Search

Modifiable lifestyle factors may reduce the risk of developing breast cancer. Obesity is associated particularly with post-menopausal breast cancer. Diet is important, and exercise equivalent to running for up to 8 hours each week reduces the risk of breast cancer, both in its own right and through reducing obesity. Alcohol consumption may be responsible for 5.8% of breast cancers in Australia and it is recommended to reduce this to two standard drinks per day. Drinking alcohol and smoking increases the risk for breast cancer and, therefore, it is important to quit tobacco smoking. Prolonged use of combined oestrogen and progesterone hormone replacement therapy and oral contraceptives may increase breast cancer risk and this must be factored into individual decisions about their use. Ionising radiation, either from diagnostic or therapeutic radiation or through occupational exposure, is associated with a high incidence of breast cancer and exposure may be reduced in some cases. Tamoxifen chemoprevention may reduce the incidence of oestrogen receptor positive cancer in 51% of women with high risk of breast cancer. Uncommon but serious side effects include thromboembolism and uterine cancer. Raloxifene, which can also reduce osteoporosis, can be used in post-menopausal women and is not associated with the development of uterine cancer. Surgical prophylaxis with bilateral mastectomy and salpingo-oophorectomy can reduce the risk of breast cancer in patients carrying BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations. For preventive treatments, mammographic screening can identify other women at high risk.

Objective: To conduct a cost analysis of a telemedicine model for cancer care (teleoncology) in northern Queensland, Australia, compared with the usual model of care from the perspective of the Townsville and other participating hospital and health services., Design: Retrospective cost-savings analysis; and a one-way sensitivity analysis performed to test the robustness of findings in net savings., Participants and Setting: Records of all patients managed by means of teleoncology at the Townsville Cancer Centre (TCC) and its six rural satellite centres in northern Queensland, Australia between 1 March 2007 and 30 November 2011., Main Outcome Measures: Costs for set-up and staffing to manage the service, and savings from avoidance of travel expenses for specialist oncologists, patients and their escorts, and for aeromedical retrievals., Results: There were 605 teleoncology consultations with 147 patients over 56 months, at a total cost of $442 276. The cost for project establishment was $36 000, equipment/maintenance was $143 271, and staff was $261 520. The estimated travel expense avoided was $762 394; this figure included the costs of travel for patients and escorts of $658 760, aeromedical retrievals of $52 400 and travel for specialists of $47 634, as well as an estimate of accommodation costs for a proportion of patients of $3600. This resulted in a net saving of $320 118. Costs would have to increase by 72% to negate the savings., Conclusion: The teleoncology model of care at the TCC resulted in net savings, mainly due to avoidance of travel costs. Such savings could be redirected to enhancing rural resources and service capabilities. This teleoncology model is applicable to geographically distant areas requiring lengthy travel.

Yes. Public health adviser David Roder and Cancer Council Australia CEO Ian Olver believe the reduction in breast cancer mortality in Australia reflects both treatment and screening effects.

Australia's efforts to prevent, diagnose and treat cancer are not as successful for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people as they are for other Australians. There is a need for a nationally coordinated, collaborative, priority-driven research effort to better understand what works, and we need to implement that knowledge. All aspects of the process must involve genuine Indigenous leadership and participation.

The Cancer Council Australia (CCA) Alcohol Working Group has prepared a position statement on alcohol use and cancer. The statement has been reviewed by external experts and endorsed by the CCA Board. Alcohol use is a cause of cancer. Any level of alcohol consumption increases the risk of developing an alcohol-related cancer; the level of risk increases in line with the level of consumption. It is estimated that 5070 cases of cancer (or 5% of all cancers) are attributable to long-term chronic use of alcohol each year in Australia. Together, smoking and alcohol have a synergistic effect on cancer risk, meaning the combined effects of use are significantly greater than the sum of individual risks. Alcohol use may contribute to weight (fat) gain, and greater body fatness is a convincing cause of cancers of the oesophagus, pancreas, bowel, endometrium, kidney and breast (in postmenopausal women). The existing evidence does not justify the promotion of alcohol use to prevent coronary heart disease, as the previously reported role of alcohol in reducing heart disease risk in light-to-moderate drinkers appears to have been overestimated. CCA recommends that to reduce their risk of cancer, people limit their consumption of alcohol, or better still avoid alcohol altogether. For individuals who choose to drink alcohol, CCA recommends that they drink only within the National Health and Medical Research Council guidelines for alcohol consumption.

In this 21st century, we will need to better analyse the outcomes of our spending on newer and more expensive anticancer drugs, particularly through postmarketing assessment, to ensure that these investments are justified. Evidence-based medicine is only as good as the evidence available, and we advocate for more independently designed and funded trials that concentrate on the minimum effective dose and duration of therapies to reduce toxicity to patients and to control costs. There is a place for governments to provide funding for these studies in the public good. Although improving survival over standard care is the gold standard for proving the efficacy of a new therapy, surrogate endpoints such as early biological marker changes, functional imaging changes or earlier measures such as progression-free survival must be investigated to enable drug therapies to be discontinued earlier if they are ineffective. Studies searching for the presence of biological targets must be funded to exploit the potential advantage of targeted therapies. Treatment guidelines are best written by experts who are independent of the pharmaceutical industry. Existing databases should be linked to better monitor the outcomes of new therapies. Privacy safeguards are important, but privacy legislation may need to be modified to serve the greater public good from the information gained from linking databases.

Potential conflicts of interest do not imply wrongdoing, but can create bias, distort decision making, and create a perception that practitioners are being "bought "or "bribed" by industry. Transparency alone may not be sufficient to erase the doubts created when authors of clinical practice guidelines or editorials declare potential conflicts of interest. Can the subconscious obligation for reciprocation that exists when gifts are offered and accepted be fully negated? Analyses of published clinical cancer research studies have found a positive association between pharmaceutical industry sponsorship and reporting of positive outcomes, manipulation of clinical trials, and hiding of "preliminary data sets". More problematic is the issue of clinical researchers leaking preliminary results to the investment industry. Influential literature reviews and treatment guidelines have been associated with widespread declarations of conflict of interest. Some potential solutions are: regulating pharmaceutical companies to declare all gifts to clinicians, or ban such gifts; for clinicians to carefully declare potential conflicts of interest or to provide pro bono advice without accepting industry sponsorship; and for all gifts and payments from industry to academic physicians to be coordinated by an independent review committee. Journals should only allow reviews, editorials, guidelines and opinion pieces to be written by those without significant conflicts of interest.

Objective: To evaluate the frequency and management of anaemia in Australian adults with solid and haematological malignancies., Design: 6-month observational, prospective, multicentre study., Participants: 694 patients recruited from outpatient oncology clinics in 24 hospitals in five Australian states between 9 April 2001 and 31 July 2001., Main Outcome Measures: Frequency of anaemia (haemoglobin [Hb] level < 120 g/L) at enrolment and over ensuing 6 months, by tumour type, disease status and cancer treatment; anaemia treatment and "trigger" Hb level for this treatment., Results: Participants had median age 60 years, and 61% were women. Prevalence of anaemia at enrolment was 35% (199/562), with 78% of these 199 having mild anaemia (Hb, 100-119 g/L). Frequency of anaemia (either present at enrolment or developing during the study) was 57% overall (323/566), and varied with tumour type, from 49% (lymphoma/myeloma) to 85% (urogenital cancer). Patients who received radiotherapy either in combination or concomitant with chemotherapy were more likely to have anaemia (73%) than those receiving chemotherapy alone (58%) (P = 0.004). Of all chemotherapy patients not anaemic at enrolment, 23% developed anaemia by the second monthly follow-up. Independent predictors for anaemia in chemotherapy patients were low baseline Hb level (odds ratio [OR], 5.4; 95% CI, 2.7-10.9) and use of platinum chemotherapeutic agents (OR, 4.8; 95% CI, 2.1-11.4) (P < 0.001). Anaemia was treated in 41% of patients with anaemia at enrolment--by transfusion (36%), iron (5%) and erythropoietic agents (2%). Frequency of anaemia treatment varied between tumour types, from 19% (breast cancer) to 60% (leukaemia). The mean "trigger Hb" for initiating transfusion was 95 g/L., Conclusions: Anaemia is prevalent among Australian patients with cancer managed in hospital oncology units. Its management varies between tumour types. Many patients do not receive treatment for their anaemia.

Although it is commonly assumed that the quality of medical school education in Australia is uniformly high, there is no national process for assessing its outcomes. There is substantial variability in the content of medical school curricula, and the process of curriculum change is becoming more challenging because of intense competition for time and space in the course. A national exit examination could provide a uniform standard of assessment for all medical school graduates in Australia, as well as foreign graduates applying to work in Australia. Such an examination could assess medical school outcomes, monitor the effects of curriculum change, and provide a benchmark for new medical schools that would help medical curricula evolve to better meet society's needs.