RESUMEN Objetivos. Comparar la mortalidad por todas las causas de pacientes oncológicos no vacunados que recibieron quimioterapia o inmunoterapia durante la pandemia, con aquellos tratados antes de la pandemia. Materiales y métodos. Realizamos un estudio de cohortes en cuatro hospitales terciarios en Argentina. Pacientes ambulatorios con una neoplasia sólida de cualquier estadio en tratamiento citotóxico o inmune intravenoso fueron elegibles. La cohorte pandémica se enroló durante la fase inicial del brote y se comparó con una cohorte de un período anterior a la pandemia utilizando emparejamiento por puntuación de propensión (PSM, por sus siglas en inglés). Los sujetos se emparejaron por edad, sexo, seguro de salud, factores de riesgo para complicaciones graves por COVID-19, estado funcional, tipo de cáncer y tratamiento, línea de tratamiento e índice de masa corporal. La mortalidad por todas las causas se estimó en ambas cohortes después de seis meses de seguimiento. Resultados. 169 pacientes fueron reclutados entre abril y agosto de 2020 para la cohorte pandémica y 377 para la cohorte prepandémica en el mismo período de 2019, 168 pacientes fueron emparejados. Luego de la PSM, la mortalidad por todas las causas fue del 17,9% en la cohorte pandémica y del 18,5% en la cohorte prepandémica, Riesgo Relativo: 0,97 (intervalo de confianza al 95 %: 0,61-1,52; p=0,888). En la cohorte pandémica, 30/168 pacientes fallecieron, ninguno por infección por COVID-19. Conclusiones. No hemos observado un aumento de mortalidad en pacientes ambulatorios no vacunados en tratamiento oncológico endovenoso activo durante la pandemia por COVID-19.

ABSTRACT Objectives. To compare all-cause mortality of unvaccinated oncology patients who received chemotherapy or immunotherapy during the pandemic with those treated before the pandemic. Materials and methods. We conducted a cohort study in four tertiary hospitals in Argentina. Outpatients with a solid neoplasm of any stage under-going cytotoxic or intravenous immunotherapy were eligible. The pandemic cohort was enrolled during the initial phase of the outbreak and compared with a pre-pandemic cohort using propensity score matching (PSM). Subjects were matched for age, sex, health insurance, risk factors for severe COVID-19 complications, performance status, cancer type and treatment, line of treatment, and body mass index. All-cause mortality was estimated for both cohorts after 6 months of follow-up. Results. A total of 169 patients were recruited between April and August 2020 for the pandemic cohort and 377 for the pre-pandemic cohort in the same months of 2019; 168 patients were matched. After PSM, all-cause mortality was 17.9% in the pandemic cohort and 18.5% in the pre-pandemic cohort; the Relative Risk was 0.97 (95 % confidence interval: 0.61-1.52; p=0.888). In the pandemic cohort, 30/168 patients died, but none from COVID-19. Conclusions. Our findings show that the mortality rate of unvaccinated ambulatory patients on active intravenous oncology treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic did not increase.

ABSTRACT Objectives. To compare all-cause mortality of unvaccinated oncology patients who received chemotherapy or immunotherapy during the pandemic with those treated before the pandemic. Materials and methods. We conducted a cohort study in four tertiary hospitals in Argentina. Outpatients with a solid neoplasm of any stage under-going cytotoxic or intravenous immunotherapy were eligible. The pandemic cohort was enrolled during the initial phase of the outbreak and compared with a pre-pandemic cohort using propensity score matching (PSM). Subjects were matched for age, sex, health insurance, risk factors for severe COVID-19 complications, performance status, cancer type and treatment, line of treatment, and body mass index. All-cause mortality was estimated for both cohorts after 6 months of follow-up. Results. A total of 169 patients were recruited between April and August 2020 for the pandemic cohort and 377 for the pre-pandemic cohort in the same months of 2019; 168 patients were matched. After PSM, all-cause mortality was 17.9% in the pandemic cohort and 18.5% in the pre-pandemic cohort; the Relative Risk was 0.97 (95 % confidence interval: 0.61-1.52; p=0.888). In the pandemic cohort, 30/168 patients died, but none from COVID-19. Conclusions. Our findings show that the mortality rate of unvaccinated ambulatory patients on active intravenous oncology treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic did not increase.

RESUMEN Objetivos. Comparar la mortalidad por todas las causas de pacientes oncológicos no vacunados que recibieron quimioterapia o inmunoterapia durante la pandemia, con aquellos tratados antes de la pandemia. Materiales y métodos. Realizamos un estudio de cohortes en cuatro hospitales terciarios en Argentina. Pacientes ambulatorios con una neoplasia sólida de cualquier estadio en tratamiento citotóxico o inmune intravenoso fueron elegibles. La cohorte pandémica se enroló durante la fase inicial del brote y se comparó con una cohorte de un período anterior a la pandemia utilizando emparejamiento por puntuación de propensión (PSM, por sus siglas en inglés). Los sujetos se emparejaron por edad, sexo, seguro de salud, factores de riesgo para complicaciones graves por COVID-19, estado funcional, tipo de cáncer y tratamiento, línea de tratamiento e índice de masa corporal. La mortalidad por todas las causas se estimó en ambas cohortes después de seis meses de seguimiento. Resultados. 169 pacientes fueron reclutados entre abril y agosto de 2020 para la cohorte pandémica y 377 para la cohorte prepandémica en el mismo período de 2019, 168 pacientes fueron emparejados. Luego de la PSM, la mortalidad por todas las causas fue del 17,9% en la cohorte pandémica y del 18,5% en la cohorte prepandémica, Riesgo Relativo: 0,97 (intervalo de confianza al 95 %: 0,61-1,52; p=0,888). En la cohorte pandémica, 30/168 pacientes fallecieron, ninguno por infección por COVID-19. Conclusiones. No hemos observado un aumento de mortalidad en pacientes ambulatorios no vacunados en tratamiento oncológico endovenoso activo durante la pandemia por COVID-19.

RESUMO Objetivo: A proporção entre pressão venosa central menos arterial de dióxido de carbono e conteúdo de oxigênio arterial menos venoso central (Pcv-aCO2/Ca-cvO2) é frequentemente usada como substituta para a oxigenação tecidual. O objetivo deste estudo foi identificar e sintetizar a literatura e a qualidade das evidências que suportam a Pcv-aCO2/Ca-cvO2 como um preditor de mortalidade em comparação com o lactato em pacientes críticos. Métodos: Pesquisamos vários bancos de dados procurando estudos que tivessem medido a Pcv-aCO2/Ca-cvO2 em pacientes críticos. Pesquisadores independentes realizaram a triagem dos artigos e a extração de dados. Uma metanálise de efeitos aleatórios foi realizada. Diferenças médias padronizadas agrupadas foram usadas para comparar a capacidade prognóstica da Pcv-aCO2/Ca-cvO2 e do lactato. Resultados: Inicialmente, obtivemos 172 estudos; 17 foram incluídos para descrição qualitativa, e dez foram incluídos para síntese quantitativa. A média de Pcv-aCO2/Ca-cvO2 foi maior nos não sobreviventes do que nos sobreviventes (diferença média padronizada agrupada de 0,75; IC95% 0,34 - 1,17; I2 = 83%), assim como os níveis de lactato (diferença média padronizada agrupada = 0,94; IC95% 0,34 - 1,54; I2 = 92%). Ambos os testes foram preditores estatisticamente significativos de mortalidade, embora com sobreposição de IC95% entre eles. Conclusão: Evidências de qualidade moderada mostraram pouca ou nenhuma diferença na capacidade da Pcv-aCO2/Ca-cvO2, em comparação com o lactato, em predizer mortalidade. No entanto, nossas conclusões são limitadas pela considerável heterogeneidade entre os estudos. Registro no PROSPERO:CRD42019130387

ABSTRACT Objective: The central venousarterial carbon dioxide pressure to arterial-central venous oxygen content ratio (Pcv-aCO2/Ca-cvO2) is frequently used as a surrogate for tissue oxygenation. We aimed to identify and synthesize literature and quality of evidence supporting Pcv-aCO2/Ca-cvO2 as a predictor of mortality in critically ill patients compared with lactate. Methods: We searched several databases for studies measuring Pcv-aCO2/Ca-cvO2 in critically ill patients. Independent investigators performed the article screening and data extraction. A random-effects metaanalysis was performed. Pooled standardized mean differences (SMD) were used to compare the prognostic ability of Pcv-aCO2/Ca-cvO2 and lactate. Results: We initially retrieved 172 studies; 17 were included for qualitative description, and 10 were included for quantitative synthesis. The mean Pcv-aCO2/Ca-cvO2 was higher in nonsurvivors than in survivors (pooled SMD = 0.75; 95%CI 0.34 - 1.17; I2 = 83%), as was the case with lactate levels (pooled SMD = 0.94; 95%CI 0.34 - 1.54; I2 = 92%). Both tests were statistically significant predictors of mortality, albeit with overlapping 95%CIs between them. Conclusion: Moderate-quality evidence showed little or no difference in the ability of Pcv-aCO2/Ca-cvO2, compared with lactate, to predict mortality. Nevertheless, our conclusions are limited by the considerable heterogeneity among the studies. PROSPERO registration:CRD42019130387

OBJETIVE: Estimate the burden of disease, the proportion attributable to the principal modifiable cardiovascular risk factors, and the direct medical cost of hospitalization associated with coronary heart disease and stroke in Argentina. METHODOLOGY: An analitical model was prepared using Argentina's 2005 mortality data and the prevalence of the principal cardiovascular risk factors (hypertension, hypercholesterolemia, overweight, obesity, hyperglycemia, current and past smoking, sedentary lifestyle, and inadequate intake of fruits and vegetables). The burden of disease-years of potential life lost (YPLL) and years of healthy life lost (YHLL)- and hospitalization costs for the cardiovascular diseases analyzed were estimated. RESULTS: In 2005 over 600 000 YHL were lost in Argentina and the number of YPLL due to heart disease and stroke was calculated at 400 000; 71.1% of the YHLL, 73.9% of the YPLL, and 76.0% of the associated costs were attributable to modifiable risk factors. Hypertension was the risk factor with the greatest impact in both men and in women, responsible for 37.3% of the total cost, 37.5% of the YPLL, and 36.6% of the YHLL. CONCLUSIONS: Most of the burden of disease from cardiovascular disease in Argentina is associated with modifiable, and therefore preventable, risk factors and could be reduced through population-based and clinical interventions that employ a risk approach; such interventions have already proven to be cost effective, accessible, and feasible in countries like Argentina.

OBJETIVO: Estimar la carga de la enfermedad, su proporción atribuible a los principales factores de riesgo cardiovascular modificables y los costos médicos directos por hospitalización, asociados con las enfermedades coronarias y los accidentes cerebrovasculares en Argentina. MÉTODOS: Se elaboró un modelo analítico a partir de los datos de mortalidad en Argentina en 2005 y la prevalencia de los principales factores de riesgo cardiovascular (hipertensión arterial, hipercolesterolemia, sobrepeso, obesidad, hiperglucemia, tabaquismo actual y pasado, sedentarismo y consumo inadecuado de frutas y verduras). Se estimaron la carga de la enfermedad -años potenciales de vida perdidos (APVP) y años de vida saludable (AVISA) perdidos- y los costos de hospitalización por las enfermedades cardiovasculares analizadas. RESULTADOS: En 2005 se perdieron en Argentina más de 600 000 AVISA y se contabilizaron casi 400 000 APVP por enfermedades coronarias y accidentes cerebrovasculares; 71,1% de los AVISA perdidos, 73,9% de APVP y 76,0% de los costos asociados son atribuibles a facto-res de riesgo modificables. La hipertensión arterial fue el factor de riesgo de mayor impacto, tanto en hombres como en mujeres: 37,3% del costo total, 37,5% de los APVP y 36,6% de los AVISA perdidos. CONCLUSIONES: La mayor parte de la carga de la enfermedad en Argentina por enfermedades cardiovasculares está relacionada con factores de riesgo modificables -por lo tanto evitables- y podría reducirse mediante intervenciones poblacionales y clínicas basadas en un enfoque de riesgo, que ya han demostrado ser efectivas en función del costo, asequibles y factibles en países como Argentina.

Argentina and Uruguay are among the countries in which a large proportion of young women smoke. The rate of smokers during pregnancy in both countries is not well known, and data on the characteristics of women who quit smoking during pregnancy compared to those who continue smoking are not available. We conducted a survey including 1512 pregnant women >18 years old (796 in Argentina; 716 in Uruguay), during antenatal visits in public hospitals of large urban regions; 44% of the women in Argentina and 53% in Uruguay had been or were regular smokers. 11% of the surveyed women in Argentina and 18% in Uruguay continued smoking during pregnancy. In both countries, the proportion of women who lived with smokers, allowed smoking at home, and were regularly or always exposed to tobacco smoke indoors, were 49%, 46% and 20% in the subgroup of women who never smoked, 67%, 60% and 32% in those who quit, and 78%, 75% and 52% in those who continued smoking, respectively. The study confirms a serious public health problem in both countries, and documents that environmental exposure persists in subgroups of women, even in those who quit smoking. It is important that the public health sector should provide access to effective programs for smoking cessation, to women who smoke during pregnancy. For the development of a new program, any intervention intending to have at least a moderate and sustainable success, it should seriously consider including components targeting the smoking environment of the pregnant women who smoke.

Argentina y Uruguay están entre los países con mayor proporción de mujeres jóvenes fumadoras. Se desconoce cuál es la proporción exacta de ellas que fuman durante el embarazo así como las características de las que dejan de fumar y las que continúan fumando durante el embarazo. Realizamos una encuesta administrada por un/a entrevistador/a a 1512 mujeres embarazadas de 18 años o mayores (796 en Argentina; 716 en Uruguay), que concurrían a control prenatal en hospitales públicos de grandes conglomerados urbanos. 44% de las mujeres en Argentina y 53% en Uruguay habían sido o eran fumadoras. Durante el embarazo, 11% de las mujeres en Argentina y 18% en Uruguay continuaron fumando. En ambos países, la proporción de mujeres que vive con fumadores, permite fumar en el hogar y regularmente o siempre se encuentra en lugares cerrados con personas que estén fumando fue 49%, 46% y 20% entre las mujeres que nunca fumaron, 67%, 60% y 32% entre las que dejaron, y 78%, 75% y 52% entre las que continuaron fumando respectivamente. El estudio confirma un importante problema de salud pública y documenta que la exposición ambiental persiste en subgrupos de mujeres, aun en aquéllas que dejaron de fumar. Es importante que el sector de salud pública provea acceso a programas efectivos para dejar de fumar durante el embarazo. Cualquier nueva intervención a desarrollar que intente tener un éxito al menos moderado y sostenible, debiera incluir componentes que actúen sobre el entorno fumador de la mujer embarazada que fuma.