Arash Ziapoor

Dr. Arash Ziapoor

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

13Years (2014-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 December 2019 in JAMA Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
GCGlobal Burden of Disease Cancer Collaboration
Global Burden of Disease Cancer Collaboration
CFChristina Fitzmaurice
Christina Fitzmaurice
DADegu Abate
Degu Abate
NANaghmeh Abbasi
Naghmeh Abbasi
HAHedayat Abbastabar
Hedayat Abbastabar
CMChristopher J. L. Murray
Christopher J. L. Murray
Cancer is now widely recognized as a global problem that unfortunately lacks a global solution. The latest United Nations high-level meeting on noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) exemplified this conundrum.1 Despite global commitment to reducing the risk of and disability from NCDs, including cancer, implementation of known solutions is inadequate to reach the 2011 Political Declaration on the Prevention and Control of Noncommunicable Diseases2,3 (25% reduction in premature mortality from NCDs by 2025) and the third Sustainable Development Goal (by 2030 reduce by one-third premature mortality from NCDs through prevention and treatment, and promote mental health and well-being).4 To reduce cancer burden, identifying the scope of the problem and mapping out implementation of solutions is best done in National Cancer Control Plans (NCCPs). However, a recent review showed that only 29% of low-income countries had a NCCP, and even if NCCPs existed, cost, financing, monitoring, and expansion of information systems was often inadequate. Many highly effective prevention and treatment strategies exist for cancer. However, they are often very specific (eg, vaccination for human papillomavirus and hepatitis B virus for prevention of cervical and liver cancer, or tyrosine kinase inhibitors for cancers with targetable mutations). Effective NCCPs therefore require detailed knowledge about the local burden of cancer and associated risk factors. We herein present results from the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) 2017 study describing cancer incidence, mortality, years of life lost (YLLs), years lived with disability (YLDs), and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) for 195 countries from 1990 through 2017, which can inform cancer control through policy, resource allocation, and health system planning.

1 December 2019 in The Lancet HIV
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
TFTahvi D Frank
Tahvi D Frank
ACAustin Carter
Austin Carter
DJDeepa Jahagirdar
Deepa Jahagirdar
MBMolly H Biehl
Molly H Biehl
DDDirk Douwes-Schultz
Dirk Douwes-Schultz
CMChristopher J L Murray
Christopher J L Murray
Understanding the patterns of HIV/AIDS epidemics is crucial to tracking and monitoring the progress of prevention and control efforts in countries. We provide a comprehensive assessment of the levels and trends of HIV/AIDS incidence, prevalence, mortality, and coverage of antiretroviral therapy (ART) for 1980-2017 and forecast these estimates to 2030 for 195 countries and territories. We determined a modelling strategy for each country on the basis of the availability and quality of data. For countries and territories with data from population-based seroprevalence surveys or antenatal care clinics, we estimated prevalence and incidence using an open-source version of the Estimation and Projection Package-a natural history model originally developed by the UNAIDS Reference Group on Estimates, Modelling, and Projections. For countries with cause-specific vital registration data, we corrected data for garbage coding (ie, deaths coded to an intermediate, immediate, or poorly defined cause) and HIV misclassification. We developed a process of cohort incidence bias adjustment to use information on survival and deaths recorded in vital registration to back-calculate HIV incidence. For countries without any representative data on HIV, we produced incidence estimates by pulling information from observed bias in the geographical region. We used a re-coded version of the Spectrum model (a cohort component model that uses rates of disease progression and HIV mortality on and off ART) to produce age-sex-specific incidence, prevalence, and mortality, and treatment coverage results for all countries, and forecast these measures to 2030 using Spectrum with inputs that were extended on the basis of past trends in treatment scale-up and new infections. Global HIV mortality peaked in 2006 with 1·95 million deaths (95% uncertainty interval 1·87-2·04) and has since decreased to 0·95 million deaths (0·91-1·01) in 2017. New cases of HIV globally peaked in 1999 (3·16 million, 2·79-3·67) and since then have gradually decreased to 1·94 million (1·63-2·29) in 2017. These trends, along with ART scale-up, have globally resulted in increased prevalence, with 36·8 million (34·8-39·2) people living with HIV in 2017. Prevalence of HIV was highest in southern sub-Saharan Africa in 2017, and countries in the region had ART coverage ranging from 65·7% in Lesotho to 85·7% in eSwatini. Our forecasts showed that 54 countries will meet the UNAIDS target of 81% ART coverage by 2020 and 12 countries are on track to meet 90% ART coverage by 2030. Forecasted results estimate that few countries will meet the UNAIDS 2020 and 2030 mortality and incidence targets. Despite progress in reducing HIV-related mortality over the past decade, slow decreases in incidence, combined with the current context of stagnated funding for related interventions, mean that many countries are not on track to reach the 2020 and 2030 global targets for reduction in incidence and mortality. With a growing population of people living with HIV, it will continue to be a major threat to public health for years to come. The pace of progress needs to be hastened by continuing to expand access to ART and increasing investments in proven HIV prevention initiatives that can be scaled up to have population-level impact. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, National Institute of Mental Health of the US National Institutes of Health (NIH), and the National Institute on Aging of the NIH.

1 June 2019 in The Lancet
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
ACAngela Y. Chang
Angela Y. Chang
KCKrycia Cowling
Krycia Cowling
AMAngela E. Micah
Angela E. Micah
ACAbigail Chapin
Abigail Chapin
CCCatherine S. Chen
Catherine S. Chen
JDJoseph L Dieleman
Joseph L Dieleman
Comprehensive and comparable estimates of health spending in each country are a key input for health policy and planning, and are necessary to support the achievement of national and international health goals. Previous studies have tracked past and projected future health spending until 2040 and shown that, with economic development, countries tend to spend more on health per capita, with a decreasing share of spending from development assistance and out-of-pocket sources. We aimed to characterise the past, present, and predicted future of global health spending, with an emphasis on equity in spending across countries. We estimated domestic health spending for 195 countries and territories from 1995 to 2016, split into three categories-government, out-of-pocket, and prepaid private health spending-and estimated development assistance for health (DAH) from 1990 to 2018. We estimated future scenarios of health spending using an ensemble of linear mixed-effects models with time series specifications to project domestic health spending from 2017 through 2050 and DAH from 2019 through 2050. Data were extracted from a broad set of sources tracking health spending and revenue, and were standardised and converted to inflation-adjusted 2018 US dollars. Incomplete or low-quality data were modelled and uncertainty was estimated, leading to a complete data series of total, government, prepaid private, and out-of-pocket health spending, and DAH. Estimates are reported in 2018 US dollars, 2018 purchasing-power parity-adjusted dollars, and as a percentage of gross domestic product. We used demographic decomposition methods to assess a set of factors associated with changes in government health spending between 1995 and 2016 and to examine evidence to support the theory of the health financing transition. We projected two alternative future scenarios based on higher government health spending to assess the potential ability of governments to generate more resources for health. Between 1995 and 2016, health spending grew at a rate of 4·00% (95% uncertainty interval 3·89-4·12) annually, although it grew slower in per capita terms (2·72% [2·61-2·84]) and increased by less than $1 per capita over this period in 22 of 195 countries. The highest annual growth rates in per capita health spending were observed in upper-middle-income countries (5·55% [5·18-5·95]), mainly due to growth in government health spending, and in lower-middle-income countries (3·71% [3·10-4·34]), mainly from DAH. Health spending globally reached $8·0 trillion (7·8-8·1) in 2016 (comprising 8·6% [8·4-8·7] of the global economy and $10·3 trillion [10·1-10·6] in purchasing-power parity-adjusted dollars), with a per capita spending of US$5252 (5184-5319) in high-income countries, $491 (461-524) in upper-middle-income countries, $81 (74-89) in lower-middle-income countries, and $40 (38-43) in low-income countries. In 2016, 0·4% (0·3-0·4) of health spending globally was in low-income countries, despite these countries comprising 10·0% of the global population. In 2018, the largest proportion of DAH targeted HIV/AIDS ($9·5 billion, 24·3% of total DAH), although spending on other infectious diseases (excluding tuberculosis and malaria) grew fastest from 2010 to 2018 (6·27% per year). The leading sources of DAH were the USA and private philanthropy (excluding corporate donations and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation). For the first time, we included estimates of China's contribution to DAH ($644·7 million in 2018). Globally, health spending is projected to increase to $15·0 trillion (14·0-16·0) by 2050 (reaching 9·4% [7·6-11·3] of the global economy and $21·3 trillion [19·8-23·1] in purchasing-power parity-adjusted dollars), but at a lower growth rate of 1·84% (1·68-2·02) annually, and with continuing disparities in spending between countries. In 2050, we estimate that 0·6% (0·6-0·7) of health spending will occur in currently low-income countries, despite these countries comprising an estimated 15·7% of the global population by 2050. The ratio between per capita health spending in high-income and low-income countries was 130·2 (122·9-136·9) in 2016 and is projected to remain at similar levels in 2050 (125·9 [113·7-138·1]). The decomposition analysis identified governments' increased prioritisation of the health sector and economic development as the strongest factors associated with increases in government health spending globally. Future government health spending scenarios suggest that, with greater prioritisation of the health sector and increased government spending, health spending per capita could more than double, with greater impacts in countries that currently have the lowest levels of government health spending. Financing for global health has increased steadily over the past two decades and is projected to continue increasing in the future, although at a slower pace of growth and with persistent disparities in per-capita health spending between countries. Out-of-pocket spending is projected to remain substantial outside of high-income countries. Many low-income countries are expected to remain dependent on development assistance, although with greater government spending, larger investments in health are feasible. In the absence of sustained new investments in health, increasing efficiency in health spending is essential to meet global health targets. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

1 September 2019 in The Lancet Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
LFLisa M. Force
Lisa M. Force
IAIbrahim Abdollahpour
Ibrahim Abdollahpour
SAShailesh M Advani
Shailesh M Advani
DADominic Agius
Dominic Agius
EAElham Ahmadian
Elham Ahmadian
NBNickhill Bhakta
Nickhill Bhakta
Accurate childhood cancer burden data are crucial for resource planning and health policy prioritisation. Model-based estimates are necessary because cancer surveillance data are scarce or non-existent in many countries. Although global incidence and mortality estimates are available, there are no previous analyses of the global burden of childhood cancer represented in disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs). Using the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2017 methodology, childhood (ages 0-19 years) cancer mortality was estimated by use of vital registration system data, verbal autopsy data, and population-based cancer registry incidence data, which were transformed to mortality estimates through modelled mortality-to-incidence ratios (MIRs). Childhood cancer incidence was estimated using the mortality estimates and corresponding MIRs. Prevalence estimates were calculated by using MIR to model survival and multiplied by disability weights to obtain years lived with disability (YLDs). Years of life lost (YLLs) were calculated by multiplying age-specific cancer deaths by the difference between the age of death and a reference life expectancy. DALYs were calculated as the sum of YLLs and YLDs. Final point estimates are reported with 95% uncertainty intervals. Globally, in 2017, there were 11·5 million (95% uncertainty interval 10·6-12·3) DALYs due to childhood cancer, 97·3% (97·3-97·3) of which were attributable to YLLs and 2·7% (2·7-2·7) of which were attributable to YLDs. Childhood cancer was the sixth leading cause of total cancer burden globally and the ninth leading cause of childhood disease burden globally. 82·2% (82·1-82·2) of global childhood cancer DALYs occurred in low, low-middle, or middle Socio-demographic Index locations, whereas 50·3% (50·3-50·3) of adult cancer DALYs occurred in these same locations. Cancers that are uncategorised in the current GBD framework comprised 26·5% (26·5-26·5) of global childhood cancer DALYs. The GBD 2017 results call attention to the substantial burden of childhood cancer globally, which disproportionately affects populations in resource-limited settings. The use of DALY-based estimates is crucial in demonstrating that childhood cancer burden represents an important global cancer and child health concern. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, American Lebanese Syrian Associated Charities (ALSAC), and St. Baldrick's Foundation.

1 May 2021 in Risk Management and Healthcare Policy
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
JAJaffar Abbas
Jaffar Abbas
DWDake Wang
Dake Wang
Zhaohui SuZhaohui Su
Zhaohui Su
AZArash Ziapoor
Arash Ziapoor
Background: This study focuses on how educating people through social media platforms can help reduce the mental health consequences of the COVID-19 to manage the global health crisis. The pandemic has posed a global mental health crisis, and correct information is indispensable to dispel uncertainty, fear, and mental stress to unify global communities in collective combat against COVID-19 disease worldwide. Mounting studies specified that manifestly endless coronavirus-related newsfeeds and death numbers considerably increased the risk of global mental health issues. Social media provided positive and negative data, and the COVID-19 has resulted in a worldwide infodemic. It has eroded public trust and impeded virus restraint, which outlived the coronavirus pandemic itself. Methods: The study incorporated the narrative review analysis based on the existing literature related to mental health problems using the non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) approach to minimize the COVID-19 adverse consequences on global mental health. The study performed a search of the electronic databases available at PsycINFO, PubMed, and LISTA. This research incorporates the statistical data related to the COVID-19 provided by the WHO, John Hopkins University, and Pakistani Ministry of Health. Results: Pakistan reported the second-highest COVID-19 cases within South Asia, the fifth-highest number of cases in Asia after Iran, India, Russia, Saudi Arabia, and the 14th highest recorded cases, as of October 14, 2020. Pakistan effectively managed the COVID-19 pandemic in the second wave. It stands at the eighth-highest number of confirmed cases in Asia, the 3rd-highest in South Asia, and the 28th-highest number of established patients globally, as of February20, 2021. Conclusion: The COVID-19 has resulted in over 108.16 million confirmed cases, deaths over 2.374 million, and a recovery of 80.16 million people worldwide, as of February 12, 2021. This study focused on exploring the COVID-19 pandemic’s adverse effects on global public health and the indispensable role of social media to provide the correct information in the COVID-19 health crisis. The findings’ generalizability offers helpful insight for crisis management and contributes to the scientific literature. The results might provide a stepping-stone for conduct future empirical studies by including other factors to conclude exciting developments.

16 October 2019 in Nature
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
RBRoy Burstein
Roy Burstein
NHNathaniel J Henry
Nathaniel J Henry
MCMichael L Collison
Michael L Collison
LMLaurie B Marczak
Laurie B Marczak
ASAmber Sligar
Amber Sligar
SHSimon Hay
Simon Hay
Since 2000, many countries have achieved considerable success in improving child survival, but localized progress remains unclear. To inform efforts towards United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 3.2—to end preventable child deaths by 2030—we need consistently estimated data at the subnational level regarding child mortality rates and trends. Here we quantified, for the period 2000–2017, the subnational variation in mortality rates and number of deaths of neonates, infants and children under 5 years of age within 99 low- and middle-income countries using a geostatistical survival model. We estimated that 32% of children under 5 in these countries lived in districts that had attained rates of 25 or fewer child deaths per 1,000 live births by 2017, and that 58% of child deaths between 2000 and 2017 in these countries could have been averted in the absence of geographical inequality. This study enables the identification of high-mortality clusters, patterns of progress and geographical inequalities to inform appropriate investments and implementations that will help to improve the health of all populations.