Academic literature on the topic 'Skin Cancer Victoria'

Background: The aim of this presentation is to provide an update on the economic evaluation of the Australian SunSmart program as well as outline the cost of skin cancer treatment to the Victorian public hospital system. This follows the publication of two recently released published economic evaluations that discusses the potential effects of skin cancer prevention inventions. Aim: 1. To highlight the cost effectiveness of skin cancer prevention in Australia 2. To highlight the costs of skin cancer treatment in the Victorian public hospital system 3. To provide strong evidence to inform governments of the value of skin cancer prevention to reduce the costs of treatment in future years. Methods: Program cost was compared with cost savings to determine the investment return of the program. In a separate study, a prevalence-based cost approach was undertaken in public hospitals in Victoria. Costs were estimated for inpatient admissions, using state service statistics, and outpatient services based on attendance at three hospitals in 2012-13. Cost-effectiveness for prevention was estimated from 'observed vs expected' analysis, together with program expenditure data. Results: With additional $AUD 0.16 ($USD 0.12) per capita investment into skin cancer prevention across Australia from 2011 to 2030, an upgraded SunSmart Program would prevent 45,000 melanoma and 95,000 NMSC cases. Potential savings in future healthcare costs were estimated at $200 million, while productivity gains were significant. A future upgraded SunSmart Program was predicted to be cost-saving from the funder perspective, with an investment return of $3.20 for every additional dollar the Australian governments/funding bodies invested into the program. In relation to the costs to the Victorian public hospital system, total annual costs were $48 million to $56 million. Skin cancer treatment in public hospitals ($9.20∼$10.39 per head/year) was 30-times current public funding in skin cancer prevention ($0.37 per head/year). Conclusion: The study demonstrates the strong economic credentials of the SunSmart Program, with a strong economic rationale for increased investment. Increased funding for skin cancer prevention must be kept high on the public health agenda. This would also have the dual benefit of enabling hospitals to redirect resources to nonpreventable conditions.

The Anti-Cancer Council of Victoria has been running sun protection programs for more than 20 years: Slip! Slop! Slap! from 1980 to 1988 and SunSmart from 1988 to the present. The Victorian Health Promotion Foundation has provided funding for the SunSmart program for the past 13 years. These programs have played an important role in changing the whole society’s approach to the sun and have resulted in marked reductions in sun exposure. This article describes the social, political, economic, and organizational context within which these programs developed. Then 10 areas are discussed that illustrate a critical aspect of the development and implementation of this successful systemwide health promotion program. These areas focus on key aspects of the context within which the program operates and on issues that derive from the experience of implementing program strategies. In summary, the success of the two programs is described as having been built on two key foundations: the vital integration of research and evaluation, on one hand, and a strong basis of consistency and continuity, on the other.

e18812 Background: Australian oncologists reported dramatic decreases in cancer referrals during the pandemic. As real time data were difficult to acquire, Cancer Australia used surrogate measures to infer where reductions in medical services occurred. We analysed data available through the Medicare Benefits Schedule (MBS), a list of the medical services and professional attendances subsidised by the Australian Government, for the five highest incidence cancers: breast, colorectal, lung, prostate, and skin cancers. Methods: We identified over 500 MBS item codes for diagnostic and treatment procedures for malignancies and pre-cancerous conditions. Item codes were categorised into analysis groups based on cancer type and/or similarities in type of service. Data were examined at national and jurisdictional levels for 2020 to determine reductions during the initial COVID-19 period and to monitor subsequent recovery. Data were compared to 2019 to account for normal seasonal variation. Results: Australia’s first wave of the pandemic ran from March to May, and a second wave in the state of Victoria alone ran from July to September 2020. We observed notable reductions across all diagnostic and surgical procedure groups examined, with initial reductions observed between March and April for diagnostic procedures, and a one-month delay for surgical procedures, between April and May. Some services showed an initial recovery in May, with many showing partial or full recovery by June. For some groups, analyses showed sustained reductions over the 12-month period. While COVID-19 case numbers were greater during the second wave, the impact on services was less pronounced, likely owing to more refined policy approaches to managing health system and workforce capacity. There was further recovery by September for some but not all services. Similar patterns of change were observed across all Australian states and territories, with some variation by jurisdiction. Conclusions: The pandemic has impacted the delivery of cancer care. Any potential delays in diagnoses and treatment due to these reductions in services may lead to more advanced cancer stage at diagnosis and poorer patient outcomes including recurrence and survival. Impact of COVID-19 on selected cancer services in Australia in 2020.[Table: see text]

BACKGROUND: There are few reports of the use of the lidocaine 5% patch (L5%P) for neuropathic pain (NP) in the cancer patient. Within a comprehensive cancer centre, L5%P has been prescribed by the Pain and Palliative Care Service (Peter McCallum Cancer Centre, East Melbourne, Victoria, Australia) for selected patients with NP since 2001.OBJECTIVE: To retrospectively audit the use of L5%P within a comprehensive cancer centre.METHODS: All L5%P prescriptions up to January 2009 were listed and patient medical records were searched to determine neuropathic pain syndromes treated, the presence of allodynia, previous analgesic medications, treatment duration and outcome.RESULTS: L5%P was prescribed for 97 patients, most frequently for persistent postsurgical NP (n=26), postherpetic neuralgia (n=24) and cancer-related NP (n=18). Six patients had no history of cancer and two patients never applied L5%P. Reviewers classed L5%P analgesic efficacy as ‘potent’ in 38% of patients with postherpetic neuralgia, 35% of patients with postsurgical pain, 27% of patients with NP after other treatments for cancer and 12% of patients with NP attributed to cancer alone. Allodynia featured in at least 60% of patients. Where allodynia was present, the efficacy of L5%P was assessed as ‘potent’ in 38% and ‘partial’ in 24%, but ‘ineffective’ in 26%, and ‘causing worse pain’ in 3.4% of patients. Treatment duration extended longer than one month in 52 patients, longer than two months in 29 patients and longer than one year in 13 patients. Therapy was ceased due to skin irritation in seven patients. The outcomes in relation to other reports are discussed.CONCLUSION: The present data support trials of L5%P for cancer patients with NP syndromes associated with allodynia.

Hair-coloring products include permanent, semi-permanent and temporary dyes that vary by chemical formulation and are distinguished mainly by how long they last. Domestic temporary hair dyes, such as fuchsin basic, basic red 2 and Victoria blue B, are especially popular because of their cheapness and facile applications. Despite numerous studies on the relationship between permanent hair dyes and disease, there are few studies addressing whether these domestic temporary hair dyes are associated with an increased cancer risk. Herein, to ascertain the bio-safety of these temporary hair dyes, we comparatively studied their percutaneous absorption, hemolytic effect and cytotoxic effects in this paper. Furthermore, to better understand the risk of these dyes after penetrating the skin, experimental and theoretical studies were carried out examining the interactions between the dyes and serum albumins as well as calf thymus (CT)-DNA. The results showed that these domestic temporary hair dyes are cytotoxic with regard to human red blood cells and NIH/3T3 cell lines, due to intense interactions with bovine serum albumin (BSA)/DNA. We conclude that the temporary hair dyes may have risk to human health, and those who use them should be aware of their potential toxic effects.

Abstract Background: Whole breast irradiation (WBI) after a positive sentinel lymph node biopsy (SNB) is recommended to be treated in the supine position to facilitate inclusion of the low axilla with “high tangents” when regional nodal irradiation is not planned. Treatment in the prone position has several advantages over supine positioning including minimizing heart and lung doses for many and decreased skin toxicity for larger breasted women. We hypothesized that, using three dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT), the low axilla can be safely and adequately treated in the prone position with minimal toxicity and good outcomes. Methods: We identified patients who underwent post lumpectomy whole breast and low axilla irradiation in the prone position using 3DCRT from 2014 to 2020. Standard 3DCRT treatment planning included delineation of surgical cavity, breast and low axillary clinical target volumes (CTV) with 5 mm expansion to planning target volumes (PTV). The “low axilla” CTV was generally defined as the level I axilla according to the RTOG Breast Cancer Atlas. Dosimetric data for both targets and organs at risk (OARs) was extracted from approved treatment plans’ dose-volume histograms (DVHs). Toxicity and cancer outcomes were collected from the electronic medical records. Descriptive statistical analysis was performed. Results: Seventy patients were identified. Median age was 61 years (range 34-87), median body mass index (BMI) was 30.4 kg/m2 (range 22.1-49.1), and 88.6% (N=62) had hormone sensitive, HER2 negative breast cancer. The median tumor size was 1.35 cm (range 0.07-4.5cm). For 56 patients (80.0%), a SNB was done with median of 2 (range 1-7) sentinel nodes removed - 19 (34%) with macro-metastasis (median size 4 mm, range 2.2-13mm), 21 (37.5%) with micrometastasis, and 16 (28.6%) with isolated tumor cells. Three patients had an additional node with isolated tumor cells. Thirteen (18.6%) were Nx (no nodal evaluation) and 1 had an unsuccessful SLNB with no lymph nodes obtained. Hypofractionation was used in 97.1% (N=68): 4256 cGy in 16 fractions (N=44, 62.8%) or 4000 cGy in 15 fractions (N=24, 34.3%). All targets were covered adequately. The median V95/V90 of the PTVbreast_eval, PTVlump_eval, and PTVAx were 96%/98.3% (range 76.2/91.9% - 99.6/101.4%), 100.1%/101.2% (range 87.6/94.9%-102.8/103.3%), and 95.3%/97.5% (range 82.4/91.6%-100.4/101.7%) respectively. The mean heart dose for all patients was 83.5 cGy; 82.7 cGy for right-sided tumors and 83.8 cGy for left-sided tumors. The median V16 of the ipsilateral lung was 4.25% (range 0.2 - 11.3%). Overall, toxicity was low with no grade 3 or higher events. For acute toxicity, most patients (N=54, 77.1%) reported grade 1 fatigue and had either grade 1 (N=52, 74.2%) or grade 2 (N=15, 21.4%) dermatitis. For late toxicity, 14 patients (20%) were referred to physical therapy after radiation, 7 (10%) for range of motion, 5 (7%) for arm lymphedema evaluation and 4 (6%) for other reasons. With a median follow-up of 18.5 months (range 0-63 months), 1 patient recurred both locally and regionally (1.4%) and one other patient recurred distantly. Conclusions: Patients with a positive SNB or are Nx who are recommended to have post-lumpectomy whole breast and low axilla irradiation can be safely and adequately treated in the prone position using 3DCRT with minimal toxicity and good outcomes. Citation Format: Victoria Doss, Erin Healy, Sasha Beyer, Sachin R. Jhawar, Jose G. Bazan, Julia White. Radiation of the low axilla in the prone position [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2021 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2021 Dec 7-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P3-19-17.

Background: Epidemiological data surrounding non-melanomatous skin cancer (NMSC) is highly variable, in part due to the lack of government cancer registries. Several studies employ the use of Medical Australia (MA) rebate data in assessing such trends, the validity of which has not been studied in the past. Conversely, melanoma skin cancer is a notifiable disease, and thus, MA and cancer registry data is readily available. The aim of the current study is to assess the use of MA for epidemiological measures for skin cancers, by using melanoma as a disease sample.Methods: Following ethics approval, data from MA and Victorian Cancer Registry (VCR) from 2004-2008 were extracted. Incidence of MA and VCR unique melanoma cases were compared and stratified by age and local government area (LGA). Regression and a paired-samples t-test were performed.Results:During the study period; 15,150 and 13,886 unique melanoma patients were identified through VCR and MA data sources respectively. An outlier in the >80­ year age group was noted between MA and VCR data. When stratified by age, significant correlation between MA and VCR was observed for all patients (gradient 0.91,R²= 0.936) and following exclusion of >80 patients (gradient 0.96,R²= 0.995). When stratified by LGA, a high degree of observation was observed for all patients (gradient 0.94,R²= 0.977) and following exclusion of >80 patients (gradient 0.996,R²= 0.975).Conclusion:Despite the inclusion of outlier data groups, acceptable correlation between MA and VCR melanoma data was observed, suggesting that MA may be suitable for assessing epidemiological trends. Such principals may be used to validate the use of MA data for similar calculations assessing NMSC trends.

BackgroundThe association between systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and cancer risk is unclear.ObjectivesDescribe the association between systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and the risk of cancer development and subsequent 5-year mortality in Western Australia (WA).MethodsPopulation-level cohort study of SLE patients (n=2,111) and general population comparators (n=21,110) hospitalised between 1980–2014. SLE patients (identified by ICD-9-CM: 695.4, 710.0, and ICD-10-AM: L93.0, M32.0) were nearest matched (10:1) for age, sex, Aboriginality, and temporality. Follow-up was from timezero (index SLE hospitalisation) to cancer development, death or 31/12/2014. Using longitudinal linked health data, we determined the risk of cancer development and subsequent 5-year mortality between SLE patients and comparators with Cox proportional hazards regression models.ResultsSLE patients had similar multivariate-adjusted risk (aHR 1.03, 95%CI 0.93, 1.15; P=0.583) of cancer development. Cancer development risk was higher in SLE patients <40 years old (aHR 1.51), and from 1980-1999 (aHR 1.28). SLE patients had higher risk of developing cancer of the oropharynx (aHR 2.13); vulvo-vagina (aHR 3.22); skin (aHR 1.20), and, lymphatic and haematopoietic tissues (aHR 1.78), all P<0.05. SLE patients had reduced risk of breast cancer (aHR 0.64). After cancer development, SLE patients had increased risk of 5-year mortality (aHR 1.16, 95%CI 1.01, 1.33); highest in 40-49 years old (aHR 1.89), and in those with skin (aHR 1.65) or prostate cancer (aHR 4.74).ConclusionHospitalised SLE patients had increased risk of multiple cancers, but a reduced risk of breast cancer. Following cancer development, SLE patients had increased risk of 5-year mortality. Together there is scope to improve cancer prevention and surveillance in SLE patients.AcknowledgementsThe authors wish to thank the staff at the Western Australian Data Linkage Branch and Emergency Department Data Collection, Hospital Morbidity Data Collection, Western Australian Cancer Registry, and Death Registrations. The authors wish to thank the Australian Co-ordinating Registry, the Registries of Births, Deaths and Marriages, the Coroners, the National Coronial Information System and the Victorian Department of Justice and Community Safety for enabling COD URF data to be used for this publication.Disclosure of InterestsNone declared

Overview Skin cancer prevention is a component of the new Cancer Plan 2022–27, which guides the work of the Cancer Institute NSW. To lessen the impact of skin cancer on the community, the Cancer Institute NSW works closely with the NSW Skin Cancer Prevention Advisory Committee, comprising governmental and non-governmental organisation representatives, to develop and implement the NSW Skin Cancer Prevention Strategy. Primary Health Networks and primary care providers are seen as important stakeholders in this work. To guide improvements in skin cancer prevention and inform the development of the next NSW Skin Cancer Prevention Strategy, an up-to-date review of the evidence on the effectiveness and feasibility of skin cancer prevention activities in primary care is required. A research team led by the Daffodil Centre, a joint venture between the University of Sydney and Cancer Council NSW, was contracted to undertake an Evidence Check review to address the questions below. Evidence Check questions This Evidence Check aimed to address the following questions: Question 1: What skin cancer primary prevention activities can be effectively administered in primary care settings? As part of this, identify the key components of such messages, strategies, programs or initiatives that have been effectively implemented and their feasibility in the NSW/Australian context. Question 2: What are the main barriers and enablers for primary care providers in delivering skin cancer primary prevention activities within their setting? Summary of methods The research team conducted a detailed analysis of the published and grey literature, based on a comprehensive search. We developed the search strategy in consultation with a medical librarian at the University of Sydney and the Cancer Institute NSW team, and implemented it across the databases Embase, MEDLINE, PsycInfo, Scopus, Cochrane Central and CINAHL. Results were exported and uploaded to Covidence for screening and further selection. The search strategy was designed according to the SPIDER tool for Qualitative and Mixed-Methods Evidence Synthesis, which is a systematic strategy for searching qualitative and mixed-methods research studies. The SPIDER tool facilitates rigour in research by defining key elements of non-quantitative research questions. We included peer-reviewed and grey literature that included skin cancer primary prevention strategies/ interventions/ techniques/ programs within primary care settings, e.g. involving general practitioners and primary care nurses. The literature was limited to publications since 2014, and for studies or programs conducted in Australia, the UK, New Zealand, Canada, Ireland, Western Europe and Scandinavia. We also included relevant systematic reviews and evidence syntheses based on a range of international evidence where also relevant to the Australian context. To address Question 1, about the effectiveness of skin cancer prevention activities in primary care settings, we summarised findings from the Evidence Check according to different skin cancer prevention activities. To address Question 2, about the barriers and enablers of skin cancer prevention activities in primary care settings, we summarised findings according to the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). The CFIR is a framework for identifying important implementation considerations for novel interventions in healthcare settings and provides a practical guide for systematically assessing potential barriers and facilitators in preparation for implementing a new activity or program. We assessed study quality using the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) levels of evidence. Key findings We identified 25 peer-reviewed journal articles that met the eligibility criteria and we included these in the Evidence Check. Eight of the studies were conducted in Australia, six in the UK, and the others elsewhere (mainly other European countries). In addition, the grey literature search identified four relevant guidelines, 12 education/training resources, two Cancer Care pathways, two position statements, three reports and five other resources that we included in the Evidence Check. Question 1 (related to effectiveness) We categorised the studies into different types of skin cancer prevention activities: behavioural counselling (n=3); risk assessment and delivering risk-tailored information (n=10); new technologies for early detection and accompanying prevention advice (n=4); and education and training programs for general practitioners (GPs) and primary care nurses regarding skin cancer prevention (n=3). There was good evidence that behavioural counselling interventions can result in a small improvement in sun protection behaviours among adults with fair skin types (defined as ivory or pale skin, light hair and eye colour, freckles, or those who sunburn easily), which would include the majority of Australians. It was found that clinicians play an important role in counselling patients about sun-protective behaviours, and recommended tailoring messages to the age and demographics of target groups (e.g. high-risk groups) to have maximal influence on behaviours. Several web-based melanoma risk prediction tools are now available in Australia, mainly designed for health professionals to identify patients’ risk of a new or subsequent primary melanoma and guide discussions with patients about primary prevention and early detection. Intervention studies have demonstrated that use of these melanoma risk prediction tools is feasible and acceptable to participants in primary care settings, and there is some evidence, including from Australian studies, that using these risk prediction tools to tailor primary prevention and early detection messages can improve sun-related behaviours. Some studies examined novel technologies, such as apps, to support early detection through skin examinations, including a very limited focus on the provision of preventive advice. These novel technologies are still largely in the research domain rather than recommended for routine use but provide a potential future opportunity to incorporate more primary prevention tailored advice. There are a number of online short courses available for primary healthcare professionals specifically focusing on skin cancer prevention. Most education and training programs for GPs and primary care nurses in the field of skin cancer focus on treatment and early detection, though some programs have specifically incorporated primary prevention education and training. A notable example is the Dermoscopy for Victorian General Practice Program, in which 93% of participating GPs reported that they had increased preventive information provided to high-risk patients and during skin examinations. Question 2 (related to barriers and enablers) Key enablers of performing skin cancer prevention activities in primary care settings included: • Easy access and availability of guidelines and point-of-care tools and resources • A fit with existing workflows and systems, so there is minimal disruption to flow of care • Easy-to-understand patient information • Using the waiting room for collection of risk assessment information on an electronic device such as an iPad/tablet where possible • Pairing with early detection activities • Sharing of successful programs across jurisdictions. Key barriers to performing skin cancer prevention activities in primary care settings included: • Unclear requirements and lack of confidence (self-efficacy) about prevention counselling • Limited availability of GP services especially in regional and remote areas • Competing demands, low priority, lack of time • Lack of incentives.