Climate change, malaria and neglected tropical diseases: a scoping review

To explore the effects of climate change on malaria and 20 neglected tropical diseases (NTDs), and potential effect amelioration through mitigation and adaptation, we searched for papers published from January 2010 to October 2023. We descriptively synthesised extracted data. We analysed numbers of papers meeting our inclusion criteria by country and national disease burden, healthcare access and quality index (HAQI), as well as by climate vulnerability score. From 42 693 retrieved records, 1543 full-text papers were assessed. Of 511 papers meeting the inclusion criteria, 185 studied malaria, 181 dengue and chikungunya and 53 leishmaniasis; other NTDs were relatively understudied. Mitigation was considered in 174 papers (34%) and adaption strategies in 24 (5%). Amplitude and direction of effects of climate change on malaria and NTDs are likely to vary by disease and location, be non-linear and evolve over time. Available analyses do not allow confident prediction of the overall global impact of climate change on these diseases. For dengue and chikungunya and the group of non-vector-borne NTDs, the literature privileged consideration of current low-burden countries with a high HAQI. No leishmaniasis papers considered outcomes in East Africa. Comprehensive, collaborative and standardised modelling efforts are needed to better understand how climate change will directly and indirectly affect malaria and NTDs

Global wealth disparities drive adherence to COVID-safe pathways in head and neck cancer surgery

Peer reviewe

Climate change, malaria and neglected tropical diseases: a scoping review

To explore the effects of climate change on malaria and 20 neglected tropical diseases (NTDs), and potential effect amelioration through mitigation and adaptation, we searched for papers published from January 2010 to October 2023. We descriptively synthesised extracted data. We analysed numbers of papers meeting our inclusion criteria by country and national disease burden, healthcare access and quality index (HAQI), as well as by climate vulnerability score. From 42 693 retrieved records, 1543 full-text papers were assessed. Of 511 papers meeting the inclusion criteria, 185 studied malaria, 181 dengue and chikungunya and 53 leishmaniasis; other NTDs were relatively understudied. Mitigation was considered in 174 papers (34%) and adaption strategies in 24 (5%). Amplitude and direction of effects of climate change on malaria and NTDs are likely to vary by disease and location, be non-linear and evolve over time. Available analyses do not allow confident prediction of the overall global impact of climate change on these diseases. For dengue and chikungunya and the group of non-vector-borne NTDs, the literature privileged consideration of current low-burden countries with a high HAQI. No leishmaniasis papers considered outcomes in East Africa. Comprehensive, collaborative and standardised modelling efforts are needed to better understand how climate change will directly and indirectly affect malaria and NTDs

Head and Neck Cancer: United Kingdom National Multidisciplinary Guidelines, Sixth Edition.

This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited

Breast cancer management pathways during the COVID-19 pandemic: outcomes from the UK ‘Alert Level 4’ phase of the B-MaP-C study

Abstract: Background: The B-MaP-C study aimed to determine alterations to breast cancer (BC) management during the peak transmission period of the UK COVID-19 pandemic and the potential impact of these treatment decisions. Methods: This was a national cohort study of patients with early BC undergoing multidisciplinary team (MDT)-guided treatment recommendations during the pandemic, designated ‘standard’ or ‘COVID-altered’, in the preoperative, operative and post-operative setting. Findings: Of 3776 patients (from 64 UK units) in the study, 2246 (59%) had ‘COVID-altered’ management. ‘Bridging’ endocrine therapy was used (n = 951) where theatre capacity was reduced. There was increasing access to COVID-19 low-risk theatres during the study period (59%). In line with national guidance, immediate breast reconstruction was avoided (n = 299). Where adjuvant chemotherapy was omitted (n = 81), the median benefit was only 3% (IQR 2–9%) using ‘NHS Predict’. There was the rapid adoption of new evidence-based hypofractionated radiotherapy (n = 781, from 46 units). Only 14 patients (1%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 during their treatment journey. Conclusions: The majority of ‘COVID-altered’ management decisions were largely in line with pre-COVID evidence-based guidelines, implying that breast cancer survival outcomes are unlikely to be negatively impacted by the pandemic. However, in this study, the potential impact of delays to BC presentation or diagnosis remains unknown

Bridging pre-surgical endocrine therapy for breast cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic: outcomes from the B-MaP-C study

Purpose: The B-MaP-C study investigated changes to breast cancer care that were necessitated by the COVID-19 pandemic. Here we present a follow-up analysis of those patients commenced on bridging endocrine therapy (BrET), whilst they were awaiting surgery due to reprioritisation of resources. Methods: This multicentre, multinational cohort study recruited 6045 patients from the UK, Spain and Portugal during the peak pandemic period (Feb–July 2020). Patients on BrET were followed up to investigate the duration of, and response to, BrET. This included changes in tumour size to reflect downstaging potential, and changes in cellular proliferation (Ki67), as a marker of prognosis. Results: 1094 patients were prescribed BrET, over a median period of 53 days (IQR 32–81 days). The majority of patients (95.6%) had strong ER expression (Allred score 7–8/8). Very few patients required expedited surgery, due to lack of response (1.2%) or due to lack of tolerance/compliance (0.8%). There were small reductions in median tumour size after 3 months’ treatment duration; median of 4 mm [IQR − 20, 4]. In a small subset of patients ( n = 47), a drop in cellular proliferation (Ki67) occurred in 26 patients (55%), from high (Ki67 ≥ 10%) to low (< 10%), with at least one month’s duration of BrET. Discussion: This study describes real-world usage of pre-operative endocrine therapy as necessitated by the pandemic. BrET was found to be tolerable and safe. The data support short-term (≤ 3 months) usage of pre-operative endocrine therapy. Longer-term use should be investigated in future trials