A mapping study and recommendations for a joint NGO (Think Pink) and Bahrain Government Breast Cancer project

Julie Sprakel 1 2, Helio Carrara 1, Bruce M Manzer 3, Zbys Fedorowicz 4

Affiliations

01 August 2019

-

doi: 10.1111/jebm.12357

Abstract

Aims: Breast cancer within the region continues to present challenges to the healthcare services. Strategies to shed light on clinical gaps could better support country-specific circumstances. The aims of the mapping study were to identify the gaps in the evidence base, for the management of breast cancer with relevance to Bahrain and the Gulf Region. In parallel, focusing on areas and directions of research, which are compatible with international and local clinical interests. It was envisaged that the mapping project would expose not only opportunities to improve support to the community but also illustrate the possible engagement of a government entity and a Nongovernment Organization in a private-public partnership.

Method: An extensive literature review of local and international publications from the period between 1979 and 2015 was undertaken. Searches were conducted using free-text terms, singularly or combined, with no limiters, to provide unrestricted retrieval of available English studies.

Results: A total of 326 citations were identified, which after deduplication provided 277 unique citations of which included 236 studies within 13 different categories, relevant to breast cancer within the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC).

Conclusion: Contextualizing gaps in literature and, therefore, providing evidence-based decisions, not only support the enduser, but better support the country-specific challenges and burdens to healthcare. Three broad but key areas were identified after mapping of the literature, covering:screening and mammography, knowledge translation and dissemination, and lymphoedema postsurgical resection. Similar mapping projects could be undertaken by other national NGO's to better support the government and solidify the framework for a public-private partnership.

Keywords: GCC (Bahrain; Saudi Arabia; Kuwait; United Arab Emirates; Qatar; Oman; Arabian Gulf; Persian Gulf); breast cancer; breast neoplasms; lymphoedema; private-public partnership.


 

References

 

  1. WHO | Cancer . Cancer. http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs297/en/. Accessed October 28, 2015.
  2. Hamadeh RR, Abulfatih NM, Fekri MA, Al‐Mehza HE. Epidemiology of breast cancer among Bahraini women: data from the Bahrain Cancer Registry. Sultan Qaboos Univ Med J. 2014;14(2):e176–e182. - PMC - PubMed
  3. Najjar H, Easson A. Age at diagnosis of breast cancer in Arab nations. Int J Surg. 2010;8(6):448–452. - PubMed
  4. El Saghir NS, Khalil MK, Eid T, et al. Trends in epidemiology and management of breast cancer in developing Arab countries: a literature and registry analysis. Int J Surg. 2007;5(4):225–233. - PubMed
  5. Manzer BM. Medicine and health care in Bahrain and the Gulf 1979–2013: a subject‐classified bibliography of articles from the Bahrain Medical Bulletin & the Journal of the Bahrain Medical Society with an appendix of bibliometric tables and figures. Manama, Bahrain: Bahrain Publishers; 2014.
  6. Clinicaltrials.gov . ClinicalTrails.gov is a database of privately and publicly funded clinical studies conducted around the world. https://clinicaltrials.gov/. Accessed 28 October, 2015.
  7. Al‐Hajeri AA, Fedorowicz Z, Amin FA, Eisinga A. The handsearching of 2 medical journals of Bahrain for reports of randomized controlled trials. Saudi Med J. 2006;27(4):526–530. - PubMed
  8. Al Hajeri AA, Al Sayyad J, Eisinga A. Handsearching the EMHJ for reports of randomized controlled trials by U.K. Cochrane Centre (Bahrain). East Mediterr Health J. 2006;12(2):S253–S257. - PubMed
  9. Cathey J, Al Hajeri AA, Fedorowicz Z. A comparison of handsearching versus EMBASE searching of the Annals of Saudi Medicine to identify reports of randomized controlled trials. Ann Saudi Med. 2006;26(1):49–51. - PMC - PubMed
  10. World Health Organization . Public‐private partnerships (PPPs). https://www.who.int/intellectualproperty/topics/ppp/en/. Accessed 12 May, 2019.
  11. Brinkerhoff DW, Brinkerhoff JM. Public–private partnerships: perspectives on purposes, politeness and good governance. Pub Admin Develop. 2011;31(1):2–14.
  12. Kostyak L, Shaw DM, Elger B, Annaheim B. A means of improving public health in low‐ and middle‐income countries? Benefits and challenges of international public–private partnerships. Pub Health. 2017;149:120–129. - PubMed
  13. Roehrichab JK, Lewis MA, George G. Are public–private partnerships a healthy option? A systematic literature review. Soc Sci Med. 2014;113:110–119. - PubMed
  14. GRADE Working Group . What is grade? http://www.gradeworkinggroup.org/index.html. Accessed 28 October, 2015.
  15. Torjesen I. How much is too much breast screening? BMJ. 2015;350:h139. - PubMed
  16. Autier P, Boniol M, Gavin A, Vatten LJ. Breast cancer mortality in neighbouring European countries with different levels of screening but similar access to treatment: trend analysis of WHO mortality database. BMJ. 2011;343:d4411. - PMC - PubMed
  17. WHO . WHO position paper on mammography screening. http://www.who.int/cancer/publications/mammographyscreening/en/. Accessed 28 October, 2015.
  18. American Cancer Society . Breast cancer prevention and early detection. http://www.cancer.org/acs/groups/cid/documents/webcontent/003165-pdf. Accessed 28 October, 2015.
  19. WHO . Benefits of mammography screening outweigh adverse effects for women aged 50–69 years. http://www.iarc.fr/en/media-centre/pr/2015/pdfs/pr234_E.pdf. Accessed 28 October, 2015.
  20. Lauby‐Secretan B, Scoccianti C, Loomis D, et al. International agency for research on cancer handbook working group. Breast‐cancer screening–viewpoint of the IARC working group. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(24):2353–2358. - PubMed
  21. CTSU . Early breast cancer trialists' collaborative group (EBCTCG). http://www.ctsu.ox.ac.uk/research/meta-trials/ebctcg. Accessed 28 October, 2015.
  22. Maguire LK, Clarke M. How much do you need: a randomised experiment of whether readers can understand the key messages from summaries of Cochrane Reviews without reading the full review. J R Soc Med. 2014;107(11):444–449. - PMC - PubMed
  23. Ulster University .The all‐Ireland hub for trials methodology research. http://www.science.ulster.ac.uk/bamfordcentre/our-research/the-all-irela.... Accessed 28 October, 2015.
  24. DiSipio T, Rye S, Newman B, Hayes S. Incidence of unilateral arm lymphoe‐dema after breast cancer: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14:500–515. - PubMed
  25. Stuiver MM, ten Tusscher MR, Agasi‐Idenburg CS, Lucas C, Aaronson NK, Bossuyt PM. Conservative interventions for preventing clinically detectable upper‐limb lymphoedema in patients who are at risk of developing lymphoedema after breast cancer therapy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;2:CD009765. - PubMed
  26. Badger C, Preston N, Seers K, Mortimer P. Physical therapies for reducing and controlling lymphoedema of the limbs. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2004(4):CD003141. - PubMed
  27. Kärki A, Anttila H, Tasmuth T, Rautakorpi UM. Lymphoedema therapy in breast cancer patients: a systematic review on effectiveness and a survey of current practices and costs in Finland. Acta Oncol. 2009;48:850–859. - PubMed
  28. Devoogdt N, Van Kampen M, Geraerts I, Coremans T, Christiaens MR. Different physical treatment modalities for lymphoedema developing after axillary lymph node dissection for breast cancer: a review. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2010;149:3–9. - PubMed
  29. Ezzo J, Manheimer E, McNeely ML, et al. Manual lymphatic drainage for lymphedema following breast cancer treatment. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;5:CD003475. - PMC - PubMed
  30. Moseley AL, Carati CJ, Piller NB. A systematic review of common conservative therapies for arm lymphoedema secondary to breast cancer treatment. Ann Oncol. 2007;18:639–646. - PubMed
  31. Alper BS, Tristan M, Ramirez‐Morera A, et al. RAPADAPTE for rapid guideline development: high‐quality clinical guidelines can be rapidly developed with limited resources. Int J Qual Health Care. 2012;28:268–274. - PubMed
  32. Schünemann R, Brożek H, Guyatt G, Oxman A. GRADE Handbook: handbook for grading the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations using the GRADE approach. Orlando, FL: Grade Working Group; 2013.
  33. Supplementary document—A national clinical guideline for breast cancer. Written and Delivered to the SCH Bahrain July 2018.

Page Navigation