Search

Additional file 1. Supplementary Information for: “Improving on estimates of the relative harm to health from using modern ENDS (vaping) compared to tobacco smoking”

Family history of colorectal cancer is a well-established and consistently strong risk factor for this disease. However, simply counting the number of affected relatives is an imprecise measure of colorectal cancer risk. We have reviewed current colorectal cancer screening guidelines from Australia, New Zealand, Canada, the US, and UK, and found that all, including the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council 2005 guidelines, assign people to risk categories largely based on age and rudimentary metrics of family history and recommend screening regimens. We claim that these guidelines are not sufficiently precise for a large proportion of people within these categories, as there is a substantial variation in colorectal cancer risk, even for people with the same family history, and even for people with a predisposing mutation in the same gene, or set of genes. If there was a tool to estimate individual colorectal cancer risk based on all known risk factors for the disease - personal and family history of cancer (including ages, ages at diagnoses, and genetic relationships across multiple generations), all known genetic factors (rare high-risk genetic mutations as well as common genetic variants), environmental factors and personal characteristics - then accurate prediction of future risk of colorectal cancer (personalised risk) may be possible. The development and utility of such a comprehensive risk prediction tool is important for appropriate personalised clinical management, including targeted colorectal cancer screening.

Background Infections due to antibiotic-resistant bacteria are threatening modern health care. However, estimating their incidence, complications, and attributable mortality is challenging. We aimed to estimate the burden of infections caused by antibiotic-resistant bacteria of public health concern in countries of the EU and European Economic Area (EEA) in 2015, measured in number of cases, attributable deaths, and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs). Methods We estimated the incidence of infections with 16 antibiotic resistance–bacterium combinations from European Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance Network (EARS-Net) 2015 data that was country-corrected for population coverage. We multiplied the number of bloodstream infections (BSIs) by a conversion factor derived from the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control point prevalence survey of health-care-associated infections in European acute care hospitals in 2011–12 to estimate the number of non-BSIs. We developed disease outcome models for five types of infection on the basis of systematic reviews of the literature. Findings From EARS-Net data collected between Jan 1, 2015, and Dec 31, 2015, we estimated 671 689 (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 583 148–763 966) infections with antibiotic-resistant bacteria, of which 63·5% (426 277 of 671 689) were associated with health care. These infections accounted for an estimated 33 110 (28 480–38 430) attributable deaths and 874 541 (768 837–989 068) DALYs. The burden for the EU and EEA was highest in infants (aged

Background: The Australian National Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (NBCSP) was introduced in 2006. When fully implemented, the programme will invite people aged 50 to 74 to complete an immunochemical faecal occult blood test (iFOBT) every 2 years. Methods and findings: To investigate colorectal cancer (CRC) screening occurring outside of the NBCSP, we classified participants (n = 2,480) in the Australasian Colorectal Cancer Family Registry (ACCFR) into 3 risk categories (average, moderately increased, and potentially high) based on CRC family history and assessed their screening practices according to national guidelines. We developed a microsimulation to compare hypothetical screening scenarios (70% and 100% uptake) to current participation levels (baseline) and evaluated clinical outcomes and cost for each risk category. The 2 main limitations of this study are as follows: first, the fact that our cost-effectiveness analysis was performed from a third-party payer perspective, which does not include indirect costs and results in overestimated cost-effectiveness ratios, and second, that our natural history model of CRC does not include polyp sojourn time, which determines the rate of cancerous transformation. Screening uptake was low across all family history risk categories (64%–56% reported no screening). For participants at average risk, 18% reported overscreening, while 37% of those in the highest risk categories screened according to guidelines. Higher screening levels would substantially reduce CRC mortality across all risk categories (95 to 305 fewer deaths per 100,000 persons in the 70% scenario versus baseline). For those at average risk, a fully implemented NBCSP represented the most cost-effective approach to prevent CRC deaths (AUS$13,000–16,000 per quality-adjusted life year [QALY]). For those at moderately increased risk, higher adherence to recommended screening was also highly cost-effective (AUS$19,000–24,000 per QALY). Conclusion: Investing in public health strategies to increase adherence to appropriate CRC screening will save lives and deliver high value for money.

BACKGROUND: Australia and New Zealand have the highest incidence rates of colorectal cancer worldwide. In Australia there is significant unwarranted variation in colorectal cancer screening due to low uptake of the immunochemical faecal occult blood test, poor identification of individuals at increased risk of colorectal cancer, and over-referral of individuals at average risk for colonoscopy. Our pre-trial research has developed a novel Colorectal cancer RISk Prediction (CRISP) tool, which could be used to implement precision screening in primary care. This paper describes the protocol for a phase II multi-site individually randomised controlled trial of the CRISP tool in primary care. METHODS: This trial aims to test whether a standardised consultation using the CRISP tool in general practice (the CRISP intervention) increases risk-appropriate colorectal cancer screening compared to control participants who receive standardised information on cancer prevention. Patients between 50 and 74 years old, attending an appointment with their general practitioner for any reason, will be invited into the trial. A total of 732 participants will be randomised to intervention or control arms using a computer-generated allocation sequence stratified by general practice. The primary outcome (risk-appropriate screening at 12 months) will be measured using baseline data for colorectal cancer risk and objective health service data to measure screening behaviour. Secondary outcomes will include participant cancer risk perception, anxiety, cancer worry, screening intentions and health service utilisation measured at 1, 6 and 12 months post randomisation. DISCUSSION: This trial tests a systematic approach to implementing risk-stratified colorectal cancer screening in primary care, based on an individual's absolute risk, using a state-of-the-art risk assessment tool. Trial results will be reported in 2020. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry, ACTRN12616001573448p . Registered on 14 November 2016.

Background Australia and New Zealand have the highest incidence rates of colorectal cancer worldwide. In Australia there is significant unwarranted variation in colorectal cancer screening due to low uptake of the immunochemical faecal occult blood test, poor identification of individuals at increased risk of colorectal cancer, and over-referral of individuals at average risk for colonoscopy. Our pre-trial research has developed a novel Colorectal cancer RISk Prediction (CRISP) tool, which could be used to implement precision screening in primary care. This paper describes the protocol for a phase II multi-site individually randomised controlled trial of the CRISP tool in primary care. Methods This trial aims to test whether a standardised consultation using the CRISP tool in general practice (the CRISP intervention) increases risk-appropriate colorectal cancer screening compared to control participants who receive standardised information on cancer prevention. Patients between 50 and 74 years old, attending an appointment with their general practitioner for any reason, will be invited into the trial. A total of 732 participants will be randomised to intervention or control arms using a computer-generated allocation sequence stratified by general practice. The primary outcome (risk-appropriate screening at 12 months) will be measured using baseline data for colorectal cancer risk and objective health service data to measure screening behaviour. Secondary outcomes will include participant cancer risk perception, anxiety, cancer worry, screening intentions and health service utilisation measured at 1, 6 and 12 months post randomisation. Discussion This trial tests a systematic approach to implementing risk-stratified colorectal cancer screening in primary care, based on an individual’s absolute risk, using a state-of-the-art risk assessment tool. Trial results will be reported in 2020. Trial registration Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry, ACTRN12616001573448p . Registered on 14 November 2016.