Objective: The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the efficacy of different mHealth interventions in increasing colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates. Methods: A literature search for eligible studies was done in ClinicalTrials.gov, PubMed, and Scopus in October 2020. Included studies were randomized controlled trials done on adults due for CRC screening, who received either an mHealth intervention to promote screening or usual care. The primary outcome from these studies was completion of CRC screening. Two reviewers independently worked on selecting studies, collecting data, and determining risk of bias. Adjusted odds ratios (AOR) for CRC screening rates were summarized into a Forest plot. Results: A total of ten trials from three continents were included in the qualitative analysis. Risk of bias is low in terms of randomization, but high in terms of participant blinding, due to the nature of the interventions. Meta-analysis of four trials showed low clinical and statistical heterogeneity (I 2 =0%). Overall, the use of mHealth interventions is associated with higher CRC screening uptake when compared to usual care (AOR 1.33; 95% CI, 1.20-1.46). This effect was seen across different types of mHealth interventions, which included automated and non-automated telephone education and text-message reminders. Conclusion: This study showed that mHealth is associated with increased CRC screening participation regardless of the type of intervention used.

Rationale. COVID-19 pandemic disease, can be transmitted during gastrointestinal procedures, via aerosolized droplets, and via fecal shedding. Both international and local endoscopy societies have issued strategies to alleviate the risk to endoscopy personnel. However, several barriers against the implementation of these recommendations exist thus individual center’s policies are employed whenever applicable. Objectives. This narrative study aims to describe the current experience and set-up in the endoscopy unit of a COVID referral center, discuss the stratification of patients for endoscopy, the operational management of the personnel and endoscopy unit in line with the adapted local and international guidelines and offer endoscopists a quick reference guide to adapt endoscopy practice during the pandemic in a resource-limited setting. Methodology. This paper reviews and consolidates current endoscopy guidelines and describes the single-center experience of Philippine General Hospital. Results. In resource-limited settings, with uncertainties of prolonged COVID-19 impact to healthcare, modification of practice, adherence to strategies and recommendations, empowerment of workforce, establishing the sustainability of resources, training, and service to patients, are essential components to combat current dilemma brought about by this pandemic. Conclusion. Integration of current local and international guidelines encompass all aspects of endoscopy practice during the pandemic. The recommendations cited are aimed to guide other resource-limited endoscopy units for potential changes and guidance in the overall practice.

Many agents have been evaluated as maintenance therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), but there is no consensus on the optimal regimen. This study assessed the effect of single-agent capecitabine maintenance therapy on the survival outcomes of mCRC patients. A comprehensive literature search was performed according to prespecified inclusion and exclusion criteria for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing capecitabine as maintenance monotherapy versus active monitoring for mCRC patients. Data on overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), time to tumor progression (TTP), adverse events, and quality of life (QoL) scores were extracted. Three RCTs with a total of 576 patients were included. Pooled analyses found neither OS benefit (HR:0.85, 95% CI:0.64–1.13) nor reduction in mortality at 24 months (RR:0.88, 95% CI:0.66–1.17) with capecitabine maintenance. Compared with active monitoring, capecitabine maintenance therapy improved PFS (HR:0.36, 95% CI:0.26–0.61) and reduced the risk of progression at 6 months (HR:0.78, 95% CI:0.56–1.10). The incidence of any grade ≥ 3 toxicity was higher with maintenance therapy than with observation (OR:2.02, 95% CI:1.42–2.88). No difference in terms of QoL was observed. Single-agent capecitabine as maintenance for patients with mCRC provides no OS benefit but results in statistically significant improvement in PFS with increased risk of toxicity. Hence, it may be considered particularly for patients who wish to delay the need for second-line treatment and who can tolerate it well.

No abstract

No abstract

This is a rare case of primary pachydermoperiostosis (PDP). A 28-year-old Filipino male presented with a lifelong history of enlarged hands and feet. He eventually developed symmetrical swelling of the ankles and knees associated with leg heaviness and knee pain with difficulty with ambulation, hence consult. His eldest brother also had the same “elephant-like” extremities. He had cutis vertices gyrata with a thickened corrugated hair pattern, deep lines on the forehead, deepened nasolabial folds, enlarged extremities especially distally, with coarse, thick skin, and prominent clubbing. The nails were convex “watch crystal-like.” The wrists, knees, and ankles were tender and enlarged, with massive effusion of the knees. All joints were devoid of warmth and erythema. Skeletal survey favored hypertrophic osteoarthropathy over acromegaly, with periosteal thickening of the metaphysis and digital clubbing. The filarial smear was negative for blood parasites. Skin biopsy showed keratoderma. Synovial fluid was non-inflammatory while arthroscopic synovial biopsy showed chronic inflammation eosinophilic amorphous tissue. Electrocardiogram, echocardiogram, thyroid function tests, complete blood count, peripheral blood smear, serum chemistries, coagulation tests, urinalysis, urine electrolytes, fecalysis, and chest CT scan were unremarkable. Whole abdomen ultrasound revealed the liver parenchymal disease. Hepatitis profile revealed chronic infection with hepatitis B, with low infectivity. The three major criteria for PDP (pachydermia, periostitis, and digital clubbing) were fulfilled. Possible secondary causes were either excluded or were non-contributory. He was started on analgesics and anti-inflammatory medicines. Repeated arthrocenteses drained liters of synovial fluid per knee, and along with intra-articular steroid injections and compressive bandages, temporarily relieved his bilateral knee pain. He was referred to rehabilitation to maximize his range of motion and to address body image issues. The patient remains on regular follow-up for periodic arthrocentesis. The option of anti-VEGF treatment and arthrotomy was explored as possibilities but were not deemed practical. PDP is a rare genodermatosis. Life span is not affected but the quality of life is dismal without supportive management, as there is no known cure. A multidisciplinary team composed of a rheumatologist, dermatologist, orthopedic surgeon, plastic surgeon, rehabilitation physician, and a psychiatrist should be available to assist in the needs of these patients.

No abstract

No abstract