Medicine (RMH) - Research Publications

Permanent URI for this collection

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 10 of 13
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Commentary: Pivoting during a pandemic: developing a new recruitment model for a randomised controlled trial in response to COVID-19
    Milton, S ; McIntosh, J ; Boyd, L ; Karnchanachari, N ; Macrae, F ; Emery, JD (BMC, 2021-09-08)
    BACKGROUND: Many non-COVID-19 trials were disrupted in 2020 and either struggled to recruit participants or stopped recruiting altogether. In December 2019, just before the pandemic, we were awarded a grant to conduct a randomised controlled trial, the Should I Take Aspirin? (SITA) trial, in Victoria, the Australian state most heavily affected by COVID-19 during 2020. MAIN BODY: We originally modelled the SITA trial recruitment method on previous trials where participants were approached and recruited in general practice waiting rooms. COVID-19 changed the way general practices worked, with a significant increase in telehealth consultations and restrictions on in person waiting room attendance. This prompted us to adapt our recruitment methods to this new environment to reduce potential risk to participants and staff, whilst minimising any recruitment bias. We designed a novel teletrial model, which involved calling participants prior to their general practitioner appointments to check their eligibility. We delivered the trial both virtually and face-to-face with similar overall recruitment rates to our previous studies. CONCLUSION: We developed an effective teletrial model which allowed us to complete recruitment at a high rate. The teletrial model is now being used in our other primary care trials as we continue to face the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    An RCT of a decision aid to support informed choices about taking aspirin to prevent colorectal cancer and other chronic diseases: a study protocol for the SITA (Should I Take Aspirin?) trial
    Milton, S ; McIntosh, J ; Macrae, F ; Chondros, P ; Trevena, L ; Jenkins, M ; Walter, FM ; Taylor, N ; Boyd, L ; Saya, S ; Karnchanachari, N ; Novy, K ; Forbes, C ; Gutierrez, JM ; Broun, K ; Whitburn, S ; McGill, S ; Fishman, G ; Marker, J ; Shub, M ; Emery, J (BMC, 2021-07-15)
    BACKGROUND: Australian guidelines recommend that all people aged 50-70 years old actively consider taking daily low-dose aspirin (100-300 mg per day) for 2.5 to 5 years to reduce their risk of colorectal cancer (CRC). Despite the change of national CRC prevention guidelines, there has been no active implementation of the guidelines into clinical practice. We aim to test the efficacy of a health consultation and decision aid, using a novel expected frequency tree (EFT) to present the benefits and harms of low dose aspirin prior to a general practice consultation with patients aged 50-70 years, on informed decision-making and uptake of aspirin. METHODS: Approximately five to seven general practices in Victoria, Australia, will be recruited to participate. Patients 50-70 years old, attending an appointment with their general practitioner (GP) for any reason, will be invited to participate in the trial. Two hundred fifty-eight eligible participants will be randomly allocated 1:1 to intervention or active control arms using a computer-generated allocation sequence stratified by general practice, sex, and mode of trial delivery (face-to-face or teletrial). There are two co-primary outcomes: informed decision-making at 1-month post randomisation, measured by the Multi-dimensional Measure of Informed Choice (MMIC), and self-reported daily use of aspirin at 6 months. Secondary outcomes include decisional conflict at 1-month and other behavioural changes to reduce CRC risk at both time points. DISCUSSION: This trial will test the efficacy of novel methods for implementing national guidelines to support informed decision-making about taking aspirin in 50-70-year-olds to reduce the risk of CRC and other chronic diseases. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) ACTRN12620001003965 . Registered on 10 October 2020.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Evaluation of the benefits, harms and cost-effectiveness of potential alternatives to iFOBT testing for colorectal cancer screening in Australia
    Lew, J-B ; St John, DJB ; Macrae, FA ; Emery, JD ; Ee, HC ; Jenkins, MA ; He, E ; Grogan, P ; Caruana, M ; Sarfati, D ; Greuter, MJE ; Coupe, VMH ; Canfell, K (WILEY, 2018-07-15)
    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.
  • Item
    No Preview Available
    Challenges in data linkage - experiences from an upper gastrointestinal cancer data linkage study
    Khan, N ; Ioannou, L ; Pilgrim, C ; Earnest, A ; Maharaj, A ; Croagh, D ; Liew, D ; Atwood, D ; Holland, J ; Philip, J ; Emery, J ; Ijzerman, M ; Brown, W ; Zalcberg, J ; Evans, S (OXFORD UNIV PRESS, 2021-09)
    Abstract Background Linked, population-level data is valuable for mapping patterns of care and evaluating health service utilisation, particularly in difficult-to-reach populations. Upper gastrointestinal (UGI) cancers have a dismal prognosis, creating difficulties engaging patients in research. The utility of a linked dataset in this population is of high value. Methods Key objectives included identifying the operational and feasibility issues associated with linking Australian state-based administrative and registry data for understanding health service utilisation in UGI cancers. Datasets pertained to hospital admissions, radiotherapy, community health, primary care, palliative care, Medicare and Pharmaceutical Benefits Schedule’s and UGI cancers. Results From a logistical perspective, data access request approval processes varied, with some requiring consent to be sought from individual services contributing data. The availability of unique person-level identifying information varied widely. Additionally, the time period of data capture differed between and within datasets, limiting the quality of the linked data. Significant costs were associated with linking with primary care and Medicare and Pharmaceutical Benefits Schedule’s. Federal dataset linkage required at least a one-year waiting period. Conclusions Whilst in theory data linkage is a powerful mechanism for obtaining population-level data, in reality, there are many logistical and financial barriers to linking multiple datasets. Consequently, critical data, which has the potential to inform policy and improve patient outcomes, cannot be procured. Key messages Logistical and financial challenges are associated with linking administrative and registry datasets for research, limiting the potential of data linkage.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Clinicians' opinions on recommending aspirin to prevent colorectal cancer to Australians aged 50-70 years: a qualitative study
    Milton, S ; McIntosh, J ; Yogaparan, T ; Alphonse, P ; Saya, S ; Karnchanachari, N ; Nguyen, P ; Lau, P ; Macrae, F ; Emery, J (BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP, 2021-02)
    OBJECTIVES: Australian guidelines recommend all adults aged 50-70 years old without existing contraindications consider taking low-dose aspirin (100-300 mg per day) for at least 2.5 years to reduce their risk of developing colorectal cancer. We aimed to explore clinicians' practices, knowledge, opinions, and barriers and facilitators to the implementation of these new guidelines. METHODS: Semistructured interviews were conducted with clinicians to whom the new guidelines may be applicable (Familial Cancer Clinic staff (geneticists, oncologists and genetic counsellors), gastroenterologists, pharmacists and general practitioners (GPs)). The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) underpinned the development of the interview guide. Coding was inductive and themes were developed through consensus between the authors. Emerging themes were mapped onto the CFIR domains: characteristics of the intervention, outer setting, inner setting, individual characteristics and process. RESULTS: Sixty-four interviews were completed between March and October 2019. Aspirin was viewed as a safe and cheap option for cancer prevention. GPs were considered by all clinicians as the most important health professionals for implementation of the guidelines. Cancer Council Australia, as a trusted organisation, was an important facilitator to guideline adoption. Uncertainty about aspirin dosage and perceived strength of the evidence, precise wording of the recommendation, previous changes to guidelines about aspirin and conflicting findings from trials in older populations were barriers to implementation. CONCLUSION: Widespread adoption of these new guidelines could be an important strategy to reduce the incidence of bowel cancer, but this will require more active implementation strategies focused on primary care and the wider community. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12620001003965).
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    The Impact of a Comprehensive Risk Prediction Model for Colorectal Cancer on a Population Screening Program
    Saya, S ; Emery, JD ; Dowty, JG ; McIntosh, JG ; Winship, IM ; Jenkins, MA (OXFORD UNIV PRESS, 2020-10-01)
    Background In many countries, population colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is based on age and family history, though more precise risk prediction could better target screening. We examined the impact of a CRC risk prediction model (incorporating age, sex, lifestyle, genomic, and family history factors) to target screening under several feasible screening scenarios. Methods We estimated the model’s predicted CRC risk distribution in the Australian population. Predicted CRC risks were categorized into screening recommendations under 3 proposed scenarios to compare with current recommendations: 1) highly tailored, 2) 3 risk categories, and 3) 4 sex-specific risk categories. Under each scenario, for 35- to 74-year-olds, we calculated the number of CRC screens by immunochemical fecal occult blood testing (iFOBT) and colonoscopy and the proportion of predicted CRCs over 10 years in each screening group. Results Currently, 1.1% of 35- to 74-year-olds are recommended screening colonoscopy and 56.2% iFOBT, and 5.7% and 83.2% of CRCs over 10 years were predicted to occur in these groups, respectively. For the scenarios, 1) colonoscopy was recommended to 8.1% and iFOBT to 37.5%, with 36.1% and 50.1% of CRCs in each group; 2) colonoscopy was recommended to 2.4% and iFOBT to 56.0%, with 13.2% and 76.9% of cancers in each group; and 3) colonoscopy was recommended to 5.0% and iFOBT to 54.2%, with 24.5% and 66.5% of cancers in each group. Conclusions A highly tailored CRC screening scenario results in many fewer screens but more cancers in those unscreened. Category-based scenarios may provide a good balance between number of screens and cancers detected and are simpler to implement.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    A randomised phase II trial to examine feasibility of standardised, early palliative (STEP) care for patients with advanced cancer and their families [ACTRN12617000534381]: a research protocol
    Philip, J ; Collins, A ; Le, B ; Sundararajan, V ; Brand, C ; Hanson, S ; Emery, J ; Hudson, P ; Mileshkin, L ; Ganiatsas, S (BMC, 2019-03-14)
    BACKGROUND: Current international consensus is that 'early' referral to palliative care services improves cancer patient and family carer outcomes; however, in practice, these referrals are not routine. Uncertainty about the 'best time' to refer has been highlighted as contributing to care variation. Previous work has identified clear disease-specific transition points in the cancer illness which heralded subsequent poor prognosis (less than 6 months) and which, we contest, represent times when palliative care should be routinely introduced as a standardised approach, if not already in place, to maximise patient and carer benefit. This protocol details a trial that will test the feasibility of a novel standardised outpatient model of early palliative care [Standardised Early Palliative Care (STEP Care)] for advanced cancer patients and their family carers, with referrals occurring at the defined disease-specific evidence-based transition points.The aims of this study are to (1) determine the feasibility of conducting a definitive phase 3 randomised trial, which evaluates effectiveness of STEP Care (compared to usual best practice cancer care) for patients with advanced breast or prostate cancer or high grade glioma; (2) examine preliminary efficacy of STEP Care on patient/family caregiver outcomes, including quality of life, mood, symptoms, illness understanding and overall survival; (3) document the impact of STEP Care on quality of end-of-life care; and (4) evaluate the timing of palliative care introduction according to patients, families and health care professionals. METHODS: Phase 2, multicenter, open-label, parallel-arm, randomised controlled trial (RCT) of STEP Care plus standard best practice cancer care versus standard best practice cancer care alone. DISCUSSION: The research will test the feasibility of standardised palliative care introduction based on illness transitions and provide guidance on subsequent development of phase 3 studies of integration. This will directly address the current uncertainty about palliative care timing. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12617000534381.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Pathways to a cancer-free future: a protocol for modelled evaluations to minimise the future burden of colorectal cancer in Australia
    Feletto, E ; Lew, J-B ; Worthington, J ; He, E ; Caruana, M ; Butler, K ; Hui, H ; Taylor, N ; Banks, E ; Barclay, K ; Broun, K ; Butt, A ; Carter, R ; Cuff, J ; Dessaix, A ; Ee, H ; Emery, J ; Frayling, IM ; Grogan, P ; Holden, C ; Horn, C ; Jenkins, MA ; Kench, JG ; Laaksonen, MA ; Leggett, B ; Mitchell, G ; Morris, S ; Parkinson, B ; St John, DJ ; Taoube, L ; Tucker, K ; Wakefield, MA ; Ward, RL ; Win, AK ; Worthley, DL ; Armstrong, BK ; Macrae, FA ; Canfell, K (BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP, 2020)
    INTRODUCTION: With almost 50% of cases preventable and the Australian National Bowel Cancer Screening Program in place, colorectal cancer (CRC) is a prime candidate for investment to reduce the cancer burden. The challenge is determining effective ways to reduce morbidity and mortality and their implementation through policy and practice. Pathways-Bowel is a multistage programme that aims to identify best-value investment in CRC control by integrating expert and end-user engagement; relevant evidence; modelled interventions to guide future investment; and policy-driven implementation of interventions using evidence-based methods. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Pathways-Bowel is an iterative work programme incorporating a calibrated and validated CRC natural history model for Australia (Policy1-Bowel) and assessing the health and cost outcomes and resource use of targeted interventions. Experts help identify and prioritise modelled evaluations of changing trends and interventions and critically assess results to advise on their real-world applicability. Where appropriate the results are used to support public policy change and make the case for optimal investment in specific CRC control interventions. Fourteen high-priority evaluations have been modelled or planned, including evaluations of CRC outcomes from the changing prevalence of modifiable exposures, including smoking and body fatness; potential benefits of daily aspirin intake as chemoprevention; increasing CRC incidence in people aged <50 years; increasing screening participation in the general and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander populations; alternative screening technologies and modalities; and changes to follow-up surveillance protocols. Pathways-Bowel is a unique, comprehensive approach to evaluating CRC control; no prior body of work has assessed the relative benefits of a variety of interventions across CRC development and progression to produce a list of best-value investments. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval was not required as human participants were not involved. Findings are reported in a series of papers in peer-reviewed journals and presented at fora to engage the community and policymakers.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Pathways to a cancer-free future: a protocol for modelled evaluations to minimise the future burden of colorectal cancer in Australia
    Feletto, E ; Lew, J-B ; Worthington, J ; He, E ; Caruana, M ; Butler, K ; Hui, H ; Taylor, N ; Banks, E ; Barclay, K ; Broun, K ; Butt, A ; Carter, R ; Cuff, J ; Dessaix, A ; Ee, H ; Emery, J ; Frayling, IM ; Grogan, P ; Holden, C ; Horn, C ; Jenkins, MA ; Kench, JG ; Laaksonen, MA ; Leggett, B ; Mitchell, G ; Morris, S ; Parkinson, B ; St John, DJ ; Taoube, L ; Tucker, K ; Wakefield, MA ; Ward, RL ; Win, AK ; Worthley, DL ; Armstrong, BK ; Macrae, FA ; Canfell, K (BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP, 2020-01-01)
    INTRODUCTION: With almost 50% of cases preventable and the Australian National Bowel Cancer Screening Program in place, colorectal cancer (CRC) is a prime candidate for investment to reduce the cancer burden. The challenge is determining effective ways to reduce morbidity and mortality and their implementation through policy and practice. Pathways-Bowel is a multistage programme that aims to identify best-value investment in CRC control by integrating expert and end-user engagement; relevant evidence; modelled interventions to guide future investment; and policy-driven implementation of interventions using evidence-based methods. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Pathways-Bowel is an iterative work programme incorporating a calibrated and validated CRC natural history model for Australia (Policy1-Bowel) and assessing the health and cost outcomes and resource use of targeted interventions. Experts help identify and prioritise modelled evaluations of changing trends and interventions and critically assess results to advise on their real-world applicability. Where appropriate the results are used to support public policy change and make the case for optimal investment in specific CRC control interventions. Fourteen high-priority evaluations have been modelled or planned, including evaluations of CRC outcomes from the changing prevalence of modifiable exposures, including smoking and body fatness; potential benefits of daily aspirin intake as chemoprevention; increasing CRC incidence in people aged <50 years; increasing screening participation in the general and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander populations; alternative screening technologies and modalities; and changes to follow-up surveillance protocols. Pathways-Bowel is a unique, comprehensive approach to evaluating CRC control; no prior body of work has assessed the relative benefits of a variety of interventions across CRC development and progression to produce a list of best-value investments. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval was not required as human participants were not involved. Findings are reported in a series of papers in peer-reviewed journals and presented at fora to engage the community and policymakers.
  • Item
    No Preview Available
    Ability of known susceptibility SNPs to predict colorectal cancer risk for persons with and without a family history
    Jenkins, MA ; Win, AK ; Dowty, JG ; MacInnis, RJ ; Makalic, E ; Schmidt, DF ; Dite, GS ; Kapuscinski, M ; Clendenning, M ; Rosty, C ; Winship, IM ; Emery, JD ; Saya, S ; Macrae, FA ; Ahnen, DJ ; Duggan, D ; Figueiredo, JC ; Lindor, NM ; Haile, RW ; Potter, JD ; Cotterchio, M ; Gallinger, S ; Newcomb, PA ; Buchanan, DD ; Casey, G ; Hopper, JL (SPRINGER, 2019-10)
    Before SNP-based risk can be incorporated in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, the ability of these SNPs to estimate CRC risk for persons with and without a family history of CRC, and the screening implications need to be determined. We estimated the association with CRC of a 45 SNP-based risk using 1181 cases and 999 controls, and its correlation with CRC risk predicted from detailed family history. We estimated the predicted change in the distribution across predefined risk categories, and implications for recommended screening commencement age, from adding SNP-based risk to family history. The inter-quintile risk ratio for colorectal cancer risk of the SNP-based risk was 3.28 (95% CI 2.54-4.22). SNP-based and family history-based risks were not correlated (r = 0.02). For persons with no first-degree relatives with CRC, screening could commence 4 years earlier for women (5 years for men) in the highest quintile of SNP-based risk. For persons with two first-degree relatives with CRC, screening could commence 16 years earlier for men and women in the highest quintile, and 7 years earlier for the lowest quintile. This 45 SNP panel in conjunction with family history, can identify people who could benefit from earlier screening. Risk reclassification by 45 SNPs could inform targeted screening for CRC prevention, particularly in clinical genetics settings when mutations in high-risk genes cannot be identified. Yet to be determined is cost-effectiveness, resources requirements, community, patient and clinician acceptance, and feasibility with potentially ethical, legal and insurance implications.