Four RCTs examined the effect of chlamydia screening on PID in women 12 months after a single screening offer. In analysis of four trials according to the intention-to-treat principle, the risk of PID was lower in women in intervention than control groups, with little evidence of between-trial heterogeneity (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.94, I(2) 7%, 4 trials, 21,686 participants, moderate quality evidence). In a sensitivity analysis, the estimated effect of chlamydia screening in two RCTs at low risk of detection bias (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.17) was compatible with no effect and was lower than in two RCTs at high or unclear risk of detection bias (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.83).The risk of epididymitis in men invited for screening, 12 months after a single screening offer, was 20% lower risk for epididymitis than in those not invited; the confidence interval was wide and compatible with no effect (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.42, 1 trial, 14,980 participants, very low quality evidence).We found no RCTs of the effects of chlamydia screening in pregnancy and no trials that measured the harms of chlamydia screening.AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Evidence about the effects of screening on C. trachomatis transmission is of low quality because of directness and risk of bias. There is moderate quality evidence that detection and treatment of chlamydia infection can reduce the risk of PID in women at individual level. There is an absence of RCT evidence about the effects of chlamydia screening in pregnancy.Future RCTs of chlamydia screening interventions should determine the effects of chlamydia screening in pregnancy, of repeated rounds of screening on the incidence of chlamydia-associated PID and chlamydia reinfection in general and high risk populations.

BACKGROUND The optimal schedule and the need for a booster dose are unclear for Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib) conjugate vaccines. We systematically reviewed relative effects of Hib vaccine schedules. METHODS We searched 21 databases to May 2010 or June 2012 and selected randomized controlled trials or quasi-randomized controlled trials that compared different Hib schedules (3 primary doses with no booster dose [3p+0], 3p+1 and 2p+1) or different intervals in primary schedules and between primary and booster schedules. Outcomes were clinical efficacy, nasopharyngeal carriage and immunological response. Results were combined in random-effects meta-analysis. RESULTS Twenty trials from 15 countries were included; 16 used vaccines conjugated to tetanus toxoid (polyribosylribitol phosphate conjugated to tetanus toxoid). No trials assessed clinical or carriage outcomes. Twenty trials examined immunological outcomes and found few relevant differences. Comparing polyribosylribitol phosphate conjugated to tetanus toxoid 3p+0 with 2p+0, there was no difference in seropositivity at the 1.0 μg/mL threshold by 6 months after the last primary dose (combined risk difference -0.02; 95% confidence interval: -0.10, 0.06). Only small differences were seen between schedules starting at different ages, with different intervals between primary doses, or with different intervals between primary and booster doses. Individuals receiving a booster were more likely to be seropositive than those at the same age who did not. CONCLUSIONS There is no clear evidence from trials that any 2p+1, 3p+0 or 3p+1 schedule of Hib conjugate vaccine is likely to provide better protection against Hib disease than other schedules. Until more data become available, scheduling is likely to be determined by epidemiological and programmatic considerations in individual settings.

This paper reports on a systematic review of qualitative research about vaginal practices in sub-Saharan Africa, which used meta-ethnographic methods to understand their origins, their meanings for the women who use them, and how they have evolved in time and place. We included published documents which were based on qualitative methods of data collection and analysis and contained information on vaginal practices. After screening, 16 texts were included which dated from 1951 to 2008. We found that practices evolve and adapt to present circumstances and that they remain an important source of power for women to negotiate challenges that they face. Recent evidence suggests that some practices may increase a woman's susceptibility to HIV and other sexually transmitted infections. The success of new female-controlled prevention technologies, such as microbicides, might be determined by whether they can and will be used by women in the course of their daily life.

Background: Intravaginal practices are commonly used by women to manage their vaginal health and sexual life. These practices could, however, affect intravaginal mucosal integrity. The objectives of this study were to examine evidence for associations between: intravaginal practices and acquisition of HIV infection; intravaginal practices and vaginal infections; and vaginal infections and HIV acquisition. Methodology/Principal Findings: We conducted a systematic review of prospective longitudinal studies, searching 15 electronic databases of journals and abstracts from two international conferences to 31(st) January 2008. Relevant articles were selected and data extracted in duplicate. Results were examined visually in forest plots and combined using random effects meta-analysis where appropriate. Of 2120 unique references we included 22 publications from 15 different studies in sub-Saharan Africa and the USA. Seven publications from five studies examined a range of intravaginal practices and HIV infection. No specific vaginal practices showed a protective effect against HIV or vaginal infections. Insertion of products for sex was associated with HIV in unadjusted analyses; only one study gave an adjusted estimate, which showed no association (hazard ratio 1.09, 95% confidence interval, Cl 0.71, 1.67). HIV incidence was higher in women reporting intravaginal cleansing but confidence intervals were wide and heterogeneity high (adjusted hazard ratio 1.88, 95% Cl 0.53, 6.69, I-2 83.2%). HIV incidence was higher in women with bacterial vaginosis (adjusted effect 1.57, 95% Cl 1.26, 1.94, I-2 19.0%) and Trichomonas vaginalis (adjusted effect 1.64, 95% Cl 1.28, 2.09, I-2 0.0%). Conclusions/Significance: A pathway linking intravaginal cleaning practices with vaginal infections that increase susceptibility to HIV infection is plausible but conclusive evidence is lacking. Intravaginal practices do not appear to protect women from vaginal infections or HIV and some might be harmful.

BACKGROUND: This report describes the incidence of childhood cancer in Switzerland, based on the data from the Swiss Childhood Cancer Registry (SCCR), a national hospital-based cancer registry with very high coverage, founded in 1976 by the Swiss Paediatric Oncology Group (SPOG). PROCEDURE: Malignancies were coded according to the International Classification of Childhood Cancer (ICCC-3). Incidence rates per 100,000 person-years were calculated for all malignancies and groups of malignancies in Swiss residents less than 15 years of age for the decade 1995-2004. RESULTS: The SCCR annually registered on average 174 new cases of cancer in Swiss residents aged

Background Accurate information about the prevalence of Chlamydia trachomatis infections is needed to assess prevention and control measures at national and regional level. Methods Systematic review up to August 2012 of population-based cross-sectional studies that estimated chlamydia prevalence in high income countries, focussing on EU/EEA Member States. Data were extracted about study findings; the risk of bias was assessed and meta-analysis was performed where appropriate. Meta-regression was used to examine the relationship between chlamydia prevalence estimates and study response rates. Results 25 population-based studies were included from 10 EU/EEA countries and 14 studies from 6 other high income countries. Four EU/EEA Member States reported on nationally representative surveys of sexually experienced adults ≤ 26 years, with response rates from 52–71%. Chlamydia point prevalence estimates in 18–24 year olds (3 studies) ranged from 3.0–4.7% in women and from 2.4–4.7% in men. Chlamydia prevalence estimates in EU/EEA countries and other high income countries were statistically consistent. The combined estimate from 5 studies in 18–26 year olds in Europe and the USA was 4.3% (95% CI 3.7, 5.0%) in women and 3.6% (95% CI 2.9, 4.3%) in men. In most studies there was either a high risk of selection bias in the methods used or insufficient information to judge. Estimates of chlamydia prevalence were inversely associated with response rate (p = 0.005 in women, 0.011 in men). Conclusions Selection bias in chlamydia prevalence surveys is likely, with over-estimation of prevalence being more likely than under-estimation. Cross-sectional surveys with lower response rates are associated with higher estimates of chlamydia prevalence. In studies with low response rates the percentage of chlamydia positive tests should not be interpreted as an estimate of population prevalence. Applying standards for the reporting of prevalence surveys might help to improve consistency in future.