and Risk Factors Study 2019 (GBD 2019) provided systematic estimates of incidence, morbidity, and mortality to inform local and international efforts toward reducing cancer burden. OBJECTIVE To estimate cancer burden and trends globally for 204 countries and territories and by Sociodemographic Index (SDI) quintiles from 2010 to 2019. EVIDENCE REVIEWThe GBD 2019 estimation methods were used to describe cancer incidence, mortality, years lived with disability, years of life lost, and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) in 2019 and over the past decade. Estimates are also provided by quintiles of the SDI, a composite measure of educational attainment, income per capita, and total fertility rate for those younger than 25 years. Estimates include 95% uncertainty intervals (UIs).FINDINGS In 2019, there were an estimated 23.6 million (95% UI, 22.2-24.9 million) new cancer cases (17.2 million when excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer) and 10.0 million (95% UI, 9.36-10.6 million) cancer deaths globally, with an estimated 250 million (235-264 million) DALYs due to cancer. Since 2010, these represented a 26.3% (95% UI, 20.3%-32.3%) increase in new cases, a 20.9% (95% UI, 14.2%-27.6%) increase in deaths, and a 16.0% (95% UI, 9.3%-22.8%) increase in DALYs. Among 22 groups of diseases and injuries in the GBD 2019 study, cancer was second only to cardiovascular diseases for the number of deaths, years of life lost, and DALYs globally in 2019. Cancer burden differed across SDI quintiles. The proportion of years lived with disability that contributed to DALYs increased with SDI, ranging from 1.4% (1.1%-1.8%) in the low SDI quintile to 5.7% (4.2%-7.1%) in the high SDI quintile. While the high SDI quintile had the highest number of new cases in 2019, the middle SDI quintile had the highest number of cancer deaths and DALYs. From 2010 to 2019, the largest percentage increase in the numbers of cases and deaths occurred in the low and low-middle SDI quintiles. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCEThe results of this systematic analysis suggest that the global burden of cancer is substantial and growing, with burden differing by SDI. These results provide comprehensive and comparable estimates that can potentially inform efforts toward equitable cancer control around the world.

BackgroundPast research in population health trends has shown that injuries form a substantial burden of population health loss. Regular updates to injury burden assessments are critical. We report Global Burden of Disease (GBD) 2017 Study estimates on morbidity and mortality for all injuries.MethodsWe reviewed results for injuries from the GBD 2017 study. GBD 2017 measured injury-specific mortality and years of life lost (YLLs) using the Cause of Death Ensemble model. To measure non-fatal injuries, GBD 2017 modelled injury-specific incidence and converted this to prevalence and years lived with disability (YLDs). YLLs and YLDs were summed to calculate disability-adjusted life years (DALYs).FindingsIn 1990, there were 4 260 493 (4 085 700 to 4 396 138) injury deaths, which increased to 4 484 722 (4 332 010 to 4 585 554) deaths in 2017, while age-standardised mortality decreased from 1079 (1073 to 1086) to 738 (730 to 745) per 100 000. In 1990, there were 354 064 302 (95% uncertainty interval: 338 174 876 to 371 610 802) new cases of injury globally, which increased to 520 710 288 (493 430 247 to 547 988 635) new cases in 2017. During this time, age-standardised incidence decreased non-significantly from 6824 (6534 to 7147) to 6763 (6412 to 7118) per 100 000. Between 1990 and 2017, age-standardised DALYs decreased from 4947 (4655 to 5233) per 100 000 to 3267 (3058 to 3505).InterpretationInjuries are an important cause of health loss globally, though mortality has declined between 1990 and 2017. Future research in injury burden should focus on prevention in high-burden populations, improving data collection and ensuring access to medical care.

The emergence of the new coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) was first seen in December 2019, which has spread rapidly and become a global pandemic. The number of cases of COVID-19 and its associated mortality have raised serious concerns worldwide. Early diagnosis of viral infection undoubtedly allows rapid intervention, disease management, and substantial control of the rapid spread of the disease. Currently, the standard approach for COVID-19 diagnosis globally is the RT-qPCR test; however, the limited access to kits and associated reagents, the need for specialized lab equipment, and the need for highly skilled personnel has led to a detection slowdown. Recently, the development of clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR)-based diagnostic systems has reshaped molecular diagnosis. The benefits of the CRISPR system such as speed, precision, specificity, strength, efficiency, and versatility have inspired researchers to develop CRISPR-based diagnostic and therapeutic methods. With the global COVID-19 outbreak, different groups have begun to design and develop diagnostic and therapeutic programs based on the efficient CRISPR system. CRISPR-based COVID-19 diagnostic systems have advantages such as a high detection speed (i.e., 30 min from raw sample to reach a result), high sensitivity and precision, portability, and no need for specialized laboratory equipment. Here, we review contemporary studies on the detection of COVID-19 based on the CRISPR system.

BackgroundWhile there is a long history of measuring death and disability from injuries, modern research methods must account for the wide spectrum of disability that can occur in an injury, and must provide estimates with sufficient demographic, geographical and temporal detail to be useful for policy makers. The Global Burden of Disease (GBD) 2017 study used methods to provide highly detailed estimates of global injury burden that meet these criteria.MethodsIn this study, we report and discuss the methods used in GBD 2017 for injury morbidity and mortality burden estimation. In summary, these methods included estimating cause-specific mortality for every cause of injury, and then estimating incidence for every cause of injury. Non-fatal disability for each cause is then calculated based on the probabilities of suffering from different types of bodily injury experienced.ResultsGBD 2017 produced morbidity and mortality estimates for 38 causes of injury. Estimates were produced in terms of incidence, prevalence, years lived with disability, cause-specific mortality, years of life lost and disability-adjusted life-years for a 28-year period for 22 age groups, 195 countries and both sexes.ConclusionsGBD 2017 demonstrated a complex and sophisticated series of analytical steps using the largest known database of morbidity and mortality data on injuries. GBD 2017 results should be used to help inform injury prevention policy making and resource allocation. We also identify important avenues for improving injury burden estimation in the future.

Background Bone fractures are a global public health issue; however, to date, no comprehensive study of their incidence and burden has been done. We aimed to measure the global, regional, and national incidence, prevalence, and years lived with disability (YLDs) of fractures from 1990 to 2019.Methods Using the framework of the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2019, we compared numbers and age-standardised rates of global incidence, prevalence, and YLDs of fractures across the 21 GBD regions and 204 countries and territories, by age, sex, and year, from 1990 to 2019. We report estimates with 95% uncertainty intervals (UIs). FindingsGlobally, in 2019, there were 178 million (95% UI 162-196) new fractures (an increase of 33•4% [30•1-37•0] since 1990), 455 million (428-484) prevalent cases of acute or long-term symptoms of a fracture (an increase of 70•1% [67•5-72•5] since 1990), and 25•8 million (17•8-35•8) YLDs (an increase of 65•3% [62•4-68•0] since 1990). The agestandardised rates of fractures in 2019 were 2296•2 incident cases (2091•1-2529•5) per 100 000 population (a decrease of 9•6% [8•1-11•1] since 1990), 5614•3 prevalent cases (5286•1-5977•5) per 100 000 population (a decrease of 6•7% [5•7-7•6] since 1990), and 319•0 YLDs (220•1-442•5) per 100 000 population (a decrease of 8•4% [7•2-9•5] since 1990). Lower leg fractures of the patella, tibia or fibula, or ankle were the most common and burdensome fracture in 2019, with an age-standardised incidence rate of 419•9 cases (345•8-512•0) per 100 000 population and an age-standardised rate of YLDs of 190•4 (125•0-276•9) per 100 000 population. In 2019, age-specific rates of fracture incidence were highest in the oldest age groups, with, for instance, 15 381•5 incident cases (11 245•3-20 651•9) per 100 000 population in those aged 95 years and older.Interpretation The global age-standardised rates of incidence, prevalence, and YLDs for fractures decreased slightly from 1990 to 2019, but the absolute counts increased substantially. Older people have a particularly high risk of fractures, and more widespread injury-prevention efforts and access to screening and treatment of osteoporosis for older individuals should help to reduce the overall burden.Funding Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

No abstract

Bioprinting offers tremendous potential in the fabrication of functional tissue constructs for replacement of damaged or diseased tissues. Among other fabrication methods used in tissue engineering, bioprinting provides accurate control over the construct's geometric and compositional attributes using an automated approach. Bioinks are composed of the hydrogel material and living cells that are critical process variables in the fabrication of functional, mechanically robust constructs. Appropriate cells can be encapsulated in bioinks to create functional tissue structures. Ideal bioinks are required to undergo a sol–gel transition consuming minimal processing time, and a plethora of chemical and physical crosslinking mechanisms are generally exploited to achieve high shape fidelity and construct stability. In contrast, crosslinking of hydrogel material at rapid rates can cause nozzle clogging, and hence, optimization of the bioink is often necessary. Bioinks can be formulated using natural or synthetic biomaterials, alone or in combination of these biomaterials. Herein, the various bioprinting methods are discussed; the natural, synthetic, or hybrid materials used as bioinks are analyzed; and the challenges, limitations, and future directions concerning the bioprinting technique are appraised.

Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19), as an emerging infectious disease, has caused significant mortality and morbidity along with socioeconomic impact. No effective treatment or vaccine has been approved yet for this pandemic disease. Cutting-edge tools, especially nanotechnology, should be strongly considered to tackle this virus. This review aims to propose several strategies to design and fabricate effective diagnostic and therapeutic agents against COVID-19 by the aid of nanotechnology. Polymeric, inorganic self-assembling materials and peptide-based nanoparticles are promising tools for battling COVID-19 as well as its rapid diagnosis. This review summarizes all of the exciting advances nanomaterials are making toward COVID-19 prevention, diagnosis and therapy.