Background: In this study, we compared and contrasted design characteristics, results, and publications of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in gastrointestinal (GI), lung, and breast cancer. Methods: A PUBMED search identified phase III RCTs of anticancer therapy in GI, lung, and breast cancer published globally during the period 2014–2017. Descriptive statistics, chi-square tests, and the Kruskal–Wallis test were used to compare RCT design, results, and output across the cancer sites. Results: A total of 352 RCTs were conducted on GI (36%), lung (29%), and breast (35%) cancer. Surrogate endpoints were used in 55% of trials; this was most common in breast trials (72%) compared to GI (47%) and lung trials (43%, p < 0.001). Breast trials more often met their primary endpoint (54%) than GI (41%) and lung trials (41%) (p = 0.024). When graded with the ESMO-MCBS, lung cancer trials (50%, 15/30) were more likely to meet the threshold for substantial benefit. GI trials were published in journals with a substantially lower impact factor (IF; median IF 13) than lung (median IF 21) and breast cancer trials (median IF 21) (p = 0.038). Conclusions: Important differences in RCT design and output exist between the three major cancer sites. Use of surrogate endpoints and the magnitude of benefit associated with new treatments vary substantially across cancer sites.

Canada has a long tradition of leading practice-changing clinical trials in oncology. Here, we describe methodology, results, and interpretation of oncology RCTs with Canadian involvement compared to RCTs from other high-income countries (HICs). A literature search identified all RCTs evaluating anti-cancer therapies published 2014–2017. RCTs were classified based on the country affiliation of first authors. The study cohort included 636 HIC-led RCTs; 155 (24%) had Canadian authors. Three-quarters (112/155, 72%) of Canadian RCTs were conducted in the palliative setting, compared to two thirds (299/481, 62%) of RCTs from other HICs (p = 0.022). Canadian RCTs were more likely than those from other HICs to be supported by industry (85% vs. 69%, p < 0.001). The proportion of positive Canadian trials that met the ESMO-MCBS threshold for substantial clinical benefit was comparable to RCTs without Canadian authors (29% vs. 32%, p = 0.137). Thirteen percent (20/155) of all Canadian trials were affiliated with the Canadian Cancer Trials Group (CCTG). Canada plays a meaningful role in the global cancer research ecosystem but is overly reliant on industry support. The very low proportion of trials that identify a new treatment with substantial clinical benefit is worrisome. A renewed investment in cancer clinical trials is needed in Canada.

Prevalence of contraceptive practices and its associated factors among women in an urban slum area of North India: An observational study - IJOGR- Print ISSN No: - 2394-2746 Online ISSN No:- 2394-2754 Article DOI No:- 10.18231/j.ijogr.2023.067, Indian Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology Research-Indian J Obstet Gyneco

Adolescence is an important stage of growth and development in the lifespan. Unmet nutritional needs lead to several public health problems such as stunted and retarded growth, impaired mental development, anaemia.Assessment and comparison of nutritional status of school going adolescents of rural and urban area and the factors affecting the nutritional status of adolescents.An observational study was conducted among the school going adolescents (10-19 years) studying in government schools in rural and urban area. A pre-designed semi-structured questionnaire was used for socio-demographic profile. Detailed clinical examination including head to toe examination, anthropometry and systemic examination was done to assess the nutritional status.Data was entered in MS Excel and analysed using SPSS and MS Excel. The statistical significance was evaluated at 95% confidence level (p<0.05). Result will be represented in tables.Eyes appeared paler in 27.22% of rural adolescents compared to 19.44% of urban. Overall prevalence of malnutrition among adolescents was 284 (78.89%) i.e.,75.56% in rural and 82.22% in urban area, in which prevalence ofunder-weight was 269 (74.72%) more in urban 137 (76.11%) compared to rural area 132 (73.33%).Prevalence of malnutrition (underweight, overweight and obesity) was more in urban area (76.11%) compared to rural area (73.33%) based on IAP-BMIcriteria.