Abbey Diaz

Long-term azithromycin for Indigenous children with non-cystic-fibrosis bronchiectasis or chronic suppurative lung disease (Bronchiectasis Intervention Study): a multicentre, double-blind, randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND Indigenous children in high-income countries have a heavy burden of bronchiectasis unrelated to cystic fibrosis. We aimed to establish whether long-term azithromycin reduced pulmonary exacerbations in Indigenous children with non-cystic-fibrosis bronchiectasis or chronic suppurative lung disease. METHODS Between Nov 12, 2008, and Dec 23, 2010, we enrolled Indigenous Australian, Maori, and Pacific Island children aged 1-8 years with either bronchiectasis or chronic suppurative lung disease into a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trial. Eligible children had had at least one pulmonary exacerbation in the previous 12 months. Children were randomised (1:1 ratio, by computer-generated sequence with permuted block design, stratified by study site and exacerbation frequency [1-2 vs ≥3 episodes in the preceding 12 months]) to receive either azithromycin (30 mg/kg) or placebo once a week for up to 24 months. Allocation concealment was achieved by double-sealed, opaque envelopes; participants, caregivers, and study personnel were masked to assignment until after data analysis. The primary outcome was exacerbation (respiratory episodes treated with antibiotics) rate. Analysis of the primary endpoint was by intention to treat. At enrolment and at their final clinic visits, children had deep nasal swabs collected, which we analysed for antibiotic-resistant bacteria. This study is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry; ACTRN12610000383066. FINDINGS 45 children were assigned to azithromycin and 44 to placebo. The study was stopped early for feasibility reasons on Dec 31, 2011, thus children received the intervention for 12-24 months. The mean treatment duration was 20·7 months (SD 5·7), with a total of 902 child-months in the azithromycin group and 875 child-months in the placebo group. Compared with the placebo group, children receiving azithromycin had significantly lower exacerbation rates (incidence rate ratio 0·50; 95% CI 0·35-0·71; p<0·0001). However, children in the azithromycin group developed significantly higher carriage of azithromycin-resistant bacteria (19 of 41, 46%) than those receiving placebo (four of 37, 11%; p=0·002). The most common adverse events were non-pulmonary infections (71 of 112 events in the azithromycin group vs 132 of 209 events in the placebo group) and bronchiectasis-related events (episodes or investigations; 22 of 112 events in the azithromycin group vs 48 of 209 events in the placebo group); however, study drugs were well tolerated with no serious adverse events being attributed to the intervention. INTERPRETATION Once-weekly azithromycin for up to 24 months decreased pulmonary exacerbations in Indigenous children with non-cystic-fibrosis bronchiectasis or chronic suppurative lung disease. However, this strategy was also accompanied by increased carriage of azithromycin-resistant bacteria, the clinical consequences of which are uncertain, and will need careful monitoring and further study. FUNDING National Health and Medical Research Council (Australia) and Health Research Council (New Zealand).

The children and sunscreen study: a crossover trial investigating children's sunscreen application thickness and the influence of age and dispenser type

OBJECTIVES To measure the thickness at which primary schoolchildren apply sunscreen on school day mornings and to compare it with the thickness (2.00 mg/cm(2)) at which sunscreen is tested during product development, as well as to investigate how application thickness was influenced by age of the child (school grades 1-7) and by dispenser type (500-mL pump, 125-mL squeeze bottle, or 50-mL roll-on). DESIGN A crossover quasiexperimental study design comparing 3 sunscreen dispenser types. SETTING Children aged 5 to 12 years from public primary schools (grades 1-7) in Queensland, Australia. PARTICIPANTS Children (n=87) and their parents randomly recruited from the enrollment lists of 7 primary schools. Each child provided up to 3 observations (n=258). INTERVENTION Children applied sunscreen during 3 consecutive school weeks (Monday through Friday) for the first application of the day using a different dispenser each week. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE Thickness of sunscreen application (in milligrams per square centimeter). The dispensers were weighed before and after use to calculate the weight of sunscreen applied. This was divided by the coverage area of application (in square centimeters), which was calculated by multiplying the childrens body surface area by the percentage of the body covered with sunscreen. RESULTS Children applied their sunscreen at a median thickness of 0.48 mg/cm(2). Children applied significantly more sunscreen when using the pump (0.75 mg/cm(2)) and the squeeze bottle (0.57 mg/cm(2)) compared with the roll-on (0.22 mg/cm(2)) (P<.001 for both). CONCLUSIONS Regardless of age, primary schoolchildren apply sunscreen at substantially less than 1.00 mg/cm(2), similar to what has been observed among adults. Some sunscreen dispensers seem to facilitate thicker application than others.

Cervical Abnormalities Are More Common among Indigenous than Other Australian Women: A Retrospective Record-Linkage Study, 2000-2011.

Indigenous Australian women have much higher incidence of cervical cancer compared to non-Indigenous women. Despite an organised cervical screening program introduced 25 years ago, a paucity of Indigenous-identified data in Pap Smear Registers remains. Prevalence of cervical abnormalities detected among the screened Indigenous population has not previously been reported. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of population-based linked health records for 1,334,795 female Queensland residents aged 20–69 years who had one or more Pap smears during 2000–2011; from linked hospital records 23,483 were identified as Indigenous. Prevalence was calculated separately for Indigenous and non-Indigenous women, for cytology-detected low-grade (cLGA) and high-grade abnormalities (cHGA), and histologically confirmed high-grade abnormalities (hHGA). Odds ratios (OR) were estimated from logistic regression analysis. In 2010–2011 the prevalence of hHGA among Indigenous women (16.6 per 1000 women screened, 95% confidence interval [CI] 14.6–18.9) was twice that of non-Indigenous women (7.5 per 1000 women screened, CI 7.3–7.7). Adjusted for age, area-level disadvantage and place of residence, Indigenous women had higher prevalence of cLGA (OR 1.4, CI 1.3–1.4), cHGA (OR 2.2, CI 2.1–2.3) and hHGA (OR 2.0, CI 1.9–2.1). Our findings show that Indigenous women recorded on the Pap Smear Register have much higher prevalence for cLGA, cHGA and hHGA compared to non-Indigenous women. The renewed cervical screening program, to be implemented in 2017, offers opportunities to reduce the burden of abnormalities and invasive cancer among Indigenous women and address long-standing data deficiencies.

The first comprehensive report on Indigenous Australian women's inequalities in cervical screening: A retrospective registry cohort study in Queensland, Australia (2000‐2011)

The Australian National Cervical Screening Program, introduced more than 20 years ago, does not record the Indigenous status of screening participants. This article reports the first population‐based estimates of participation in cervical screening for Indigenous and non‐Indigenous Australian women.

Cancer outcomes for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians in rural and remote areas.

OBJECTIVE To examine the association between residential remoteness and stage of cancer at diagnosis, treatment uptake, and survival within the Australian Indigenous population. DESIGN Systematic review and matched retrospective cohort study. SETTING Australia. PARTICIPANTS Systematic review: published papers that included a comparison of cancer stage at diagnosis, treatment uptake, mortality and/or survival for Indigenous people across remoteness categories were identified (n = 181). Fifteen papers (13 studies) were included in the review. Original analyses: new analyses were conducted using data from the Queensland Indigenous Cancer Study (QICS) comparing cancer stage at diagnosis, treatment uptake, and survival for Indigenous cancer patients living in rural/remote areas (n = 627, 66%) and urban areas (n = 329, 34%). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Systematic review: Papers were included if there were related to stage of disease at diagnosis, treatment, mortality and survival of cancer. Restrictions were not placed on the outcome measures reported (e.g. standardised mortality ratios versus crude mortality rates). Original analyses: Odds ratios (OR, 95%CI) were used to compare stage of disease and treatment uptake between the two remoteness groups. Treatment uptake (treated/not treated) was analysed using logistic regression analysis. Survival was analysed using Cox proportional hazards regression. The final multivariate models included stage of cancer at diagnosis and area-level socioeconomic status (SEIFA). RESULTS Existing evidence of variation in cancer outcomes for Indigenous people in remote compared with metropolitan areas is limited. While no previous studies have reported on differences in cancer stage and treatment uptake by remoteness within the Indigenous population, the available evidence suggests Indigenous cancer patients are less likely to survive their cancer the further they live from urban centres. New analysis of QICS data indicates that Indigenous cancer patients in rural/remote Queensland were less likely to be diagnosed with localised disease and less likely to receive treatment for their cancer compared to their urban counterparts. CONCLUSION More research is needed to fully understand geographic differentials in cancer outcomes within the Indigenous population. Knowing how geographical location interacts with Indigenous status can help to identify ways of improving cancer outcomes for Indigenous Australians.

Factors associated with cancer-specific and overall survival among Indigenous and non-Indigenous gynecologic cancer patients in Queensland, Australia: a matched cohort study

Objective Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women have a higher mortality rate due to gynecologic cancer compared with non-Indigenous women. For cervical cancer, Australian Indigenous women are less likely to survive 5 years following diagnoses than non-Indigenous women. This study investigates the factors associated with gynecologic cancer treatment and survival among Queensland indigenous and non-Indigenous women. Methods Australian Indigenous women diagnosed with uterine, cervical, ovarian, or other gynecologic cancers during 1998–2004 in the public hospital system were included. They were frequency matched on age (±5 years), residential remoteness, and cancer type to a random sample of non-Indigenous women. One- and 5-year cancer-specific survival was examined according to Indigenous status using Cox proportional hazards regression. Results Indigenous women (n = 137) compared with non-Indigenous women (n = 120) were less likely to be diagnosed with localized disease (49% vs 65%, P = 0.02) and had more comorbidities (52% vs 21%, P < 0.001). Indigenous women were less likely to receive any cancer treatment compared with non-Indigenous women (91% vs 98%, P = 0.01), although when excluding those with metastatic cancer, there was no significant difference in uptake of treatment (95% vs 91%, respectively, P = 0.31). Among those who did undergo treatment, there was no difference in time to treatment (median difference 0.5 days, P = 0.98). Gynecologic cancer–specific survival differences between Indigenous and non-Indigenous women were most prominent in the first year following diagnosis (hazard ratio [HR], 1.89; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.06–3.38) and were no longer significant 5 years after diagnosis (HR, 1.47 [95% CI, 0.97–2.25]). For cervical cancer, crude 1-year survival was poorer for Indigenous women compared with non-Indigenous women (HR, 2.46 [95% CI, 1.03–5.90]), but was no different when adjusted for stage and treatment of cancer (HR, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.45–2.24]). Conclusions Improving the early diagnosis of cervical cancer in Indigenous women may increase cancer-specific survival in the year following diagnosis.

Using probabilistic record linkage methods to identify Australian Indigenous women on the Queensland Pap Smear Register: the National Indigenous Cervical Screening Project

Objective To evaluate the feasibility and reliability of record linkage of existing population-based data sets to determine Indigenous status among women receiving Pap smears. This method may allow for the first ever population measure of Australian Indigenous womens cervical screening participation rates. Setting/participants A linked data set of women aged 20–69 in the Queensland Pap Smear Register (PSR; 1999–2011) and Queensland Cancer Registry (QCR; 1997–2010) formed the Initial Study Cohort. Two extracts (1995–2011) were taken from Queensland public hospitals data (Queensland Hospital Admitted Patient Data Collection, QHAPDC) for women, aged 20–69, who had ever been identified as Indigenous (extract 1) and had a diagnosis or procedure code relating to cervical cancer (extract 2). The Initial Study Cohort was linked to extract 1, and women with cervical cancer in the initial cohort were linked to extract 2. Outcome measures The proportion of women in the Initial Cohort who linked with the extracts (true -pairs) is reported, as well as the proportion of potential pairs that required clerical review. After assigning Indigenous status from QHAPDC to the PSR, the proportion of women identified as Indigenous was calculated using 4 algorithms, and compared. Results There were 28 872 women (2.1%) from the Initial Study Cohort who matched to an ever Indigenous record in extract 1 (n=76 831). Women with cervical cancer in the Initial Study Cohort linked to 1385 (71%) records in extract 2. The proportion of Indigenous women ranged from 2.00% to 2.08% when using different algorithms to define Indigenous status. The Final Study Cohort included 1 372 823 women (PSR n=1 374 401; QCR n=1955), and 5 062 118 records. Conclusions Indigenous status in Queensland cervical screening data was successfully ascertained through record linkage, allowing for the crucial assessment of the current cervical screening programme for Indigenous women. Our study highlights the need to include Indigenous status on Pap smear request and report forms in any renewed and redesigned cervical screening programme in Australia.

Comorbidity and cervical cancer survival of Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australian women: A semi-national registry-based cohort study (2003-2012)

Background Little is known about the impact of comorbidity on cervical cancer survival in Australian women, including whether Indigenous women’s higher prevalence of comorbidity contributes to their lower survival compared to non-Indigenous women. Methods Data for cervical cancers diagnosed in 2003–2012 were extracted from six Australian state-based cancer registries and linked to hospital inpatient records to identify comorbidity diagnoses. Five-year cause-specific and all-cause survival probabilities were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Flexible parametric models were used to estimate excess cause-specific mortality by Charlson comorbidity index score (0,1,2+), for Indigenous women compared to non-Indigenous women. Results Of 4,467 women, Indigenous women (4.4%) compared to non-Indigenous women had more comorbidity at diagnosis (score ≥1: 24.2% vs. 10.0%) and lower five-year cause-specific survival (60.2% vs. 76.6%). Comorbidity was associated with increased cervical cancer mortality for non-Indigenous women, but there was no evidence of such a relationship for Indigenous women. There was an 18% reduction in the Indigenous: non-Indigenous hazard ratio (excess mortality) when comorbidity was included in the model, yet this reduction was not statistically significant. The excess mortality for Indigenous women was only evident among those without comorbidity (Indigenous: non-Indigenous HR 2.5, 95%CI 1.9–3.4), indicating that factors other than those measured in this study are contributing to the differential. In a subgroup of New South Wales women, comorbidity was associated with advanced-stage cancer, which in turn was associated with elevated cervical cancer mortality. Conclusions Survival was lowest for women with comorbidity. However, there wasn’t a clear comorbidity-survival gradient for Indigenous women. Further investigation of potential drivers of the cervical cancer survival differentials is warranted. Impact The results highlight the need for cancer care guidelines and multidisciplinary care that can meet the needs of complex patients. Also, primary and acute care services may need to pay more attention to Indigenous Australian women who may not obviously need it (i.e. those without comorbidity).

Educational programmes for primary prevention of skin cancer

This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: To assess the effects of education programmes for skin cancer prevention in the general population.

Indigenous women with gynaecological cancers have poorer survival than Non-Indigenous women: explained by stage, comorbidity and treatment uptake

Abstract of a poster presentation presented at the Joint Meeting of the COSA 39th Annual Scientific Meeting and IPOS 14th World Congress of Psycho-Oncology, 13-15 November 2012, Brisbane Convention and Exhibition Centre.