Tobacco and alcohol cessation or reduction interventions in people with oral dysplasia and head and neck cancer: systematic review protocol.

BACKGROUND: Head and neck cancers include malignancies of the mouth, larynx and oropharynx. Tobacco use and alcohol consumption are associated with increased risks of developing and dying from head and neck cancer. The aim of this review is to examine the effectiveness of smoking and alcohol cessation interventions on disease-related outcomes, quality of life and behavioural change in adults with head and neck cancer and oral dysplasia. METHODS: The Cochrane library, CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and Web of Science databases will be searched for randomised controlled trials investigating the effects of smoking or alcohol interventions on patients with either head and neck cancer or oral dysplasia. The primary outcomes are disease-free survival and, for participants with oral dysplasia, malignant transformation to cancer. Secondary outcomes are disease recurrence and progression, quality of life and behavioural change. The quality of included studies will be assessed using the 'Cochrane Collaborations tool for assessing risk of bias'. A qualitative synthesis of the results will be reported, and a meta-analysis of the outcome data conducted, where appropriate. DISCUSSION: This systematic review will identify the extent of the current research on smoking and alcohol cessation interventions in patients with head and neck cancer and oral epithelial dysplasia. The findings have the potential to inform which interventions have been successful and how future behavioural change interventions should be conducted within these populations. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42016038237.

Prostate-specific antigen patterns in US and European populations: comparison of six diverse cohorts.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether there are differences in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels at diagnosis or changes in PSA levels between US and European populations of men with and without prostate cancer (PCa). SUBJECTS AND METHODS: We analysed repeated measures of PSA from six clinically and geographically diverse cohorts of men: two cohorts with PSA-detected PCa, two cohorts with clinically detected PCa and two cohorts without PCa. Using multilevel models, average PSA at diagnosis and PSA change over time were compared among study populations. RESULTS: The annual percentage PSA change of 4-5% was similar between men without cancer and men with PSA-detected cancer. PSA at diagnosis was 1.7 ng/mL lower in a US cohort of men with PSA-detected PCa (95% confidence interval 1.3-2.0 ng/mL), compared with a UK cohort of men with PSA-detected PCa, but there was no evidence of a different rate of PSA change between these populations. CONCLUSION: We found that PSA changes over time are similar in UK and US men diagnosed through PSA testing and even in men without PCa. Further development of PSA models to monitor men on active surveillance should be undertaken in order to take advantage of these similarities. We found no evidence that guidelines for using PSA to monitor men cannot be passed between US and European studies.

Associations of sexual dysfunction symptoms with PSA-detected localised and advanced prostate cancer: a case-control study nested within the UK population-based ProtecT (Prostate testing for cancer and Treatment) study.

BACKGROUND: Sexual dysfunction might be symptomatic of cancer spreading beyond the prostate by local invasion, a mechanism of tumour progression associated with prognosis. Conversely, among men with raised prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels, a negative association might be expected if sexual dysfunction was symptomatic of benign, rather than malignant, prostatic disease. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Cases and controls were selected from among men recruited to the UK population-based ProtecT (Prostate testing for cancer and Treatment) study. Men aged 50-69 years were invited for PSA testing and those with a PSA level > or = 3.0 ng/ml were invited for biopsy. We investigated whether symptoms of sexual dysfunction, determined by self-completed questionnaire prior to biopsy, were associated with prostate cancer. RESULTS: Of the 8924 men who had a PSA level> or = 3.0 ng/ml (11% of the men who had a PSA test), 6585 underwent biopsy of whom 2813 and 421, respectively, were subsequently diagnosed with localised and advanced prostate cancer and 3351 had a negative biopsy result. No individual symptom of sexual dysfunction was associated with risk of prostate cancer. The symptom score was associated with advanced (odds ratio (OR) per one unit increase in score=1.06; 1.00-1.12; P=0.07) but not with localised (OR=1.00; 0.97-1.02; P=0.9) prostate cancer (P=0.05 for heterogeneity). CONCLUSIONS: Our study provides weak evidence that sexual dysfunction may be associated with PSA-detected advanced, but not localised, prostate cancer among men with raised PSA levels.