Luke Hounsome
Public Health England
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Luke Hounsome.
European Urology | 2015
Luke Hounsome; Julia Verne; John S. McGrath; David Gillatt
BACKGROUND The Improving Outcomes in Urological Cancers guidelines recommended centralisation of cystectomy services to improve outcomes for bladder cancer (BCa) patients. OBJECTIVE To investigate trends in all-cause and cause-specific survival to see if there was an improvement in survival after centralisation was implemented. To analyse trends in the number of acute hospital trusts undertaking cystectomy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS We used routine data to capture information on radical cystectomy (RC) in BCa patients aged 20 yr and older between 1998 and 2010 (n=16,033). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS We calculated 30-d and 90-d mortality, and 30-d, 90-d, 1-yr, and 5-yr survival. The average number of RCs per trust was derived. Trends were identified using regression analysis. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS The 30-d crude mortality decreased from 5.2% to 2.1% (p<0.001) and 90-d crude mortality decreased from 10.3% to 5.1% (p<0.001). There was an increase in 30-d relative survival from 96% to 98% (p<0.001), in 90-d relative survival from 91% to 96% (p<0.001), in 1-yr relative survival from 71% to 80% (p<0.001), and in 5-yr relative survival from 49% to 56% (2004-2006 data; p<0.001). The mean number of RCs performed by trusts in England increased from six to 24 (p<0.001). Smoking status and stage at diagnosis were not available. CONCLUSIONS Survival after RC has increased alongside decreases in short-term mortality. There is little evidence of a cohort effect. The trends in survival are linear and we conclude that the continued survival improvements are a result of a combination of service improvements that include service reconfiguration, improved surgical training, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, enhanced recovery principles, and continued improvements in perioperative care. PATIENT SUMMARY We analysed routinely collected hospital data. Outcomes for patients who undergo cystectomy have improved for all age groups. This is likely to be due to a combination of changes in practice.
BJUI | 2012
Sean G. Vesey; John E. McCabe; Luke Hounsome; Sarah Fowler
Study Type – Therapy (outcomes)
BMC Medicine | 2015
Therese Lloyd; Luke Hounsome; Anita Mehay; Sarah Mee; Julia Verne; Alison Cooper
BackgroundIn the UK, a man’s lifetime risk of being diagnosed with prostate cancer is 1 in 8. We calculated both the lifetime risk of being diagnosed with and dying from prostate cancer by major ethnic group.MethodsPublic Health England provided prostate cancer incidence and mortality data for England (2008–2010) by major ethnic group. Ethnicity and mortality data were incomplete, requiring various assumptions and adjustments before lifetime risk was calculated using DevCan (percent, range).ResultsThe lifetime risk of being diagnosed with prostate cancer is approximately 1 in 8 (13.3 %, 13.2–15.0 %) for White men, 1 in 4 (29.3 %, 23.5–37.2 %) for Black men, and 1 in 13 (7.9 %, 6.3–10.5 %) for Asian men, whereas that of dying from prostate cancer is approximately 1 in 24 (4.2 %, 4.2–4.7 %) for White men, 1 in 12 (8.7 %, 7.6–10.6 %) for Black men, and 1 in 44 (2.3 %, 1.9–3.0 %) for Asian men.ConclusionsIn England, Black men are at twice the risk of being diagnosed with, and dying from, prostate cancer compared to White men. This is an important message to communicate to Black men. White, Black, and Asian men with a prostate cancer diagnosis are all as likely to die from the disease, independent of their ethnicity. Nonetheless, proportionally more Black men are dying from prostate cancer in England.
BJUI | 2014
Gregory Boustead; Sarah Fowler; Rajiv Swamy; Roger Kocklebergh; Luke Hounsome
To investigate Tumour‐Node‐Metastasis (TNM) stage and demographics at presentation in a very large, contemporary UK cohort of patients with bladder cancer and compare them with other published series, as little published data exists on the pathological characteristics of bladder cancer at presentation.
BJUI | 2014
Weranja Ranasinghe; Simon P. Kim; Nathan Lawrentschuk; Shomik Sengupta; Luke Hounsome; Jim Barber; Richard Jones; Paul Davis; Damien Bolton; Raj Persad
To analyse the trends in opportunistic PSA screening in Australia, focusing on younger men (<55 years of age), to examine the effects of this screening on transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS)‐guided biopsy rates and to determine the nature of prostate cancers (PCas) being detected.
BMJ Open | 2016
Joanna Thorn; Emma L Turner; Luke Hounsome; Eleanor Walsh; L Down; Julia Verne; Jenny Donovan; David E. Neal; Freddie C. Hamdy; Richard M. Martin; Sian Noble
Objectives To evaluate the accuracy of routine data for costing inpatient resource use in a large clinical trial and to investigate costing methodologies. Design Final-year inpatient cost profiles were derived using (1) data extracted from medical records mapped to the National Health Service (NHS) reference costs via service codes and (2) Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) data using NHS reference costs. Trust finance departments were consulted to obtain costs for comparison purposes. Setting 7 UK secondary care centres. Population A subsample of 292 men identified as having died at least a year after being diagnosed with prostate cancer in Cluster randomised triAl of PSA testing for Prostate cancer (CAP), a long-running trial to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing. Results Both inpatient cost profiles showed a rise in costs in the months leading up to death, and were broadly similar. The difference in mean inpatient costs was £899, with HES data yielding ∼8% lower costs than medical record data (differences compatible with chance, p=0.3). Events were missing from both data sets. 11 men (3.8%) had events identified in HES that were all missing from medical record review, while 7 men (2.4%) had events identified in medical record review that were all missing from HES. The response from finance departments to requests for cost data was poor: only 3 of 7 departments returned adequate data sets within 6 months. Conclusions Using HES routine data coupled with NHS reference costs resulted in mean annual inpatient costs that were very similar to those derived via medical record review; therefore, routinely available data can be used as the primary method of costing resource use in large clinical trials. Neither HES nor medical record review represent gold standards of data collection. Requesting cost data from finance departments is impractical for large clinical trials. Trial registration number ISRCTN92187251; Pre-results.
BJUI | 2013
Mf Eylert; Luke Hounsome; Julia Verne; Amit Bahl; Edward R. Jefferies; Raj Persad
To ascertain current trends in the incidence and mortality rates for upper tract urothelial cancer (UTUC) and identify any relationship with age, stage at presentation, social deprivation and treatment method.
SpringerPlus | 2015
James Sewell; Weranja Ranasinghe; Daswin De Silva; Ben Ayres; Tamra Ranasinghe; Luke Hounsome; Julia Verne; Raj Persad
PurposeTo investigate and compare the trends in incidence and mortality of penile cancer between Australia, England and Wales, and the US, and provide hypotheses for these trends.MethodsCancer registry data from 1982 to 2005 inclusive were obtained from Australia, England and Wales, and the United States. From these data, age-specific, -standardised and mortality:incidence ratios were calculated, and compared.ResultsThe overall incidence of penile cancer in England and Wales (1.44 per 100,000 man-years) was higher than in Australia (0.80 per 100,000), and the US (0.66 per 100,000). Incidence of penile cancer in all three countries has remained relatively stable over time. Similarly, although the mortality rates were also higher in England and Wales (0.37 per 100,000 man-years) compared to Australia (0.18 per 100,000) and the US (0.15 per 100,000), the mortality/incidence ratios were similar for all three countries.ConclusionsPenile cancer incidence is low, affecting mainly older men. Rates differ between the three countries, being twice as common in England and Wales as in the other studied regions. Circumcision rates have a potential influence on these rates but are not the sole explanation for the variation.
Journal of Clinical Urology | 2014
Mf Eylert; Luke Hounsome; R. Persad; Amit Bahl; Edward R. Jefferies; Julia Verne; H Mostafid
Objective The objective of this article is to obtain up-to-date epidemiological statistics of bladder cancer in England. Methods We collected incidence from the National Cancer Data Repository (NCDR), survival from the national Cancer Information System (CIS), ethnicity information from the Hospital Episode Statistics (HES), mortality and smoking rates from the Office for National Statistics (ONS). Results Incidence of bladder cancer has fallen continuously. Mortality has reduced less, leading to worsening survival. Bladder cancer mainly affects men, the most deprived, and the elderly. The gender gap is decreasing, and the deprivation gap is unchanged. Mortality is unchanged in the youngest, oldest and least deprived females. Mortality has recently increased in the oldest males. The highest incidence and mortality is found in industrial areas. This study is limited by i) its retrospective design using existing databases, allowing identification of associations and statistical differences, but not causation; and ii) very restricted ethnicity data. onclusion Reductions in bladder cancer incidence and mortality in England coincide with a decrease in high-risk occupations and public health measures to reduce smoking. Some risk factors in modern living may as yet be unidentified. It remains paramount to ensure equity of access and treatment regardless of gender, age, region and social deprivation to further improve mortality.
BMJ Open | 2016
Amy Downing; Penny Wright; Richard Wagland; Eila Watson; Therese Kearney; R Mottram; M Allen; Cairnduff; Oonagh McSorley; H Butcher; Luke Hounsome; Conan Donnelly; Peter Selby; Paul Kind; William Cross; Jwh Catto; Dyfed Wyn Huws; David H. Brewster; E McNair; Lauren Matheson; Carol Rivas; Johana Nayoan; M Horton; Jessica Corner; Julia Verne; Anna Gavin; Adam Glaser
Background Prostate cancer and its treatment may impact physically, psychologically and socially; affecting the health-related quality of life of men and their partners/spouses. The Life After Prostate Cancer Diagnosis (LAPCD) study is a UK-wide patient-reported outcomes study which will generate information to improve the health and well-being of men with prostate cancer. Methods and analysis Postal surveys will be sent to prostate cancer survivors (18–42 months postdiagnosis) in all 4 UK countries (n=∼70 000). Eligible men will be identified and/or verified through cancer registration systems. Men will be surveyed twice, 12 months apart, to explore changes in outcomes over time. Second, separate cohorts will be surveyed once and the design will include evaluation of the acceptability of online survey tools. A comprehensive patient-reported outcome measure has been developed using generic and specific instruments with proven psychometric properties and relevance in national and international studies. The outcome data will be linked with administrative health data (eg, treatment information from hospital data). To ensure detailed understanding of issues of importance, qualitative interviews will be undertaken with a sample of men who complete the survey across the UK (n=∼150) along with a small number of partners/spouses (n=∼30). Ethics and dissemination The study has received the following approvals: Newcastle and North Tyneside 1 Research Ethics Committee (15/NE/0036), Health Research Authority Confidentiality Advisory Group (15/CAG/0110), NHS Scotland Public Benefit and Privacy Panel (0516-0364), Office of Research Ethics Northern Ireland (16/NI/0073) and NHS R&D approval from Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. Using traditional and innovative methods, the results will be made available to men and their partners/spouses, the funders, the NHS, social care, voluntary sector organisations and other researchers.