No abstract

In a population survey, 2652 respondents aged 15+ years reported their preferred place of death, if dying of 'a terminal illness such as cancer or emphysema', to be home (70%), a hospital (19%), hospice (10%), or nursing home (<1%). The majority of respondents in all socio-demographic categories reported a preference for dying at home, with the greatest majorities occurring in younger age groups. After weighting to the age-sex distribution of all South Australian cancer deaths, 58% in our survey declared a preference to die at home, which is much higher than the 14% of cancer deaths that actually occurred at home in South Australia in 2000-2002. Multivariable analyses indicate that predictors of preferred home death include younger age, male, born in the UK/Ireland or Italy/Greece, better physical health, poorer mental health, and fewer concerns about dying at home. Predictors of preference for death in a hospice rather than hospital include older age, female, single, metropolitan residence, having higher educational and income levels, paid employment, awareness of advanced directives, and interpreting 'dying with dignity' as death without pain or suffering. Investigating the differences between preferred and actual places of death may assist service providers to meet end-of-life wishes.

BACKGROUND: Previous reports have described differences in biology and outcome for colorectal cancer based on whether the primary is right or left sided. Further division by right, left, and rectum or even exact primary site has also been explored. Possible differences in response to biological agents have also been reported based on side of primary lesion. METHODS: We explored the South Australian registry for metastatic colorectal cancer to assess if there were any differences in patient characteristics, prognostic markers, and treatment received and outcomes based on whether the primary was right or left sided. We also explored if differences exist based on left colon and rectum and by exact primary site. RESULTS: Two thousand nine hundred seventy-two patients were analyzed. Thirty-five percent had a right-sided primary. The median overall survival for the entire group right versus left was 9.6 versus 20.3 months (P <.001). Multivariate analysis confirmed side of primary as an independent prognostic factor. For the group that had active therapy, defined as chemotherapy (6 metastasis resection), median overall survival was right, 18.2 months; and left, 29.4 months (P <.001). Importantly, we found no suggestion of major differences if left side was divided by left colon and rectum, and trends by individual site still supported a left and right division. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with a right-sided primary have more negative prognostic factors and indeed have inferior outcomes compared with those with a left-sided primary. Our data with further breakdown by exact site still favor a simple left-versus-right division moving forward for metastatic colorectal cancer. Cancer 2015;121:830-5.

The average age at diagnosis for colorectal cancer (CRC) in Australia is 69, and the age-specific incidence rises rapidly after age 50 years. The incidence has stabilized or is declining in older age groups in Australia during recent decades, possibly related to the increased uptake of screening and high-risk surveillance. In the same time frame, a rising incidence of CRC in younger adults has been well-documented in the United States. This rise in incidence in the young has not been reported from other countries that share long-term exposure to westernised urban lifestyles. Using data from the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, we examined trends in national incidence rates for CRC under age 50 years and observed that rates in people under age 40 years have been rising for the last two decades. We further performed a review of the literature regarding CRC in young adults to outline the extent of current understanding, explore potential risk factors such as obesity, alcohol, and sedentary lifestyles, and to identify the questions remaining to be addressed. Although absolute numbers might not justify a population screening approach, the dispersal of young adults with CRC across the primary health-care system decreases probability of their recognition. Patient and physician awareness, aided by stool and emerging blood-screening tests and risk profiling tools, have the potential to aid in identification of those young adults who would most benefit from a colonoscopy through early detection of CRCs or by removal of advanced polyps.

The purpose of this study was to provide in-depth insight into men's experiences of prostate cancer, specifically: perceived stigma and self-blame, social isolation, unmet need and help-seeking. A qualitative descriptive approach was used. Semi-structured interviews were undertaken with 20 men diagnosed with prostate cancer, and thematic analysis was undertaken. Some participants perceived a stigma associated with prostate cancer and cancer in general, which sometimes acted as a barrier to disclosure. Self-blame and internalisation of cause was not a prominent issue. Participants' descriptions of emotional distress, social isolation and anxiety demonstrated the impact of prostate cancer. Social isolation was most commonly reported as a physical consequence of treatment and/or side effects. Participants felt both support and ongoing care were limited at post-treatment. Most did not seek or receive help for emotional or psychosocial problems from a formal source due to anticipated awkwardness, autonomous coping, not burdening others, unwanted sympathy and retaining privacy. Prostate cancer can cause considerable emotional and social burden for some men, and many are unlikely to seek or receive help. Men, and their support networks, require active encouragement throughout diagnosis, treatment and follow-up to overcome barriers and access additional support, particularly for sexual, emotional and psychosocial issues.

This review summarizes the findings of studies conducted in Australia between 1980 and 2008 that focused on the health status of migrants in one or more of Australia's National Health Priority Areas (NHPAs), identifies gaps in knowledge, and suggests further research directions. Systematic literature searches were performed on CINAHL, MediText, PsycINFO, and MEDLINE. It was found that the majority of migrants enjoy better health than the Australian-born population in the conditions that are part of the NHPAs, with the exception of diabetes. Mediterranean migrants have particularly favorable health outcomes. The migrant health advantage appears to deteriorate with increasing duration of residence. Many of the analyzed studies were conducted more than 10 years ago or had a narrow focus. Little is known about the health status of migrants with respect to a number of NHPAs, including musculoskeletal conditions and asthma.The health status of recently arrived migrant groups from the Middle East and Africa has not been explored in detail.

Participation in screening was associated with a breast-cancer mortality reduction of between 30 and 41%, depending on assumptions about screening self-selection bias. A downward mortality risk by recency of last screen prior to cancer diagnosis, and frequency of recent screening, is consistent with a screening effect.

No abstract