Understanding the magnitude of cancer burden attributable to potentially modifiable risk factors is crucial for development of effective prevention and mitigation strategies. We analysed results from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2019 to inform cancer control planning efforts globally. The GBD 2019 comparative risk assessment framework was used to estimate cancer burden attributable to behavioural, environmental and occupational, and metabolic risk factors. A total of 82 risk–outcome pairs were included on the basis of the World Cancer Research Fund criteria. Estimated cancer deaths and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) in 2019 and change in these measures between 2010 and 2019 are presented. Globally, in 2019, the risk factors included in this analysis accounted for 4·45 million (95% uncertainty interval 4·01–4·94) deaths and 105 million (95·0–116) DALYs for both sexes combined, representing 44·4% (41·3–48·4) of all cancer deaths and 42·0% (39·1–45·6) of all DALYs. There were 2·88 million (2·60–3·18) risk-attributable cancer deaths in males (50·6% [47·8–54·1] of all male cancer deaths) and 1·58 million (1·36–1·84) risk-attributable cancer deaths in females (36·3% [32·5–41·3] of all female cancer deaths). The leading risk factors at the most detailed level globally for risk-attributable cancer deaths and DALYs in 2019 for both sexes combined were smoking, followed by alcohol use and high BMI. Risk-attributable cancer burden varied by world region and Socio-demographic Index (SDI), with smoking, unsafe sex, and alcohol use being the three leading risk factors for risk-attributable cancer DALYs in low SDI locations in 2019, whereas DALYs in high SDI locations mirrored the top three global risk factor rankings. From 2010 to 2019, global risk-attributable cancer deaths increased by 20·4% (12·6–28·4) and DALYs by 16·8% (8·8–25·0), with the greatest percentage increase in metabolic risks (34·7% [27·9–42·8] and 33·3% [25·8–42·0]). The leading risk factors contributing to global cancer burden in 2019 were behavioural, whereas metabolic risk factors saw the largest increases between 2010 and 2019. Reducing exposure to these modifiable risk factors would decrease cancer mortality and DALY rates worldwide, and policies should be tailored appropriately to local cancer risk factor burden. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is the defining global health crisis of our time and the greatest challenge facing the world. Meteorological parameters are reportedly crucial factors affecting respiratory infectious disease epidemics; however, the effect of meteorological parameters on COVID-19 remains controversial. This study investigated the effects of temperature and relative humidity on daily new cases and daily new deaths of COVID-19, which has useful implications for policymakers and the public. Daily data on meteorological conditions, new cases and new deaths of COVID-19 were collected for 166 countries (excluding China) as of March 27, 2020. Log-linear generalized additive model was used to analyze the effects of temperature and relative humidity on daily new cases and daily new deaths of COVID-19, with potential confounders controlled for, including wind speed, median age of the national population, Global Health Security Index, Human Development Index and population density. Our findings revealed that temperature and relative humidity were both negatively related to daily new cases and deaths. A 1 °C increase in temperature was associated with a 3.08% (95% CI: 1.53%, 4.63%) reduction in daily new cases and a 1.19% (95% CI: 0.44%, 1.95%) reduction in daily new deaths, whereas a 1% increase in relative humidity was associated with a 0.85% (95% CI: 0.51%, 1.19%) reduction in daily new cases and a 0.51% (95% CI: 0.34%, 0.67%) reduction in daily new deaths. The results remained robust when different lag structures and the sensitivity analysis were used. These findings provide preliminary evidence that the COVID-19 pandemic may be partially suppressed with temperature and humidity increases. However, active measures must be taken to control the source of infection, block transmission and prevent further spread of COVID-19.

COVID-19, the disease caused by SARS-CoV-2, was first reported in December 2019.¹ Globally, as of January 28, 2021, there have been 100 455 529 confirmed cases, including 2 166 440 deaths.² The disease course of COVID-19 ranges from asymptomatic to mild respiratory infections to pneumonia and even to acute respiratory distress syndrome.³ Patients with no symptoms at screening point were defined as having asymptomatic infections, which included infected people who have not yet developed symptoms but go on to develop symptoms later (presymptomatic infections), and those who are infected but never develop any symptoms (true asymptomatic or covert infections).^4,5 Owing to the absence of symptoms, these patients would not seek medical care and could not be detected by temperature screening. Presymptomatic transmission will also make temperature screening less effective.⁶ Only extensive testing and close contact tracing could lead to identification of more asymptomatic infections.⁷

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is a major public health problem worldwide. China has the world's largest burden of HBV infection and will be a major contributor towards the global elimination of hepatitis B disease by 2030. The country has made good progress in reducing incidence of HBV infection in the past three decades. The achievements are mainly due to high vaccination coverages among children and high coverage of timely birth-dose vaccine for prevention of mother-to-child transmission of HBV (both > 95%). However, China still faces challenges in achieving its target of 65% reduction in mortality from hepatitis B by 2030. Based on targets of the World Health Organization's Global health sector strategy on viral hepatitis 2016-2021, we highlight further priorities for action towards HBV elimination in China. To achieve the impact target of reduced mortality we suggest that the service coverage targets of diagnosis and treatment should be prioritized. First, improvements are needed in the diagnostic and treatment abilities of medical institutions and health workers. Second, the government needs to reduce the financial burden of health care on patients. Third, better coordination is needed across existing national programmes and resources to establish an integrated prevention and control system that covers prevention, screening, diagnosis and treatment of HBV infection across the life cycle. In this way, progress can be made towards achieving the target of eliminating hepatitis B in China by 2030.

Background: To date, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) becomes increasingly fierce due to the emergence of variants. Rapid herd immunity through vaccination is needed to block the mutation and prevent the emergence of variants that can completely escape the immune surveillance. We aimed to systematically evaluate the effectiveness and safety of COVID-19 vaccines in the real world and to establish a reliable evidence-based basis for the actual protective effect of the COVID-19 vaccines, especially in the ensuing waves of infections dominated by variants. Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase and Web of Science from inception to July 22, 2021. Observational studies that examined the effectiveness and safety of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines among people vaccinated were included. Random-effects or fixed-effects models were used to estimate the pooled vaccine effectiveness (VE) and incidence rate of adverse events after vaccination, and their 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: A total of 58 studies (32 studies for vaccine effectiveness and 26 studies for vaccine safety) were included. A single dose of vaccines was 41% (95% CI: 28–54%) effective at preventing SARS-CoV-2 infections, 52% (31–73%) for symptomatic COVID-19, 66% (50–81%) for hospitalization, 45% (42–49%) for Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admissions, and 53% (15–91%) for COVID-19-related death; and two doses were 85% (81–89%) effective at preventing SARS-CoV-2 infections, 97% (97–98%) for symptomatic COVID-19, 93% (89–96%) for hospitalization, 96% (93–98%) for ICU admissions, and 95% (92–98%) effective for COVID-19-related death, respectively. The pooled VE was 85% (80–91%) for the prevention of Alpha variant of SARS-CoV-2 infections, 75% (71–79%) for the Beta variant, 54% (35–74%) for the Gamma variant, and 74% (62–85%) for the Delta variant. The overall pooled incidence rate was 1.5% (1.4–1.6%) for adverse events, 0.4 (0.2–0.5) per 10 000 for severe adverse events, and 0.1 (0.1–0.2) per 10 000 for death after vaccination. Conclusions: SARS-CoV-2 vaccines have reassuring safety and could effectively reduce the death, severe cases, symptomatic cases, and infections resulting from SARS-CoV-2 across the world. In the context of global pandemic and the continuous emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants, accelerating vaccination and improving vaccination coverage is still the most important and urgent matter, and it is also the final means to end the pandemic. Graphical

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is still in a global pandemic state. Some studies have reported that COVID-19 vaccines had a protective effect against long COVID. However, the conclusions of the studies on the effect of COVID-19 vaccines on long COVID were not consistent. This study aimed to systematically review relevant studies in the real world, and performed a meta-analysis to explore the relationship between vaccination and long COVID. We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Web of science, and ScienceDirect from inception to 19 September 2022. The PICO (P: patients; I: intervention; C: comparison; O: outcome) was as follows: patients diagnosed with COVID-19 (P); vaccination with COVID-19 vaccines (I); the patients were divided into vaccinated and unvaccinated groups (C); the outcomes were the occurrence of long COVID, as well as the various symptoms of long COVID (O). A fixed-effect model and random-effects model were chosen based on the heterogeneity between studies in order to pool the effect value. The results showed that the vaccinated group had a 29% lower risk of developing long COVID compared with the unvaccinated group (RR = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.58–0.87, p < 0.01). Compared with patients who were not vaccinated, vaccination showed its protective effect in patients vaccinated with two doses (RR = 0.83, 95% CI: 0.74–0.94, p < 0.01), but not one dose (RR = 0.83, 95% CI: 0.65–1.07, p = 0.14). In addition, vaccination was effective against long COVD in patients either vaccinated before SARS-CoV-2 infection/COVID-19 (RR = 0.82, 95% CI: 0.74–0.91, p < 0.01) or vaccinated after SARS-CoV-2 infection/COVID-19 (RR = 0.83, 95% CI: 0.74–0.92, p < 0.01). For long COVID symptoms, vaccination reduced the risk of cognitive dysfunction/symptoms, kidney diseases/problems, myalgia, and sleeping disorders/problems sleeping. Our study shows that COVID-19 vaccines had an effect on reducing the risk of long COVID in patients vaccinated before or after SARS-CoV-2 infection/COVID-19. We suggest that the vaccination rate should be improved as soon as possible, especially for a complete vaccination course. There should be more studies to explore the basic mechanisms of the protective effect of COVID-19 vaccines on long COVID in the future.