What are the mechanisms underlying the delivery of survivorship care information in Australia? A realist review.

OBJECTIVE: Quality survivorship information is an essential component of cancer care. However, survivors often report not receiving this information and healthcare professionals report limited practical guidance on how to effectively deliver survivorship information. Therefore, this study used realist review methods to identify mechanisms reported within the published literature for communicating survivorship information and to understand the contextual factors that make these mechanisms effective. METHODS: Full-text papers published in CINAHL, PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and Academic Search Ultimate were included. Studies included in this review were conducted in Australia between January 2006 and December 2023, and reported on how information regarding survivorship care was communicated to adult cancer survivors living in the community. This review utilized realist methodologies: text extracts were converted to if-then statements used to generate context-mechanism-outcome theories. RESULTS: Fifty-one studies were included and six theories for mechanisms that underpin the effective delivery of survivorship information were formed. These include: (1) tailoring information based on the survivors' background, (2) enhancing communication among providers, (3) employing dedicated survivorship staff, (4) providing survivorship training, (5) reducing the burden on survivors to navigate their care, and (6) using multiple modalities to provide information. CONCLUSIONS: Findings can inform practical guidance for how survivorship care information is best delivered in practice. Clinicians can apply this guidance to improve their individual interactions with cancer survivors, as can policymakers to develop healthcare systems and procedures that support effective communication of cancer survivorship information.

Incidence and survival for childhood cancer by endorsed non-stage prognostic indicators in Australia.

BACKGROUND: An international expert panel recently recommended 15 'non-stage prognostic indicators' (NSPIs) across eight childhood cancers, classified as essential or additional, for collection in population-based cancer registries. We aimed to describe the incidence distribution and survival of each of these NSPIs. PROCEDURES: Cases were extracted from the Australian Childhood Cancer Registry. The study cohort (n = 4187) comprised all children aged under 15 years diagnosed with an eligible cancer between 2010 and 2018, with follow-up until 31 December 2020. NSPI data were collected directly from each patient's medical records. Differences in 5-year relative survival were assessed using multivariable flexible parametric models, adjusted for sex and age group at diagnosis. RESULTS: The availability of data varied, exceeding 85% for all essential NSPIs apart from histologic subtype for Wilms tumours (69%) and lineage for acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (78%). Information on additional NSPIs tended to be recorded less often, particularly cytogenetic subtype for non-alveolar rhabdomyosarcoma (28%) and astrocytoma (4%). Eight NSPIs exhibited a significant difference in survival, with the largest disparity occurring among children with astrocytoma according to tumour grade (5-year relative survival of 18% for grade IV disease compared with 99% for grade I disease; p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrate that most of the recommended NSPIs can be retrieved from medical records in Australia in recent years, allowing the capability of assessing survival within patient subgroups of clinical interest. Reporting of NSPI data has the capability to inform local and global understanding of population-level disparities in childhood cancer survival.

Individual and area level factors associated with the breast cancer diagnostic-treatment interval in Queensland, Australia.

BACKGROUND: Delays to breast cancer treatment can lead to more aggressive and extensive treatments, increased expenses, increased psychological distress, and poorer survival. We explored the individual and area level factors associated with the interval between diagnosis and first treatment in a population-based cohort in Queensland, Australia. METHODS: Data from 3216 Queensland women aged 20 to 79, diagnosed with invasive breast cancer (ICD-O-3 C50) between March 2010 and June 2013 were analysed. Diagnostic dates were sourced from the Queensland Cancer Registry and treatment dates were collected via self-report. Diagnostics-treatment intervals were modelled using flexible parametric survival methods. RESULTS: The median interval between breast cancer diagnosis and first treatment was 15 days, with an interquartile range of 9-26 days. Longer diagnostic-treatment intervals were associated with a lack of private health coverage, lower pre-diagnostic income, first treatments other than breast conserving surgery, and residence outside a major city. The model explained a modest 13.7% of the variance in the diagnostic-treatment interval [Formula: see text]. Sauerbrei's D was 0.82, demonstrating low to moderate discrimination performance. CONCLUSION: Whilst this study identified several individual- and area-level factors associated with the time between breast cancer diagnosis and first treatment, much of the variation remained unexplained. Increased socioeconomic disadvantage appears to predict longer diagnostic-treatment intervals. Though some of the differences are small, many of the same factors have also been linked to screening and diagnostic delay. Given the potential for accumulation of delay at multiple stages along the diagnostic and treatment pathway, identifying and applying effective strategies address barriers to timely health care faced by socioeconomically disadvantaged women remains a priority.

Cost-utility analysis of a telehealth psychological support intervention for people with primary brain tumor: Telehealth Making Sense of brain tumor.

OBJECTIVE: To undertake an economic evaluation of a telehealth psychological support intervention for patients with primary brain tumor (PBT). METHODS: A within-trial cost-utility analysis over 6 months was performed comparing a tailored telehealth-psychological support intervention with standard care (SC) in a randomized control trial. Data were sourced from the Telehealth Making Sense of Brain Tumor (Tele-MAST) trial survey data, project records, and administrative healthcare claims. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were calculated based on the EuroQol-5D-5L. Non-parametric bootstrapping with 2000 iterations was used to determine sampling uncertainty. Multiple imputation was used for handling missing data. RESULTS: The Tele-MAST trial included 82 participants and was conducted in Queensland, Australia during 2018-2021. When all healthcare claims were included, the incremental cost savings from Tele-MAST were -AU$4,327 (95% CI: -$8637, -$18) while incremental QALY gains were small at 0.03 (95% CI: -0.02, 0.08). The likelihood of Tele-MAST being cost-effective versus SC was 87% at a willingness-to-pay threshold of AU$50,000 per QALY gain. When psychological-related healthcare costs were included only, the incremental cost per QALY gain was AU$10,685 (95% CI: dominant, $24,566) and net monetary benefits were AU$534 (95% CI: $466, $602) with a 65% likelihood of the intervention being cost-effective. CONCLUSIONS: Based on this small randomized controlled trial, the Tele-MAST intervention is a cost-effective intervention for improving the quality of life of people with PBT in Australia. Patients receiving the intervention incurred significantly lower overall healthcare costs than patients in SC. There was no significant difference in costs incurred for psychological health services.

Disease mapping: Geographic differences in population rates of interventional treatment for prostate cancer in Australia.

BACKGROUND: Treatment decisions for men diagnosed with prostate cancer depend on a range of clinical and patient characteristics such as disease stage, age, general health, risk of side effects and access. Associations between treatment patterns and area-level factors such as remoteness and socioeconomic disadvantage have been observed in many countries. OBJECTIVE: To model spatial differences in interventional treatment rates for prostate cancer at high spatial resolution to inform policy and decision-making. METHODS: Hospital separations data for interventional treatments for prostate cancer (radical prostatectomy, low dose rate and high dose rate brachytherapy) for men aged 40 years and over were modelled using spatial models, generalised linear mixed models, maximised excess events tests and k-means statistical clustering. RESULTS: Geographic differences in population rates of interventional treatments were found (p<0.001). Separation rates for radical prostatectomy were lower in remote areas (12.2 per 10 000 person-years compared with 15.0-15.9 in regional and major city areas). Rates for all treatments decreased with increasing socioeconomic disadvantage (radical prostatectomy 19.1 /10 000 person-years in the most advantaged areas compared with 12.9 in the most disadvantaged areas). Three groups of similar areas were identified: those with higher rates of radical prostatectomy, those with higher rates of low dose brachytherapy, and those with low interventional treatment rates but higher rates of excess deaths. The most disadvantaged areas and remote areas tended to be in the latter group. CONCLUSIONS: The geographic differences in treatment rates may partly reflect differences in patients' physical and financial access to treatments. Treatment rates also depend on diagnosis rates and thus reflect variation in investigation rates for prostate cancer and presentation of disease. Spatial variation in interventional treatments may aid identification of areas of under-treatment or over-treatment.

Treatment intervals and survival for women diagnosed with early breast cancer in Queensland: the Breast Cancer Outcomes Study, a population-based cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To assess associations between breast cancer-specific survival and timeliness of treatment, based on 2020 Australian guidelines for the treatment of early breast cancer. DESIGN: Population-based cohort study; analysis of linked Queensland Cancer Register, patient medical record, and National Death Index data, supplemented by telephone interviews. SETTING, PARTICIPANTS: Women aged 20-79 years diagnosed with invasive breast cancer during 1 March 2010 - 30 June 2013, followed to 31 December 2020. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Breast cancer-specific survival for women who received or did not receive treatment within the recommended timeframe, overall and for six treatment intervals; optimal cut-points for each treatment interval; characteristics of women for whom treatment was not provided within the recommended timeframe. RESULTS: Of 5426 eligible women, 4762 could be invited for interviews; complete data were available for 3044 women (56% of eligible women, 65% of invited women). Incomplete compliance with guideline interval recommendations was identified for 1375 women (45%); their risk of death from breast cancer during the follow-up period was greater than for those for whom guideline compliance was complete (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.43; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-1.96). Risk of death was greater for women for whom the diagnosis to surgery interval exceeded 29 days (aHR, 1.76; 95% CI, 1.19-2.59), the surgery to chemotherapy interval exceeded 36 days (aHR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.13-2.36), or the chemotherapy to radiotherapy interval exceeded 31 days (aHR, 1.83; 95% CI, 1.19-2.80). Treatment intervals longer than recommended were more frequent for women for whom breast cancer was detected by public facility screening (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.58; 95% CI, 1.22-2.04) or by symptoms (aOR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.09-1.79) than when cancer had been detected in private facilities, and for women without private health insurance (aOR, 1.96; 95% CI, 1.66-2.32) or living outside major cities (aOR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.18-1.62). CONCLUSIONS: Breast cancer-specific survival was poorer for women for whom the diagnosis to surgery, surgery to chemotherapy, or chemotherapy to radiotherapy intervals exceeded guideline-recommended limits. Our findings support 2020 Australian guideline recommendations regarding timely care.

Temporal changes in childhood cancer incidence and survival by stage at diagnosis in Australia, 2000-2017.

BACKGROUND: The Toronto Paediatric Cancer Stage Guidelines are a compendium of staging systems developed to facilitate collection of consistent and comparable data on stage at diagnosis for childhood cancers by cancer registries. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This retrospective, observational cohort study investigated changes in stage-specific incidence and survival for children diagnosed between 2000-2008 compared to 2009-2017 using the population-based Australian Childhood Cancer Registry. Information on mortality for each patient was available to 31st December 2020. Shifts in incidence by stage were evaluated using chi-square tests, and differences in stage-specific five-year observed survival for all causes of death over time were assessed using flexible parametric models. RESULTS: Stage was assigned according to the Toronto Guidelines for 96% (n = 7944) of the total study cohort (n = 8292). Changes in the distribution of incidence by stage between the two diagnosis periods were observed for retinoblastoma, with stage 0 increasing from 26% to 37% of cases (p = 0.02), and hepatoblastoma, with metastatic disease increasing from 22% to 39% of cases (p = 0.04). There were large gains in stage-specific survival over time for stage IV rhabdomyosarcoma (five-year adjusted mortality hazard ratio for 2009-2017 compared to 2000-2008 of 0.38, 95% CI 0.19-0.77; p = 0.01), stage M3 for medulloblastoma (HR = 0.41, 95% CI 0.21-0.79; p = 0.01) and metastatic neuroblastoma excluding stage MS (HR = 0.61, 95% CI 0.44-0.84; p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: These results indicate that improvements in childhood cancer survival in Australia are most likely due to refined management rather than changes in stage at diagnosis, particularly for metastatic solid tumours. Wide international uptake of the Toronto Guidelines will allow comprehensive evaluation of differences in survival between countries.

Geographical and spatial variations in bowel cancer screening participation, Australia, 2015-2020.

BACKGROUND: Participation in bowel cancer screening programs remains poor in many countries. Knowledge of geographical variation in participation rates may help design targeted interventions to improve uptake. This study describes small-area and broad geographical patterns in bowel screening participation in Australia between 2015-2020. METHODS: Publicly available population-level participation data for Australia's National Bowel Cancer Screening Program (NBCSP) were modelled using generalized linear models to quantify screening patterns by remoteness and area-level disadvantage. Bayesian spatial models were used to obtain smoothed estimates of participation across 2,247 small areas during 2019-2020 compared to the national average, and during 2015-2016 and 2017-2018 for comparison. Spatial heterogeneity was assessed using the maximized excess events test. RESULTS: Overall, screening participation rates was around 44% over the three time-periods. Participation was consistently lower in remote or disadvantaged areas, although heterogeneity was evident within these broad categories. There was strong evidence of spatial differences in participation over all three periods, with little change in patterns between time periods. If the spatial variation was reduced (so low participation areas were increased to the 80th centile), an extra 250,000 screens (4% of total) would have been conducted during 2019-2020. CONCLUSIONS: Despite having a well-structured evidence-based government funded national bowel cancer screening program, the substantial spatial variation in participation rates highlights the importance of accounting for the unique characteristics of specific geographical regions and their inhabitants. Identifying the reasons for geographical disparities could inform interventions to achieve more equitable access and a higher overall bowel screening uptake.

Evaluation of the telehealth making sense of brain tumor psychological support intervention for people with primary brain tumor and their caregivers: A randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: This pragmatic randomized control trial aimed to evaluate clinical efficacy of the Making Sense of Brain Tumour program delivered via videoconferencing (Tele-MAST) for improving mental health and quality of life (QoL) relative to standard care in individuals with primary brain tumor (PBT). METHOD: Adults with PBT experiencing at least mild distress (Distress Thermometer ≥4) and caregivers were randomly allocated to the 10-session Tele-MAST program or standard care. Mental health and QoL were assessed pre-intervention, post-intervention (primary endpoint), and 6-weeks and 6-months follow-up. The primary outcome was clinician-rated depressive symptoms on the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale. RESULTS: 82 participants with PBT (34% benign, 20% lower-grade glioma, 46% high-grade glioma) and 36 caregivers were recruited (2018-2021). Controlling for baseline functioning, Tele-MAST participants with PBT had lower depressive symptoms at post-intervention (95% CI: 10.2-14.6, vs. 15.2-19.6, p = 0.002) and 6-weeks post-intervention (95% CI: 11.5-15.8 vs. 15.6-19.9, p = 0.010) than standard care, and were almost 4 times more likely to experience clinically reduced depression (OR, 3.89; 95% CI: 1.5-9.9). Tele-MAST participants with PBT also reported significantly better global QoL, emotional QoL and lower anxiety at post-intervention and 6-weeks post-intervention than standard care. There were no significant intervention effects for caregivers. At 6-months follow-up participants with PBT who received Tele-MAST reported significantly better mental health and QoL relative to pre-intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Tele-MAST was found to be more effective for reducing depressive symptoms at post-intervention than standard care for people with PBT but not caregivers. Tailored and extended psychological support may be beneficial for people with PBT.

What are the post-treatment information needs of rural cancer survivors in Australia? A systematic literature review.

OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic literature review to critically assess the met and unmet post-treatment information needs of cancer survivors living in rural communities in Australia, to inform the improvement of survivors' transition from treatment in major cities to community care. METHODS: Cumulative index of nursing and allied health literature, PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane CENTRAL and Academic Search Ultimate databases and websites of 118 cancer organisations were searched for relevant Australian studies published since 2006. Key search terms included 'rural', 'remote', 'regional', 'cancer', 'survivor*', 'living with', and 'post-treatment'. Data reflecting study source, aims, methodology, and reported information needs were extracted and summarised. Study quality was assessed using Joanna Briggs Institute tools. RESULTS: Fifty-two articles met eligibility criteria. Only six of these specified a primary aim of understanding information needs for rural cancer survivors. Information on prognosis and recovery; managing treatment side effects; healthy lifestyle choices; referrals to support services, and face-to-face and written delivery of information at multiple time points were reported as needed and often lacking for rural cancer survivors. CONCLUSIONS: Co-ordinated, multi-step provision of information to support health and recovery after cancer treatment and beyond is likely to be particularly important for rural cancer survivors given their broad range of needs and reduced access to health care services. Findings provide useful recommendations to facilitate patients' transition home to rural communities after cancer treatment in major cities, however, an increased understanding of the information needs of rural survivors is required to inform the development of guidelines that can be used in clinical practice.

Skin cancer-related conditions managed in general practice in Australia, 2000-2016: a nationally representative, cross-sectional survey.

OBJECTIVE: Skin cancer is Australia's most common and costly cancer. We examined the frequency of Australian general practice consultations for skin cancer-related conditions, by patient and general practitioner (GP) characteristics and by time period. DESIGN: Nationally representative, cross-sectional survey of general practice clinical activity. SETTING, PARTICIPANTS: Patients aged 15 years or older having a skin cancer-related condition managed by GPs in the Bettering the Evaluation And Care of Health study between April 2000 and March 2016. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Proportions and rates per 1000 encounters. RESULTS: In this period, 15 678 GPs recorded 1 370 826 patient encounters, of which skin cancer-related conditions were managed 65 411 times (rate of 47.72 per 1000 encounters, 95% CI 46.41 to 49.02). Across the whole period, 'skin conditions' managed were solar keratosis (29.87%), keratinocyte cancer (24.85%), other skin lesion (12.93%), nevi (10.98%), skin check (10.37%), benign skin neoplasm (8.76%) and melanoma (2.42%). Over time, management rates increased for keratinocyte cancers, skin checks, skin lesions, benign skin neoplasms and melanoma; but remained stable for solar keratoses and nevi. Skin cancer-related encounter rates were higher for patients aged 65-89 years, male, living in Queensland or in regional or remote areas, with lower area-based socioeconomic status, of English-speaking background, Veteran card holders and non-healthcare card holders; and for GPs who were aged 35-44 years or male. CONCLUSION: These findings show the spectrum and burden of skin cancer-related conditions managed in general practice in Australia, which can guide GP education, policy and interventions to optimise skin cancer prevention and management.

The growing prevalence of childhood cancer survivors in Australia.

Survivors of childhood cancer have an increased risk of long-term health issues arising mostly from the side effects of treatment. Using population-based data from the Australian Childhood Cancer Registry (ACCR) for children aged 0-14 at diagnosis between 1983 and 2018, there were a total of 17,468 prevalent cases of childhood cancer survivors on 31 December 2018. We also found an 80% increase in the number of 5-year prevalent cases, from 1979 in 1988 to 3566 in 2018. Both short- and long-term prevalence estimates are important for monitoring childhood cancer survivorship and planning for the specific needs of this expanding cohort.

Severity and risk factors of interval breast cancer in Queensland, Australia: a population-based study.

BACKGROUND: Interval breast cancers (BC) are those diagnosed within 24 months of a negative mammogram. This study estimates the odds of being diagnosed with high-severity BC among screen-detected, interval, and other symptom-detected BC (no screening history within 2 years); and explores factors associated with being diagnosed with interval BC. METHODS: Telephone interviews and self-administered questionnaires were conducted among women (n = 3,326) diagnosed with BC in 2010-2013 in Queensland. Respondents were categorised into screen-detected, interval, and other symptom-detected BCs. Data were analysed using logistic regressions with multiple imputation. RESULTS: Compared with screen-detected BC, interval BC had higher odds of late-stage (OR = 3.50, 2.9-4.3), high-grade (OR = 2.36, 1.9-2.9) and triple-negative cancers (OR = 2.55, 1.9-3.5). Compared with other symptom-detected BC, interval BC had lower odds of late stage (OR = 0.75, 0.6-0.9), but higher odds of triple-negative cancers (OR = 1.68, 1.2-2.3). Among women who had a negative mammogram (n = 2,145), 69.8% were diagnosed at their next mammogram, while 30.2% were diagnosed with an interval cancer. Those with an interval cancer were more likely to have healthy weight (OR = 1.37, 1.1-1.7), received hormone replacement therapy (2-10 years: OR = 1.33, 1.0-1.7; > 10 years: OR = 1.55, 1.1-2.2), conducted monthly breast self-examinations (BSE) (OR = 1.66, 1.2-2.3) and had previous mammogram in a public facility (OR = 1.52, 1.2-2.0). CONCLUSION: These results highlight the benefits of screening even among those with an interval cancer. Women-conducted BSE were more likely to have interval BC which may reflect their increased ability to notice symptoms between screening intervals.

Survivorship care plans and information for rural cancer survivors.

PURPOSE: The purpose of the study was to investigate the amount and type of survivorship care information received by cancer survivors living in rural Australia and whether this varies according to demographic factors or cancer type. METHODS: Self-reported receipt of a survivorship care plan (SCP) and information on various aspects of survivorship care (e.g., managing side effects, healthy lifestyles, psychosocial advice and monitoring for recurrence) were collected from 215 cancer survivors who had returned home to a rural area in Queensland Australia after receiving cancer treatment in a major city within the previous 5 years (72% in the previous 12 months). Logistic regression was used to assess for differences across demographic factors and cancer type. RESULTS: Only 35% of participants reported receiving a SCP and proportions of those reporting the receipt of specific information varied from 74% for information on short-term side effects to less than 30% for information on finances, chemoprevention and monitoring for signs of recurrence. No significant differences were found in the receipt of survivorship care information across demographic factors or cancer type. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that cancer survivors living in rural areas are not consistently provided with adequate survivorship care information, particularly that pertaining to long-term health and recovery. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Without improved systems for delivering survivorship care information to patients returning home to rural communities after treatment, these cancer survivors risk missing out on necessary information and advice to maintain their health, wellbeing and long-term recovery.

Childhood cancer survival and avoided deaths in Australia, 1983-2016.

BACKGROUND: Large improvements in childhood cancer survival have been reported over recent decades. Data from cancer registries have the advantage of providing a 'whole of population' approach to gauge the success of cancer control efforts. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate recent survival estimates for children diagnosed with cancer Australia and to examine the extent of changes in survival over the last 35 years. For the first time, we also estimated the number of deaths among Australian children that were potentially avoided due to improvements in survival. METHODS: A retrospective, population-based cohort study design was used. Case information was extracted from the Australian Childhood Cancer Registry for 1983-2016, with follow-up to 31 December 2017. Eligible children were aged 0-14 with a basis of diagnosis other than autopsy or death certificate only. Five-year relative survival was calculated using the semi-complete cohort method for three diagnosis periods (1983-1994, 1995-2006 and 2007-2016), and changes in survival over time were assessed via flexible parametric models. Avoided deaths within 5 years for those diagnosed between 1995 and 2016 were estimated under the assumption that survival rates remained the same as for 1983-1994. RESULTS: Overall 5-year survival within the study cohort (n = 20,871) increased from 72.8% between 1983 and1994 to 86.1% between 2007 and 2016, equating to an adjusted excess mortality hazard ratio of 1.82 (95% confidence interval 1.67, 1.97). Most cancers showed improvements in survival; other gliomas, hepatoblastoma and osteosarcoma were exceptions. Among children diagnosed between 1995 and 2016, 38.7% of expected deaths within 5 years of diagnosis (n = 1537 of 3970) were avoided due to temporal improvements in survival. CONCLUSIONS: Survival for childhood cancer has continued to improve over recent years, thanks mainly to ongoing progress in treatment development combined with improved supportive care. Providing innovative measures of survival, such as avoided deaths, may assist with understanding outcome data produced by cancer registries.

Second Primary Cancers Following Cancer Among Adolescents and Young Adults in Queensland, Australia, 1982-2018.

Purpose: Increased risk of second primary cancers is an unwanted consequence of cancer survivorship. While the epidemiology of second cancers is well-documented for children and older people, less is known about second cancers among adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer survivors. Methods: Unit record data were obtained from the Queensland Cancer Register. The study cohort comprised Queensland residents aged 15 to 39 years who were diagnosed with a first primary invasive cancer between 1982 and 2013. Follow-up on second cancers was available for a minimum of 5 years to the end of 2018. Standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) were used to approximate the risk of a second primary cancer relative to the general population. Results: In total, 3086 second primary cancers were observed among 34,431 eligible AYA patients (9%), equating to an overall SIR of 1.59 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.53-1.64). Melanoma (n = 853, 28%) and female breast cancer (n = 594, 19%) were the most common types of second primary cancer in the study cohort. Relative risk of all second primary cancers combined among AYA patients was inversely associated with age and was highest within the period immediately after first diagnosis irrespective of age group; for example, patients aged 15-24 at first diagnosis recorded more than four times as many second primary cancers than expected within 2 years of their first cancer (SIR = 4.40, 95% CI 2.83-6.82). Conclusions: Detailed data on second primary cancers among AYA cancer survivors are important in promoting increased awareness and to inform the development of targeted prevention and surveillance strategies.

Long-term childhood cancer survival in Australia using period estimation.

Estimates of childhood cancer survival are usually reported at 5 years after diagnosis only. Using cases prevalent between 2014 and 2018 from the population-based Australian Childhood Cancer Registry, we used the period method to calculate relative survival up to 20 years post diagnosis by cancer type. Twenty-year relative survival for all childhood cancers combined (n = 14,353) was 83.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 82.6%-85.0%). Survival decreased only slightly after 10 years for most childhood cancers, except for some types of brain and liver tumours. These contemporary estimates of long-term survival provide valuable information to assist childhood cancer patients and their families in planning for the future.

Geographical and spatial disparities in the incidence and survival of rare cancers in Australia.

Rare cancers collectively account for around a quarter of cancer diagnoses and deaths. However, epidemiological studies are sparse. We describe spatial and geographical patterns in incidence and survival of rare cancers across Australia using a population-based cancer registry cohort of rare cancer cases diagnosed among Australians aged at least 15 years, 2007 to 2016. Rare cancers were defined using site- and histology-based categories from the European RARECARE study, as individual cancer types having crude annual incidence rates of less than 6/100 000. Incidence and survival patterns were modelled with generalised linear and Bayesian spatial Leroux models. Spatial heterogeneity was tested using the maximised excess events test. Rare cancers (n = 268 070) collectively comprised 22% of all invasive cancer diagnoses and accounted for 27% of all cancer-related deaths in Australia, 2007 to 2016 with an overall 5-year relative survival of around 53%. Males and those living in more remote or more disadvantaged areas had higher incidence but lower survival. There was substantial evidence for spatial variation in both incidence and survival for rare cancers between small geographical areas across Australia, with similar patterns so that those areas with higher incidence tended to have lower survival. Rare cancers are a substantial health burden in Australia. Our study has highlighted the need to better understand the higher burden of these cancers in rural and disadvantaged regions where the logistical challenges in their diagnosis, treatment and support are magnified.