American Cancer Society; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Swiss Re; Swiss Cancer Research foundation; Swiss Cancer League; Institut National du Cancer; La Ligue Contre le Cancer; Rossy Family Foundation; US National Cancer Institute; and the Susan G Komen Foundation.

SummaryBackgroundGlobal inequalities in access to health care are reflected in differences in cancer survival. The CONCORD programme was designed to assess worldwide differences and trends in population-based cancer survival. In this population-based study, we aimed to estimate survival inequalities globally for several subtypes of childhood leukaemia.MethodsCancer registries participating in CONCORD were asked to submit tumour registrations for all children aged 0–14 years who were diagnosed with leukaemia between Jan 1, 1995, and Dec 31, 2009, and followed up until Dec 31, 2009. Haematological malignancies were defined by morphology codes in the International Classification of Diseases for Oncology, third revision. We excluded data from registries from which the data were judged to be less reliable, or included only lymphomas, and data from countries in which data for fewer than ten children were available for analysis. We also excluded records because of a missing date of birth, diagnosis, or last known vital status. We estimated 5-year net survival (ie, the probability of surviving at least 5 years after diagnosis, after controlling for deaths from other causes [background mortality]) for children by calendar period of diagnosis (1995–99, 2000–04, and 2005–09), sex, and age at diagnosis (<1, 1–4, 5–9, and 10–14 years, inclusive) using appropriate life tables. We estimated age-standardised net survival for international comparison of survival trends for precursor-cell acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) and acute myeloid leukaemia (AML).FindingsWe analysed data from 89 828 children from 198 registries in 53 countries. During 1995–99, 5-year age-standardised net survival for all lymphoid leukaemias combined ranged from 10·6% (95% CI 3·1–18·2) in the Chinese registries to 86·8% (81·6–92·0) in Austria. International differences in 5-year survival for childhood leukaemia were still large as recently as 2005–09, when age-standardised survival for lymphoid leukaemias ranged from 52·4% (95% CI 42·8–61·9) in Cali, Colombia, to 91·6% (89·5–93·6) in the German registries, and for AML ranged from 33·3% (18·9–47·7) in Bulgaria to 78·2% (72·0–84·3) in German registries. Survival from precursor-cell ALL was very close to that of all lymphoid leukaemias combined, with similar variation. In most countries, survival from AML improved more than survival from ALL between 2000–04 and 2005–09. Survival for each type of leukaemia varied markedly with age: survival was highest for children aged 1–4 and 5–9 years, and lowest for infants (younger than 1 year). There was no systematic difference in survival between boys and girls.InterpretationGlobal inequalities in survival from childhood leukaemia have narrowed with time but remain very wide for both ALL and AML. These results provide useful information for health policy makers on the effectiveness of health-care systems and for cancer policy makers to reduce inequalities in childhood cancer survival.FundingCanadian Partnership Against Cancer, Cancer Focus Northern Ireland, Cancer In...

The distribution of ovarian cancer histology varies widely worldwide. Type I epithelial, germ cell and sex cord-stromal tumours are generally associated with higher survival than type II tumours, so the proportion of these tumours may influence survival estimates for all ovarian cancers combined. The distribution of histological groups should be considered when comparing survival between countries and regions.

Background:Low cancer awareness may contribute to delayed diagnosis and poor cancer survival. We aimed to quantify socio-demographic differences in cancer symptom awareness and barriers to symptomatic presentation in the English population.Methods:Using a uniquely large data set (n=49 270), we examined the association of cancer symptom awareness and barriers to presentation with age, gender, marital status and socio-economic position (SEP), using logistic regression models to control for confounders.Results:The youngest and oldest, the single and participants with the lowest SEP recognised the fewest cancer symptoms, and reported most barriers to presentation. Recognition of nine common cancer symptoms was significantly lower, and embarrassment, fear and difficulties in arranging transport to the doctor's surgery were significantly more common in participants living in the most deprived areas than in the most affluent areas. Women were significantly more likely than men to both recognise common cancer symptoms and to report barriers. Women were much more likely compared with men to report that fear would put them off from going to the doctor.Conclusions:Large and robust socio-demographic differences in recognition of some cancer symptoms, and perception of some barriers to presentation, highlight the need for targeted campaigns to encourage early presentation and improve cancer outcomes.

Background:Campaigns aimed at raising cancer awareness and encouraging early presentation have been implemented in England. However, little is known about whether people with low cancer awareness and increased barriers to seeking medical help have worse cancer survival, and whether there is a geographical variation in cancer awareness and barriers in England.Methods:From population-based surveys (n=35 308), using the Cancer Research UK Cancer Awareness Measure, we calculated the age- and sex-standardised symptom awareness and barriers scores for 52 primary care trusts (PCTs). These measures were evaluated in relation to the sex-, age-, and type of cancer-standardised cancer survival index of the corresponding PCT, from the National Cancer Registry, using linear regression. Breast, lung, and bowel cancer survival were analysed separately.Results:Cancer symptom awareness and barriers scores varied greatly between geographical regions in England, with the worst scores observed in socioeconomically deprived parts of East London. Low cancer awareness score was associated with poor cancer survival at PCT level (estimated slope=1.56, 95% CI: 0.56; 2.57). The barriers score was not associated with overall cancer survival, but it was associated with breast cancer survival (estimated slope=−0.66, 95% CI: −1.20; −0.11). Specific barriers, such as embarrassment and difficulties in arranging transport to the doctor's surgery, were associated with worse breast cancer survival.Conclusions:Cancer symptom awareness and cancer survival are associated. Campaigns should focus on improving awareness about cancer symptoms, especially in socioeconomically deprived areas. Efforts should be made to alleviate barriers to seeking medical help in women with symptoms of breast cancer.

Background:Ethnic differences in cancer symptom awareness and barriers to seeking medical help in the English population are not fully understood. We aimed to quantify these differences, to help develop more effective health campaigns, tailored to the needs of different ethnic groups.Methods:Using a large national data set (n=38 492) of cross-sectional surveys that used the Cancer Research UK Cancer Awareness Measure, we examined how cancer symptom awareness and barriers varied by ethnicity, controlling for socio-economic position, age and gender. Data were analysed using multivariable logistic regression.Results:Awareness of cancer symptoms was lower in minority ethnic groups than White participants, with the lowest awareness observed among Bangladeshis and Black Africans. Ethnic minorities were more likely than White British to report barriers to help-seeking. South Asians reported the highest emotional barriers, such as lack of confidence to talk to the doctor, and practical barriers, such as worry about many other things. The Irish were more likely than the White British to report practical barriers, such as being too busy to visit a doctor. White British participants were more likely than any other ethnic group to report that they would feel worried about wasting the doctor's time. Overall, Black Africans had the lowest barriers. All differences were statistically significant (P<0.01 level), after controlling for confounders.Conclusions:Our findings suggest the need for culturally sensitive and targeted health campaigns, focused on improving recognition of cancer symptoms among ethnic minorities. Campaigns should tackle the specific barriers prevalent in each ethnic group.

Caffeine is odorless, bitter taste substance which can be naturally found in coffee, cocoa, tea leaves, and is intentionally added in food and pharmaceutical products. It can also be found in surface water in small concentrations where is often used as an excellent indicator of human waste. The aim of the work is determination of caffeine content in food, beverages, analgesics and surface water using solidphase extraction followed by high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). Caffeine content was determined in 12 commercial tea and coffee products, non-alcoholic energy drinks and food, 5 combined preparations of analgesics and the Danube samples collected from 7 representative locations. The results showed that caffeine content in food ranged 5,6-158 mg/100 g, tea samples 24,71-30,81 mg/100 ml, coffee samples 1328-3594 mg/100 g, energy drinks 9,69-30,79 mg/100 ml and in the Danube samples 15,91-306,12 ng/l. Caffeine content in combined commercial formulations of non-narcotic analgesics of all brands did meet specifications. The data suggested that the proposed HPLC method can be used for routine determination and control of caffeine content in different matrices.

The version in the Kent Academic Repository may differ from the final published version. Users are advised to check http://kar.kent.ac.uk for the status of the paper. Users should always cite the published version of record.