Evolution of the joint International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), and WHO cancer control assessments (imPACT Reviews).

Before 2005, cancer and other non-communicable diseases were not yet health and development agenda priorities. Since the 2005 World Health Assembly Resolution, which encouraged WHO, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to jointly work on cancer control, progress was achieved in low-income and middle-income countries on a small scale. Recently, rapid acceleration in UN collaboration and global cancer activities has focused attention in global cancer control. This Policy Review presents the evolution of the IAEA, IARC, and WHO joint advisory service to help countries assess needs and capacities throughout the comprehensive cancer control continuum. We also highlight examples per country, showcasing a snapshot of global good practices to foster an exchange of experiences for continuous improvement in the integrated mission of Programme of Action for Cancer Therapy (imPACT) reviews and follow-up support. The future success of progress in cancer control lies in the high-level political and financial commitments. Linking the improvement of cancer services to the strengthening of health systems after the COVID-19 pandemic will also ensure ongoing advances in the delivery of care across the cancer control continuum.

Sri Lanka's early success in the containment of COVID-19 through its rapid response: Clinical & epidemiological evidence from the initial case series.

BACKGROUND: Despite the rising global burden, Sri Lanka reported a relatively low caseload and mortality (13 deaths as of 20 October 2020) for COVID-19. This warrants exploration of the clinical and epidemiological characteristics of the case series during the initial passive case detection phase in Sri Lanka, in order to understand the success in containment of the disease for more than nine months in the country through its initial early and rapid pandemic response. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted using secondary data (hospital records and investigation reports) extracted from all laboratory-confirmed patients admitted to the three main state-sector hospitals in Sri Lanka from 11 March to 7 April 2020. Clinical outcomes were categorized as mild, severe and critical, as per the international classification. Kruskal-Wallis H, Mann Whitney U and Fisher's exact tests compared differences between the variables. RESULTS: The case series comprised 146 live discharges and six deaths. Majority were males (63.2%); mean age of 40.9 (SD = 17.9); and symptomatic (72.4%). Sixty-one (40.1%) had co-morbidities, the commonest being diabetes (20.4%) and hypertension (17.8%). Mild (93.4%), severe (2.6%) and critical (4.0%) disease outcomes were noted. Disease severity was significantly higher with older age (p = 0.037), co-morbidities (p = 0.026); and higher white-cell (p = 0.045) and lymphocyte (p = 0.043) counts; but not with being symptomatic (p = 0.683). The commonest symptoms were fever (62.5%), dry cough (48.0%) and sore throat (26.9%). The median duration (IQR) was 3.0 (1.0-5.0) and 18.0 (15.0-29.5) days, respectively before and during hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: In contrast to high-risk countries, the younger age, milder disease and low mortality observed in local patients during the initial phase of the pandemic, reflect the early success in containment of the pandemic in Sri Lanka. However, once the disease becomes severe, the factors determining disease fatality remain the same as in other countries. This highlights the value of establishing strong public health systems and disease surveillance in a country, which could provide long-term effects on disease control.