Acceptability and appropriateness of a risk-tailored organised melanoma screening program: Qualitative interviews with key informants.

INTRODUCTION: In Australia, opportunistic screening (occurring as skin checks) for the early detection of melanoma is common, and overdiagnosis is a recognised concern. Risk-tailored cancer screening is an approach to cancer control that aims to provide personalised screening tailored to individual risk. This study aimed to explore the views of key informants in Australia on the acceptability and appropriateness of risk-tailored organised screening for melanoma, and to identify barriers, facilitators and strategies to inform potential future implementation. Acceptability and appropriateness are crucial, as successful implementation will require a change of practice for clinicians and consumers. METHODS: This was a qualitative study using semi-structured interviews. Key informants were purposively selected to ensure expertise in melanoma early detection and screening, prioritising senior or executive perspectives. Consumers were expert representatives. Data were analysed deductively using the Tailored Implementation for Chronic Diseases (TICD) checklist. RESULTS: Thirty-six participants were interviewed (10 policy makers; 9 consumers; 10 health professionals; 7 researchers). Key informants perceived risk-tailored screening for melanoma to be acceptable and appropriate in principle. Barriers to implementation included lack of trial data, reluctance for low-risk groups to not screen, variable skill level in general practice, differing views on who to conduct screening tests, confusing public health messaging, and competing health costs. Key facilitators included the perceived opportunity to improve health equity and the potential cost-effectiveness of a risk-tailored screening approach. A range of implementation strategies were identified including strengthening the evidence for cost-effectiveness, engaging stakeholders, developing pathways for people at low risk, evaluating different risk assessment criteria and screening delivery models and targeted public messaging. CONCLUSION: Key informants were supportive in principle of risk-tailored melanoma screening, highlighting important next steps. Considerations around risk assessment, policy and modelling the costs of current verses future approaches will help inform possible future implementation of risk-tailored population screening for melanoma.

Long-term cost-effectiveness of a melanoma prevention program using genomic risk information compared with standard prevention advice in Australia.

PURPOSE: Evidence indicates that a melanoma prevention program using personalized genomic risk provision and genetic counseling can affect prevention behaviors, including reducing sunburns in adults with no melanoma history. This analysis evaluated its longer-term cost-effectiveness from an Australian health system perspective. METHODS: The primary outcome was incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) of genomic risk provision (intervention) compared with standard prevention advice. A decision-analytic Markov model was developed using randomized trial data to simulate lifetime cost-effectiveness. All costs were presented in 2018/19 Australian dollars (AUD). The intervention effect on reduced sunburns was stratified by sex and traditional risk, which was calculated through a validated prediction model. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were undertaken for robustness checks. RESULTS: The per participant cost of intervention was AUD$189. Genomic risk provision targeting high-traditional risk individuals produced an ICER of AUD$35,254 (per quality-adjusted life year gained); sensitivity analyses indicated the intervention would be cost-effective in more than 50% of scenarios. When the intervention was extended to low-traditional risk groups, the ICER was AUD$43,746 with a 45% probability of being cost-effective. CONCLUSION: Genomic risk provision targeted to high-traditional melanoma risk individuals is likely a cost-effective strategy for reducing sunburns and will likely prevent future melanomas and keratinocyte carcinomas.

Study protocol for a randomised controlled trial to evaluate the use of melanoma surveillance photography to the Improve early detection of MelanomA in ultra-hiGh and high-risk patiEnts (the IMAGE trial).

INTRODUCTION: Melanoma surveillance photography (MSP) is a comprehensive surveillance method that comprises two- or three-dimensional total body photography with tagged digital dermoscopy, performed at prescribed intervals. It has the potential to reduce unnecessary biopsies and enhance early detection of melanoma, but it is not yet standard care for all high-risk patients in Australia. This protocol describes a randomised controlled trial (RCT) designed to evaluate the clinical impact and cost-effectiveness of using MSP for the surveillance of individuals at ultra-high or high risk of melanoma from a health system perspective. METHODS AND DESIGN: This is a registry-based, unblinded, multi-site, parallel-arm RCT that will be conducted over 3 years. We aim to recruit 580 participants from three Australian states: Victoria, New South Wales and Queensland, via state cancer registries or direct referral from clinicians. Eligible participants within 24 months of a primary cutaneous melanoma diagnosis will be randomised 1:1 to receive either MSP in addition to their routine clinical surveillance (intervention group) or routine clinical surveillance without MSP (control group). Most participants will continue surveillance with their usual care provider, and the frequency of follow-up visits in both groups will depend on the stage of their primary melanoma and risk factors. The primary outcome measure of the study is the number of unnecessary biopsies (i.e. false positives, being cases where a lesion is biopsied due to suspected melanoma on clinical examination, either with or without MSP, but the resulting histopathology finding is negative for melanoma). Secondary outcomes include the evaluation of health economic outcomes, quality of life and patient acceptability. Two sub-studies will explore the benefit of MSP in high-risk patients prior to a melanoma diagnosis and the diagnostic performance of MSP in the teledermatology setting compared to the en face clinical setting. DISCUSSION: This trial will determine the clinical efficacy, cost-effectiveness and affordability of MSP to facilitate policy decision-making at the national and local levels, across primary and specialist care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04385732 . Registered on May 13, 2020.

Systematic development of quality indicators for skin cancer management in primary care: a mixed-methods study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Australia has the highest incidence of skin cancer in the world, with two out of three Australians expected to be diagnosed with skin cancer in their lifetime. Such incidence necessitates large-scale, effective skin cancer management practices. General practitioners (in mainstream practice and in skin cancer clinics) play an important role in skin cancer care provision, making decisions based on relevant evidence-based guidelines, protocols, experience and training. Diversity in these decision-making practices can result in unwarranted variation. Quality indicators are frequently implemented in healthcare contexts to measure performance quality at the level of the clinician and healthcare practice and mitigate unwarranted variation. Such measurements can facilitate performance comparisons between peers and a standard benchmark, often resulting in improved processes and outcomes. A standardised set of quality indicators is yet to be developed in the context of primary care skin cancer management. AIMS: This research aims to identify, develop and generate expert consensus on a core set of quality indicators for skin cancer management in primary care. METHODS: This mixed-methods study involves (1) a scoping review of the available evidence on quality indicators in skin cancer management in primary care, (2) identification and development of a core set of quality indicators through interviews/qualitative proforma surveys with participants, and (3) a focus group involving discussion of quality indicators according to Nominal Group Technique. Qualitative and quantitative data will be collected and analysed using thematic and descriptive statistical analytical methods. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Approval was granted by the university's Research Ethics Committee (HREC no. 520211051532420). Results from this study will be widely disseminated in publications, study presentations, educational events and reports.

FRAMe: Familial Risk Assessment of Melanoma-a risk prediction tool to guide CDKN2A germline mutation testing in Australian familial melanoma.

Germline mutations in CDKN2A greatly increase risk of developing cutaneous melanoma. We have constructed a risk prediction model, Familial Risk Assessment of Melanoma (FRAMe), for estimating the likelihood of carrying a heritable CDKN2A mutation among Australian families, where the prevalence of these mutations is low. Using logistic regression, we analysed characteristics of 299 Australian families recruited through the Sydney site of GenoMEL (international melanoma genetics consortium) with at least three cases of cutaneous melanoma (in situ and invasive) among first-degree blood relatives, for predictors of the presence of a pathogenic CDKN2A mutation. The final multivariable prediction model was externally validated in an independent cohort of 61 melanoma kindreds recruited through GenoMEL Queensland. Family variables independently associated with the presence of a CDKN2A mutation in a multivariable model were number of individuals diagnosed with melanoma under 40 years of age, number of individuals diagnosed with more than one primary melanoma, and number of individuals blood related to a melanoma case in the first degree diagnosed with any cancer excluding melanoma and non-melanoma skin cancer. The number of individuals diagnosed with pancreatic cancer was not independently associated with mutation status. The risk prediction model had an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.851 (95% CI 0.793, 0.909) in the training dataset, and 0.745 (95%CI 0.612, 0.877) in the validation dataset. This model is the first to be developed and validated using only Australian data, which is important given the higher rate of melanoma in the population. This model will help to effectively identify families suitable for genetic counselling and testing in areas of high ambient ultraviolet radiation. A user-friendly electronic nomogram is available at www.melanomarisk.org.au .

The Melanoma Genomics Managing Your Risk Study randomised controlled trial: statistical analysis plan.

BACKGROUND: The Melanoma Genomics Managing Your Risk Study is a randomised controlled trial that aims to evaluate the efficacy of providing information on personal genomic risk of melanoma in reducing ultraviolet radiation (UV) exposure, stratified by traditional risk group (low or high phenotypic risk) in the general population. The primary outcome is objectively measured total daily Standard Erythemal Doses at 12 months. Secondary outcomes include UV exposure at specific time periods, self-reported sun protection and skin-examination behaviours, psychosocial outcomes, and ethical considerations surrounding offering genomic testing at a population level. A within-trial and modelled economic evaluation will be undertaken from an Australian health system perspective to assess the cost-effectiveness of the intervention. OBJECTIVE: To publish the pre-determined statistical analysis plan (SAP) before database lock and the start of analysis. METHODS: This SAP describes the data synthesis, analysis principles and statistical procedures for analysing the outcomes from this trial. The SAP was approved after closure of recruitment and before completion of patient follow-up. It outlines the planned primary analyses and a range of subgroup and sensitivity analyses. Health economic outcomes are not included in this plan but will be analysed separately. The SAP will be adhered to for the final data analysis of this trial to avoid potential analysis bias that may arise from knowledge of the outcome data. RESULTS: This SAP is consistent with best practice and should enable transparent reporting. CONCLUSION: This SAP has been developed for the Melanoma Genomics Managing Your Risk Study and will be followed to ensure high-quality standards of internal validity and to minimise analysis bias. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Prospectively registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ID: ACTR N12617000691347 . Registered on 15 May 2017.

Cost-Effectiveness of a Psycho-Educational Intervention Targeting Fear of Cancer Recurrence in People Treated for Early-Stage Melanoma.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the cost effectiveness of a newly developed psycho-educational intervention to reduce fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) in early-stage melanoma patients. METHODS: A within-trial cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analysis was conducted from the Australian health system perspective using data from linked Medicare records. Outcomes included FCR, measured with the severity subscale of the FCR Inventory; quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) measured using the preference-based instrument, Assessment of Quality of Life-8 Dimensions (AQoL-8D) and 12-month survival. An incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated for two economic outcomes: (1) cost per additional case of 'high' FCR avoided and (2) cost per QALY gained. Means and 95% CIs around the ICER were generated from non-parametric bootstrapping with 1000 replications. RESULTS: A total of 151 trial participants were included in the economic evaluation. The mean cost of the psycho-educational intervention was AU$1614 per participant, including intervention development costs. The ICER per case of high FCR avoided was AU$12,903. The cost-effectiveness acceptability curve demonstrated a 78% probability of the intervention being cost effective relative to the control at a threshold of AU$50,000 per extra person avoiding FCR. The ICER per QALY gained was AU$116,126 and the probability of the intervention being cost effective for this outcome was 36% at a willingness to pay of AU$50,000 per QALY. CONCLUSION: The psycho-educational intervention reduced FCR at 12 months for people at high risk of developing another melanoma and may represent good value for money. For the QALY outcome, the psycho-educational intervention is unlikely to be cost effective at standard government willingness-to-pay levels. The trial was prospectively registered in the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (CTRN12613000304730).

Gender equity in epidemiology: a policy brief.

The under-representation of women in leadership in scientific fields presents a serious problem. Gender diversity is integral to innovation and productivity, and inequality leads to loss of gender talent in science including epidemiology. This policy brief summarizes some of the key dimensions and determinants contributing to gender-equity gaps in epidemiology and other scientific fields, relevant to developed countries where there is more published evidence. Women in scientific fields hold fewer positions on editorial boards, lack equal representation in speaking engagements at conferences, and are less likely to publish or receive top tier grant funding. Reasons for these inequities range from unconscious bias, biased promotion systems, and traditional norms in the division of family life and labor in our society leading to the attrition of women in academia. Addressing the problem of gender inequity, as a component of gender inequality, will provide an ethical basis to advance innovation. Data on gender equity in the field of epidemiology are sparse. We call on academic institutions, professional societies and associations, and editorial boards relevant to epidemiology (as well as other academic disciplines more broadly) to take meaningful action to build an evidence base as to the extent of gender inequities in epidemiologic research, teaching, policy, and practice. We outline some of the necessary steps required to achieve gender equity, such as career development and mentoring programs, institutional support, and programs to address bias.

The melanoma genomics managing your risk study: A protocol for a randomized controlled trial evaluating the impact of personal genomic risk information on skin cancer prevention behaviors.

BACKGROUND: Reducing ultraviolet radiation (UV) exposure and improving early detection may reduce melanoma incidence, mortality and health system costs. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of providing information on personal genomic risk of melanoma in reducing UV exposure at 12 months, according to low and high traditional risk. METHODS: In this randomized controlled trial, participants (target sample = 892) will be recruited from the general population, and randomized (1:1 ratio, intervention versus control). Intervention arm participants provide a saliva sample, receive personalized melanoma genomic risk information, a genetic counselor phone call, and an educational booklet on melanoma prevention. Control arm participants receive only the educational booklet. Eligible participants are aged 18-69 years, have European ancestry and no personal history of melanoma. All participants will complete a questionnaire and wear a UV dosimeter to objectively measure their sun exposure at baseline, 1- and 12-month time-points, except 1-month UV dosimetry will be limited to ~250 participants. The primary outcome is total daily Standard Erythemal Doses at 12 months. Secondary outcomes include objectively measured UV exposure for specific time periods (e.g. midday hours), self-reported sun protection and skin-examination behaviors, psycho-social outcomes, and ethical considerations surrounding offering genomic testing at a population level. A within-trial and modelled economic evaluation will be undertaken from an Australian health system perspective to assess the intervention costs and outcomes. DISCUSSION: This trial will inform the clinical and personal utility of introducing genomic testing into the health system for melanoma prevention and early detection at a population-level. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12617000691347.

A National Budget Impact Analysis of a Specialised Surveillance Programme for Individuals at Very High Risk of Melanoma in Australia.

BACKGROUND: Specialised surveillance using total body photography and digital dermoscopy to monitor people at very high risk of developing a second or subsequent melanoma has been reported as cost effective. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to estimate the 5-year healthcare budget impact of providing specialised surveillance for people at very high risk of subsequent melanoma from the perspective of the Australian healthcare system. METHODS: A budget impact model was constructed to assess the costs of monitoring and potential savings compared with current routine care based on identification of patients at the time of a melanoma diagnosis. We used data from a published cost-effectiveness analysis of specialised surveillance, and Cancer Registry data, to estimate the patient population and healthcare costs for 2017-2021. RESULTS: When all eligible patients, estimated at 18% of patients with melanoma diagnosed annually in Australia, received specialised surveillance rather than routine care, the cumulative 5-year cost was estimated at $93.5 million Australian dollars ($AU) ($US 64 million) for specialised surveillance compared with $AU 120.7 million ($US 82.7 million) for routine care, delivering savings of $AU 27.2 million ($US 18.6 million). With a staggered introduction of 60% of eligible patients accessing surveillance in year 1, increasing to 90% in years 4 and 5, the cumulative cost over 5 years was estimated at $AU 98.1 million ($US 67.2 million), amounting to savings of $AU 22.6 million ($US 15.5 million) compared with routine care. CONCLUSIONS: Specialised melanoma surveillance is likely to provide substantial cost savings for the Australian healthcare system.

Sensitivity of Preference-Based Quality-of-Life Measures for Economic Evaluations in Early-Stage Melanoma.

Importance: The diagnosis of a life-threatening disease like melanoma can affect all aspects of a person's life, including health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and psychological aspects of melanoma such as fear of cancer recurrence (FCR). Economic evaluations of psychological interventions require preference-based (utility) instruments that are sensitive to changes in well-being and HRQOL; however, very few studies have evaluated the sensitivity of these instruments when used for people with melanoma. Objective: To compare utility scores from the multiple-attribute instrument Assessment of Quality of Life-8-Dimension Scale (AQoL-8D) with the mapped utility scores of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Melanoma (FACT-M) and to investigate the sensitivity of both instruments in identifying the influence of FCR on HRQOL. Design, Setting, and Participants: This assessment of data from a randomized clinical trial of a psychoeducational intervention to reduce FCR, conducted at 3 high-risk melanoma clinics in Australia, evaluated 164 patients with early-stage melanoma and a high risk of developing a second primary melanoma. Main Outcomes and Measures: The FACT-M and AQoL-8D were used to assess HRQOL and FCR among the study participants. Concurrent validity was assessed by comparing the total and subdomain scores of the 2 instruments, and the strength of associations was assessed using Pearson correlation coefficient. Convergent validity was assessed by comparing participants' HRQOL, demographic, and clinical characteristics using the χ2 test and F statistic. Both the FACT-M and AQoL-8D utilities were regressed on FCR Inventory (FCRI) severity scores to estimate the effect of elevated FCR on HRQOL. Results: A total of 164 participants completed the baseline questionnaires, but only 163 met all inclusion criteria and underwent the full analysis: 72 were women; 91 were men; and mean (SD) age was 58.2 (12.1) years. Both the AQoL-8D and FACT-M instruments showed good concurrent validity and could differentiate between relevant subgroups including level of FCRI severity. The AQoL-8D and FACT-M utilities were strongly correlated (r2 = 0.57). Respondents had a mean (SD) AQoL-8D utility of 0.77 (0.2), and a mean (SD) FACT-M utility score of 0.76 (0.07). High levels of FCRI severity were associated with a decrease in utility of 0.12 (95% CI, -0.19 to -0.05) as measured by AQoL-8D, and a decrease of 0.03 (95% CI, -0.05 to -0.01) as measured by the FACT-M. Conclusions and Relevance: For economic evaluations of psychological interventions in melanoma, the AQoL-8D and FACT-M are valid measures of utility; however, the AQoL-8D demonstrates greater sensitivity to FCRI severity. Our results suggest a significant association between FCR and HRQOL.

Cost-Effectiveness of Skin Surveillance Through a Specialized Clinic for Patients at High Risk of Melanoma.

Purpose Clinical guidelines recommend that people at high risk of melanoma receive regular surveillance to improve survival through early detection. A specialized High Risk Clinic in Sydney, Australia was found to be effective for this purpose; however, wider implementation of this clinical service requires evidence of cost-effectiveness and data addressing potential overtreatment of suspicious skin lesions. Patients and Methods A decision-analytic model was built to compare the costs and benefits of specialized surveillance compared with standard care over a 10-year period, from a health system perspective. A high-risk standard care cohort was obtained using linked population data, comprising the Sax Institute's 45 and Up cohort study, linked to Medicare Benefits Schedule claims data, the cancer registry, and hospital admissions data. Benefits were measured in quality-adjusted life-years gained. Sensitivity analyses were undertaken for all model parameters. Results Specialized surveillance through the High Risk Clinic was both less expensive and more effective than standard care. The mean saving was A$6,828 (95% CI, $5,564 to $8,092) per patient, and the mean quality-adjusted life-year gain was 0.31 (95% CI, 0.27 to 0.35). The main drivers of the differences were detection of melanoma at an earlier stage resulting in less extensive treatment and a lower annual mean excision rate for suspicious lesions in specialized surveillance (0.81; 95% CI, 0.72 to 0.91) compared with standard care (2.55; 95% CI, 2.34 to 2.76). The results were robust when tested in sensitivity analyses. Conclusion Specialized surveillance was a cost-effective strategy for the management of individuals at high risk of melanoma. There were also fewer invasive procedures in specialized surveillance compared with standard care in the community.

Economic evaluations of psychosocial interventions in cancer: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: Although the effectiveness of many psychosocial interventions for people with cancer has been established, one barrier to implementation in routine clinical care is a lack of data on cost-effectiveness. We conducted a systematic review to assess the cost-effectiveness of psychosocial interventions for improving psychological adjustment among people with cancer. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature, study appraisal and narrative synthesis. RESULTS: Eight studies involving 1668 patients were identified. Four of these reported outcomes in a cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY) framework. Six studies reported psychosocial interventions to be cost-effective for improving health-related quality of life, mood, pain, distress or fear of cancer progression, compared with usual care. Of the six psychosocial interventions identified as cost-effective, three were cognitive-behavioural therapy-based interventions, one was a nurse-delivered telephone follow-up plus educational group programme, one was a group-based exercise and psychosocial intervention and one was a series of 10 face-to-face or telephone-based individual support sessions delivered by a nurse. The quality of studies assessed according to the Consensus Health Economic Criteria-list criteria was good overall; however, some studies were limited by their choice of outcome measure and omission of important categories of costs. CONCLUSIONS: Several psychosocial interventions, particularly those based on cognitive-behavioural therapy, have been demonstrated to represent good value for money in cancer care. Future research should include a clear definition of the economic question, inclusion of all relevant costs, and consideration of utility-based quality of life measures for QALY estimation. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Accuracy of self-reported nevus and pigmentation phenotype compared with clinical assessment in a population-based study of young Australian adults.

BACKGROUND: Awareness of individual risk may encourage improved prevention and early detection of melanoma. METHODS: We evaluated the accuracy of self-reported pigmentation and nevus phenotype compared with clinical assessment, and examined agreement between nevus counts from selected anatomical regions. The sample included 456 cases with invasive cutaneous melanoma diagnosed between ages 18 to 39 years and 538 controls from the population-based Australian Melanoma Family Study. Participants completed a questionnaire about their pigmentation and nevus phenotype, and attended a dermatologic skin examination. RESULTS: There was strong agreement between self-reported and clinical assessment of eye color [κ, = 0.78; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.74-0.81]; and moderate agreement for hair color (κ = 0.46; 95% CI, 0.42-0.50). Agreement between self-reported skin color and spectrophotometer-derived measurements was poor (κ = 0.12; 95% CI, 0.08-0.16) to moderate (Spearman correlation rs = -0.37; 95% CI, -0.32 to -0.42). Participants tended to underestimate their nevus counts and pigmentation; men were more likely to underreport their skin color. The rs was 0.43 (95% CI, 0.38-0.49) comparing clinical total body nevus counts with self-reported nevus categories. There was good agreement between total body nevus counts and site-specific nevus counts, particularly on both arms. CONCLUSIONS: Young adults have suboptimal accuracy when assessing important risk characteristics including nevus numbers and pigmentation. Measuring nevus count on the arms is a good predictor of full body nevus count. IMPACT: These results have implications for the likely success of targeted public health programs that rely on self-assessment of these factors.

Specialized surveillance for individuals at high risk for melanoma: a cost analysis of a high-risk clinic.

IMPORTANCE: Regular surveillance of individuals at high risk for cutaneous melanoma improves early detection and reduces unnecessary excisions; however, a cost analysis of this specialized service has not been undertaken. OBJECTIVE: To determine the mean cost per patient of surveillance in a high-risk clinic from the health service and societal perspectives. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We used a bottom-up microcosting method to measure resource use in a consecutive sample of 102 patients treated in a high-risk hospital-based clinic in Australia during a 12-month period. EXPOSURE: Surveillance and treatment of melanoma. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: All surveillance and treatment procedures were identified through direct observation, review of medical records, and interviews with staff and were valued using scheduled fees from the Australian government. Societal costs included transportation and loss of productivity. RESULTS: The mean number of clinic visits per year was 2.7 (95% CI, 2.5-2.8) for surveillance and 3.8 (95% CI, 3.4-4.1) for patients requiring surgical excisions. The mean annual cost per patient to the health system was A $882 (95% CI, A $783-$982) (US $599 [95% CI, US $532-$665]); the cost discounted across 20 years was A $11,546 (95% CI, A $10,263-$12,829) (US $7839 [95% CI, US $6969-$8710]). The mean annual societal cost per patient (excluding health system costs) was A $972 (95% CI, A $899-$1045) (US $660 [95% CI, US $611-$710]); the cost discounted across 20 years was A $12,721 (95% CI, A $12,554-$14,463) (US $8637 [95% CI, US $8523-$9820]). Diagnosis of melanoma or nonmelanoma skin cancer and frequent excisions for benign lesions in a relatively small number of patients was responsible for positively skewed health system costs. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Microcosting techniques provide an accurate cost estimate for the provision of a specialized service. The high societal cost reflects the time that patients are willing to invest to attend the high-risk clinic. This alternative model of care for a high-risk population has relevance for decision making about health policy.

Physical activity and endometrial cancer risk: a review of the current evidence, biologic mechanisms and the quality of physical activity assessment methods.

OBJECTIVES: To (1) determine the nature of the association between physical activity and endometrial cancer risk; (2) assess the contribution of variation in the quality of physical activity measurement to inconsistencies in study results; and (3) review the biologic mechanisms that might mediate possible effects of physical activity on risk. METHODS: We reviewed and summarized all published epidemiologic studies examining physical activity and endometrial cancer risk, and evidence relating to possible biologic mechanisms. We assigned each study a quality score for physical activity measurement. RESULTS: Fourteen of the 18 studies showed a convincing or possible protective effect of physical activity on endometrial cancer risk, with an average relative risk reduction of around 30%. A dose-response relation was observed in 7 of 13 studies. The quality score was not related to the observed strength of association or the presence of a dose-response relation. There was epidemiologic and biologic evidence that vigorous activity, as well as light and moderate intensity activities, such as housework, gardening or walking for transportation, may reduce risk. CONCLUSIONS: Physical activity probably has a protective role in endometrial cancer development. More epidemiologic and biologic evidence is needed to make conclusive recommendations on optimal types, characteristics or time periods of physical activity.