BackgroundThere are well-known differences in gender outcome in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and other cancers. In this work, we evaluated several randomised clinical trials to explore the gender influence in the outcome of patients with NSCLC treated with targeted therapy and immunotherapy.MethodsWe performed a series of meta-analysis to compare the gender outcome in the routine setting for overall survival and progression-free survival (PFS) in phase III randomised clinical trials comparing EGFR inhibitors versus chemotherapy (OPTIMAL, LUX-lung 3, LUX-lung 6, EURTAC, ENSURE and WTJOG); ALK inhibitors versus chemotherapy (ASCEND 4, ASCEND 5, PROFILE 1014 and NCT009323893) and anti-PD1 checkpoint inhibitors versus chemotherapy (CheckMate 017, CheckMate 026, CheckMate 057, KEYNOTE 010 and KEYNOTE 024).ResultsFemale patients with NSCLC have a reduced risk of death compared with men (HR=0.73; 95% CI 0.67 to 0.79; p<0.00001). Women had a better benefit from EGFR inhibitors than men (HR=0.34; 95% CI 0.28 to 0.40; p<0.00001 vs HR=0.44; 95% CI 0.34 to 0.56; p<0.00001, respectively). The benefit from ALK inhibitors was similar for both genders (HR=0.51; 95% CI 0.42 to 0.61; p<0.00001 vs HR=0.48; 95% CI 0.39 to 0.59; p<0.00001, for women and men, respectively). Anti-PD1 inhibitors significantly improved the PFS in male patients when compared with chemotherapy (HR=0.76; 95% CI 0.68 to 0.86; p<0.00001); in contrast, women showed no benefit in 5/5 randomised trials (HR=1.03; 95% CI 0.89 to 1.20; p=0.69).ConclusionsIn this exploratory study, some targeted treatments were influenced by gender. Despite differences in outcomes that could be attributed to different histology, EGFR and smoking status, gender should be evaluated more deeply as prognostic variable in patients with NSCLC.

The aim of this study is to provide a more accurate representation of COVID-19's case fatality rate (CFR) by performing meta-analyses by continents and income, and by comparing the result with pooled estimates. We used multiple | ABOU GHAYDA ET AL.

BackgroundChildhood obesity is emerging as a major public health problem worldwide. To date, most studies of obesity and overweight in Peru are focused on adults, with few of them involving children, a population at a critical stage of development. The trend in overweight and obesity prevalence in Peruvian children under the age of five has not yet been determined. Thus, the objective of the present study is to evaluate the prevalence rates of overweight and obesity between 2010 and 2015 in children under the age of five, stratified by geographical areas in Peru.MethodsData were obtained from the Nutritional Status Information System of Peru. The total number of children evaluated was 14,155,914. For the Geographic Information Systems (GIS), the program Geo Da 1.8® was used to ascertain the spatial distribution of prevalence rates and was mapped for children under five. To assess the degree of spatial dependence, exploratory spatial data analysis was performed using the Moran’s I statistic and was assessed with the Local Indicators of Spatial Association (LISA) analysis to identify geographic concentrations of high and low of obesity and overweight levels.ResultsBetween 2010 and 2015, the national prevalence of childhood overweight and obesity ranged from 6.2%- 6.8% and 1.5%–2.7%, respectively. The highest prevalence of childhood overweight and obesity was found in 2014 and 2013, respectively. During these years, we observed that obesity decreased, but overweight remained stable. The highest prevalence of overweight and obesity was found in the departments located on the coast. Significant positive spatial autocorrelation was found for both overweight and obesity. The departments with the highest prevalence of overweight and obesity were concentrated in Lima, Callao, Ica, Moquegua and Tacna. The lowest were found in Loreto, Cusco and San Martin.ConclusionThe decrease in obesity and the stabilisation of overweight are positive results for the Peruvian childhood. However, in comparison with other Latin American countries, Peru still lags in obesity prevention.

No abstract

No abstract