Prostate cancer, the second most common cancer worldwide in 2012, poses a high public burden prompting the need to develop effective treatment strategies. To determine the progress made through the years, this paper documented the timeline of treatment strategies for advanced prostate cancer as presented in a scientific session held in July 2018. Two treatment strategies for metastatic prostate cancer were emphasized: the addition of docetaxel (chemotherapy) and abiraterone acetate plus prednisone to androgen-deprivation therapy (i.e. standard of care). Related clinical trials including but not limited to the CHAARTED trial, STAMPEDE trial, and LATITUDE trial showed that addition of either DOC or ABI led to a general increase in the overall survival of the patient. Furthermore, treatment strategies for non-metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer were also discussed. Evidence from clinical trials showed that addition of enzalutamide or apalutamide to ADT yielded better outcomes than ADT-placebo. These recent advancements have broadened the physician's options for treatment.

BACKGROUND: The Philippines is among countries globally with high multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) burden. An operations research on Bedaquiline (BDQ), a new drug for MDR-TB, was launched by the Department of Health (DOH) in 2016.

OBJECTIVES: This paper aimed to gather the opinions and first-hand experiences of clinicians in the Philippines regarding BDQ.

METHODS: A facilitated roundtable discussion among nine clinicians included in the operations research on BDQ in the Philippines was conducted in June 2018. Topics covered included: (a) considerations in the use of BDQ, (b) outcomes of patients given BDQ, and (c) perceptions on effectiveness and safety of BDQ. Recordings and field notes from the discussion were subjected to framework analysis.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: Participants gave BDQ an overall positive feedback due to the effectiveness, less toxicity, and ease of administration compared to other anti-TB drugs. Issues on BDQ included the novelty of the drug that caused doubts at first use and the limited application of the drug as dictated by the inclusion criteria within the context of the operations research, among others. The significant number of patients lost to follow up and ways to address this challenge were also discussed.

Objective: We aimed to provide practical guidance on the scoping review process, building on the methodologies and general steps outlined by Arksey and O’Malley, Levac et al. and The Joanna Briggs Institute. Methods: We reviewed the methodologies of three scoping studies conducted by the authors in the College of Public Health, University of the Philippines Manila between 2016 and 2017. For each project, we outlined the steps, tools utilized, good practices performed, challenges encountered, and recommendations for improving the scoping review process in relation to existing guidelines. We compared the similarities and differences across the three reviews and guidelines to come up with a list of good practices and recommendations. Results: We propose an expanded 10-step and iterative framework based on our analysis of three scoping studies: Define your research question; 2. Specify your research statement according to population, concept, and context; Prepare the necessary tools, forms, and software packages; 4. Assemble your expert panel and/or consultants; Develop your search strategy; 6. Implement the search strategy and retrieve identified studies; 7. Screen and assess studies for inclusion in the scoping review; 8. Chart the data; 9. Synthesize your results; and 10. Prepare your final report. Conclusion Scoping reviews as a method of evidence synthesis are increasingly gaining popularity among researchers due to the scope of what can be reviewed in a relatively short amount of time. With only three scoping studies informing our proposed methodology, other issues and challenges in the conduct of a scoping review may have been missed in the expanded framework presented in this paper. We suggest future studies to apply existing scoping review methodologies, to further enhance this rapidly evolving framework in research, policy, and practice.
Review ; Methods

Objectives: This scoping review aimed to support a landscape analysis to identify lessons learned about intersectoral collaborations (ISCs) by describing their existing models in the context of dengue, malaria and yellow fever. Methods: A scoping review following the methodology of Joanna Briggs Institute was performed using the following inclusion criteria: studies involving humans; studies discussing intersectoral collaborations, malaria/dengue/yellow fever, and prevention or control at any level; and studies in countries endemic for the aforementioned diseases. Studies were screened using Covidence, while data were extracted using NVivo. Results: Of the 7,535 records retrieved, 69 were included in the qualitative analysis. Most ISCs were initiated by multilateral organizations and ministries of health, and none by communities. Strategies included advocacy, health education, research, public health measures, resource mobilization, service delivery and training; mostly employed on a community level. Monitoring and evaluation were mostly formative, ongoing, and participatory. Gaps included administrative and policy barriers, resource shortages, and inadequate research and training. Conclusions Multiple models of ISC exist in the literature. There is a need to develop a comprehensive framework for an effective and sustainable multisectoral approach for the prevention and control of VBDs ensuring adequate resources, active stakeholders, and strategies that span the entire socio-ecological spectrum.
Dengue ; Disease Vectors ; Intersectoral Collaboration ; Malaria ; Vector Borne Diseases

BACKGROUND: A reliable and socially validated definition of recovery in schizophrenia is essential to decrease stigma associated with the illness. This study aimed to define recovery in schizophrenia in the Philippine context, determine its specific elements, and describe methods of assessment in clinical practice. METHODS: We invited a group of purposively selected Filipino psychiatrists to participate in six simultaneous roundtable discussions to gather their opinions and perspectives on recovery in schizophrenia. Transcripts of the discussions were then subjected to framework analysis. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION Most Filipino psychiatrists were of the considered opinion that recovery in schizophrenia is possible, and their vision of a recovered patient resembles a combination of psychological and medical models. The mini-FROGS tool was deemed generally applicable in the Philippine setting except for self-esteem and sense of independence primarily because it is difficult to evaluate. The SWN was received with mixed reactions among the psychiatrists. Spirituality as an element of recovery and the family-oriented culture of the Filipinos were emphasized as important considerations in assessing patients. Other suggestions were given to tailor-fit these tools to the Philippine context.
Schizophrenia ; Philippines