Burden of 30 cancers among men: Global statistics in 2022 and projections for 2050 using population-based estimates.

BACKGROUND: Men exhibit higher prevalence of modifiable risk factors, such as smoking and alcohol consumption, leading to greater cancer incidence and lower survival rates. Comprehensive evidence on global cancer burden among men, including disparities by age group and country, is sparse. To address this, the authors analyzed 30 cancer types among men in 2022, with projections estimated for 2050. METHODS: The 2022 GLOBOCAN estimates were used to describe cancer statistics for men in 185 countries/territories worldwide. Mortality-to-incidence ratios (MIRs) were calculated by dividing age-standardized mortality rates by incidence rates. RESULTS: In 2022, a high MIR (indicating poor survival) was observed among older men (aged 65 years and older; 61%) for rare cancer types (pancreatic cancer, 91%) and in countries with low a Human Development Index (HDI; 74%). Between 2022 and 2050, cancer cases are projected to increase from 10.3 million to 19 million (≥84%). Deaths are projected to increase from 5.4 million to 10.5 million (≥93%), with a greater than two-fold increase among men aged 65 years and older (≥117%) and for low-HDI and medium-HDI countries/territories (≥160%). Cancer cases and deaths are projected to increase among working-age groups (≥39%) and very-high-HDI countries/territories (≥50%). CONCLUSIONS: Substantial disparities in cancer cases and deaths were observed among men in 2022, and these are projected to widen by 2050. Strengthening health infrastructure, enhancing workforce quality and access, fostering national and international collaborations, and promoting universal health coverage are crucial to reducing cancer disparities and ensuring cancer equity among men globally.

A qualitative exploration of the pathway to diagnosis and treatment of cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck with perineural spread.

BACKGROUND: Perineural spread (PNS) is associated with a poor prognosis in cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (cSCCHN). Hence, investigating facilitators and barriers of early diagnosis and treatment of PNS in cSCCHN may improve outcomes. METHODS: Patients were recruited from an institutional database. Semi-structured interviews were conducted according to the Model of Pathways to Treatment. Thematic analysis was based on the four main intervals in the framework using a data-driven analytical method. RESULTS: Seventeen participants were interviewed. Facilitators included patients' past experiences, symptom progression, trust in healthcare professionals (HCPs), and capacity to leverage relationships. Barriers included difficult diagnoses, limited access to cancer services, lack of care coordination, and lack of awareness of PNS among primary health care providers. CONCLUSION: These findings emphasise the complexity early diagnosis and treatment of PNS. Interventions like clinical practice guidelines, education for HCPs, and telehealth could facilitate timely detection and management.

This year sees an opportunity for long-needed oral health reforms. Cancer patients, in particular, stand to benefit.

The long-standing divide in Australia between medicine and dentistry has left many with inequitable access to dental care. People with oral cancer, in particular, may have few options for dental rehabilitation after cancer treatment, even with private health insurance. However, 2024 could finally see health care reforms that address these inequities, with significant momentum building in Australia. In this Perspective, we argue for a national approach to reforms that incorporate aspects of preventive health, primary health care, Medicare Benefits Schedule item review, and the value of Private Health Insurance rebates for dental care.

Models of survivorship care in patients with head and neck cancer in regional, rural, and remote areas: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: Rural people with head and neck cancers (HNC) are likely to experience poorer health outcomes due to limited access to health services, so many benefit from models of care that account for rurality. The aim of this review was to synthesise literature on models of care in this population. METHODS: Studies were identified using seven databases: PubMed, PsycINFO, Scopus, Embase, CINAHL, Medline, and Web of Science. Studies that tested or reported a model of care in rural HNC survivors were included. Data on characteristics and outcomes of the models were synthesised according to the domains in the Cancer Survivorship Care Quality Framework, and study quality was appraised. RESULTS: Seventeen articles were included. Eight were randomised controlled trials (seven with a control group and one single-arm study). Three models were delivered online, nine via telehealth, and five in-person. Majority were led by nurses and allied health specialists and most addressed management of physical (n = 9) and psychosocial effects (n = 6), while only a few assessed implementation outcomes such as cost-effectiveness. None evaluated the management of chronic health conditions. CONCLUSION: Positive outcomes were reported for domains of survivorship care that were measured; however, further evaluation of models of care for rural people with HNC is needed to assess effectiveness across all domains of care. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Rural cancer survivors are a diverse population with unique needs. Alternative models of care such as shared care, or models personalised to the individual, could be considered to reduce disparities in access to care and outcomes.

Associations between patient-level health literacy and diagnostic time intervals for head and neck cancer: A prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Health literacy (HL) comprises skills and knowledge required to understand, access, and make decisions about healthcare. Our aim was to examine associations between patient HL and time intervals (defined in the Aarhus statement) along the pathway to treatment of head and neck cancer (HNC). METHODS: A prospective cohort study was conducted from October 2018 to March 2020. Participants completed the Health Literacy Questionnaire (HLQ®) and described key events and dates along the pathway to treatment using validated questionnaires. Correlations between six diagnostic time intervals and domains of HL were explored, and factors predicting exceeding maximum acceptable timeframes were assessed using logistic regression. RESULTS: One hundred patients with a diagnosis of HNC within the preceding 6 months were recruited. HLQ® Domain 2 (sufficient information to manage health) was significantly negatively associated with four intervals: the patient interval (first symptom to first presentation), primary care interval (first presentation to referral to secondary care), diagnostic interval (first presentation to diagnosis), and total interval (first symptom to treatment onset); correlation coefficients -0.25 to -0.27 (P < 0.05). Domain 8 (ability to find good information) was significantly negatively associated with three intervals (primary care interval, diagnostic interval, and total interval; correlation coefficients -0.23 to -0.34; P < 0.05). Higher education, age, and comorbidity levels were associated with shorter patient and diagnostic intervals. CONCLUSIONS: HL may be a potential target to improve timeliness of HNC diagnosis and reduce disparities in outcomes.

How age affects health-related-quality-of-life outcomes in maxillomandibular reconstructive surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Maxillomandibular reconstruction has various functional, aesthetic, and psychosocial effects that can decrease patients' health-related quality of life (HRQOL). The aim of this study was to compare HRQOL outcomes in older and younger patients undergoing maxillomandibular reconstruction. METHODS: A cross-sectional study of patients undergoing maxillomandibular reconstruction surgery between November 2008 and January 2021 was conducted. Participants completed the FACE-Q Head and Neck Cancer Module, M.D. Anderson Dysphagia Inventory (MDADI), and Speech Handicap Index (SHI). Results from these instruments were used to compare HRQOL outcomes in old (≥70 years) and young (<70 years) patients. RESULTS: Ninety-nine patients who underwent maxillomandibular reconstruction completed the instruments (response rate 50%), of which 33 (33%) were aged ≥70 years. Older age was associated with improved FACE-Q speaking (+11.3, P = 0.045), FACE-Q cancer worry (-9.97, P = 0.050), and SHI score (-16.6, P = 0.013). After adjusting for the effect of radiotherapy, age was associated with improved FACE-Q speaking (+16.8, P = 0.012), FACE-Q smiling distress (+12.6, P = 0.040), FACE-Q worry (-11.0, P = 0.032), and SHI scores (-18.4, P = 0.004). Older age was associated with an increased likelihood of postoperative complications (odds ratio (OR) = 2.9, P = 0.02) and medical complications (OR = 4.6, P = 0.012). CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing maxillomandibular reconstruction, older age (≥70 years) was associated with better HRQOL outcomes in domains relating to speech and cancer worry. In all other HRQOL outcomes, the two age groups performed similarly.

A 10-year update to the principles for clinical trial data sharing by pharmaceutical companies: perspectives based on a decade of literature and policies.

Data sharing is essential for promoting scientific discoveries and informed decision-making in clinical practice. In 2013, PhRMA/EFPIA recognised the importance of data sharing and supported initiatives to enhance clinical trial data transparency and promote scientific advancements. However, despite these commitments, recent investigations indicate significant scope for improvements in data sharing by the pharmaceutical industry. Drawing on a decade of literature and policy developments, this article presents perspectives from a multidisciplinary team of researchers, clinicians, and consumers. The focus is on policy and process updates to the PhRMA/EFPIA 2013 data sharing commitments, aiming to enhance the sharing and accessibility of participant-level data, clinical study reports, protocols, statistical analysis plans, lay summaries, and result publications from pharmaceutical industry-sponsored trials. The proposed updates provide clear recommendations regarding which data should be shared, when it should be shared, and under what conditions. The suggested improvements aim to develop a data sharing ecosystem that supports science and patient-centred care. Good data sharing principles require resources, time, and commitment. Notwithstanding these challenges, enhancing data sharing is necessary for efficient resource utilization, increased scientific collaboration, and better decision-making for patients and healthcare professionals.

Patient-reported experiences and satisfaction with head and neck surgery outreach clinics in regional New South Wales, Australia: A cross-sectional survey.

RATIONALE: Head and neck surgery services are increasingly being centralised in Australia. Outreach models can overcome burdens of travel that patients in regional and rural areas experience when attending routine appointments, by providing services closer to home. AIM: To explore patient-reported experiences and satisfaction with regional outreach services for head and neck surgery in Australia. METHODS: Patients who attended two regional outreach clinics in New South Wales (NSW), Australia, were surveyed over a 6-month period. Patients completed the Outpatient Cancer Clinics Survey (2020 version) that explored perceptions and experiences of the clinic. Patients with cancer were asked to complete the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System and the Communication and Attitudinal Self-Efficacy scale. Descriptive statistics and analysis of data was performed, and results were compared to the NSW statewide Outpatient Cancer Clinics Survey (2020). Content analysis of free text responses was performed. RESULTS: Some 128 patients responded (56% response rate; mean age 67.2 years, 46.1% female). Compared to the 2020 NSW survey, a higher proportion of patients in our cohort responded positively to 14 of the 26 questions, with the greatest differences observed for questions regarding waiting area comfort (+12.1%, p = 0.008), being informed about different treatment options (+9.5%, p = 0.04), and issues relating to parking (+9.5%, p = 0.03). A lower proportion of our sample responded positively to the question about whether health professionals knew enough about their medical history (-19.3%, p < 0.001). Respondents appreciated having a local clinic that helped them avoid travel to major cities and associated expenses and highlighted benefits of expert consultation and timeliness of investigations. However, cost of appointments and level of reimbursements remain barriers for some patients. CONCLUSIONS: Patients had a high level of satisfaction with regional outreach clinics for head and neck surgery across most domains, indicating patients highly value this service.

Travel-associated cost savings to patients and the health system through provision of specialist head and neck surgery outreach clinics in rural New South Wales, Australia.

INTRODUCTION: Centralisation of head and neck surgical services means that patients in regional and remote Australia need to travel long distances for treatment and follow-up, imparting a significant financial burden on patients and the health system. OBJECTIVE: To estimate costs of travel to local outreach clinics and determine potential cost savings to patients and the health system by avoiding patient travel to major cities for head and neck surgical care. DESIGN: Retrospective audit of three head and neck surgery outreach clinics in New South Wales, Australia over 4 years (2017-2020). Direct costs of travel from a patient's residence to their local outreach clinic were estimated. Costs of travel and accommodation to Sydney for an appointment were calculated for different travel modes. Estimated reimbursements for travel through government support schemes were calculated based on published rates. FINDINGS: Some 657 patients attended the three clinics, accounting for 1981 appointments. Depending on mode of travel, the estimated median cost of return travel (including accommodation) to Sydney was $379 to $739 per patient per trip and the median government reimbursement ranged from $182 to $279 per trip. In comparison, the cost of return travel by car to local outreach clinics ranged from $28 to $163 per appointment. Outreach clinics were estimated to save patients a median of $285 per trip and avoided government reimbursements of $215 per trip. DISCUSSION: Despite uptake in telehealth, outreach medical services remain an important asset for people living in regional areas to address inequities in access. However, the cost benefits are likely to be underestimated as our approach did not account for indirect costs associated with travel. CONCLUSION: Outreach head and neck surgical services located in regional areas can reduce the financial burden on both patients and the healthcare system. Greater investment in outreach clinics could ensure sustainability of services to promote equitable access to specialised surgical services.

In person and virtual process mapping experiences to capture and explore variability in clinical practice: application to genetic referral pathways across seven Australian hospital networks.

Genetic referral for Lynch syndrome (LS) exemplifies complex clinical pathways. Identifying target behaviours (TBs) for change and associated barriers requires structured group consultation activities with busy clinicians - consolidating implementation activities whilst retaining rigour is crucial. This study aimed to: i) use process mapping to gain in-depth understandings of site-specific LS testing and referral practices in Australian hospitals and support identification of TBs for change, ii) explore if barriers to identified TBs could be identified through process mapping focus-group data, and iii) demonstrate pandemic-induced transition from in-person to virtual group interactive process mapping methods. LS clinical stakeholders attended interactive in-person or virtual focus groups to develop site-specific "process maps" visually representing referral pathways. Content analysis of transcriptions informed site-specific process maps, then clinical audit data was compared to highlight TBs for change. TBs were reviewed in follow-up focus groups. Secondary thematic analysis explored barriers to identified TBs, coded against the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). The transition from in-person to pandemic-induced virtual group interactive process mapping methods was documented. Process mapping highlighted six key areas of clinical practice variation across sites and site-specific TBs for change were identified. Key barriers to identified TBs emerged, categorised to seven TDF domains. Process mapping revealed variations in clinical practices surrounding LS referral between sites. Incorporating qualitative perspectives enhances process mapping by facilitating identification of TBs for change and barriers, providing a pathway to developing targeted interventions. Virtual process mapping activities produced detailed data and enabled comprehensive map development.

To achieve change in the health system using implementation approaches, time-poor clinicians must engage in information-gathering and idea-generation activities. This research revealed that qualitative process mapping focus groups held both in-person and virtually can be used to streamline these activities, by simultaneously identifying target behaviours for change, and barriers to change, while gaining information about site-specific clinical processes. Hospital process mapping shows that complex clinical processes vary significantly between sites, and that understanding local variation is crucial to developing targeted interventions. This study has informed new approaches to implementation research methods.

Construct and discriminant validity testing of the FACE-Q Head and Neck Cancer Module for assessing speech and swallowing outcomes for patients undergoing maxillectomy or mandibulectomy.

BACKGROUND: The FACE-Q H&N is a patient reported outcome measure covering multiple constructs for patients with head and neck tumors. Additional testing is needed to determine suitability in assessing speech- and swallowing-related quality of life and function. METHODS: FACE-Q H&N, The M. D. Anderson Dysphagia Inventory (MDADI), and Speech Handicap Index (SHI) scores were collected from two patient cohorts who had undergone jaw reconstruction. Construct validity was assessed using convergent validity testing and known groups testing to assess discriminant validity. RESULTS: A priori hypotheses testing demonstrated strong correlations (ρ > 0.6, p < 0.05) between FACE-Q H&N eating and drinking, swallowing and eating distress scales with MDADI subscales, and between FACE-Q H&N speech function and distress scales and the SHI. Known groups testing demonstrated all instruments could delineate outcomes among patients who had radiation, advanced tumors, and tracheostomy. CONCLUSION: The FACE-Q H&N may be an alternative for the SHI and MDADI in this patient cohort.

Treatment approaches and outcomes of a head and neck lymphedema service at an Australian comprehensive cancer center.

BACKGROUND: Patients treated for head and neck cancer are at high risk of developing head and neck lymphedema (HNL). We describe outcomes of HNL management at an Australian institution from 2018 to 2020. METHODS: Electronic records from Chris O'Brien Lifehouse were retrospectively reviewed from January 1, 2018 to December 31, 2020. Objective changes in HNL were assessed using The M. D. Anderson Cancer Center (MDACC) HNL rating scale and Assessment of Lymphedema of the Head and Neck (ALOHA). RESULTS: Among the 100 patients referred for management of HNL, surgery was the most frequent treatment modality (80%; 70% with neck dissection) and 69% underwent radiotherapy. Manual lymphatic drainage (MLD) was most often prescribed (96%), followed by self-MLD (93%). Small but significant improvements in ALOHA measurements were observed for 50 patients (50%). Only 5/29 (17%) patients had post-treatment improvements on the MDACC scale. CONCLUSIONS: Standardized, prospective measurement of treatment approaches and outcomes is needed to further evaluate the service.

Interventions to reduce times to diagnosis and treatment of head and neck cancer: A systematic review and narrative synthesis.

BACKGROUND: We systematically reviewed evidence of health system interventions to reduce diagnostic and treatment intervals for people with head and neck cancer (HNC). METHODS: Electronic databases were searched from inception to 30 April 2020 for controlled or uncontrolled comparative studies. Primary outcome was any time interval between first clinical presentation and treatment onset. RESULTS: Thirty-seven studies were included. Four types of interventions were identified: single clinic-based (N = 4), multidisciplinary clinic-based (N = 15), hospital or service re-design (N = 12), and health system re-design (N = 6). There was some evidence that multidisciplinary interventions improve timeliness of diagnosis and treatment; however, evidence of long-term effectiveness was lacking. Study quality was assessed as either low or moderate. CONCLUSIONS: Interventions to reduce times to diagnosis and treatment of HNC are heterogeneous, with limited evidence of effectiveness. Future interventions should account for the complex and dynamic nature of health systems and adhere to best-practice principles for early-diagnosis research.

Virtual reality digital surgical planning for jaw reconstruction: a usability study.

BACKGROUND: Digital surgical planning (DSP) has revolutionized the preparation and execution of the management of complex head and neck pathologies. The addition of virtual reality (VR) allows the surgeon to have a three-dimensional experience with six degrees of freedom for visualizing and manipulating objects. This pilot study describes the participants experience with the first head and neck reconstructive VR-DSP platform. METHODS: An original VR-DSP platform has been developed for planning the ablation and reconstruction of head and neck pathologies. A prospective trial utilizing this platform involving reconstructive surgeons was performed. Participants conducted a simulated VR-DSP planning session, pre- and post-questionnaire as well as audio recordings allowing for qualitative analysis. RESULTS: Thirteen consultant reconstructive surgeons representing three surgical backgrounds with varied experience were recruited. The majority of surgeons had no previous experience with VR. Based on the system usability score, the VR-DSP platform was found to have above average usability. The qualitative analysis demonstrated the majority had a positive experience. Participants identified some perceived barriers to implementing the VR-DSP platform. CONCLUSIONS: Virtual reality-digital surgical planning is usable and acceptable to reconstructive surgeons. Surgeons were able to perform the steps in an efficient time despite limited experience. The addition of VR offers additional benefits to current VSP platforms. Based on the results of this pilot study, it is likely that VR-DSP will be of benefit to the reconstructive surgeon.

Effect of Radiotherapy on Functional and Health-Related Quality of Life Outcomes after Jaw Reconstruction.

Long-term health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and functional outcomes following mandibular and maxillary reconstruction are lacking. To determine these outcomes, a cross-sectional study of patients with a history of cancer who underwent jaw reconstruction was undertaken. Participants were identified from a database of jaw reconstruction procedures at the Chris O'Brien Lifehouse (Sydney, Australia). Eligible patients had at least one month follow-up, were aged ≥18 years at surgery, and had history of malignancy. HRQOL was measured using the FACE-Q Head and Neck Cancer Module (FACE-Q H&N). Functional outcomes were measured using the FACE-Q H&N, MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory (MDADI) and Speech Handicap Index (SHI). Ninety-seven questionnaires were completed (62% response rate). Mean age of respondents was 63.7 years, 61% were male, and 64% underwent radiotherapy. Treatment with radiotherapy was associated with worse outcomes across 10/14 FACE-Q H&N scales, three MDADI subscales and one composite score, and the SHI. Mean differences in scores between irradiated and non-irradiated patients exceeded clinically meaningful differences for the MDADI and SHI. Issues with oral competence, saliva, speaking, and swallowing worsened with increasing time since surgery. Younger patients reported greater concerns with appearance, smiling, speaking, and cancer worry. Women reported greater concerns regarding appearance and associated distress. History of radiotherapy substantially impacts HRQOL and function after jaw reconstruction. Age at surgery and gender were also predictors of outcomes and associated distress. Pre-treatment counselling of patients requiring jaw reconstruction may lead to improved survivorship for patients with head and neck cancer.

A qualitative exploration of the facilitators and barriers to early diagnosis and treatment of head and neck cancer: Perceptions of patients and carers.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study to explore experiences of patients and carers of the pathway to diagnosis and treatment of head and neck cancer (HNC), focusing on differences based on remoteness of residence. METHODS: Patients ≥6 months post-treatment completion, and their carers, were recruited. Semi-structured interviews, guided by the Model of Pathways to Treatment as the theoretical framework, were conducted to examine pathways to treatment of HNC and facilitators and barriers to early diagnosis and treatment. Thematic analysis with an iterative and data-driven approach was used to identify themes. RESULTS: A total of 39 patients and 17 carers participated in the interviews. Facilitators of timely diagnosis and treatment included a sense of urgency from health care professionals (HCPs), advocacy by the HCP or carers, and leveraging social capital. Distance to services, financial costs, and a perceived lack of emotional investment by HCPs arose as barriers to timely diagnosis and treatment. Participants were often able to rationalise that not all delays were negative, depending causes and expected impact on cancer management. CONCLUSION: The findings highlight the complex nature of factors facilitating and impeding early HNC diagnosis and treatment that may be targeted in interventions to support patients and meet important benchmarks for high-quality cancer care.

Impact of targeted wording on response rates to a survey of general practitioners on referral processes for suspected head and neck cancer: an embedded randomised controlled trial.

Introduction Low response rates to surveys can lead to non-response bias, limiting generalisability of findings. When survey topics pertain to uncommon conditions, the decision of general practitioners (GPs) to complete a questionnaire may be swayed by the perceived relevance of the questionnaire content to their practice. Aim To explore whether targeted wording of a questionnaire for GPs about head and neck cancer referral patterns affects response rates. Methods A randomised controlled trial was embedded into a larger survey on referral practices for head and neck cancer among GPs in New South Wales, Australia. GPs were randomly allocated to receive versions of the study material with explanatory text written using either a 'symptom-frame' or a 'cancer-frame'; however, the questions and responses were the same in both groups. Results The overall response rate was 10.9% (196/1803). The response rate to the 'cancer-frame' version was 10.6% and 11.1% for the 'symptom-frame' version. After adjusting for practice location and GP gender, the difference in response rate based on wording was not significant (difference 0.5% [95%CI: -2.4, 3.4%]). A sub-analysis showed that GPs practicing in regional New South Wales were more likely to respond to the survey compared to those practicing in metropolitan New South Wales, independent of the intervention group or participant sex (AOR 1.61 [95%CI: 1.12, 2.31]; P = 0.01). Discussion The wording 'frame' of the survey did not appear to impact response rates in a survey of referral practices for suspected head and neck cancer; however, the significantly higher response rate from regional GPs warrants further investigation as to whether the content was considered more salient to their practice.

Interventions for head and neck cancer survivors: Systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Interventions for head/neck cancer (HNC) survivors may not address their cancer-related and general health needs. METHODS: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guided this systematic review of studies from 2000 to 2021 of interventions targeting cancer survivors treated with curative-intent, using MEDLINE, Embase, Emcare, and PsycINFO. Interventions were categorized into domains of the Quality of Cancer Survivorship Care Framework to characterize the scope and quality of interventions. RESULTS: We identified 28 studies for inclusion: 13 randomized and 15 non-randomized. Most targeted surveillance/management of physical effects (n = 24) including 13 that also targeted psychosocial effects. Four studies addressed prevention/surveillance for recurrence/new cancers, one addressed health promotion/disease prevention, and one addressed chronic medical conditions. Most studies (n = 27) had medium-high risk of bias. CONCLUSIONS: There are few high-quality studies addressing HNC survivorship. Future rigorously designed studies should address broader areas of care, including chronic disease management and health promotion/disease prevention.

Lynch syndrome testing of colorectal cancer patients in a high-income country with universal healthcare: a retrospective study of current practice and gaps in seven australian hospitals.

BACKGROUND: To inform effective genomic medicine strategies, it is important to examine current approaches and gaps in well-established applications. Lynch syndrome (LS) causes 3-5% of colorectal cancers (CRCs). While guidelines commonly recommend LS tumour testing of all CRC patients, implementation in health systems is known to be highly variable. To provide insights on the heterogeneity in practice and current bottlenecks in a high-income country with universal healthcare, we characterise the approaches and gaps in LS testing and referral in seven Australian hospitals across three states. METHODS: We obtained surgery, pathology, and genetics services data for 1,624 patients who underwent CRC resections from 01/01/2017 to 31/12/2018 in the included hospitals. RESULTS: Tumour testing approaches differed between hospitals, with 0-19% of patients missing mismatch repair deficiency test results (total 211/1,624 patients). Tumour tests to exclude somatic MLH1 loss were incomplete at five hospitals (42/187 patients). Of 74 patients with tumour tests completed appropriately and indicating high risk of LS, 36 (49%) were missing a record of referral to genetics services for diagnostic testing, with higher missingness for older patients (0% of patients aged ≤ 40 years, 76% of patients aged > 70 years). Of 38 patients with high-risk tumour test results and genetics services referral, diagnostic testing was carried out for 25 (89%) and identified a LS pathogenic/likely pathogenic variant for 11 patients (44% of 25; 0.7% of 1,624 patients). CONCLUSIONS: Given the LS testing and referral gaps, further work is needed to identify strategies for successful integration of LS testing into clinical care, and provide a model for hereditary cancers and broader genomic medicine. Standardised reporting may help clinicians interpret tumour test results and initiate further actions.

Geographic variation in referral practices for patients with suspected head and neck cancer: A survey of general practitioners using a clinical vignette.

INTRODUCTION: General practitioners (GPs) play a crucial role in cancer care and GPs are often the first doctor that patients with symptoms suggestive of cancer will encounter. Head and neck cancer (HNC) is a relatively uncommon presentation in primary care, and evidence suggests that times to diagnosis and treatment of HNC vary based on geographical location of patients. This may be due to barriers to referral faced by regional or rural GPs as compared to those in metropolitan cities in Australia. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of geographical location of GPs on management of patients with symptoms suggestive of HNC. DESIGN: This was a descriptive, analytical, cross-sectional survey. Surveys were sent to GPs at practices in two primary health care networks in New South Wales, Australia (Mid North Coast Primary Healthcare Network and the Central and Eastern Sydney Primary Healthcare Network) between February and May 2020. Main outcome measures were perceived time from referral to specialist appointment, factors affecting timeliness of patient help-seeking, and awareness and use of clinical guidelines. FINDINGS: A total of 1803 GPs were sampled, of which 196 responded (45 regional GPs and 151 metropolitan GPs). Less than half (48%) of regional GPs reported patients could expect to be seen by a specialist within 2 weeks of referral, compared to 70% of metropolitan GPs (p = 0.001). Most metropolitan GPs stated they would refer a patient with suspected HNC to a surgeon subspecialising in HNC. Regional GPs were split between ear, nose, and throat (ENT) and general surgeons. Availability of services was the most common factor influencing referral practices for regional GPs, whereas for metropolitan GPs, this was the patient's symptoms. Awareness of government resources for cancer referrals was generally low. DISCUSSION: Regional GPs report patients with HNC are less likely to be seen by a specialist within optimal time frames compared to metropolitan GPs. Respondents reported different barriers to early referral of patients with suspected HNC, with regional GPs more often citing system-level factors while metropolitan GPs more often cited patient-level factors. CONCLUSION: Evaluating service provision and uptake with respect to community need, and addressing of barriers to implementation, may minimise unwarranted clinical variation.