The impact of surgical delay on resectability of colorectal cancer: An international prospective cohort study

AIM: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has provided a unique opportunity to explore the impact of surgical delays on cancer resectability. This study aimed to compare resectability for colorectal cancer patients undergoing delayed versus non-delayed surgery. METHODS: This was an international prospective cohort study of consecutive colorectal cancer patients with a decision for curative surgery (January-April 2020). Surgical delay was defined as an operation taking place more than 4 weeks after treatment decision, in a patient who did not receive neoadjuvant therapy. A subgroup analysis explored the effects of delay in elective patients only. The impact of longer delays was explored in a sensitivity analysis. The primary outcome was complete resection, defined as curative resection with an R0 margin. RESULTS: Overall, 5453 patients from 304 hospitals in 47 countries were included, of whom 6.6% (358/5453) did not receive their planned operation. Of the 4304 operated patients without neoadjuvant therapy, 40.5% (1744/4304) were delayed beyond 4 weeks. Delayed patients were more likely to be older, men, more comorbid, have higher body mass index and have rectal cancer and early stage disease. Delayed patients had higher unadjusted rates of complete resection (93.7% vs. 91.9%, P = 0.032) and lower rates of emergency surgery (4.5% vs. 22.5%, P < 0.001). After adjustment, delay was not associated with a lower rate of complete resection (OR 1.18, 95% CI 0.90-1.55, P = 0.224), which was consistent in elective patients only (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.69-1.27, P = 0.672). Longer delays were not associated with poorer outcomes. CONCLUSION: One in 15 colorectal cancer patients did not receive their planned operation during the first wave of COVID-19. Surgical delay did not appear to compromise resectability, raising the hypothesis that any reduction in long-term survival attributable to delays is likely to be due to micro-metastatic disease

Twelve-month observational study of children with cancer in 41 countries during the COVID-19 pandemic

Introduction Childhood cancer is a leading cause of death. It is unclear whether the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted childhood cancer mortality. In this study, we aimed to establish all-cause mortality rates for childhood cancers during the COVID-19 pandemic and determine the factors associated with mortality. Methods Prospective cohort study in 109 institutions in 41 countries. Inclusion criteria: children &lt;18 years who were newly diagnosed with or undergoing active treatment for acute lymphoblastic leukaemia, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, Hodgkin lymphoma, retinoblastoma, Wilms tumour, glioma, osteosarcoma, Ewing sarcoma, rhabdomyosarcoma, medulloblastoma and neuroblastoma. Of 2327 cases, 2118 patients were included in the study. The primary outcome measure was all-cause mortality at 30 days, 90 days and 12 months. Results All-cause mortality was 3.4% (n=71/2084) at 30-day follow-up, 5.7% (n=113/1969) at 90-day follow-up and 13.0% (n=206/1581) at 12-month follow-up. The median time from diagnosis to multidisciplinary team (MDT) plan was longest in low-income countries (7 days, IQR 3-11). Multivariable analysis revealed several factors associated with 12-month mortality, including low-income (OR 6.99 (95% CI 2.49 to 19.68); p&lt;0.001), lower middle income (OR 3.32 (95% CI 1.96 to 5.61); p&lt;0.001) and upper middle income (OR 3.49 (95% CI 2.02 to 6.03); p&lt;0.001) country status and chemotherapy (OR 0.55 (95% CI 0.36 to 0.86); p=0.008) and immunotherapy (OR 0.27 (95% CI 0.08 to 0.91); p=0.035) within 30 days from MDT plan. Multivariable analysis revealed laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection (OR 5.33 (95% CI 1.19 to 23.84); p=0.029) was associated with 30-day mortality. Conclusions Children with cancer are more likely to die within 30 days if infected with SARS-CoV-2. However, timely treatment reduced odds of death. This report provides crucial information to balance the benefits of providing anticancer therapy against the risks of SARS-CoV-2 infection in children with cancer

Combination of the W boson polarization measurements in top quark decays using ATLAS and CMS data at s = 8 TeV

Abstract: The combination of measurements of the W boson polarization in top quark decays performed by the ATLAS and CMS collaborations is presented. The measurements are based on proton-proton collision data produced at the LHC at a centre-of-mass energy of 8 TeV, and corresponding to an integrated luminosity of about 20 fb−1 for each experiment. The measurements used events containing one lepton and having different jet multiplicities in the final state. The results are quoted as fractions of W bosons with longitudinal (F0), left-handed (FL), or right-handed (FR) polarizations. The resulting combined measurements of the polarization fractions are F0 = 0.693 ± 0.014 and FL = 0.315 ± 0.011. The fraction FR is calculated from the unitarity constraint to be FR = −0.008 ± 0.007. These results are in agreement with the standard model predictions at next-to-next-to-leading order in perturbative quantum chromodynamics and represent an improvement in precision of 25 (29)% for F0 (FL) with respect to the most precise single measurement. A limit on anomalous right-handed vector (VR), and left- and right-handed tensor (gL, gR) tWb couplings is set while fixing all others to their standard model values. The allowed regions are [−0.11, 0.16] for VR, [−0.08, 0.05] for gL, and [−0.04, 0.02] for gR, at 95% confidence level. Limits on the corresponding Wilson coefficients are also derived

Efficacy and tolerability of the new antiepileptic drugs. I: Treatment of new onset epilepsy: Report of the Therapeutics and Technology Assessment Subcommittee and Quality Standards Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology and the American Epilepsy Society

Objective: To assess the evidence demonstrating efficacy, tolerability, and safety of seven new antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) (gabapentin, lamotrigine, topiramate, tiagabine, oxcarbazepine, levetiracetam, and zonisamide—reviewed in the order in which these agents received approval by the US Food and Drug Administration) in the treatment of children and adults with newly diagnosed partial and generalized epilepsies.Methods: A 23-member committee, including general neurologists, pediatric neurologists, epileptologists, and doctors in pharmacy, evaluated the available evidence based on a structured literature review including MEDLINE, Current Contents, and Cochrane library for relevant articles from 1987 until September 2002, with selected manual searches up until 2003.Results: There is evidence either from comparative or dose-controlled trials that gabapentin, lamotrigine, topiramate, and oxcarbazepine have efficacy as monotherapy in newly diagnosed adolescents and adults with either partial or mixed seizure disorders. There is also evidence that lamotrigine is effective for newly diagnosed absence seizures in children. Evidence for effectiveness of the new AEDs in newly diagnosed patients with other generalized epilepsy syndromes is lacking.Conclusions: The results of this evidence-based assessment provide guidelines for the prescription of AEDs for patients with newly diagnosed epilepsy and identify those seizure types and syndromes where more evidence is necessary.</jats:p

Efficacy and tolerability of the new antiepileptic drugs. II: Treatment of refractory epilepsy: Report of the Therapeutics and Technology Assessment Subcommittee and Quality Standards Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology and the American Epilepsy Society

Objective: To assess the evidence demonstrating efficacy, tolerability, and safety of seven new antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) (gabapentin, lamotrigine, topiramate, tiagabine, oxcarbazepine, levetiracetam, and zonisamide) in the treatment of children and adults with refractory partial and generalized epilepsies.Methods: A 23-member committee including general neurologists, pediatric neurologists, epileptologists, and doctors in pharmacy evaluated the available evidence based on a structured literature review including MEDLINE, Current Contents, and Cochrane library for relevant articles from 1987 until March 2003.Results: All of the new AEDs were found to be appropriate for adjunctive treatment of refractory partial seizures in adults. Gabapentin can be effective for the treatment of mixed seizure disorders, and gabapentin, lamotrigine, oxcarbazepine, and topiramate for the treatment of refractory partial seizures in children. Limited evidence suggests that lamotrigine and topiramate are also effective for adjunctive treatment of idiopathic generalized epilepsy in adults and children, as well as treatment of the Lennox Gastaut syndrome.Conclusions: The choice of AED depends upon seizure and/or syndrome type, patient age, concomitant medications, AED tolerability, safety, and efficacy. The results of this evidence-based assessment provide guidelines for the prescription of AEDs for patients with refractory epilepsy and identify those seizure types and syndromes where more evidence is necessary.</jats:p