Search

Follow-up care is important for childhood cancer survivors to facilitate early detection and treatment of late-effects. We aimed to describe preferences for different organisational aspects and models of followup care among Swiss childhood cancer survivors, and characteristics associated with preferences for different models. We contacted 720 survivors aged 18+ years, diagnosed with cancer after 1990 (age 0-16 years), registered in the Swiss Childhood Cancer Registry (SCCR), and Swiss resident, who previously participated in a baseline survey. They received questionnaires to assess attendance and preferences for follow-up (rated on 4 point scales, 0-3). Clinical information was available from the SCCR. Survivors (n=314: response rate 43.6%; 47.8% still attended follow-up) rated clinical reasons for follow-up higher than supportive reasons (p children’s hospital (mean=1.94, SD=1.11), adult hospital (mean=1.86, SD=0.98) or general practitioner (mean=1.86, SD=1.01) rather than a central specialised late effects clinic (mean=1.25, SD=1.06, p preferred decentralised clinic-based follow-up, rather than one central specialised late effects clinic. Survivors’ preferences should be considered to ensure future attendance

Background:Little is known about engagement in multiple health behaviours in childhood cancer survivors.Methods:Using latent class analysis we identified health behaviour patterns in 835 adult survivors of childhood cancer (age 20 35 years) and 1670 age and sex matched controls from the general population. Behaviour groups were determined from replies to questions on smoking drinking cannabis use sporting activities diet sun protection and skin examination.Results:The model identified four health behaviour patterns: 'risk avoidance' with a generally healthy behaviour; 'moderate drinking' with higher levels of sporting activities but moderate alcohol consumption; 'risk taking' engaging in several risk behaviours; and 'smoking' smoking but not drinking. Similar proportions of survivors and controls fell into the 'risk avoiding' (42 vs 44) and the 'risk taking' cluster (14 vs 12) but more survivors were in the 'moderate drinking' (39 vs 28) and fewer in the 'smoking' cluster (5 vs 16). Determinants of health behaviour clusters were gender migration background income and therapy.Conclusion:A comparable proportion of childhood cancer survivors as in the general population engage in multiple health compromising behaviours. Because of increased vulnerability of survivors multiple risk behaviours should be addressed in targeted health interventions.British Journal of Cancer advance online publication 21 June 2012; doi:10.1038/bjc.2012.250 www.bjcancer.com.

Background: In contrast with established evidence linking high doses of ionizing radiation with childhood cancer, research on low-dose ionizing radiation and childhood cancer has produced inconsistent results. Objective: We investigated the association between domestic radon exposure and childhood cancers, particularly leukemia and central nervous system (CNS) tumors. Methods: We conducted a nationwide census-based cohort study including all children < 16 years of age living in Switzerland on 5 December 2000, the date of the 2000 census. Follow-up lasted until the date of diagnosis, death, emigration, a child’s 16th birthday, or 31 December 2008. Domestic radon levels were estimated for each individual home address using a model developed and validated based on approximately 45,000 measurements taken throughout Switzerland. Data were analyzed with Cox proportional hazard models adjusted for child age, child sex, birth order, parents’ socioeconomic status, environmental gamma radiation, and period effects. Results: In total, 997 childhood cancer cases were included in the study. Compared with children exposed to a radon concentration below the median (< 77.7 Bq/m3), adjusted hazard ratios for children with exposure ≥ the 90th percentile (≥ 139.9 Bq/m3) were 0.93 (95% CI: 0.74, 1.16) for all cancers, 0.95 (95% CI: 0.63, 1.43) for all leukemias, 0.90 (95% CI: 0.56, 1.43) for acute lymphoblastic leukemia, and 1.05 (95% CI: 0.68, 1.61) for CNS tumors. Conclusions: We did not find evidence that domestic radon exposure is associated with childhood cancer, despite relatively high radon levels in Switzerland. Citation: Hauri D, Spycher B, Huss A, Zimmermann F, Grotzer M, von der Weid N, Weber D, Spoerri A, Kuehni C, Röösli M, for the Swiss National Cohort and the Swiss Paediatric Oncology Group (SPOG). 2013. Domestic radon exposure and risk of childhood cancer: a prospective census-based cohort study. Environ Health Perspect 121:1239–1244; http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1306500