Search

Background: We investigated the impact of the COVID‐19 pandemic on oral cancer (OC), comparing diagnosis and number of pre‐operative days in the diagnosis of OC in 2019 (pre‐COVID‐19) and that in 2020 (during the COVID‐19 pandemic). Methods: Using data from a cancer registry‐based study on the impact of COVID‐19 on cancer care in Osaka (CanReCO), we collected details of sex, age, residential area, cancer site, date of diagnosis, clinical stage at first treatment and number of pre‐operative days in OC patients. Results: A total of 1470 OC cases were registered. Incidence of OC before and during COVID‐19 was 814 and 656 cases, respectively. During the first wave of the pandemic (March to May 2020), incidence was about half that in the same period in 2019 (2019; n = 271, 2020; n = 145). Number of pre‐operative days (median number of days between the first hospital visit and surgery date) was significantly shorter during the COVID‐19 year (24.5 days) than in the pre‐COVID‐19 year (28 days, p = 0.0015). Conclusions: Incidence of OC during the COVID‐19 pandemic was lower than in pre‐COVID‐19. Despite disruption in the healthcare system, the number of pre‐operative days for OC cases was shorter during the pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Second primary cancer (SPC) is one of the most life‐threatening late effects of childhood cancers. We investigated the incidence and survival outcomes of SPC in childhood cancer patients in Japan. Data were obtained from the population‐based Osaka Cancer Registry. Individuals diagnosed with cancer at age 0–14 years during 1975–2014 and survived 2 months or longer were followed through December 2015. The risk of developing SPC was assessed with standardized incidence ratio (SIR), excess absolute risk (EAR, per 100,000 person‐years), and cumulative incidence. Multivariable Poisson regression analysis was carried out to assess relative risks of SPC by treatment method. Survival analysis was undertaken using the Kaplan–Meier method. Of 7229 childhood cancer survivors, 101 (1.4%) developed SPC after a median of 11.6 years. Overall SIR was 5.0, which corresponded with 84.3 EAR. The cumulative incidence was 0.9%, 2.1%, and 3.4% at 10, 20, and 30 years, respectively. Among all SPCs, the type that contributed most to the overall burden was cancers in the central nervous system (EAR = 28.0) followed by digestive system (EAR = 15.1), thyroid (EAR = 8.3), and bones and joints (EAR = 7.8); median latency ranged from 2.0 years (lymphomas) to 26.6 years (skin cancers). Patients treated with radiotherapy alone were at a 2.58‐fold increased risk of developing SPC compared to those who received neither chemotherapy nor radiotherapy. Among patients who developed SPCs, 5‐year and 10‐year survival probabilities after SPC diagnosis were 61.7% and 52.0%, respectively. Risk‐based long‐term follow‐up planning is essential to inform survivorship care and help reduce the burden of SPCs in childhood cancer survivors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Cancer survival varies by socioeconomic status in Japan. We examined the extent to which survival disparities are explained by factors relevant to cancer control measures (promoting early‐stage detection, standardizing treatment, and centralizing patients to government‐accredited cancer hospitals [ACHs]). Methods: From the Osaka Cancer Registry, patients diagnosed with solid malignant tumors during 2005–2014 and aged 15–84 years (N = 376,077) were classified into quartiles using the Area Deprivation Index (ADI). Trends in inequalities were assessed for potentially associated factors: early‐stage detection, treatment modality, and utilization of ACH (for first contact/diagnosis/treatment). 3‐year all‐cause survival was computed by the ADI quartile. Multivariable Cox regression models were used to assess survival disparities and their trends through a series of adjustment for the potentially associated factors. Results: During 2005–2014, the most deprived ADI quartile had lower rates than the least deprived quartile for early‐stage detection (42.6% vs. 48.7%); receipt of surgery (58.1% vs. 64.1%); and utilization of ACH (83.5% vs. 88.4%). While rate differences decreased for receipt of surgery and utilization of ACH (Annual Percent Change = −3.2 and − 11.9, respectively) over time, it remained unchanged for early‐stage detection. During 2012–2014, the most deprived ADI quartile had lower 3‐year survival than the least deprived (59.0% vs. 69.4%) and higher mortality (Hazard Ratio [HR] = 1.32, adjusted for case‐mix): this attenuated with additional adjustment for stage at diagnosis (HR = 1.23); treatment modality (HR = 1.20); and utilization of ACH (HR = 1.19) Conclusions: Despite improvements in equalizing access to quality cancer care during 2005–2014, survival disparities remained. Interventions to reduce inequalities in early‐stage detection could ameliorate such gaps. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims/Introduction: We investigated the association between coexisting diabetes at the time of cancer diagnosis, and the overall survival and incidence of second primary cancer in patients with cancer and receiving drug therapy for diabetes. Materials and Methods: We used cancer registry and administrative data of patients diagnosed with cancer at designated cancer care hospitals in Osaka Prefecture between 2010 and 2015. The presence of diabetes was identified from the prescription records of antidiabetic drugs in Diagnosis Procedure Combination System data. After adjusting for patient characteristics, we compared overall survival between patients with cancer with coexisting diabetes and those without coexisting diabetes using the Cox proportional hazards model. In addition, the impact of coexisting diabetes on the risk of developing second primary cancer was evaluated using a competing risk analysis. Results: Of the 131,701 patients with cancer included in the analysis, 6,135 (4.7%) had coexisting diabetes. The 5‐year survival rates for patients with and without coexisting diabetes were 56.2% (95% confidence interval 54.8–57.6) and 72.7% (95% confidence interval 72.4–73.0), respectively. Coexisting diabetes was associated with a higher risk of developing second primary cancer (subdistribution hazard ratio 1.23; 95% confidence interval 1.08–1.41). In site‐specific analysis, coexisting diabetes was associated with an increased risk for the development of second primary cancer of multiple myeloma, and cancer of the uterus, pancreas and liver. Conclusions: Coexisting diabetes was associated with a higher mortality and risk of developing second primary cancer in Japanese patients with cancer and on drug therapy for diabetes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Little is known about dementia's impact on patterns of diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes in cancer patients. This study aimed to elucidate the differences in cancer staging, treatment, and mortality in older cancer patients with and without preexisting dementia. Methods: Using cancer registry data and administrative data from 30 hospitals in Japan, this multicentre retrospective cohort study examined patients aged 65–99 years who were newly diagnosed with gastric, colorectal, or lung cancer in 2014–2015. Dementia status (none, mild, and moderate-to-severe) at the time of cancer diagnosis was extracted from clinical summaries in administrative data, and set as the exposure of interest. We constructed multivariable logistic regression models to analyse cancer staging and treatment, and multivariable Cox regression models to analyse three-year survival. Results: Among gastric (n = 6016), colorectal (n = 7257), and lung (n = 4502) cancer patients, 5.1%, 5.8%, and 6.4% had dementia, respectively. Patients with dementia were more likely to receive unstaged and advanced-stage cancer diagnoses; less likely to undergo tumour resection for stage I, II, and III gastric cancer and for stage I and II lung cancer; less likely to receive pharmacotherapy for stage III and IV lung cancer; more likely to undergo tumour resection for all-stage colorectal cancer; and more likely to die within three years of cancer diagnosis. The effects of moderate-to-severe dementia were greater than those of mild dementia, with the exception of tumour resection for colorectal cancer. Conclusion: Older cancer patients with preexisting dementia are less likely to receive standard cancer treatment and more likely to experience poorer outcomes. Clinicians should be aware of these risks, and would benefit from standardised guidelines to aid their decision-making in diagnosing and treating these patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Typhoid fever is a common cause of fever in Cambodian children but diagnosis and treatment are usually presumptive owing to the lack of quick and accurate tests at an initial consultation. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of using a rapid diagnostic test (RDT) for typhoid fever diagnosis, an immunoglobulin M lateral flow assay (IgMFA), in a remote health centre setting in Cambodia from a healthcare provider perspective. A cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) with decision analytic modelling was conducted. We constructed a decision tree model comparing the IgMFA versus clinical diagnosis in a hypothetical cohort with 1000 children in each arm. The costs included direct medical costs only. The eligibility was children (≤14 years old) with fever. Time horizon was day seven from the initial consultation. The number of treatment success in typhoid fever cases was the primary health outcome. The number of correctly diagnosed typhoid fever cases (true-positives) was the intermediate health outcome. We obtained the incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER), expressed as the difference in costs divided by the difference in the number of treatment success between the two arms. Sensitivity analyses were conducted. The IgMFA detected 5.87 more true-positives than the clinical diagnosis (38.45 versus 32.59) per 1000 children and there were 3.61 more treatment successes (46.78 versus 43.17). The incremental cost of the IgMFA was estimated at $5700; therefore, the ICER to have one additional treatment success was estimated to be $1579. The key drivers for the ICER were the relative sensitivity of IgMFA versus clinical diagnosis, the cost of IgMFA, and the prevalence of typhoid fever or multi-drug resistant strains. The IgMFA was more costly but more effective than the clinical diagnosis in the base-case analysis. An IgMFA could be more cost-effective than the base-case if the sensitivity of IgMFA was higher or cost lower. Decision makers may use a willingness-to-pay threshold that considers the additional cost of hospitalisation for treatment failures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]