Distribution and trends of hematology and oncology research in Latin America: A decade of uncertainty

The landscape of hematology research in Brazil: an analysis of data from citation databases

INTRODUCTION

Scientometrics is the field concerned with measuring and analyzing academic literature, using specific metrics and data from bibliometric databases. Hematology is a broad area of science and medicine, from which several landmark scientific discoveries have emerged.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this report is to provide a snapshot of the landscape of hematology research in Brazil, based on a comprehensive analysis of published studies in hematology whose authors were affiliated to Brazilian institutions from 1980 to 2020.

METHOD

Articles, reviews and letters to the editor with at least one author affiliated to a Brazilian institution were retrieved from Incytes/Web of Science or Scopus databases. Importantly, only papers classified in the subject area "Hematology" by the embedded algorithms of each database were included.

RESULTS

Considering all published papers, Brazil is in the 22nd position, contributing with around 1.1% of papers in this period. A clear and sustained increase in publication output can be observed from the early 1990's to the present moment. Publicly-funded higher education institutions were the main contributors to the development and consolidation of the hematology scientific community, which has grown in diversity, with an increasing number of contributions from private institutions. In regard to funding, public agencies have been and remain by large as the most important funder of research in hematology in Brazil.

CONCLUSION

We suggest that continuous monitoring of the temporal trends of some of the data compiled in our report could potentially contribute to a clearer picture of the development of hematology research in Brazil.

Contributions to the American Society of Hematology Meeting From Low- and Middle-Income Countries: An In-Depth Analysis and Call to Action

PURPOSE

Establishing research capacity in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) is key for improving the outcomes of patients with hematologic diseases globally. Few studies have analyzed the contributions of LMICs to global hematology. The American Society of Hematology Meeting (ASH) is the largest international academic event where peer-reviewed contributions in our field are presented.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional analysis, all abstracts accepted to ASH 2018 selected for a poster or oral presentation were reviewed. Those that had a contributing author from an LMIC were identified. The proportion of LMIC abstracts across categories was analyzed. Country of origin, high-income country participation, the presence of a conflict of interest (COI), and sponsorship were determined.

RESULTS

From 4,871 abstracts reviewed, 506 had a contributing author from an LMIC (10.4%), with 277 (54.7%) contributions in partnership with a high-income country. LMIC-independent contributions corresponded to 19 of 1,026 oral abstracts (1.9%) and 209 of 3,845 posters (5.4%). Most abstracts from LMICs were clinical (n = 311; 61.5%) and multicentric in nature (n = 353; 69.8%). COI statements with the pharmaceutical industry were common (n = 214; 42.3%). Collaboration between LMICs was infrequent (n = 33; 6.5%). Upper-middle-income countries had 466 participations (81.5%), in comparison with 96 (16.8%) in low-middle-income and 10 (1.7%) in low-income countries.

CONCLUSION

LMICs were responsible for a small fraction of abstracts at ASH18; low-income countries were practically absent. Almost half of accepted works represented a form of international collaboration, with clinical, multicenter studies predominating and COI disclosures a frequent and unexpected feature, reflecting the instrumental nature of LMIC participation and a lack of independent, robust, locally developed hematology research.

Scientific publications in cancer: in Latin America, strong scientific networks increase productivity (the TENJIN study)

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this study are to evaluate the relationship between authorship networking, socioeconomic factors, and scientific productivity across Latin America.

METHODS

In a bibliometric analysis of cancer-related Latin-American publications, the relationship between authorship network indicators, sociodemographic factors, and number of peer-reviewed indexed publications per country was explored. A systematic review of the literature for cancer publications between 2000 and 2018 using the Scopus database limited to Latin-American authors was used for the construction of coauthorship and publication networks and their respective metrics. Sociodemographic variables including percentage of invested gross domestic product in research, population, and cancer incidence were also estimated. Multiple linear regression models were constructed to determine the relationship between productivity and the aforementioned variables.

RESULTS

A total of 8,528 articles across nine countries were included. Brazil was the most productive nation with 41.8% of identified references followed by Mexico (16.6%) and Argentina (12.9%). Latin America experienced a 9% growth in number of publications across the studied time frame. After analyzing networking and sociodemographic variables, number of authors in a collaboration network and percentage of invested gross domestic product were associated with high productivity yielding a multiple regression model with an R2 value of 0.983.

CONCLUSIONS

This study indicates that extensive authorship networking and a high investment in research strongly predict cancer-related productivity.

Epidemiology of Hematologic Malignancies in Real-World Settings: Findings From the Hemato-Oncology Latin America Observational Registry Study

PURPOSE

Limited information is available on multiple myeloma (MM), chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) management in Latin America. The primary objective of the Hemato-Oncology Latin America (HOLA) study was to describe patient characteristics and treatment patterns of Latin American patients with MM, CLL, and NHL.

METHODS

This study was a multicenter, retrospective, medical chart review of patients with MM, CLL, and NHL in Latin America identified between January 1, 2006, and December 31, 2015. Included were adults with at least 1 year of follow-up (except in cases of death within 1 year of diagnosis) treated at 30 oncology hospitals (Argentina, 5; Brazil, 9; Chile, 1; Colombia, 5; Mexico, 6; Panama/Guatemala, 4).

RESULTS

Of 5,140 patients, 2,967 (57.7%) had NHL, 1,518 (29.5%) MM, and 655 (12.7%) CLL. Median follow-up was 2.2 years for MM, 3.0 years for CLL, and 2.2 years for NHL, and approximately 26% died during the study observation period. Most patients had at least one comorbidity at diagnosis. The most frequent induction regimen was thalidomide-based chemotherapy for MM and chlorambucil with or without prednisone for CLL. Most patients with NHL had diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL; 49.1%) or follicular lymphoma (FL; 19.5%). The majority of patients with DLBCL or FL received rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone.

CONCLUSION

The HOLA study generated an unprecedented level of high-quality, real-world evidence on characteristics and treatment patterns of patients with hematologic malignancies. Regional disparities in patient characteristics may reflect differences in ethnoracial identity and level of access to care. These data provide needed real-world evidence to understand the disease landscape in Latin America and may be used to inform clinical and health policy decision making.

Scientific Productivity and Cancer-Related Mortality: A Case Study of a Positive Association in Colombia

PURPOSE

Cancer morbidity represents an increasing public health issue; this worldwide phenomenon also is true for emerging upper-middle-income countries, such as Colombia. The main purpose of this study was to uncover the relationship between scientific productivity and cancer-related mortality in our setting.

METHODS

We conducted a temporal-trend ecologic study by means of bibliometric analysis from records of publications from SCOPUS database with Colombian institutional affiliations between 2000 and 2015. Productivity and overall mortality were estimated and compared using econometric modeling to identify potential correlations. Additional exploratory analyses per six most frequent cancer sites were performed.

RESULTS

Of 2,645 publication records retrieved, 1,464 (55.3%) met selection criteria to be classified as Colombian scientific production (interobserver agreement, 92.96%; κ = 0.859; 95% CI, 0.800 to 0.918). Overall, 79.6% of the records corresponded to original or in-press articles; furthermore, almost half (49.7%) embodied descriptive study designs. Selected records reported a median of five authors and three different affiliations per publication; 66% had been cited at least once up to September 2017. The most-studied cancer-specific locations were cervix (16.1%), breast (11.5%), and stomach (9.8%), but nonspecific locations had the largest combined participation (23.4%). An increasing trend in scientific productivity was correlated to decreasing trend in overall cancer mortality, which was reported as an inverse proportional relationship in the linear regression modeling (r = -0.958; P < .001). Graphic analyses per cancer-specific sites revealed heterogeneous behaviors of this relationship.

CONCLUSION

Colombian cancer-specific scientific productivity demonstrated a steady growth as opposed to a decreasing mortality trend in the recent years. The research output is predominantly descriptive with relatively low interinstitutional partnership and low impact in the international scientific community.

Barriers in Latin America for the management of locally advanced breast cancer

Breast cancer (BC) is a highly prevalent malignancy in Latin American women, most cases being diagnosed at locally advanced or metastatic stages when options for cancer care are limited. Despite its label as a public health problem in the region, Latin American BC patients face several barriers in accessing standard of care treatment when compared with patients from developed countries. In this review, we analyse the landscape of the four main identified barriers in the region: i) high burden of locally advanced/advanced BC; ii) inadequate access to medical resources; iii) deficient access to specialised cancer care and iv) insufficient BC research in Latin America. Unfortunately, these barriers represent the main factors associated with the BC poor outcomes seen in the region. Targeted actions should be conducted independently by each country and as a region to overcome these limitations and create an enhanced model of BC care.

Full publication of results initially presented in abstracts

BACKGROUND

Abstracts of presentations at scientific meetings are usually available only in conference proceedings. If subsequent full publication of results reported in these abstracts is based on the magnitude or direction of the results, publication bias may result. Publication bias creates problems for those conducting systematic reviews or relying on the published literature for evidence about health and social care.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review reports of studies that have examined the proportion of meeting abstracts and other summaries that are subsequently published in full, the time between meeting presentation and full publication, and factors associated with full publication.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Science Citation Index, reference lists, and author files. The most recent search was done in February 2016 for this substantial update to our earlier Cochrane Methodology Review (published in 2007).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included reports of methodology research that examined the proportion of biomedical results initially presented as abstracts or in summary form that were subsequently published. Searches for full publications had to be at least two years after meeting presentation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We calculated the proportion of abstracts published in full using a random-effects model. Dichotomous variables were analyzed using risk ratio (RR), with multivariable models taking into account various characteristics of the reports. We assessed time to publication using Kaplan-Meier survival analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

Combining data from 425 reports (307,028 abstracts) resulted in an overall full publication proportion of 37.3% (95% confidence interval (CI), 35.3% to 39.3%) with varying lengths of follow-up. This is significantly lower than that found in our 2007 review (44.5%. 95% CI, 43.9% to 45.1%). Using a survival analyses to estimate the proportion of abstracts that would be published in full by 10 years produced proportions of 46.4% for all studies; 68.7% for randomized and controlled trials and 44.9% for other studies. Three hundred and fifty-three reports were at high risk of bias on one or more items, but only 32 reports were considered at high risk of bias overall.Forty-five reports (15,783 abstracts) with 'positive' results (defined as any 'significant' result) showed an association with full publication (RR = 1.31; 95% CI 1.23 to 1.40), as did 'positive' results defined as a result favoring the experimental treatment (RR =1.17; 95% CI 1.07 to 1.28) in 34 reports (8794 abstracts). Results emanating from randomized or controlled trials showed the same pattern for both definitions (RR = 1.21; 95% CI 1.10 to 1.32 (15 reports and 2616 abstracts) and RR = 1.17; 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.32 (13 reports and 2307 abstracts), respectively.Other factors associated with full publication include oral presentation (RR = 1.46; 95% CI 1.40 to 1.52; studied in 143 reports with 115,910 abstracts); acceptance for meeting presentation (RR = 1.65; 95% CI 1.48 to 1.85; 22 reports with 22,319 abstracts); randomized trial design (RR = 1.51; 95% CI 1.36 to 1.67; 47 reports with 28,928 abstracts); and basic research (RR = 0.78; 95% CI 0.74 to 0.82; 92 reports with 97,372 abstracts). Abstracts originating at an academic setting were associated with full publication (RR = 1.60; 95% CI 1.34 to 1.92; 34 reports with 16,913 abstracts), as were those considered to be of higher quality (RR = 1.46; 95% CI 1.23 to 1.73; 12 reports with 3364 abstracts), or having high impact (RR = 1.60; 95% CI 1.41 to 1.82; 11 reports with 6982 abstracts). Sensitivity analyses excluding reports that were abstracts themselves or classified as having a high risk of bias did not change these findings in any important way.In considering the reports of the methodology research that we included in this review, we found that reports published in English or from a native English-speaking country found significantly higher proportions of studies published in full, but that there was no association with year of report publication. The findings correspond to a proportion of abstracts published in full of 31.9% for all reports, 40.5% for reports in English, 42.9% for reports from native English-speaking countries, and 52.2% for both these covariates combined.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

More than half of results from abstracts, and almost a third of randomized trial results initially presented as abstracts fail to be published in full and this problem does not appear to be decreasing over time. Publication bias is present in that 'positive' results were more frequently published than 'not positive' results. Reports of methodology research written in English showed that a higher proportion of abstracts had been published in full, as did those from native English-speaking countries, suggesting that studies from non-native English-speaking countries may be underrepresented in the scientific literature. After the considerable work involved in adding in the more than 300 additional studies found by the February 2016 searches, we chose not to update the search again because additional searches are unlikely to change these overall conclusions in any important way.

Genotyping low-grade gliomas among Hispanics

Background

Low-grade gliomas (LGGs) are classified by the World Health Organization as astrocytoma (DA), oligodendroglioma (OD), and mixed oligoastrocytoma (OA). TP53 mutation and 1p19q codeletion are the most-commonly documented molecular abnormalities. Isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) 1/2 mutations are frequent in LGGs; however, IDH-negative gliomas can also occur. Recent research suggests that ATRX plays a significant role in gliomagenesis.

Methods

We investigated p53 and Olig2 protein expression, and MGMT promoter methylation, 1p19q codeletion, IDH, and ATRX status in 63 Colombian patients with LGG. The overall survival (OS) rate was estimated and compared according to genotype.

Results

The most common histology was DA, followed by OD and OA. IDH1/2 mutations were found in 57.1% and MGMT+ (positive status of MGMT promoter methylation methyl-guanyl-methyl-transferase gene) in 65.1% of patients, while overexpression of p53 and Olig2 was present in 30.2% and 44.4%, respectively, and 1p19q codeletion in 34.9% of the patients. Overexpression of ATRX was analyzed in 25 patients, 16% tested positive and were also mutations in isocitrate dehydrogenase and negative 1p19q-codelition. The median follow-up was 15.8 months (95% CI, 7.6-42.0) and OS was 39.2 months (95% CI, 1.3-114). OS was positively and significantly affected by MGMT+, 1p19q codeletion, surgical intervention extent, and number of lobes involved. Multivariate analysis confirmed that MGMT methylation status and 1p19q codeletion affected OS.

Conclusions

This is the first study evaluating the molecular profile of Hispanic LGG patients. Findings confirmed the prognostic relevance of MGMT methylation and 1p19q codeletion, but do not support IDH1/2 mutation as a relevant marker. The latter may be explained by sample size and selection bias. ATRX alterations were limited to patients with DA and were mutations in isocitrate dehydrogenase and negative 1p19q-codelition.

Cancer clinical research in Latin America: current situation and opportunities. Expert opinion from the first ESMO workshop on clinical trials, Lima, 2015

Latin America and the Caribbean have not yet developed strong clinical cancer research programmes. In order to improve this situation two international cancer organisations, the Latin American Society of Clinical Oncology (SLACOM) and the European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO) worked closely with the Peruvian Cooperative Oncology Group (GECOPERU) and organised a clinical cancer research workshop held in Lima, Peru, in October 2015. Many oncologists from different Latin American countries participated in this gathering. The opportunities for and strengths of clinical oncology research in Latin American and Caribbean countries were identified as the widespread use of the Spanish language, the high cancer burden, growing access to information, improving patient education, access to new drugs for research centres, regional networks and human resources. However, there are still many weaknesses and problems including the long timeline for regulatory approval, lack of economic investment, lack of training and lack of personnel participating in clinical research, lack of cancer registries, insufficient technology and insufficient supplies for the diagnosis and treatment of cancer, few cancer specialists, low general levels of education and the negative attitude of government authorities towards clinical research.

Progress and remaining challenges for cancer control in Latin America and the Caribbean

Cancer is one of the leading causes of mortality worldwide, and an increasing threat in low-income and middle-income countries. Our findings in the 2013 Commission in The Lancet Oncology showed several discrepancies between the cancer landscape in Latin America and more developed countries. We reported that funding for health care was a small percentage of national gross domestic product and the percentage of health-care funds diverted to cancer care was even lower. Funds, insurance coverage, doctors, health-care workers, resources, and equipment were also very inequitably distributed between and within countries. We reported that a scarcity of cancer registries hampered the design of credible cancer plans, including initiatives for primary prevention. When we were commissioned by The Lancet Oncology to write an update to our report, we were sceptical that we would uncover much change. To our surprise and gratification much progress has been made in this short time. We are pleased to highlight structural reforms in health-care systems, new programmes for disenfranchised populations, expansion of cancer registries and cancer plans, and implementation of policies to improve primary cancer prevention.

Global methaemoglobinaemia research output (1940-2013): a bibliometric analysis

Bibliometric studies, which involve the use of statistical methods, are increasingly being used for research assessment. A bibliometric analysis was conducted to evaluate the publication pattern of methaemoglobinaemia research output at the global level based on the Scopus database. We analysed selected documents with "methemoglobinemia", or "methaemoglobinaemia" as a part of the title and reported the following parameters: trends of publication output, country of publication, journal pattern, collaborative measures, citations pattern, and institute productivity. A total of 1770 articles were published worldwide. The time trend for the number of articles showed an increase after 2000. The highest number of articles related to methaemoglobinaemia was from the USA (24.8 %), followed distantly by the UK (4.5 %), India (3.7 %), and France (3.7 %). No data related to methaemoglobinaemia were published from 152 countries. The total number of citations at the date of data collection was 10,080, with an average of 5.7 citations per document. The USA and UK had the highest h-index of 31 and 14, respectively, and six countries had an h-index of 9-14. It is notable that Canada was ranked eighth in the number of publications but fourth in h-index and India was ranked third in the number of publications but eighth in h-index. Furthermore, Canada produced the most internationally collaborated papers out of the total number of publications for each country (16.1 %), followed by the UK (13.9 %). This bibliometric analysis provides data contributing to a better understanding of the methaemoglobinaemia research field. The number of publications on methaemoglobinaemia increased significantly after 2000. The USA was the most productive country as measured by total publications. The USA and UK achieved the highest h-index in the field of methaemoglobinaemia research, signifying a higher quality of research than other countries.