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

Effectiveness of a parenting programme to reduce violence in a cash transfer system in the Philippines: RCT with follow-up

Background Parenting interventions and conditional cash transfer (CCT) programmes are promising strategies to reduce the risk of violence against children, but evidence of the effectiveness of combining such programmes is lacking for families in low- and middle-income countries with children over two years of age. This study examined the effectiveness of a locally adapted parenting programme delivered as part of a government CCT system to low-income families with children aged two to six years in Metro Manila, Philippines. Methods Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to either a 12-session group-based parenting programme or treatment-as-usual services (N = 120). Participation in either service was required among the conditions for receiving cash grants. Baseline assessments were conducted in July 2017 with one-month post-intervention assessments in January-February 2018 and 12-month follow-up in January-February 2019. All assessments were parent-report (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03205449). Findings One-month post-intervention assessments indicated moderate intervention effects for primary outcomes of reduced overall child maltreatment (d = -0.50 [-0.86, -0.13]), emotional abuse (d = -0.59 [-0.95; -0.22]), physical abuse (IRR = 0.51 [0.27; 0.74]), and neglect (IRR = 0.52 [0.18; 0.85]). There were also significant effects for reduced dysfunctional parenting, child behaviour problems, and intimate partner violence, and increased parental efficacy and positive parenting. Reduced overall maltreatment, emotional abuse, and neglect effects were sustained at one-year follow-up. Interpretation Findings suggest that a culturally adapted parenting intervention delivered as part of a CCT programme may be effective in sustaining reductions in violence against children in low- and middle-income countries