In the 1990s, a maverick breast surgeon at @TataMemorial (fresh from his return from the UK) stepped up to do research. Now, to understand the situation, you should go back 30 years, when research was not as big as it is now, and certainly not from surgeons.
Surgeons, and especially cancer surgeons, were renowned for their technical prowess, and their sheer bravado – "wherever the cancer, however advanced, I will take it out". So, our surgeon-researcher was ridiculed for even attempting clinical research
For a surgeon, he couldn’t have chosen a worse topic to research on: early detection; nothing to do with surgery, or even treatment. Remember, this was the 1990s. Cowboy surgery was celebrated, and research ridiculed
Being a breast surgeon, he was troubled with women consistently coming with advanced cancers, and he set out to see if he could work on picking them up at an earlier stage. But community-based early detection needs money, and he just didn’t have it.
He called up his friend who was a corporate leader with an Indian consumer company, and asked him to fund a pilot. Probably based more on friendship than his belief in the idea, the friend gave him a small grant
Our protagonist breast surgeon, accompanied by a couple of his co-workers go around the lanes of Parel (Mumbai) daily, examining women clinically to detect breast cancer early. They examine 4000 women, and find two cancers
By a strange twist of fate, the 1994 @uicc annual Congress was held in New Delhi by the @TataMemorial
Our maverick presented these results at the meeting. What followed subsequently would be unbelievable in today’s world
A tall American gentleman walked up to our breast surgeon, congratulated him on the study and suggested he apply for a grant from the @NIH
At the time, our hero had no idea that the American gentleman was in charge of grant funding at the @NIH
To cut a long story short, the application forms arrived, the application was made (ambitiously, for breast and cervical cancer) , and our hero received an @NIH R01 grant! This is an extremely difficult grant to get...
Soon, he started a community-based cluster randomized trial evaluating the role of #VisualInspectionAceticAcid and #ClinicalBreastExamination for early detection of cervical and breast cancer respectively in 150,000 women between 35 and 64 years in the slums of Mumbai
The challenges were enormous: skeptical women (and skeptical families); the sheer logistics of screening 75000 women with #VIA and #CBE every 2 years for 8 years, and following up 150,000 women for 20 years; recording every cancer; recording every death
He had great support: his mentee (Dr Rajan Badwe, who went on to become the Director of the @TataMemorial), some young, idealistic preventive oncology physicians (Dr Gauravi Mishra & Dr S Shastri), over a 100 dedicated high school educated women as health workers
Relentlessly screening, recording, documenting, following up every one of these 150,000 women, over 20 years! And remember, these were Mumbai slums.. where migration was the rule rather than the exception
15 years later, the cervical cancer screening results came in – a 31% reduction in cervical cancer mortality, using a low-cost, low-tech method, which soon was adopted by several Indian states
The cervical cancer mortality reduction was recognized and given the privilege of a plenary presentation at @ASCO ; to give context, 5 out of 35000+ abstracts are chosen for an @ASCO plenary talk
20 years later, the breast cancer results kicked in – a 15% (non-significant) reduction in breast cancer mortality in the study population, with a 30% breast cancer mortality reduction in women >50 years
One man. With a vision. And the belief. Saving thousands of lives of women with breast and cervical cancer. Folks, salute the indomitable Prof Indraneel Mittra
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Great work by Connor Wells & Shubham Sharma @QueensUHealth asking two important #GlobalHealth questions 1. Is there a #publicationbias against papers from #LMICs? 2. Do oncology RCTs match the global disease burden?
Confirms something we always knew
What we did was this...
We identified 3 problems and 2 facts
We looked at all phase 3 studies in oncology from 2014 to 2017; classified origin of these RCTs based on #WorldBank economic classification of countries. We compared RCT designs and results from HICs and LMICs. The findings were striking…
Of 694 RCTs, 636(92%) were led by HICs; 58(8%) by LMICs. This is the first problem – huge imbalance in where research is done. Cancer incidence is strikingly different in HICs & LMICs, with considerable burden in LMICs. How can we accept such a skewed distribution of research?
The WHO’s chief scientist on a year of loss and learning nature.com/articles/d4158…
For anyone remotely involved in healthcare, these are life lessons from @doctorsoumya. A must read.
For those of you who want a quick analysis, thread.
Disclaimer: I’m just breaking this up & annotating them with my own comments. Between quotes are her exact words (with some poetic license)
Planning ahead & prioritizing first steps – an important aspect of taking up a new job
“My original plan for 2020 included rolling out new processes to ensure the quality of technical documents, such as guidelines on water quality, tobacco advertising and immunization programmes”
The preprints of the #SOLIDARITY trial are out on MedRxiv. While many may lament that all four drugs tested did not show benefit, this is a remarkable trial for many reasons. Thread
What the #MAMS design does is enable testing multiple drugs simultaneously, flexibility to drop unpromising ones & add new promising ones even midway during the trial. This was crucial in the #COVID__19 pandemic where the situation has been constantly evolving
I’ve been watching with increasing concern at the trend of new daily diagnoses of COVID-19 in India over the past two weeks. To me, this reflects general public mood which seems to have begun to ignore the threat this virus poses. Thread
While the good news is that our death rates haven’t been as bad as some of the other countries (we might debate the accuracy of death reporting), but with a population of 1.35 billion people, the absolute numbers are still sobering. And rural India is just beginning to get hit
What I’d like to see is reliable “Excess mortality” and a P score which will quantify the true impact of the pandemic on deaths in India. We know that Mumbai had an excess mortality of 13000 deaths between Apr and Jul 2020. We don’t yet have data for India as a whole.
I can't believe the @US_FDA Commissioner @SteveFDA announced that 35 out of 100 patients treated with #ConvalescentPlasma will benefit from it. This demonstrates either a lack of understanding of basic statistics (relative risk vs absolute risk) or external pressures. (1/n)
There are several problems with this - first, this is not based on randomized evidence. This is based on "data obtained from the ongoing National Expanded Access Treatment Protocol (EAP) sponsored by the Mayo Clinic". The preprint is available on medrxiv.org/content/10.110… (2/n)
In an observational study of 35,322 patients transfused with CP, 7-day mortality was 8.7% in those where CP was transfused early (3 days or less) and 11.9% in those transfused later (>3 days). 30 day mortality was 21.6% vs 26.7%. (3/n)
The power of large, pragmatic randomized trials. Conducted by academic researchers using an adaptive trial design (#MAMS), and you’ve got a winner. Strong reasons why publicly funded research is so very important. Thread
The #RECOVERY trial has answered 3 important, clinically relevant questions about #COVID_19. It has shown that #Dexamethasone is beneficial in patients requiring oxygen/ ventilation & that HCQ and Lopinavir-Ritonavir are not useful. #HCQ results are now out in preprint!
#RECOVERY randomized 1561 pts to #HCQ and 3155 to standard of care. Primary endpoint of 28-day mortality was 26.8% in the HCQ arm and 25% in the SOC arm. Lack of benefit consistent across all sub-groups. And remember, 28-day mortality in the same trial in the Dexa arm was 21.6%