Australia's National Bowel Cancer Screening Program: does it work for Indigenous Australians?

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Despite a lower incidence of bowel cancer overall, Indigenous Australians are more likely to be diagnosed at an advanced stage when prognosis is poor. Bowel cancer screening is an effective means of reducing incidence and mortality from bowel cancer through early identification and prompt treatment. In 2006, Australia began rolling out a population-based National Bowel Cancer Screening Program (NBCSP) using the Faecal Occult Blood Test. Initial evaluation of the program revealed substantial disparities in bowel cancer screening uptake with Indigenous Australians significantly less likely to participate in screening than the non-Indigenous population.</p> <p>This paper critically reviews characteristics of the program which may contribute to the discrepancy in screening uptake, and includes an analysis of organisational, structural, and socio-cultural barriers that play a part in the poorer participation of Indigenous and other disadvantaged and minority groups.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A search was undertaken of peer-reviewed journal articles, government reports, and other grey literature using electronic databases and citation snowballing. Articles were critically evaluated for relevance to themes that addressed the research questions.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The NBCSP is not reaching many Indigenous Australians in the target group, with factors contributing to sub-optimal participation including how participants are selected, the way the screening kit is distributed, the nature of the test and comprehensiveness of its contents, cultural perceptions of cancer and prevailing low levels of knowledge and awareness of bowel cancer and the importance of screening.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Our findings suggest that the population-based approach to implementing bowel cancer screening to the Australian population unintentionally excludes vulnerable minorities, particularly Indigenous and other culturally and linguistically diverse groups. This potentially contributes to exacerbating the already widening disparities in cancer outcomes that exist among Indigenous Australians. Modifications to the program are recommended to facilitate access and participation by Indigenous and other minority populations. Further research is also needed to understand the needs and social and cultural sensitivities of these groups around cancer screening and inform alternative approaches to bowel cancer screening.</p

The management of acute venous thromboembolism in clinical practice. Results from the European PREFER in VTE Registry

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in Europe. Data from real-world registries are necessary, as clinical trials do not represent the full spectrum of VTE patients seen in clinical practice. We aimed to document the epidemiology, management and outcomes of VTE using data from a large, observational database. PREFER in VTE was an international, non-interventional disease registry conducted between January 2013 and July 2015 in primary and secondary care across seven European countries. Consecutive patients with acute VTE were documented and followed up over 12 months. PREFER in VTE included 3,455 patients with a mean age of 60.8 ± 17.0 years. Overall, 53.0 % were male. The majority of patients were assessed in the hospital setting as inpatients or outpatients (78.5 %). The diagnosis was deep-vein thrombosis (DVT) in 59.5 % and pulmonary embolism (PE) in 40.5 %. The most common comorbidities were the various types of cardiovascular disease (excluding hypertension; 45.5 %), hypertension (42.3 %) and dyslipidaemia (21.1 %). Following the index VTE, a large proportion of patients received initial therapy with heparin (73.2 %), almost half received a vitamin K antagonist (48.7 %) and nearly a quarter received a DOAC (24.5 %). Almost a quarter of all presentations were for recurrent VTE, with &gt;80 % of previous episodes having occurred more than 12 months prior to baseline. In conclusion, PREFER in VTE has provided contemporary insights into VTE patients and their real-world management, including their baseline characteristics, risk factors, disease history, symptoms and signs, initial therapy and outcomes

Diagnosis and risk stratification in patients with anti-RNP autoimmunity

INTRODUCTION: Anti-RNP autoantibodies occur either in Mixed Connective Tissue Disease (MCTD) (with a frequently favorable prognosis), or in systemic lupus (SLE) cases with aggressive major organ disease. It is uncertain how to assess for the risk of severe disease in anti-RNP+ patients. METHODS: Following IRB-approved protocols, clinical data and blood was collected from patients with known or suspected anti-RNP autoimmunity and normal controls in a cohort study. Samples were screened for parameters of immune activation. Groups were compared based on clinical diagnoses, disease classification criteria, disease activity, and specific end-organ clinical manifestations. RESULTS: 97% of patients satisfying Alarcon-Segovia MCTD criteria also met SLICC SLE criteria, while 47% of the anti-RNP+ SLE patients also met MCTD criteria. Among SLICC SLE patients, MCTD criteria were associated with reduced rates of renal disease (Odds Ratio 4.3, 95% confidence interval 1.3–14.0), increased rates of Raynaud’s Phenomenon (OR 3.5, 95% c.i. 1.3–9.5), and increased serum BCMA, TACI, and TNFa levels. Circulating immune markers and markers of Type I Interferon activation were not effective at distinguishing clinical subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Among anti-RNP patients, the question of MCTD versus SLE is not either/or: most MCTD patients also have lupus. MCTD classification criteria (but not a broad set of immune markers) distinguish a subset of SLE patients at reduced risk for renal disease