Search

Background: This study reports cancer incidence and survival among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and other Australian children, and assesses changes over time., Procedure: Data were from the population-based Australian Childhood Cancer Registry. The study comprised children aged under 15 diagnosed between 1997 and 2016 and with mortality follow-up until 31 December 2017. Incidence trends were analysed using JoinPoint regression. Five-year cancer-specific survival was calculated using the semi-complete approach with survival comparisons made using multivariable flexible parametric models., Results: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children accounted for 506 of 13,299 eligible cases (3.8%). Incidence rates for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children across the study period increased by 2.3% annually (95% confidence interval [CI]: +0.6% to +4.0%) and for other Australian children increased by 0.6% annually (95% CI: +0.3% to +0.9%; p = .05). Nonetheless, cancer incidence was consistently lower for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children, with an incidence rate ratio of 0.73 (95% CI: 0.62-0.85; p < .01) between 2012 and 2016. Survival for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children with solid tumours was 70.6% (95% CI: 62.5%-77.3%) and for other Australian children was 83.5% (95% CI: 82.3%-84.7%; p < .01), with indications of this difference diminishing in recent years., Conclusions: Improvements in identification, particularly in urban areas, most likely accounts for the greater increase in cancer incidence rates among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children. Examination of data on stage at diagnosis and treatment may provide important insights into survival for children with solid tumours., (© 2021 Commonwealth of Australia. Pediatric Blood & Cancer © 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: Lung cancer is the most common cause of cancer-related mortality for both Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians, and the death rate of lung cancer in Indigenous Australians is increasing., Aims: To provide a comprehensive description of patterns of lung cancer presentation, diagnosis, treatment and outcomes in Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians in the Top End of the Northern Territory., Methods: Retrospective cohort study of adult patients with a new diagnosis of lung cancer in the Top End between January 2010 and December 2014. Unadjusted survival probabilities by indigenous status were calculated. The primary end-point was all-cause mortality., Results: Despite receiving similar diagnostic procedures and treatment, Indigenous Australians with lung cancer have poorer 1- and 5-year survival (25.0% and 9.4% respectively), when compared to non-Indigenous Australians included in the study (42.0% and 16.2% respectively). Indigenous lung cancer patients were more likely to be female (51.6% of indigenous patients were female, compared to 30.5% non-indigenous), be current smokers (61.3% vs 36.9%), have more comorbidities (73.6% vs 52.7%, 24.2% vs 5.3% and 30.8% vs 14.2% for respiratory disease, renal insufficiency and diabetes mellitus respectively), and live in more socio-economically disadvantaged (66.7% vs 14.2%) and very remote areas (66.1% vs 6.8%). They were also more likely to die at home, compared to their non-indigenous counterparts (64.3% vs 26.7%)., Conclusions: Indigenous patients from the Top End diagnosed with lung cancer were more likely to have poorer survival outcomes when compared to non-indigenous people. Potential reasons for the discrepancy in survival need to be addressed urgently., (© 2020 Royal Australasian College of Physicians.)

Background: Disparity in outcomes between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people after cancer diagnosis is multifactorial, including lower cancer screening participation, later diagnosis, reduced access and uptake of cancer treatment, higher rate of comorbidities, and barriers accessing the health system. Little is known about cancer survivorship experiences., Objective: The aim of this study was to explore Indigenous Australian cancer survivor's perspectives of cancer survivorship., Methods: Indigenous people who completed cancer treatment 6 months to 5 years before fieldwork were recruited from a tertiary hospital and remote primary health service for this qualitative study. Data collection was guided by yarning methods, a culturally appropriate method emphasizing storytelling. Data were interpreted using a social constructionist framework., Results: Thirteen women and 6 men were interviewed. Participants' past experiences contributed to their specific identity as survivors. Participants described factors affecting a positive transition from cancer patient to cancer survivor and the importance of ongoing family support in helping to manage survivorship. Finally, participants described a range of community support they received and provided to others and how this improved their cancer survivorship., Conclusion: Although a range of experiences are presented, this study provides evidence that the survivorship perspectives of Indigenous cancer survivors may be, in part, shared by non-Indigenous cancer survivors., Implications for Practice: Acknowledging Indigenous cancer survivors' past experiences and how these influence their overall well-being is important for providing patient-centered and culturally appropriate care. Nurses and other healthcare professionals may use this knowledge to foster a range of coping strategies to assist Indigenous cancer survivors to live well.

Background: Indigenous Australians experience greater health disadvantage and have a higher prevalence of many chronic health conditions. Liver diseases leading to cirrhosis are among the most common contributor to the mortality gap between Indigenous and other Australian adults. However, no comparative data exist assessing differences in presentation and patient outcomes between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians hospitalised with cirrhosis., Methods: Using data from the Hospital Admitted Patient Data Collection and the Death Registry, this retrospective, population-based, cohort study including all people hospitalised for cirrhosis in the state of Queensland during 2008-2017 examined rate of readmission (Poisson regression), cumulative survival (Kaplan-Meier), and assessed the differences in survival (Multivariable Cox regression) by Indigenous status. Predictor variables included demographic, health service characteristics and clinical data., Results: We studied 779 Indigenous and 10,642 non-Indigenous patients with cirrhosis. A higher proportion of Indigenous patients were younger than 50 years (346 [44%] vs. 2063 [19%] non-Indigenous patients), lived in most disadvantaged areas (395 [51%) vs. 2728 [26%]), had alcohol-related cirrhosis (547 [70%] vs. 5041 [47%]), had ascites (314 [40%] vs. 3555 [33%), and presented to hospital via the Emergency Department (510 [68%] vs. 4790 [47%]). Indigenous patients had 3.04 times the rate of non-cirrhosis readmissions (95%CI 2.98-3.10), 1.35 times the rate of cirrhosis-related readmissions (95%CI 1.29-1.41), and lower overall survival (17% vs. 27%; unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) = 1.16 95%CI 1.06-1.27), compared to non-Indigenous patients. Most of the survival deficit was explained by Emergency Department presentation (adj-HR = 1.03 95%CI 0.93-1.13), and alcohol-related aetiology (adj-HR = 1.08 95%CI 0.99-1.19). The remaining survival deficit was influenced by the other clinico-demographic and health service factors (final adj-HR = 1.08 95%CI 0.96-1.20)., Conclusions: There was evidence of differential presentation, higher rates of readmissions, and poorer survival for Indigenous Australians with cirrhosis, compared to other Australians. The increased prevalence of Emergency Department presentation among Indigenous patients suggests missed opportunities for early intervention to prevent progressive cirrhosis complications and hospital readmissions.

Background: Cancer care involves many different healthcare providers. Delayed or inaccurate communication between specialists and general practitioners (GP) may negatively affect care., Aim: To describe the pattern and variation of communication between primary healthcare (PHC) services and hospitals and specialists in relation to the patient's cancer care., Methods: A retrospective audit of clinical records of Indigenous Australians diagnosed with cancer during 2010-2016 identified through 10 PHC services in Queensland is described. Poisson regression was used to model the dichotomous outcome availability of hospital discharge summary versus not., Results: A total of 138 patient records was audited; 115 of those patients visited the PHC service for cancer-related care after cancer diagnosis; 40.0% visited the service before a discharge summary was available, and 36.5% of the patients had no discharge summary in their medical notes. While most discharge summaries noted important information about the patient's cancer, 42.4% lacked details regarding the discharge medications regimen., Conclusions: Deficits in communication and information transfer between specialists and GP may adversely affect patient care. Indigenous Australians are a relatively disadvantaged group that experience poor health outcomes and relatively poor access to care. The low proportion of discharge summaries noting discharge medication regimen is of concern among Indigenous Australians with cancer who have high comorbidity burden and low health literacy. Our findings provide an insight into some of the factors associated with quality of cancer care, and may provide guidance for focus areas for further research and improvement efforts., (© 2019 Royal Australasian College of Physicians.)

Purpose: The role of general practitioners in cancer care has expanded in recent years. However, little is known about utilization of primary health care (PHC) services by patients with cancer, particularly among socio-economically disadvantaged groups. We describe utilization of PHC services by patients with cancer, and the nature of the care provided. The study focuses on a disadvantaged group in Australia, namely Indigenous Australians., Methods: A retrospective audit of clinical records in ten PHC services in Queensland, Australia. Demographic and clinical data of Indigenous Australians diagnosed with cancer during 2010-2016 were abstracted from patient's medical records at the PHC services. The rates of cancer-related visits were calculated using person years at risk as a denominator., Results: A total of 138 patients' records were audited. During 12 months following the cancer diagnosis, patients visited the PHC service on average 5.95 times per year. Frequency of visits were relatively high in remote areas and among socioeconomic disadvantaged patients (IRR = 1.87, 95%CI 1.61-2.17; IRR = 1.79, 95%CI 1.45-2.21, respectively). Over 80% of visits were for seeking attention for symptoms, wound care, and emotional or social support. Patients who did not undergo surgery, had greater comorbidity, received chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy, and male gender had significantly greater rate of visits than their counterparts., Conclusion: The frequency of utilization of PHC services, especially by patients with comorbidities, and the range of reasons for attendance highlights the important role of PHC services in providing cancer care. The reliance on PHC services, particularly by patients in remote and disadvantaged communities, has important implications for appropriate resourcing and support for services in these locations.

Objectives: This study describes and compares the unmet supportive care needs between Indigenous and Non-Indigenous people with cancer., Methods: Data from two cross-sectional supportive care needs studies were matched in a 1:1 ratio for Indigenous (n = 125) and Non-Indigenous (n = 125) Australian adults diagnosed with cancer. Descriptive statistics were used to compare type and prevalence of 24 need items measured by the SCNS-SF34 and SCNAT-IP., Results: A higher proportion of Non-Indigenous participants compared to Indigenous participants reported having any moderate-to-high level of unmet needs (70% vs. 54%, p = 0.013) and the difference was consistently observed across non-matched characteristics. While concerns for caregivers, fear of recurrence and pain were central needs for both Indigenous participants and Non-Indigenous participants, there were some key differences in the specific unmet needs between groups. Physical issues including doing usual daily activities and dealing with fatigue were the top priorities for Non-Indigenous people, while money worries, dealing with psychological issues such as how to keep their spirit strong or hope about their future appeared to be priorities for Indigenous people., Conclusions: Variations in the unmet supportive care needs between Indigenous and Non-Indigenous people with cancer may guide health professionals to target specific needs when preparing care plans., (© 2019 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Introduction: Indigenous Australians with cancer tend to be diagnosed with more aggressive and advanced-stage disease, receive less treatment, have poorer survival and lower quality of life than other Australians. Reducing these inequalities requires an understanding of the supportive care needs of this cancer group. This study aims to describe the type and extent of unmet supportive care needs of Indigenous Australian cancer patients., Method: A multicentre, cross-sectional study recruited 145 Indigenous adults diagnosed with cancer in the previous 5 years in four Australian states and territories. Using a culturally specific tool, unmet needs were assessed in four domains: 'physical and psychological', 'hospital care', 'information and communication' and 'practical and cultural'. Moderate to high unmet need is that which requires some or a lot more help to be addressed., Results: Two-thirds (65%) of patients reported at least one moderate to high unmet need and 20% of patients had moderate to high unmet needs with five or more items. Overall, patients most commonly reported moderate to high unmet needs in the physical/psychological (46%) and practical/cultural domains (34%), than the information/communication (23%) and hospital care domains (16%). More specifically, 'money worries' was the most frequently reported moderate to high unmet need (20%)., Conclusion: Most Indigenous Australians living with cancer experience unmet supportive care needs. Physical/psychological and practical/cultural concerns were identified as priority areas for Indigenous cancer patients. These findings may inform priority areas for intervention towards optimal care pathways for Indigenous Australians diagnosed and living with cancer.

Introduction: Disparities in cancer outcomes between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people are well reported. Some Australian Indigenous communities' beliefs about cancer may influence health behaviours, support for those with cancer and ,ultimately, treatment outcomes. This project was instigated by request of a cultural adviser from a regional Queensland community and aims to make community perceptions of cancer visible, facilitate development of resources representing these perceptions and briefly evaluate the project from the community's perspective., Methods: The project was guided by qualitative, participatory and visual research methodology. Community participation was engaged by identifying community champions who helped recruit interested community members and continued project momentum. The project was defined and driven by community, and a consensus decision making approach was used to select resources or activities to represent community perceptions of cancer and raise cancer awareness. Qualitative data were collected from yarning groups at two community forums and subsequent group sessions to explore and define community perceptions of cancer. Informed consent was obtained prior to audio-taped yarning groups. Data were also included from publicly available interviews broadcast on radio and television. All data about community perceptions of cancer and of the project were thematically analysed. Photovoice using cameras was the visual method chosen to capture images and stories representing community cancer beliefs., Results: Three main themes were derived from thematic analysis of data collected about community perceptions of cancer, identified by participants as important to improving cancer outcomes: (1) silence in the community, (2) support is important for survivorship and (3) awareness of cancer and the importance of sharing positive stories. A consensus decision-making approach resulted in the community choosing two resources to stimulate community discussion about cancer, raise awareness and reduce stigma. These were creating a community quilt, with each quilt square representing community perceptions of cancer, and producing a community calendar, with messages promoting healthy behaviours and cancer screening. The overall project was viewed as valuable for facilitating and improving the conversation about cancer with family, friends, the broader community and health professionals. Group sessions were considered important for providing a shared, safe space for support, for asking health related questions and as an instigator to share cancer related knowledge and stories with others., Conclusion: Silence around cancer may influence awareness and discussion about cancer, screening participation and help-seeking behaviour in this community. In this project, engaging with the community created a safe space for conversation around a previously taboo topic, which could lead to improved screening and help seeking behaviour. The role of primary health care in reducing health disparities by partnering with community to conduct awareness and prevention activities and by providing culturally appropriate care for Indigenous people is emphasised.

Indigenous Australians diagnosed with cancer experience higher mortality and lower survival rates compared to non-Indigenous Australians. Reasons are multifaceted and complex. Knowledge about Indigenous cancer survivors' perspectives of positive cancer survivorship is a gap in research evidence. The study explored cancer survivorship perspectives of Indigenous cancer survivors, their support people and healthcare workers with a view to developing recommendations for cancer survivorship. Indigenous Australians who completed cancer treatment in the previous 6 months to 5 years, their support people and primary healthcare workers were recruited from primary healthcare centres and a large tertiary Queensland hospital. Semi-structured interviews and focus groups were conducted with written and informed consent obtained prior. Participants emphasised key action areas and recommendations to enhance cancer survivorship, namely: establishing a community cancer advocate and peer support program, availability and use of a cancer-specific Indigenous primary healthcare worker and hospital-based Indigenous patient navigator, as well as adoption of question prompt lists and cancer survivorship care plans. Existing research suggests significant benefits from implementing the key recommendations identified in this study. Greater support and commitment across health sectors and funding bodies is needed to promote institutional change and health system development.

Background: Little is known about the impact of comorbidity on cervical cancer survival in Australian women, including whether Indigenous women's higher prevalence of comorbidity contributes to their lower survival compared to non-Indigenous women., Methods: Data for cervical cancers diagnosed in 2003-2012 were extracted from six Australian state-based cancer registries and linked to hospital inpatient records to identify comorbidity diagnoses. Five-year cause-specific and all-cause survival probabilities were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Flexible parametric models were used to estimate excess cause-specific mortality by Charlson comorbidity index score (0,1,2+), for Indigenous women compared to non-Indigenous women., Results: Of 4,467 women, Indigenous women (4.4%) compared to non-Indigenous women had more comorbidity at diagnosis (score ≥1: 24.2% vs. 10.0%) and lower five-year cause-specific survival (60.2% vs. 76.6%). Comorbidity was associated with increased cervical cancer mortality for non-Indigenous women, but there was no evidence of such a relationship for Indigenous women. There was an 18% reduction in the Indigenous: non-Indigenous hazard ratio (excess mortality) when comorbidity was included in the model, yet this reduction was not statistically significant. The excess mortality for Indigenous women was only evident among those without comorbidity (Indigenous: non-Indigenous HR 2.5, 95%CI 1.9-3.4), indicating that factors other than those measured in this study are contributing to the differential. In a subgroup of New South Wales women, comorbidity was associated with advanced-stage cancer, which in turn was associated with elevated cervical cancer mortality., Conclusions: Survival was lowest for women with comorbidity. However, there wasn't a clear comorbidity-survival gradient for Indigenous women. Further investigation of potential drivers of the cervical cancer survival differentials is warranted., Impact: The results highlight the need for cancer care guidelines and multidisciplinary care that can meet the needs of complex patients. Also, primary and acute care services may need to pay more attention to Indigenous Australian women who may not obviously need it (i.e. those without comorbidity).

Background: Lung cancer and cervical cancer are higher in incidence for Indigenous Australians and survival is worse compared with non-Indigenous Australians. Here we aim to determine if being Indigenous and/or other factors are associated with patients receiving "suboptimal treatment" compared to "optimal treatment" according to clinical guidelines for two cancer types., Methods: Data were collected from hospital medical records for Indigenous adults diagnosed with cervical cancer and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and a frequency-matched comparison group of non-Indigenous patients in the Queensland Cancer Registry between January 1998 and December 2004. The two cancer types were analyzed separately., Results: A total of 105 women with cervical cancer were included in the study, 56 of whom were Indigenous. Indigenous women had higher odds of not receiving optimal treatment according to clinical guidelines (unadjusted OR 7.1; 95% CI, 1.5-33.3), even after adjusting for stage (OR 5.7; 95% CI, 1.2-27.3). Of 225 patients with NSCLC, 198 patients (56% Indigenous) had sufficient information available to be analyzed. The odds of receiving suboptimal treatment were significantly higher for Indigenous compared to non-Indigenous NSCLC patients (unadjusted OR 1.9; 95% CI, 1.0-3.6) and remained significant after adjusting for stage, comorbidity and age (adjusted OR 2.1; 95% CI, 1.1-4.1)., Conclusions: The monitoring of treatment patterns and appraisal against guidelines can provide valuable evidence of inequity in cancer treatment. We found that Indigenous people with lung cancer or cervical cancer received suboptimal treatment, reinforcing the need for urgent action to reduce the impact of these two cancer types on Indigenous people., (© 2016 John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.)

Purpose: The purposes of the present study are to describe changes over time in the prevalence of unmet supportive care needs of Indigenous Australians newly diagnosed with cancer and to identify factors associated with greater needs at diagnosis., Methods: Unmet needs were assessed by the Supportive Care Needs Assessment Tool for Indigenous People (SCNAT-IP) within 3 months and at 6 months post-diagnosis. Overall needs and specific need domains were modelled using generalized estimating equations. Associations between risk factors and moderate-high unmet needs at diagnosis were assessed using multivariable logistic regression analyses., Results: Over half (54%) of the participants (n = 82) experienced at least one moderate-high unmet need at diagnosis which reduced to 34% at 6 months post-diagnosis. This improvement mainly reflected the decrease in needs from the physical/psychological domain (p = 0.042). The median overall unmet need score and most domain scores were significantly lower at 6 months. Eighteen percent experienced multiple (5+) moderate-high unmet needs at diagnosis (60% continued to report needs at 6 months). The top unmet needs at diagnosis were money worries (27%), concerns about the worries of those close to you (16%) and worry about your illness spreading/getting worse (15%). Having a higher education and having received cancer treatment in the last 30 days were significantly associated with greater needs at diagnosis., Conclusions: While unmet needs decreased over time, some patients continued to experience moderate-high unmet needs. This study indicates that needs should be monitored throughout the patient's journey. Coordination of support, particularly for those with multiple needs, may be important for this group.

Aim: While Indigenous people in Queensland have lower colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality than the rest of the population, CRC remains the third most frequent cancer among Australian Indigenous people overall. This study aimed to investigate patterns of care and survival between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians with CRC., Methods: Through a matched-cohort design we compared 80 Indigenous and 85 non-Indigenous people all diagnosed with CRC and treated in Queensland public hospitals during 1998-2004 (frequency matched on age, sex, geographical remoteness). We compared clinical and treatment data (Pearson's chi-square) and all-cause and cancer survival (Cox regression analysis)., Results: Indigenous patients with CRC were not significantly more likely to have comorbidity, advanced disease at diagnosis or less treatment than non-Indigenous people. There was also no statistically significant difference in all-cause survival (HR 1.14, 95% CI 0.69, 1.89) or cancer survival (HR 1.01, 95% CI 0.60, 1.69) between the two groups., Conclusions: Similar CRC mortality among Indigenous and other Australians may reflect both the lower incidence and adequate management. Increasing life expectancy and exposures to risk factors suggests that Indigenous people are vulnerable to a growing burden of CRC. Primary prevention and early detection will be of paramount importance to future CRC control among Indigenous Australians. Current CRC management must be maintained and include prevention measures to ensure that predicted increases in CRC burden are minimized., (© 2014 Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd.)

Background: The Australian National Cervical Screening Program, introduced more than 20 years ago, does not record the Indigenous status of screening participants. This article reports the first population-based estimates of participation in cervical screening for Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australian women., Methods: This was a retrospective, population-based study of 1,334,795 female Queensland residents, aged 20 to 69 years, who participated in cervical screening from 2000 to 2011; 26,829 were identified as Indigenous through linkage to hospitalization records. Participation rates were calculated as the number of women screened divided by the average estimated resident population, with adjustments made for hysterectomies, for each 2-, 3-, and 5-year screening period. Multivariate logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), which were adjusted for age group, place of residence, and socioeconomic disadvantage., Results: In 2010-2011, the 2-year participation rate was 55.7% (95% CI, 55.6%-55.9%) for non-Indigenous women and 33.5% (95% CI, 32.9%-34.1%) for Indigenous women; this represented a decrease from 2000-2001 (57.7% [95% CI, 57.6%-57.9%] and 35.3% [95% CI, 34.5%-36.1%], respectively). The difference between Indigenous and non-Indigenous women was greatest for those aged 45 to 49 years. The 3- and 5-year participation rates were higher within both groups, and the absolute differences between the 2 groups were larger. Significant interactions between the Indigenous status and the place of residence and socioeconomic disadvantage highlight that the Indigenous/non-Indigenous differential was evident in all places of residence except for very remote areas (OR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.95-1.02) and was greatest in the most affluent areas (OR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.24-0.27)., Conclusions: Indigenous Australian women participate less than non-Indigenous women, and this gap has not closed. These results provide important benchmarks for the new Australian cervical screening program commencing in 2017, which will provide opportunities to reduce inequities for Indigenous women and address longstanding data deficiencies in the collection of the Indigenous status. Cancer 2016;122:1560-9. © 2016 The Authors. Cancer published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Cancer Society., (© 2016 The Authors. Cancer published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Cancer Society.)

Objectives: We compared patterns of care, comorbidity, disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) and survival in Indigenous and non-Indigenous women with breast cancer in Queensland, Australia (1998-2004)., Methods: A cohort study of Indigenous (n = 110) and non-Indigenous women (n = 105), frequency matched on age and remoteness. We used Pearson's Chi-squared analysis to compare proportions, hazard models to assess survival differences and calculated disability-adjusted life years (DALYs)., Results: Indigenous women were more likely to be socially disadvantaged (43 vs. 20 %, p < 0.01) have comorbidity (42 vs. 18 % p < 0.01), and have regional spread or distant metastasis (metastasis, 51 vs. 36 %, p = 0.02) than non-Indigenous women; there was no difference in treatment patterns. More Indigenous women died in the follow-up period (p = 0.01). DALY's were 469 and 665 per 100,000 for Indigenous and non-Indigenous women, respectively, with a larger proportion of the burden attributed to premature death among the former (63 vs. 59 %)., Conclusions: Indigenous women with breast cancer received comparable treatment to their non-Indigenous counterparts. The higher proportion of DALYs related to early death in Indigenous women suggests higher fatality with breast cancer in this group. Later stage at diagnosis and higher comorbidity presence among Indigenous women reinforce the need for early detection and improved management of co-existing disease.

Objective: To evaluate the feasibility and reliability of record linkage of existing population-based data sets to determine Indigenous status among women receiving Pap smears. This method may allow for the first ever population measure of Australian Indigenous women's cervical screening participation rates., Setting/participants: A linked data set of women aged 20-69 in the Queensland Pap Smear Register (PSR; 1999-2011) and Queensland Cancer Registry (QCR; 1997-2010) formed the Initial Study Cohort. Two extracts (1995-2011) were taken from Queensland public hospitals data (Queensland Hospital Admitted Patient Data Collection, QHAPDC) for women, aged 20-69, who had ever been identified as Indigenous (extract 1) and had a diagnosis or procedure code relating to cervical cancer (extract 2). The Initial Study Cohort was linked to extract 1, and women with cervical cancer in the initial cohort were linked to extract 2., Outcome Measures: The proportion of women in the Initial Cohort who linked with the extracts (true -pairs) is reported, as well as the proportion of potential pairs that required clerical review. After assigning Indigenous status from QHAPDC to the PSR, the proportion of women identified as Indigenous was calculated using 4 algorithms, and compared., Results: There were 28,872 women (2.1%) from the Initial Study Cohort who matched to an ever Indigenous record in extract 1 (n=76,831). Women with cervical cancer in the Initial Study Cohort linked to 1385 (71%) records in extract 2. The proportion of Indigenous women ranged from 2.00% to 2.08% when using different algorithms to define Indigenous status. The Final Study Cohort included 1,372,823 women (PSR n=1,374,401; QCR n=1955), and 5,062,118 records., Conclusions: Indigenous status in Queensland cervical screening data was successfully ascertained through record linkage, allowing for the crucial assessment of the current cervical screening programme for Indigenous women. Our study highlights the need to include Indigenous status on Pap smear request and report forms in any renewed and redesigned cervical screening programme in Australia., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/)

Background: The cancer toll on Indigenous Australians is alarming with overall cancer incidence and mortality rates higher and the 5-year survival rate lower for Indigenous Australians compared with non-Indigenous Australians. Meanwhile, a range of approaches to health and illness-including both complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) and traditional Indigenous medicine (TM)-are used by cancer patients. Little work has focused on Indigenous cancer patients with regard to CAM/TM use. This article reports findings from the first examination of the prevalence and profile of TM/CAM use and users among Indigenous Australians with cancer., Methods: A structured questionnaire was administered via face-to-face interviews to 248 Indigenous Australian cancer patients diagnosed with a range of cancer types. All received treatment and were recruited from 1 of 4 large hospitals located in Queensland, Australia., Results: A substantial percentage (18.7%) of Indigenous cancer patients use at least one TM/CAM for support with their care, including traditional Indigenous therapy use (2.8%), visiting a traditional Indigenous practitioner (2.8%), CAM use (10.7%), visiting a CAM practitioner (2.4%), and attending relaxation/meditation classes (4.0%). Having a higher level of educational attainment was positively associated with CAM practitioner consultations (P = .015). Women with breast cancer were more likely to attend relaxation/meditation classes (P = .019). Men with genital organ cancer were more likely to use traditional Indigenous therapies (P = .017) and/or CAM (P = .002)., Conclusion: A substantial percentage of Indigenous Australians reported using TM/CAM for their cancer care, and there is a need to expand examination of this area of health care using large-scale studies focusing on in-depth specific cancer(s)., (© The Author(s) 2015.)

Objective: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women have a higher mortality rate due to gynecologic cancer compared with non-Indigenous women. For cervical cancer, Australian Indigenous women are less likely to survive 5 years following diagnoses than non-Indigenous women. This study investigates the factors associated with gynecologic cancer treatment and survival among Queensland indigenous and non-Indigenous women., Methods: Australian Indigenous women diagnosed with uterine, cervical, ovarian, or other gynecologic cancers during 1998-2004 in the public hospital system were included. They were frequency matched on age (±5 years), residential remoteness, and cancer type to a random sample of non-Indigenous women. One- and 5-year cancer-specific survival was examined according to Indigenous status using Cox proportional hazards regression., Results: Indigenous women (n = 137) compared with non-Indigenous women (n = 120) were less likely to be diagnosed with localized disease (49% vs 65%, P = 0.02) and had more comorbidities (52% vs 21%, P < 0.001). Indigenous women were less likely to receive any cancer treatment compared with non-Indigenous women (91% vs 98%, P = 0.01), although when excluding those with metastatic cancer, there was no significant difference in uptake of treatment (95% vs 91%, respectively, P = 0.31). Among those who did undergo treatment, there was no difference in time to treatment (median difference 0.5 days, P = 0.98). Gynecologic cancer-specific survival differences between Indigenous and non-Indigenous women were most prominent in the first year following diagnosis (hazard ratio [HR], 1.89; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.06-3.38) and were no longer significant 5 years after diagnosis (HR, 1.47 [95% CI, 0.97-2.25]). For cervical cancer, crude 1-year survival was poorer for Indigenous women compared with non-Indigenous women (HR, 2.46 [95% CI, 1.03-5.90]), but was no different when adjusted for stage and treatment of cancer (HR, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.45-2.24])., Conclusions: Improving the early diagnosis of cervical cancer in Indigenous women may increase cancer-specific survival in the year following diagnosis.

Objective: To examine the association between residential remoteness and stage of cancer at diagnosis, treatment uptake, and survival within the Australian Indigenous population., Design: Systematic review and matched retrospective cohort study., Setting: Australia., Participants: Systematic review: published papers that included a comparison of cancer stage at diagnosis, treatment uptake, mortality and/or survival for Indigenous people across remoteness categories were identified (n = 181). Fifteen papers (13 studies) were included in the review. Original analyses: new analyses were conducted using data from the Queensland Indigenous Cancer Study (QICS) comparing cancer stage at diagnosis, treatment uptake, and survival for Indigenous cancer patients living in rural/remote areas (n = 627, 66%) and urban areas (n = 329, 34%)., Main Outcome Measures: Systematic review: Papers were included if there were related to stage of disease at diagnosis, treatment, mortality and survival of cancer. Restrictions were not placed on the outcome measures reported (e.g. standardised mortality ratios versus crude mortality rates). Original analyses: Odds ratios (OR, 95%CI) were used to compare stage of disease and treatment uptake between the two remoteness groups. Treatment uptake (treated/not treated) was analysed using logistic regression analysis. Survival was analysed using Cox proportional hazards regression. The final multivariate models included stage of cancer at diagnosis and area-level socioeconomic status (SEIFA)., Results: Existing evidence of variation in cancer outcomes for Indigenous people in remote compared with metropolitan areas is limited. While no previous studies have reported on differences in cancer stage and treatment uptake by remoteness within the Indigenous population, the available evidence suggests Indigenous cancer patients are less likely to survive their cancer the further they live from urban centres. New analysis of QICS data indicates that Indigenous cancer patients in rural/remote Queensland were less likely to be diagnosed with localised disease and less likely to receive treatment for their cancer compared to their urban counterparts., Conclusion: More research is needed to fully understand geographic differentials in cancer outcomes within the Indigenous population. Knowing how geographical location interacts with Indigenous status can help to identify ways of improving cancer outcomes for Indigenous Australians., (© 2015 National Rural Health Alliance Inc.)

Objective: The purpose of this study is to explore the levels of interest among Indigenous people with cancer in identifying cancer risk in their family and seeking genetic counselling/testing., Design and Setting: A cross-sectional survey of Indigenous cancer patients recruited from four major treating hospitals in Queensland. Participants' family history of cancer and interest in genetic counselling/testing was sought using a structured questionnaire., Results: Overall, 73.0% of 252 participants reported having a family history of cancer; of those, 52.8% had at least one first-degree relative with cancer. A total of 68.3% of participants indicated concern about relatives being affected by cancer and 54.4% of participants indicated they would like to assess the cancer risk in their family with a specialist. Concern was associated with willingness to discuss the risk of cancer with a specialist (p<0.001)., Conclusions: Indigenous cancer patients do have a family history of cancer and appear willing to undergo genetic counselling/investigation. It is of great concern that this population could miss the benefits of the technological advances in health care, creating a much larger disparity in health outcomes., Implications: Health service providers should not assume that Indigenous cancer patients will not follow their recommendations when referred to genetic counselling/investigation services., (© 2014 Public Health Association of Australia.)

Background: Indigenous Australians have lower overall cancer survival which has not yet been fully explained. To address this knowledge deficit, we investigated the associations between comorbidities, cancer treatment and survival in Indigenous and non-Indigenous people in Queensland, Australia., Methods: A cohort study of 956 Indigenous and 869 non-Indigenous patients diagnosed with cancer during 1998-2004, frequency-matched on age, sex, remoteness of residence and cancer type, and treated in Queensland public hospitals. Survival after cancer diagnosis, and effect of stage, treatment, and comorbidities on survival were examined using Cox proportional hazard models., Results: Overall Indigenous people had more advanced cancer stage (p = 0.03), more comorbidities (p < 0.001), and received less cancer treatment (77% vs. 86%, p = 0.001). Among patients without comorbidities and social disadvantage, there was a lower uptake of treatment among Indigenous patients compared to non-Indigenous patients. For those who received treatment, time to commencement, duration and dose of treatment were comparable. Unadjusted cancer survival (HR = 1.30, 95% CI 1.15-1.48) and non-cancer survival (HR = 2.39, 95% CI 1.57-3.63) were lower in the Indigenous relative to non-Indigenous patients over the follow-up period. When adjusted for clinical factors, there was no difference in cancer-specific survival between the groups (HR = 1.10, 95% CI 0.96-1.27). One-year survival was lower for Indigenous people for all-causes of death (adjusted HR = 1.33, 95% CI 1.12-1.83)., Conclusion: In this study, Indigenous Australians received less cancer treatment, had more comorbidities and had more advanced cancer stage at diagnosis, factors which contribute to poorer cancer survival. Moreover, for patients with a more favourable distribution of such prognostic factors, Indigenous patients received less treatment overall relative to non-Indigenous patients. Personalised cancer care, which addresses the clinical, social and overall health requirements of Indigenous patients, may improve their cancer outcomes.

Objective: Indigenous children in developed countries are at increased risk of chronic suppurative lung disease (CSLD), including bronchiectasis. We evaluated sociodemographic and medical factors in indigenous children with CSLD/bronchiectasis from Australia, United States (US), and New Zealand (NZ)., Methods: Indigenous children aged 0.5-8 years with CSLD/bronchiectasis were enrolled from specialist clinics in Australia (n = 97), Alaska (n = 41), and NZ (n = 42) during 2004-2009, and followed for 1-5 years. Research staff administered standardized parent interviews, reviewed medical histories and performed physical examinations at enrollment., Results: Study children in all three countries had poor housing and sociodemographic circumstances at enrollment. Except for increased household crowding, most poverty indices in study participants were similar to those reported for their respective local indigenous populations. However, compared to their local indigenous populations, study children were more often born prematurely and had both an increased frequency and earlier onset of acute lower respiratory infections (ALRIs). Most (95%) study participants had prior ALRI hospitalizations and 77% reported a chronic cough in the past year. Significant differences (wheeze, ear disease and plumbed water) between countries were present., Discussion: Indigenous children with CSLD/bronchiectasis from three developed countries experience significant disparities in poverty indices in common with their respective indigenous population; however, household crowding, prematurity and early ALRIs were more common in study children than their local indigenous population. Addressing equity, especially by preventing prematurity and ALRIs, should reduce risk of CSLD/bronchiectasis in indigenous children., (© 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Purpose: This study assessed variation in childhood cancer survival by Indigenous status in Australia, and explored the effect of place of residence and socio-economic disadvantage on survival., Methods: All children diagnosed with cancer during 1997-2007 were identified through the Australian Pediatric Cancer Registry. Cox regression analysis was used to assess the adjusted differences in survival., Results: Overall, 5-years survival was 75.0 % for Indigenous children (n = 196) and 82.3 % for non-Indigenous children (n = 6,376, p = 0.008). Compared to other children, Indigenous cases had 1.36 times the risk of dying within 5 years of diagnosis after adjustments for rurality of residence, socio-economic disadvantage, cancer diagnostic group, and year of diagnosis (95 % CI 1.01-1.82). No significant survival differential was found for leukemias or tumors of the central nervous system; Indigenous children were 1.83 times more likely (95 % CI 1.22-2.74) than other children to die within 5 years from 'other tumors' (e.g., lymphomas, neuroblastoma). Among children who lived in 'remote/very remote/outer regional' areas, and among children with a subgroup of 'other tumors' that were staged, being Indigenous significantly increased the likelihood of death (HR = 1.69, 95 % CI 1.10-2.59 and HR = 2.99, 95 % CI 1.35-6.62, respectively); no significant differences by Indigenous status were seen among children with stage data missing., Conclusions: Differences in place of residence, socio-economic disadvantage, and cancer diagnostic group only partially explain the survival disadvantage of Indigenous children. Other reasons underlying the disparities in childhood cancer outcomes by Indigenous status are yet to be determined, but may involve factors such as differences in treatment.

Background: Indigenous children in high-income countries have a heavy burden of bronchiectasis unrelated to cystic fibrosis. We aimed to establish whether long-term azithromycin reduced pulmonary exacerbations in Indigenous children with non-cystic-fibrosis bronchiectasis or chronic suppurative lung disease., Methods: Between Nov 12, 2008, and Dec 23, 2010, we enrolled Indigenous Australian, Maori, and Pacific Island children aged 1-8 years with either bronchiectasis or chronic suppurative lung disease into a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trial. Eligible children had had at least one pulmonary exacerbation in the previous 12 months. Children were randomised (1:1 ratio, by computer-generated sequence with permuted block design, stratified by study site and exacerbation frequency [1-2 vs ≥3 episodes in the preceding 12 months]) to receive either azithromycin (30 mg/kg) or placebo once a week for up to 24 months. Allocation concealment was achieved by double-sealed, opaque envelopes; participants, caregivers, and study personnel were masked to assignment until after data analysis. The primary outcome was exacerbation (respiratory episodes treated with antibiotics) rate. Analysis of the primary endpoint was by intention to treat. At enrolment and at their final clinic visits, children had deep nasal swabs collected, which we analysed for antibiotic-resistant bacteria. This study is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry; ACTRN12610000383066., Findings: 45 children were assigned to azithromycin and 44 to placebo. The study was stopped early for feasibility reasons on Dec 31, 2011, thus children received the intervention for 12-24 months. The mean treatment duration was 20·7 months (SD 5·7), with a total of 902 child-months in the azithromycin group and 875 child-months in the placebo group. Compared with the placebo group, children receiving azithromycin had significantly lower exacerbation rates (incidence rate ratio 0·50; 95% CI 0·35-0·71; p<0·0001). However, children in the azithromycin group developed significantly higher carriage of azithromycin-resistant bacteria (19 of 41, 46%) than those receiving placebo (four of 37, 11%; p=0·002). The most common adverse events were non-pulmonary infections (71 of 112 events in the azithromycin group vs 132 of 209 events in the placebo group) and bronchiectasis-related events (episodes or investigations; 22 of 112 events in the azithromycin group vs 48 of 209 events in the placebo group); however, study drugs were well tolerated with no serious adverse events being attributed to the intervention., Interpretation: Once-weekly azithromycin for up to 24 months decreased pulmonary exacerbations in Indigenous children with non-cystic-fibrosis bronchiectasis or chronic suppurative lung disease. However, this strategy was also accompanied by increased carriage of azithromycin-resistant bacteria, the clinical consequences of which are uncertain, and will need careful monitoring and further study., Funding: National Health and Medical Research Council (Australia) and Health Research Council (New Zealand)., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Indigenous Australians experience more aggressive cancers and higher cancer mortality rates than other Australians. Cancer patients undergoing treatment are likely to access health services (e.g. social worker, cancer helpline, pain management services). To date Indigenous cancer patients' use of these services is limited. This paper describes the use of health services by Indigenous cancer patients., Methods: Indigenous cancer patients receiving treatment were recruited at four major Queensland public hospitals (Royal Brisbane Women's Hospital, Princess Alexandra, Cairns Base Hospital and Townsville Hospital). Participants were invited to complete a structured questionnaire during a face-to-face interview which sought information about their use of community and allied health services., Results: Of the 157 patients interviewed most were women (54.1%), of Aboriginal descent (73.9%), lived outer regional areas (40.1%) and had a mean age of 52.2 years. The most frequent cancer types were breast cancer (22.3%), blood related (14.0%), lung (12.1%) and gastroenterological (10.8%). More than half of the participants reported using at least one of the 'Indigenous Health Worker/Services' (76.4%), 'Allied Health Workers/Services' (72.6%) and 'Information Sources' (70.7%). Younger participants 19-39 years were more likely to use information sources (81.0%) than older participants who more commonly used community services (48.8%). The cancer patients used a median of three health services groups while receiving cancer treatment., Conclusions: Indigenous cancer patients used a range of health services whilst receiving treatment. Indigenous Health Workers/Services and Allied Health Workers/Services were the most commonly used services. However, there is a need for further systematic investigation into the health service utilization by Indigenous cancer patients.

Problem: Townsville Cancer Centre provides video-consultation (VC) services to patients in rural/remote regions of North Queensland in order to improve access to specialist cancer care. The experience and responses of indigenous patients using this service have not been studied. Our objective is to assess the level of satisfaction and the responses of Indigenous patients, their families and health workers (HWs) to VC and such teleoncology service., Design: Descriptive study, using semistructured interviews., Setting: Tertiary referral centre (Townsville Cancer Centre) and various rural and remote towns in Queensland., Key Measures for Improvement: Satisfaction levels of Indigenous patients, their family members and Indigenous HWs with various aspects of the teleoncology service., Lessons Learnt: Our evaluation suggests that teleoncology is an acceptable model of care for Indigenous patients, with high levels of satisfaction expressed from patients, families and HWs. Health professionals involved with providing this service need to be adaptive to the needs of individual patients and local communities in order to provide culturally appropriate care. Formal skills training for staff, effective communication between specialist and local HWs, and informed consent procedures are essential to maintain safety of practices. Strategies for change are: • Mandatory informed consent procedure for all patients offered with VC. • Formalised competency training for staff in skills essential to maintain safe practices in teleoncology. • Clear clinical documentation to facilitate improved communication in patient management between medical staff at main centre and distant sites. • Further efforts in promotion, education and support for staff to participate in telemedicine., (© 2012 The Authors. Australian Journal of Rural Health © National Rural Health Alliance Inc.)

Objective: To examine the differential in cancer survival between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people in Queensland in relation to time after diagnosis, remoteness and area-socioeconomic disadvantage., Design, Setting and Participants: Descriptive study of population-based data on all 150,059 Queensland residents of known Indigenous status aged 15 years and over who were diagnosed with a primary invasive cancer during 1997-2006., Main Outcome Measures: Hazard ratios for the categories of area-socioeconomic disadvantage, remoteness and Indigenous status, as well as conditional 5-year survival estimates., Results: Five-year survival was lower for Indigenous people diagnosed with cancer (50.3%; 95% CI, 47.8%-52.8%) compared with non-Indigenous people (61.9%; 95% CI, 61.7%-62.2%). There was no evidence that this differential varied by remoteness (P = 0.780) or area-socioeconomic disadvantage (P = 0.845). However, it did vary by time after diagnosis. In a time-varying survival model stratified by age, sex and cancer type, the 50% excess mortality in the first year (adjusted HR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.38-1.63) reduced to near unity at 2 years after diagnosis (HR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.78-1.35)., Conclusions: After a wide disparity in cancer survival in the first 2 years after diagnosis, Indigenous patients with cancer who survive these 2 years have a similar outlook to non-Indigenous patients. Access to services and socioeconomic factors are unlikely to be the main causes of the early lower Indigenous survival, as patterns were similar across remoteness and area-socioeconomic disadvantage. There is an urgent need to identify the factors leading to poor outcomes early after diagnosis among Indigenous people with cancer.

Background: International studies examining the association between the incidence of childhood cancer and characteristics of the area in which the patient lives have generally reported inconsistent patterns. Area-based differentials in childhood cancer throughout Australia have not been previously published at a national level., Procedure: Population-based information from the Australian Paediatric Cancer Registry was used to identify all children aged 0- to 14-years old diagnosed with invasive cancer or intracranial and intraspinal tumors of benign or uncertain behavior between 1996 and 2006. Age-standardized incidence rates per million children per year and the corresponding incidence rate ratios were calculated, categorized by remoteness of residence and an area-based index of socioeconomic disadvantage. Results were also stratified by the most common types of childhood cancer., Results: There was a significant, decreasing gradient in the incidence of childhood cancer as remoteness of residence increased. Children living in remote or very remote areas were 21% less likely to be diagnosed with cancer compared to children in major cities, mainly due to differences in the incidence of leukemias and lymphomas. This differential was no longer significant when only non-Indigenous children were considered. No clear relationship was found between incidence and socioeconomic status (SES) in contrast to similar earlier studies., Conclusions: The findings by remoteness of residence are consistent with the lower incidence rates of cancer that are typically associated with Indigenous Australians. There is also a suggestion that the etiological factors associated with childhood leukemia and SES may have altered over time., (Copyright © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Background: Overall, Indigenous Australians with cancer are diagnosed with more advanced disease, receive less cancer treatment and have poorer cancer survival than non-Indigenous Australians. The prognosis for Indigenous people with specific cancers varies however, and their prognosis for cancers of the head and neck is largely unknown. We therefore have compared clinical characteristics, treatment and survival between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people diagnosed with head and neck cancer in Queensland, Australia., Methods: Rates were based on a cohort of Indigenous people (n = 67), treated in public hospitals between 1998 and 2004 and frequency-matched on age and location to non-Indigenous cases (n = 62) also treated in the public health system. Data were obtained from hospital records and the National Death Index. We used Pearson's Chi-squared analysis to compare categorical data (proportions) and Cox proportional hazard models to assess survival differences., Results: There were no significant differences in socioeconomic status, stage at diagnosis or number and severity of comorbidities between Indigenous and non-Indigenous patients, although Indigenous patients were more likely to have diabetes. Indigenous people were significantly less likely to receive any cancer treatment (75% vs. 95%, P = 0.005) and, when cancer stage, socioeconomic status, comorbidities and cancer treatment were taken into account, they experienced greater risk of death from head and neck cancer (HR 1.88, 1.10, 3.22) and from all other causes (HR 5.83, 95% CI 1.09, 31.04)., Conclusion: These findings show for the first time that Indigenous Australians with head and neck cancer receive less cancer treatment and suggest survival disparity could be reduced if treatment uptake was improved. There is a need for a greater understanding of the reasons for such treatment and survival disparities, including the impact of the poorer overall health on cancer outcomes for Indigenous Australians.

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.

Objective: To examine cancer incidence and mortality in Indigenous Queenslanders., Design, Setting and Patients: Assessment of indirectly standardised incidence and mortality ratios for Indigenous Australians in Queensland diagnosed with cancer from 1997 to 2006, compared with the total Queensland population., Main Outcome Measures: Standardised incidence and mortality ratios., Results: Compared with the total Queensland population, Indigenous Queenslanders had a lower overall incidence of cancer (standardised incidence ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.75-0.82), but a higher incidence of some of the more fatal cancer types. Overall cancer mortality was higher (standardised mortality ratio, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.28-1.45) and similar to rates for Indigenous people in other Australian states., Conclusion: Cancer rates for Indigenous Queenslanders, a mostly urbanised population, are similar to rates for Indigenous Australians mostly living in remote areas.

Objective: To assess the outcomes of an education intervention for childhood asthma conducted by Australian Indigenous health care workers (IHCWs)., Design and Setting: Randomised controlled trial in a primary health care setting on Thursday Island and Horn Island, and in Bamaga, Torres Strait region of northern Australia, April 2005 to March 2007., Participants: 88 children, aged 1-17 years, with asthma diagnosed by a respiratory physician (intervention group, 35; control group, 53; 98% Indigenous children)., Interventions: Children were randomly allocated to: (i) three additional asthma education sessions with a trained IHCW, or (ii) no additional asthma education. Both groups were re-assessed at 12 months., Main Outcome Measures: Primary endpoint: number of unscheduled visits to hospital or a doctor caused by asthma exacerbation., Secondary Outcomes: measures of quality of life (QoL) and functional severity index; asthma knowledge and understanding of asthma action plans (AAPs); and school days missed because of wheezing., Results: The groups were comparable at baseline (except for asthma severity, which was adjusted for in the analysis). There were no significant differences in the primary outcome (number of unscheduled medical visits for asthma). School children in the intervention group missed fewer school days because of wheezing (100% < 7 days v 21% of those in the control group missed 7-14 days). Significantly more carers in the intervention group could answer questions about asthma medication, knew where their AAP was kept (84% v 56%), and were able to describe the plan (67% v 40%). In both the intervention and control groups (before-and-after comparison), there was a significantly reduced frequency of asthma exacerbations, as well as an improved QoL score and functional severity index, with no significant differences between the groups., Conclusions: A community-based asthma education program conducted by trained IHCWs improves some important asthma outcomes in Indigenous children with asthma., Trial Registration: Australian Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN012605000718640.

Objective: To compare survival of Indigenous and non-Indigenous lung cancer patients and to investigate any corresponding differences in stage, treatment and comorbidities., Design and Setting: Cohort study of 158 Indigenous and 152 non-Indigenous patients (frequency-matched on age, sex and rurality) diagnosed with lung cancer between 1996 and 2002 and treated in Queensland public hospitals., Main Outcome Measures: Survival after diagnosis of lung cancer; effects of stage at diagnosis, treatment, comorbidities and histological subtype on lung cancer-specific survival., Results: Survival of Indigenous lung cancer patients was significantly lower than that of non-Indigenous patients (median survival, 4.3 v 10.3 months; hazard ratio, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.14-1.92). Of 158 Indigenous patients, 72 (46%) received active treatment with chemotherapy, radiotherapy or surgery compared with 109 (72%) of the 152 non-Indigenous patients, and this treatment disparity remained after adjusting for histological subtype, stage at diagnosis, and comorbidities (adjusted risk ratio, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.53-0.73). The treatment disparity explained most of the survival deficit: the hazard ratio reduced to 1.10 (95% CI, 0.83-1.44) after inclusion of treatment variables in the proportional hazards survival model. The remaining survival deficit was explained by the higher prevalence of comorbidities among Indigenous cancer patients, mainly diabetes., Conclusion: Survival after a diagnosis of lung cancer is worse for Indigenous patients than for non-Indigenous patients, and differences in treatment between the two groups are mainly responsible.

Background: Indigenous Australians do not have the high standard of health that Australians in general have, and have worse outcomes for several diseases such as cancer. However, few comparative data exist to prove this disparity. We assessed differences in disease stage at cancer diagnosis, treatment, and survival between these two populations in Queensland., Methods: Indigenous people diagnosed with cancer between 1997 and 2002 were identified through the cancer registry and compared with randomly selected non-Indigenous patients who were frequency-matched for age, sex, place of residence, cancer site, and year of diagnosis. We obtained details of treatment from hospital medical records. We restricted analyses to patients treated in the public sector, since less than 5% of Indigenous cases were treated privately. We used multivariate models, mainly Cox regression analyses, to assess differences., Findings: We studied 815 Indigenous and 810 non-Indigenous cancer patients. Stage at diagnosis differed significantly (p=0.007): 47% of Indigenous versus 53% of non-Indigenous patients had localised cancer, 22% versus 21% had distant metastases, and 12% versus 7% had no information on stage in the medical chart examined. Comorbidities such as diabetes mellitus or chronic renal disease were more common in Indigenous patients. These individuals were less likely to have had treatment for cancer (surgery, chemotherapy, radiotherapy), and waited longer for surgery (hazard ratio=0.84, 95% CI 0.72-0.97) than non-Indigenous patients. After adjustment for stage at diagnosis, treatment, and comorbidities, non-Indigenous patients had better survival than Indigenous ones (hazard ratio=1.3, 95% CI 1.1-1.5)., Interpretation: Non-Indigenous cancer patients survive longer than Indigenous ones, even after adjustment for stage at diagnosis, cancer treatment, and greater comorbidity in Indigenous cases. We believe that better understanding of cultural differences in attitudes to cancer and its treatment could translate into meaningful public-health and clinical interventions to improve cancer survival in Indigenous Australians.

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of supplementation with zinc and vitamin A in Indigenous children hospitalised with acute lower respiratory infection (ALRI)., Design: Randomised controlled, 2-by-2 factorial trial of supplementation with zinc and vitamin A., Setting and Participants: 187 Indigenous children aged < 11 years hospitalised with 215 ALRI episodes at Alice Springs Hospital (April 2001 to July 2002)., Interventions: Vitamin A was administered on Days 1 and 5 of admission at a dose of 50 000 IU (infants under 12 months), or 100 000 IU; and zinc sulfate was administered daily for 5 days at a daily dose of 20 mg (infants under 12 months) or 40 mg., Main Outcome Measure: Time to clinical recovery from fever and tachypnoea, duration of hospitalisation, and readmission for ALRI within 120 days., Results: There was no clinical benefit of supplementation with vitamin A, zinc or the two combined, with no significant difference between zinc and no-zinc, vitamin A and no-vitamin A or zinc + vitamin A and placebo groups in time to resolution of fever or tachypnoea, or duration of hospitalisation. Instead, we found increased morbidity; children given zinc had increased risk of readmission for ALRI within 120 days (relative risk, 2.4; 95% CI, 1.003-6.1)., Conclusion: This study does not support the use of vitamin A or zinc supplementation in the management of ALRI requiring hospitalisation in Indigenous children living in remote areas. Even in populations with high rates of ALRI and poor living conditions, vitamin A and zinc therapy may not be useful. The effect of supplementation may depend on the prevalence of deficiency of these micronutrients in the population.

Background and Objective: Although the International Study of Asthma and Allergies in Childhood (ISAAC) questionnaire has been used in many countries and has been validated previously, it has not been used in Australian Indigenous communities. We endeavoured to assess its performance when administered in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities., Methods: In a cross-sectional study, we assessed the ISAAC's questionnaire when administered face-to-face in Indigenous communities in the Torres Strait region, Australia., Results: Comparing responses to the questionnaire with clinical assessment of 260 Indigenous children by a pediatric respiratory physician, sensitivity (87%) was high, but specificity (51%) and positive predictive value (33%) were low. Using a logistic regression model, we determined which questions were most useful in predicting a clinical diagnosis of asthma. Using a predictive equation, asthma was detected with 79% sensitivity and 77% specificity, and the calculated weighted estimate of asthma prevalence in the region was 16.3%., Conclusion: Our findings reveal that although the ISAAC questionnaire is a reasonably sensitive tool for both epidemiologic and clinical studies of asthma in Indigenous communities, its value is enhanced when used in conjunction with a predictive model. We have also shown that asthma is prevalent in the Torres Strait region.