Primary and Secondary Prevention of Cancer

A special issue of Journal of Clinical Medicine (ISSN 2077-0383). This special issue belongs to the section "Epidemiology & Public Health".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: 30 June 2024 | Viewed by 1135

Special Issue Editor


E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
1. Maccabi Institute for Research & Innovation, Maccabi Healthcare Services, Tel-Aviv, Israel 2. School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Israel
Interests: preventive medicine; real-world data analysis; pharmacoepidemiology; outcome research; primary care

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

Cancer, responsible for an estimated 24 million new cases and 10 million deaths each year, stands as the second leading contributor to the global disease burden. Preventive services are an essential component of healthcare, and their underutilization is a persistent concern in developed and developing countries. Several factors, such as cost, time constraints, resource limitations, and patient adherence issues, contribute to the suboptimal results of these critical services. In order to tackle this challenge, it is imperative for researchers and healthcare professionals to remain up to date with the latest advances and draw insights from global healthcare systems in the field of cancer prevention strategies.

Addressing this formidable challenge necessitates that researchers and healthcare professionals stay abreast of the latest advances and glean insights from healthcare systems worldwide, particularly in the realm of prevention strategies. Incorporating cutting-edge tools such as digital health and big data analytics can be instrumental in the early identification of individuals at high risk of cancer.

Moreover, it is paramount to establish effective methods that provide comprehensive explanations regarding the associated risks and benefits to various stakeholders, including patients, decision-makers, and healthcare staff. In this Special Issue, we invite authors to submit their original research articles on the most recent developments in the primary and secondary prevention of cancer. Your contributions will play a pivotal role in enhancing healthcare practices and promoting the widespread adoption of preventive cancer services on a global scale.

Dr. Gabriel Chodick
Guest Editor

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Journal of Clinical Medicine is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2600 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • non-communicable diseases
  • preventive medicine
  • primary and secondary prevention
  • real-world data analysis
  • outcome research
  • primary care

Published Papers (2 papers)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

14 pages, 1454 KiB  
Article
Clinical and Economic Implications of Hydroxyurea Intolerance in Polycythemia Vera in Routine Clinical Practice
by Martin H. Ellis, Tamar Tadmor, Naama Yekutiel, Gabriel Chodick, Moti Levy, Giora Sharf, Nana Ben Zvi, Raanan Leef, Oren Feine and Oren Shavit
J. Clin. Med. 2024, 13(12), 3390; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13123390 - 10 Jun 2024
Viewed by 323
Abstract
Background/Objectives: Polycythemia vera (PV) is a chronic hematologic neoplasm commonly treated with hydroxyurea (HU). We utilized the advanced digitalized database of Maccabi Healthcare Services to retrospectively investigate the clinical and economic implications of HU intolerance in the routine clinical care of PV patients [...] Read more.
Background/Objectives: Polycythemia vera (PV) is a chronic hematologic neoplasm commonly treated with hydroxyurea (HU). We utilized the advanced digitalized database of Maccabi Healthcare Services to retrospectively investigate the clinical and economic implications of HU intolerance in the routine clinical care of PV patients in Israel. Methods: We collected data on demographics, physician visits, hospitalizations, laboratory results, medication purchases, cardiovascular and thrombotic events, mental health, economic outcomes, and mortality. Outcomes included cardiovascular and other thrombotic events, disease progression, mental health events, economic outcomes, and overall mortality. Results: Of the 830 patients studied, 3 (0.4%) were resistant to HU treatment, 318 (38.3%) were intolerant to HU treatment, and 509 (61.3%) were stable on HU treatment. The venous thrombosis rate was significantly higher among HU-intolerant compared to HU-stable patients (1.58 vs. 0.47 per 100 person-years [PY], respectively; p < 0.001). The rate of progression to myelofibrosis was 6 vs. 0.9 per 100 PY in HU-intolerant patients vs. HU-stable patients, respectively (p < 0.001), and the rate of progression to acute myeloid leukemia (AML) was 1.16 vs. 0.2 per 100 PY in HU-intolerant patients vs. HU-stable patients, respectively (p < 0.001). The phlebotomy requirement, mortality rate, and total hospitalization days among HU-intolerant patients were significantly higher than in HU-stable patients (p = 0.049, p < 0.001, p < 0.001, respectively). More mental health-related events were noted in HU-intolerant patients vs. HU-stable patients (p = 0.007), and the total healthcare cost ratio was 2.65 for the HU-intolerant patients compared with HU-stable patients. Conclusions: This study suggests that HU-intolerant patients are more likely to have worse outcomes than HU-stable patients, highlighting the need for the close monitoring of these patients for disease-related complications or progression. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Primary and Secondary Prevention of Cancer)
Show Figures

Figure 1

11 pages, 3999 KiB  
Article
Distinguishing Axillary Lymphadenopathy after COVID-19 Vaccination from Malignant Lymphadenopathy
by Shintaro Yamanaka, Keiko Tanaka, Masao Miyagawa, Teruhito Kido, Shinji Hasebe, Shoichiro Yamamoto, Tomomi Fujii, Kazuto Takeuchi and Yoshihiro Yakushijin
J. Clin. Med. 2024, 13(12), 3387; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13123387 - 9 Jun 2024
Viewed by 548
Abstract
Objectives: To study the differences between malignant hypermetabolic axillary lymphadenopathy (MHL) and COVID-19 vaccine-associated axillary hypermetabolic lymphadenopathy (VAHL) using clinical imaging. Methods: A total of 1096 patients underwent Positron Emission Tomography-Computed Tomography (PET-CT) between 1 June 2021 and 30 April 2022 [...] Read more.
Objectives: To study the differences between malignant hypermetabolic axillary lymphadenopathy (MHL) and COVID-19 vaccine-associated axillary hypermetabolic lymphadenopathy (VAHL) using clinical imaging. Methods: A total of 1096 patients underwent Positron Emission Tomography-Computed Tomography (PET-CT) between 1 June 2021 and 30 April 2022 at Ehime University Hospital. In total, 188 patients with axillary lymphadenopathy after the COVID-19 vaccination were evaluated. The patients were classified into three groups such as VAHL (n = 27), MHL (n = 21), and equivocal hypermetabolic axillary lymphadenopathy (EqHL; n = 140). Differences in lymph node (LN) swellings were statistically analyzed using clinical imaging (echography, CT, and 18F-FDG PET). Results: MHL included a higher female population (90.5%) owing to a higher frequency of breast cancer (80.9%). Axillary LNs of MHL did not show any LN fatty hilums (0%); however, those of VAHL and EqHL did (15.8 and 36%, respectively). After the logistic regression analysis of the patients who had axillary lymphadenopathy without any LN fatty hilums, the minor axis length and ellipticity (minor axis/major axis) in the largest axillary LN, SUVmax, and Tissue-to-Background Ratio (TBR) were useful in distinguishing malignant lymphadenopathies. A receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) analysis indicated that a cut-off value of ≥7.3 mm for the axillary LN minor axis (sensitivity: 0.714, specificity: 0.684) and of ≥0.671 for ellipticity (0.667 and 0.773, respectively) in the largest LN with the highest SUVmax and TBR were predictive of MHL. Conclusions: Axillary lymphadenopathy of the minor axis and ellipticity in LN without fatty hilums may be useful to be suspicious for malignancy, even in patients who have received COVID-19 vaccination. Further examinations, such as 18F-FDG PET, are recommended for such patients. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Primary and Secondary Prevention of Cancer)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop