Search

Evidence on the endometrial and ovarian cancer burden preventable through modifications to current causal behavioural and hormonal exposures is limited. Whether the burden differs by population subgroup is unknown. We linked pooled data from six Australian cohort studies to national cancer and death registries, and quantified exposure-cancer associations using adjusted proportional hazards models. We estimated exposure prevalence from representative health surveys. We then calculated Population Attributable Fractions (PAFs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), accounting for competing risk of death, and compared PAFs for population subgroups. During a median 4.9 years follow-up, 510 incident endometrial and 303 ovarian cancers were diagnosed. Overweight and obesity explained 41.9% (95% CI 32.3–50.1) of the endometrial cancer burden and obesity alone 34.5% (95% CI 27.5–40.9). This translates to 12,800 and 10,500 endometrial cancers in Australia in the next 10 years, respectively. The body fatness-related endometrial cancer burden was highest (49–87%) among women with diabetes, living remotely, of older age, lower socio-economic status or educational attainment and born in Australia. Never use of oral contraceptives (OCs) explained 8.1% (95% CI 1.8–14.1) or 2500 endometrial cancers. A higher BMI and current long-term MHT use increased, and long-term OC use decreased, the risk of ovarian cancer, but the burden attributable to overweight, obesity or exogenous hormonal factors was not statistically significant. Excess body fatness, a trait that is of high and increasing prevalence globally, is responsible for a large proportion of the endometrial cancer burden, indicating the need for effective strategies to reduce adiposity. • Contemporary estimates of endometrial cancer burden attributable to body fatness. • Overweight and obesity explain 42%, and obesity alone explains 35% of endometrial cancers. • First estimates of future endometrial cancer burden for population subgroups. • Overweight and obesity explain 49–87% of the endometrial cancer burden for some subgroups of women. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Objective: To review published literature on the equity of participation in colorectal cancer screening amongst different population subgroups, in addition to identifying factors identified as barriers and facilitators to equitable screening. Studies were included in the review if they included FOBT as at least one of the screening tests. Method: Relevant published articles were identified through systematic electronic searches of selected databases and the examination of the bibliographies of retrieved articles. Studies of the association with colorectal cancer screening test participation, barriers to equitable participation in screening, and studies examining interventional actions to facilitate screening test participation were included. Data extraction and analysis was undertaken using an approach to the synthesis of qualitative and quantitative studies called Realist Review. Results: Sixty-three articles were identified that met the inclusion criteria. SES status, ethnicity, age and gender have been found as predictors of colorectal cancer screening test participation. This review also found that the potential for equitable cancer screening test participation may be hindered by access barriers which vary amongst population sub-groups. Conclusion: This review provides evidence of horizontal inequity in colorectal cancer screening test participation, but limited understanding of the mechanism by which it is sustained, and few evidence-based solutions. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]