Smartphone applications for melanoma detection by community, patient and generalist clinician users: a review.

Smartphone health applications ('apps') are widely available but experts remain cautious about their utility and safety. We reviewed currently available apps for the detection of melanoma (July 2014), aimed at general community, patient and generalist clinician users. A proforma was used to extract and assess each app that met the inclusion criteria, and we undertook content analysis to evaluate their content and the evidence applied in their development. Thirty-nine apps were identified with the majority available only for Apple users. Over half (n = 22) provided information or education about melanoma, ultraviolet radiation exposure prevention advice, and skin self-examination strategies, mainly using the ABCDE (A, Asymmetry; B, Border; C, Colour; D, Diameter; E, Evolving) method. Half (n = 19) helped users take and store images of their skin lesions either for review by a dermatologist or for self-monitoring to identify change, an important predictor of melanoma; a similar number (n = 18) used reminders to help users monitor their skin lesions. A few (n = 9) offered expert review of images. Four apps provided a risk assessment to patients about the probability that a lesion was malignant or benign, and one app calculated users' future risk of melanoma. None of the apps appeared to have been validated for diagnostic accuracy or utility using established research methods. Smartphone apps for detecting melanoma by nonspecialist users have a range of functions including information, education, classification, risk assessment and monitoring change. Despite their potential usefulness, and while clinicians may choose to use apps that provide information to educate their patients, apps for melanoma detection require further validation of their utility and safety.This is the final published version. It first appeared at http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bjd.13665

Identifying people at higher risk of melanoma across the U.K.: a primary-care-based electronic survey

BACKGROUND: Melanoma incidence is rising rapidly worldwide among white populations. Defining higher-risk populations using risk prediction models may help targeted screening and early detection approaches. OBJECTIVES: To assess the feasibility of identifying people at higher risk of melanoma using the Williams self-assessed clinical risk estimation model in U.K. primary care. METHODS: We recruited participants from the waiting rooms of 22 general practices covering a total population of > 240 000 in three U.K. regions: Eastern England, North East Scotland and North Wales. Participants completed an electronic questionnaire using tablet computers. The main outcome was the mean melanoma risk score using the Williams melanoma risk model. RESULTS: Of 9004 people approached, 7742 (86%) completed the electronic questionnaire. The mean melanoma risk score for the 7566 eligible participants was 17·15 ± 8·51, with small regional differences [lower in England compared with Scotland (P = 0·001) and Wales (P < 0·001), mainly due to greater freckling and childhood sunburn among Scottish and Welsh participants]. After weighting to the age and sex distribution, different potential cut-offs would allow between 4% and 20% of the population to be identified as higher risk, and those groups would contain 30% and 60%, respectively of those likely to develop melanoma. CONCLUSIONS: Collecting data on the melanoma risk profile of the general population in U.K. primary care is both feasible and acceptable for patients in a general practice setting, and provides opportunities for new methods of real-time risk assessment and risk stratified cancer interventions

Protocol for the CHEST Australia trial: A phase II randomised controlled trial of an intervention to reduce time-to-consult with symptoms of lung cancer

© 2015, BMJ Publishing Group. All rights reserved. Introduction: Lung cancer is the most common cancer worldwide, with 1.3 million new cases diagnosed every year. It has one of the lowest survival outcomes of any cancer because over two-thirds of patients are diagnosed when curative treatment is not possible. International research has focused on screening and community interventions to promote earlier presentation to a healthcare provider to improve early lung cancer detection. This paper describes the protocol for a phase II, multisite, randomised controlled trial, for patients at increased risk of lung cancer in the primary care setting, to facilitate early presentation with symptoms of lung cancer. Methods/analysis: The intervention is based on a previous Scottish CHEST Trial that comprised of a primary-care nurse consultation to discuss and implement a self-help manual, followed by selfmonitoring reminders to improve symptom appraisal and encourage help-seeking in patients at increased risk of lung cancer. We aim to recruit 550 patients from two Australian states: Western Australia and Victoria. Patients will be randomised to the Intervention (a health consultation involving a self-help manual, monthly prompts and spirometry) or Control (spirometry followed by usual care). Eligible participants are long-term smokers with at least 20 pack years, aged 55 and over, including ex-smokers if their cessation date was less than 15 years ago. The primary outcome is consultation rate for respiratory symptoms. Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval has been obtained from The University of Western Australia's Human Research Ethics Committee (RA/4/1/6018) and The University of Melbourne Human Research Committee (1 441 433). A summary of the results will be disseminated to participants and we plan to publish the main trial outcomes in a single paper. Further publications are anticipated after further data analysis. Findings will be presented at national and international conferences from late 2016. Trial registration number: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry ACTRN 1261300039 3752

Symptoms and patient factors associated with diagnostic intervals for pancreatic cancer (SYMPTOM pancreatic study): a prospective cohort study

This is the final version. Available on open access from Elsevier via the DOI in this recordBackground Pancreatic cancer is the tenth most common cancer in the UK; however, outcomes are poor, in part due to late diagnosis. We aimed to identify symptoms and other clinical and sociodemographic factors associated with pancreatic cancer diagnosis and diagnostic intervals. Methods We did this prospective cohort study at seven hospitals in two regions in England. We recruited participants aged 40 years or older who were referred for suspicion of pancreatic cancer. Data were collected by use of a patient questionnaire and primary care and hospital records. Descriptive and regression analyses were done to examine associations between symptoms and patient factors with the total diagnostic interval (time from onset of the first symptom to the date of diagnosis), comprising patient interval (time from first symptom to first presentation) and health system interval (time from first presentation to diagnosis). Findings We recruited 391 participants between Jan 1, 2011, and Dec 31, 2014 (24% response rate). 119 (30%) participants were diagnosed with pancreatic cancer (41 [34%] had metastatic disease), 47 (12%) with other cancers, and 225 (58%) with no cancer. 212 (54%) patients had multiple first symptoms whereas 161 (41%) patients had a solitary first symptom. In this referred population, no initial symptoms were reported more frequently by patients with cancer than by those with no cancer. Several subsequent symptoms predicted pancreatic cancer: jaundice (51 [49%] of 105 patients with pancreatic cancer vs 25 [12%] of 211 patients with no cancer; p<0·0001), fatigue (48/95 [51%] vs 40/155 [26%]; p=0·0001), change in bowel habit (36/87 [41%] vs 28/175 [16%]; p<0·0001), weight loss (55/100 [55%] vs 41/184 [22%]; p<0·0001), and decreased appetite (41/86 [48%] vs 41/156 [26%]; p=0·0011). There was no difference in any interval between patients with pancreatic cancer and those with no cancer (total diagnostic interval: median 117 days [IQR 57–234] vs 131 days [IQR 66–284]; p=0·32; patient interval 18 days [0–37] vs 15 days [1–62]; p=0·22; health system interval 76 days [28–161] vs 79 days [30–156]; p=0·68). Total diagnostic intervals were shorter when jaundice (hazard ratio [HR] 1·38, 95% CI 1·07–1·78; p=0·013) and decreased appetite (1·42, 1·11–1·82; p=0·0058) were reported as symptoms, and longer in patients presenting with indigestion (0·71, 0·56–0·89; p=0·0033), back pain (0·77, 0·59–0·99; p=0·040), diabetes (0·71, 0·52–0·97; p=0·029), and self-reported anxiety or depression, or both (0·67, 0·49–0·91; p=0·011). Health system intervals were likewise longer with indigestion (0·74, 0·58–0·95; p=0·0018), back pain (0·76, 0·58–0·99; p=0·044), diabetes (0·63, 0·45–0·89; p=0·0082), and self-reported anxiety or depression, or both (0·63, 0·46–0·88; p=0·0064), but were shorter with male sex (1·41, 1·1–1·81; p=0·0072) and decreased appetite (1·56, 1·19–2·06; p=0·0015). Weight loss was associated with longer patient intervals (HR 0·69, 95% CI 0·54–0·89; p=0·0047). Interpretation Although we identified no initial symptoms that differentiated people diagnosed with pancreatic cancer from those without pancreatic cancer, key additional symptoms might signal the disease. Health-care professionals should be vigilant to the possibility of pancreatic cancer in patients with evolving gastrointestinal and systemic symptoms, particularly in those with diabetes or mental health comorbidities. Funding National Institute for Health Research and Pancreatic Cancer Action.National Institute for Health Research (NIHR

Presentations to general practice before a cancer diagnosis in Victoria: a cross-sectional survey

OBJECTIVE: To assess variations in the number of general practitioner visits preceding a cancer diagnosis, and in the length of the interval between the patient first suspecting a problem and their seeing a hospital specialist. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Analysis of data provided to the Cancer Patient Experience Survey (CPES; survey response rate, 37.7%) by 1552 patients with one of 19 cancer types and treated in one of five Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre hospitals, 1 October 2012 - 30 April 2013. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who had had three or more GP consultations about cancer-related health problems before being referred to hospital. The secondary outcome was the interval between the patient first suspecting a problem and their seeing a hospital specialist. RESULTS: 34% of the patients included in the final analyses (426 of 1248) had visited a GP at least three times before referral to a hospital doctor. The odds ratios (reference: rectal cancer; adjusted for age, sex, language spoken at home, and socio-economic disadvantage index score) varied according to cancer type, being highest for pancreatic cancer (3.2; 95% CI, 1.02-9.9), thyroid cancer (2.5; 95% CI, 0.9-6.6), vulval cancer (2.5; 95% CI, 0.7-8.7) and multiple myeloma (2.4; 95% CI, 1.1-5.5), and lowest for patients with breast cancer (0.4; 95% CI, 0.2-0.8), cervical cancer (0.5; 95% CI, 0.1-2.1), endometrial cancer (0.5; 95% CI, 0.2-1.4) or melanoma (0.7; 95% CI, 0.3-1.5). Cancer type also affected the duration of the interval from symptom onset to seeing a hospital doctor; it took at least 3 months for more than one-third of patients with prostate or colon cancer to see a hospital doctor. CONCLUSION: Certain cancer types were more frequently associated with multiple GP visits, suggesting they are more challenging to recognise early. In Victoria, longer intervals from the first symptoms to seeing a hospital doctor for colon or prostate cancer may reflect poorer community symptom awareness, later GP referral, or limited access to gastroenterology and urology services.Our study was funded by the Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre. Georgios Lyratzopoulos is supported by a Cancer Research UK Clinician Scientist Fellowship (A18180)

Evaluation of the benefits, harms and cost‐effectiveness of potential alternatives to iFOBT testing for colorectal cancer screening in Australia

The Australian National Bowel Cancer Screening Program (NBCSP) will fully roll‐out 2‐yearly screening using the immunochemical Faecal Occult Blood Testing (iFOBT) in people aged 50 to 74 years by 2020. In this study, we aimed to estimate the comparative health benefits, harms, and cost‐effectiveness of screening with iFOBT, versus other potential alternative or adjunctive technologies. A comprehensive validated microsimulation model, Policy1‐Bowel, was used to simulate a total of 13 screening approaches involving use of iFOBT, colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy, computed tomographic colonography (CTC), faecal DNA (fDNA) and plasma DNA (pDNA), in people aged 50 to 74 years. All strategies were evaluated in three scenarios: (i) perfect adherence, (ii) high (but imperfect) adherence, and (iii) low adherence. When assuming perfect adherence, the most effective strategies involved using iFOBT (annually, or biennially with/without adjunct sigmoidoscopy either at 50, or at 54, 64 and 74 years for individuals with negative iFOBT), or colonoscopy (10‐yearly, or once‐off at 50 years combined with biennial iFOBT). Colorectal cancer incidence (mortality) reductions for these strategies were 51–67(74–80)% in comparison with no screening; 2‐yearly iFOBT screening (i.e. the NBCSP) would be associated with reductions of 51(74)%. Only 2‐yearly iFOBT screening was found to be cost‐effective in all scenarios in context of an indicative willingness‐to‐pay threshold of A$50,000/life‐year saved (LYS); this strategy was associated with an incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio of A$2,984/LYS–A$5,981/LYS (depending on adherence). The fully rolled‐out NBCSP is highly cost‐effective, and is also one of the most effective approaches for bowel cancer screening in Australia

The Improving Rural Cancer Outcomes Trial: a cluster-randomised controlled trial of a complex intervention to reduce time to diagnosis in rural cancer patients in Western Australia.

BACKGROUND: Rural Australians have poorer survival for most common cancers, due partially to later diagnosis. Internationally, several initiatives to improve cancer outcomes have focused on earlier presentation to healthcare and timely diagnosis. We aimed to measure the effect of community-based symptom awareness and general practice-based educational interventions on the time to diagnosis in rural patients presenting with breast, prostate, colorectal or lung cancer in Western Australia. METHODS: 2 × 2 factorial cluster randomised controlled trial. Community Intervention: cancer symptom awareness campaign tailored for rural Australians. GP intervention: resource card with symptom risk assessment charts and local cancer referral pathways implemented through multiple academic detailing visits. Trial Area A received the community symptom awareness and Trial Area B acted as the community campaign control region. Within both Trial Areas general practices were randomised to the GP intervention or control. PRIMARY OUTCOME: total diagnostic interval (TDI). RESULTS: 1358 people with incident breast, prostate, colorectal or lung cancer were recruited. There were no significant differences in the median or ln mean TDI at either intervention level (community intervention vs control: median TDI 107.5 vs 92 days; ln mean difference 0.08 95% CI -0.06-0.23 P=0.27; GP intervention vs control: median TDI 97 vs 96.5 days; ln mean difference 0.004 95% CI -0.18-0.19 P=0.99). There were no significant differences in the TDI when analysed by factorial design, tumour group or sub-intervals of the TDI. CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest trial to test the effect of community campaign or GP interventions on timeliness of cancer diagnosis. We found no effect of either intervention. This may reflect limited dose of the interventions, or the limited duration of follow-up. Alternatively, these interventions do not have a measurable effect on time to cancer diagnosis

A Common Origin for Neutrino Anarchy and Charged Hierarchies

The generation of exponential flavor hierarchies from extra-dimensional wavefunction overlaps is re-examined. We find, surprisingly, that coexistence of anarchic fermion mass matrices with such hierarchies is intrinsic and natural to this setting. The salient features of charged fermion and neutrino masses and mixings can thereby be captured within a single framework. Both Dirac and Majorana neutrinos can be realized. The minimal phenomenological consequences are discussed, including the need for a fundamental scale far above the weak scale to adequately suppress flavor-changing neutral currents. Two broad scenarios for stabilizing this electroweak hierarchy are studied, warped compactification and supersymmetry. In warped compactifications and "Flavorful Supersymmetry," where non-trivial flavor structure appears in the new TeV physics, Dirac neutrinos are strongly favored over Majorana by lepton flavor violation tests. We argue that this is part of a more general result for flavor-sensitive TeV-scale physics. Our scenario strongly suggests that the supersymmetric flavor problem is not solved locally in the extra dimension, but rather at or below the compactification scale. In the supersymmetric Dirac case, we discuss how the appearance of light right-handed sneutrinos considerably alters the physics of dark matter.Comment: Comparison with the Froggatt-Nielsen mechanism omitted. Some clarifications added. This is the version accepted by PRL with a longer abstract