MJA
MJA

    The complex impact of COVID‐19 on cancer outcomes in Australia

    Karen Canfell, Karen Chiam, Carolyn Nickson and G Bruce Mann
    Med J Aust 2023; 219 (9): . || doi: 10.5694/mja2.52125
    Published online: 6 November 2023

    In 2019, before the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic, about 145 000 new cases of cancer (excluding non‐melanoma skin cancer) were diagnosed, and there were nearly 50 000 cancer‐related deaths in Australia.1 The cancer burden is expected to remain substantial over the next quarter‐century, with an estimated cumulative 4.56 million new cases and 1.45 million cancer deaths in that period.2 The impact of the pandemic on cancer care and outcomes is multifaceted and expected to be heterogenous across settings and subpopulations. This is partly due to differences in the stringency of public health controls, and thus the extent and timing of health services disruptions, which varied greatly between jurisdictions during the pandemic. The effect on specific cancer types also depends on their natural history, cancer control measures already in place, and susceptibility of those measures to broader public health controls. This article summarises the known data on the impact of the pandemic on cancer services, identifies gaps in current knowledge, and discusses the implications for future research priorities.

    Please login with your free MJA account to view this article in full

    LOGIN
    CREATE AN ACCOUNT

    Please note: institutional and Research4Life access to the MJA is now provided through Wiley Online Library.

    View on Wiley Online Library
    Online responses are no longer available. Please refer to our instructions for authors page for more information.

      Hepatocellular carcinoma surveillance in Australia: current and future perspectives

      Samuel Hui, Sally Bell, Suong Le and Anouk Dev
      Med J Aust || doi: 10.5694/mja2.52124
      Published online: 23 October 2023

      Summary

      • Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a leading cause of cancer‐related death worldwide, and is increasing in incidence in Australia.
      • For most people with cirrhosis and chronic hepatitis B, HCC screening and surveillance is recommended with 6‐monthly ultrasound. However, most patients with HCC are still diagnosed outside of surveillance with incurable disease.
      • While HCC surveillance almost certainly reduces cancer‐related mortality, the potential harms of surveillance are incompletely understood.
      • Surveillance uptake remains suboptimal in many contexts, and stems from a combination of patient, clinician and system level barriers.
      • Improved case‐finding strategies may be required to identify high risk individuals in need of surveillance, as cirrhosis and viral hepatitis are often asymptomatic.
      • HCC prediction models and novel surveillance tools such as biomarker panels, computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging may have a future role in personalised HCC surveillance.
      • Analyses suggest surveillance may be cost‐effective, but Australian data remain limited.
      • A centralised HCC surveillance program may ultimately have a role in delivering improved and more equitable care.

      Please login with your free MJA account to view this article in full

      LOGIN
      CREATE AN ACCOUNT

      Please note: institutional and Research4Life access to the MJA is now provided through Wiley Online Library.

      View on Wiley Online Library

      • 1 School of Clinical Sciences at Monash Health, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC
      • 2 Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Monash Health, Melbourne, VIC


      Correspondence: samuel.hui@monash.edu


      Open access:

      Open access publishing facilitated by Monash University, as part of the Wiley ‐ Monash University agreement via the Council of Australian University Librarians.

      Acknowledgements: 

      Samuel Hui is supported by a Research Training Program stipend from Monash University.

      Competing interests:

      No relevant disclosures.

      • 1. World Health Organization, International Agency for Research on Cancer. Liver. 2020. https://gco.iarc.fr/today/data/factsheets/cancers/11‐Liver‐fact‐sheet.pdf (viewed Jan 2023).
      • 2. Wallace MC, Preen DB, Short MW, et al. Hepatocellular carcinoma in Australia 1982‐2014: increasing incidence and improving survival. Liver Int 2019; 39: 522‐530.
      • 3. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Cancer in Australia 2021 (Cancer series no. 133; Cat. no. CAN 144). Canberra: AIHW, 2021. https://www.aihw.gov.au/getmedia/0ea708eb‐dd6e‐4499‐9080‐1cc7b5990e64/aihw‐can‐144.pdf.aspx?inline=true (viewed Jan 2023).
      • 4. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Cancer in Australia: in brief 2019 (Cancer series no. 122; Cat no. CAN 126). Canberra: AIHW, 2019. https://www.aihw.gov.au/getmedia/f4f2b22f‐8189‐4c51‐9e2a‐66384cbca683/aihw‐can‐126.pdf.aspx?inline=true.accessed (viewed Jan 2023).
      • 5. Hong TP, Gow P, Fink M, et al. Novel population‐based study finding higher than reported hepatocellular carcinoma incidence suggests an updated approach is needed. Hepatology 2016; 63: 1205‐1212.
      • 6. Adams LA, Roberts SK, Strasser SI, et al. Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease burden: Australia, 2019‐2030. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2020; 35: 1628‐1635.
      • 7. Huang DQ, El‐Serag HB, Loomba R. Global epidemiology of NAFLD‐related HCC: trends, predictions, risk factors and prevention. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 2021; 18: 223‐238.
      • 8. Bruix J, Sherman M, American Association for the Study of Liver D. Management of hepatocellular carcinoma: an update. Hepatology 2011; 53: 1020‐1022.
      • 9. Forner A, Reig ME, de Lope CR, et al. Current strategy for staging and treatment: the BCLC update and future prospects. Semin Liver Dis 2010; 30: 61‐74.
      • 10. Lubel JS, Roberts SK, Strasser SI, et al. Australian recommendations for the management of hepatocellular carcinoma: a consensus statement. Med J Aust 2021; 214: 475‐483. https://www.mja.com.au/journal/2021/214/10/australian‐recommendations‐management‐hepatocellular‐carcinoma‐consensus
      • 11. Reig M, Forner A, Rimola J, et al. BCLC strategy for prognosis prediction and treatment recommendation: the 2022 update. J Hepatol 2022; 76: 681‐693.
      • 12. Hong TP, Gow PJ, Fink M, et al. Surveillance improves survival of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: a prospective population‐based study. Med J Aust 2018; 209: 348‐354. https://www.mja.com.au/journal/2018/209/8/surveillance‐improves‐survival‐patients‐hepatocellular‐carcinoma‐prospective
      • 13. Cancer Council Australia Hepatocellular Carcinoma Surveillance Working Group. Clinical practice guidelines for hepatocellular carcinoma surveillance for people at high risk in Australia. https://app.magicapp.org/#/guideline/7585 (viewed Sept 2023).
      • 14. Llovet JM, Brú C, Bruix J. Prognosis of hepatocellular carcinoma: the BCLC staging classification. Semin Liver Dis 1999; 19: 329‐338.
      • 15. European Association for the Study of the Liver. EASL clinical practice guidelines: management of hepatocellular carcinoma. J Hepatol 2018; 69: 182‐236.
      • 16. Marrero JA, Kulik LM, Sirlin CB, et al. Diagnosis, staging, and management of hepatocellular carcinoma: 2018 practice guidance by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases. Hepatology 2018; 68: 723‐750.
      • 17. Omata M, Cheng AL, Kokudo N, et al. Asia‐Pacific clinical practice guidelines on the management of hepatocellular carcinoma: a 2017 update. Hepatol Int 2017; 11: 317‐370.
      • 18. Sheu JC, Sung JL, Chen DS, et al. Growth rate of asymptomatic hepatocellular carcinoma and its clinical implications. Gastroenterology 1985; 89: 259‐266.
      • 19. Nathani P, Gopal P, Rich N, et al. Hepatocellular carcinoma tumour volume doubling time: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Gut 2021; 70: 401.
      • 20. Zhang BH, Yang BH, Tang ZY. Randomized controlled trial of screening for hepatocellular carcinoma. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2004; 130: 417‐422.
      • 21. Singal AG, Zhang E, Narasimman M, et al. HCC surveillance improves early detection, curative treatment receipt, and survival in patients with cirrhosis: A meta‐analysis. J Hepatol 2022; 77: 128‐139.
      • 22. Singal AG, Mittal S, Yerokun OA, et al. Hepatocellular carcinoma screening associated with early tumor detection and improved survival among patients with cirrhosis in the US. Am J Med 2017; 130: 1099‐1106.e1.
      • 23. Gates TJ. Screening for cancer: evaluating the evidence. Am Fam Physician 2001; 63: 513‐522.
      • 24. Poustchi H, Farrell GC, Strasser SI, et al. Feasibility of conducting a randomized control trial for liver cancer screening: is a randomized controlled trial for liver cancer screening feasible or still needed? Hepatology 2011; 54: 1998‐2004.
      • 25. Atiq O, Tiro J, Yopp AC, et al. An assessment of benefits and harms of hepatocellular carcinoma surveillance in patients with cirrhosis. Hepatology 2017; 65: 1196‐1205.
      • 26. Konerman MA, Verma A, Zhao B, et al. Frequency and outcomes of abnormal imaging in patients with cirrhosis enrolled in a hepatocellular carcinoma surveillance program. Liver Transpl 2019; 25: 369‐379.
      • 27. Singal AG, Patibandla S, Obi J, et al. Benefits and harms of hepatocellular carcinoma surveillance in a prospective cohort of patients with cirrhosis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2021; 19: 1925‐1932.e1.
      • 28. Lafata JE, Simpkins J, Lamerato L, et al. The economic impact of false‐positive cancer screens. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2004; 13: 2126‐2132.
      • 29. Brodersen J, Siersma VD. Long‐term psychosocial consequences of false‐positive screening mammography. Ann Fam Med 2013; 11: 106‐115.
      • 30. Zhao C, Jin M, Le RH, et al. Poor adherence to hepatocellular carcinoma surveillance: a systematic review and meta‐analysis of a complex issue. Liver Int 2018; 38: 503‐514.
      • 31. Singal AG, Li X, Tiro J, et al. Racial, social, and clinical determinants of hepatocellular carcinoma surveillance. Am J Med 2015; 128: 90.e1‐7.
      • 32. Wigg AJ, Narayana SK, Hartel G, et al. Hepatocellular carcinoma amongst Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples of Australia. eClinicalMedicine 2021; 36: 100919.
      • 33. Parker C, Tong SY C, Dempsey K, et al. Hepatocellular carcinoma in Australia's Northern Territory: high incidence and poor outcome. Med J Aust 2014; 201: 470‐474. https://www.mja.com.au/journal/2014/201/8/hepatocellular‐carcinoma‐australias‐northern‐territory‐high‐incidence‐and‐poor
      • 34. Howell J, Ward JS, Davies J, et al. Hepatocellular carcinoma in Indigenous Australians: a call to action. Med J Aust 2021; 214: 201‐202.e1. https://www.mja.com.au/journal/2021/214/5/hepatocellular‐carcinoma‐indigenous‐australians‐call‐action
      • 35. Purcell Y, Copin P, Paulatto L, et al. Hepatocellular carcinoma surveillance: Eastern and Western perspectives. Ultrasonography 2019; 38: 191‐199.
      • 36. Kudo M. Japan's successful model of nationwide hepatocellular carcinoma surveillance highlighting the urgent need for global surveillance. Liver Cancer 2012; 1: 141‐143.
      • 37. Beste LA, Ioannou GN, Yang Y, et al. Improved surveillance for hepatocellular carcinoma with a primary care‐oriented clinical reminder. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2015; 13: 172‐179.
      • 38. Del Poggio P, Olmi S, Ciccarese F, et al. A training program for primary care physicians improves the effectiveness of ultrasound surveillance of hepatocellular carcinoma. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2015; 27: 1103‐1108.
      • 39. Nazareth S, Leembruggen N, Tuma R, et al. Nurse‐led hepatocellular carcinoma surveillance clinic provides an effective method of monitoring patients with cirrhosis. Int J Nurs Pract 2016; 22 Suppl 2: 3‐11.
      • 40. Singal AG, Tiro JA, Murphy CC, et al. Mailed outreach invitations significantly improve hcc surveillance rates in patients with cirrhosis: a randomized clinical trial. Hepatology 2019; 69: 121‐130.
      • 41. Kennedy NA, Rodgers A, Altus R, et al. Optimisation of hepatocellular carcinoma surveillance in patients with viral hepatitis: a quality improvement study. Intern Med J 2013; 43: 772‐777.
      • 42. Wolf E, Rich NE, Marrero JA, et al. Use of hepatocellular carcinoma surveillance in patients with cirrhosis: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Hepatology 2021; 73: 713‐725.
      • 43. Low ES, Apostolov R, Wong D, et al. Hepatocellular carcinoma surveillance and quantile regression for determinants of underutilisation in at‐risk Australian patients. World J Gastrointest Oncol 2021; 13: 2149‐2160.
      • 44. Hui S, Sane N, Wang A, et al. Hepatocellular carcinoma surveillance in the telehealth era: a single‐centre review. J Telemed Telecare 2023: 1357633x231166032.
      • 45. Allard N, Cabrie T, Wheeler E, et al. The challenge of liver cancer surveillance in general practice: Do recall and reminder systems hold the answer? Aust Fam Physician 2017; 46: 859‐864.
      • 46. Simmons OL, Feng Y, Parikh ND, et al. Primary care provider practice patterns and barriers to hepatocellular carcinoma surveillance. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2019; 17: 766‐773.
      • 47. Walker M, El‐Serag HB, Sada Y, et al. Cirrhosis is under‐recognised in patients subsequently diagnosed with hepatocellular cancer. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2016; 43: 621‐630.
      • 48. Francica G, Borzio M. Status of, and strategies for improving, adherence to HCC screening and surveillance. J Hepatocell Carcinoma 2019; 6: 131‐141.
      • 49. Kramer JR, Davila JA, Miller ED, et al. The validity of viral hepatitis and chronic liver disease diagnoses in Veterans Affairs administrative databases. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2008; 27: 274‐282.
      • 50. Nehra MS, Ma Y, Clark C, et al. Use of administrative claims data for identifying patients with cirrhosis. J Clin Gastroenterol 2013; 47: e50‐54.
      • 51. Ahn JC, Attia ZI, Rattan P, et al. Development of the AI‐Cirrhosis‐ECG Score: an electrocardiogram‐based deep learning model in cirrhosis. Am J Gastroenterol 2022; 117: 424‐432.
      • 52. Barocas JA, Tasillo A, Eftekhari Yazdi G, et al. Population‐level outcomes and cost‐effectiveness of expanding the recommendation for age‐based hepatitis c testing in the United States. Clin Infect Dis 2018; 67: 549‐556.
      • 53. Deuffic‐Burban S, Huneau A, Verleene A, et al. Assessing the cost‐effectiveness of hepatitis C screening strategies in France. J Hepatol 2018; 69: 785‐792.
      • 54. Tan C‐K, Goh GB‐B, Youn J, et al. Public awareness and knowledge of liver health and diseases in Singapore. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2021; 36: 2292‐2302.
      • 55. Alqahtani SA, Paik JM, Biswas R, et al. Poor awareness of liver disease among adults with NAFLD in the United States. Hepatol Commun 2021; 5: 1833‐1847.
      • 56. Bittencourt PL, Codes L, Cesar HF, et al. Public knowledge and attitudes toward liver diseases and liver cancer in the Brazilian population: a cross sectional study. Lancet Reg Health Am 2023; 23: 100531.
      • 57. Lubel JS, Roberts SK, Howell J, et al. Current issues in the prevalence, diagnosis and management of hepatocellular carcinoma in Australia. Intern Med J 2021; 51: 181‐188.
      • 58. Liver Foundation. The Liver Foundation – 2022–23 pre‐Budget submission. https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2022‐03/258735_the_liver_foundation.pdf (viewed July 2023).
      • 59. Thurnheer MC, Schulz TR, Nguyen T, et al. Regional challenges: evaluation of a hepatitis outreach programme using transient elastography (FibroScan) in Victoria. Intern Med J 2016; 46: 273‐281.
      • 60. Ma X, Yang Y, Tu H, et al. Risk prediction models for hepatocellular carcinoma in different populations. Chin J Cancer Res 2016; 28: 150‐160.
      • 61. Voulgaris T, Papatheodoridi M, Lampertico P, et al. Clinical utility of hepatocellular carcinoma risk scores in chronic hepatitis B. Liver Int 2020; 40: 484‐495.
      • 62. Papatheodoridis G, Dalekos G, Sypsa V, et al. PAGE‐B predicts the risk of developing hepatocellular carcinoma in Caucasians with chronic hepatitis B on 5‐year antiviral therapy. J Hepatol 2016; 64: 800‐806.
      • 63. Tahata Y, Sakamori R, Yamada R, et al. Prediction model for hepatocellular carcinoma occurrence in patients with hepatitis C in the era of direct‐acting anti‐virals. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2021; 54: 1340‐1349.
      • 64. Semmler G, Meyer EL, Kozbial K, et al. HCC risk stratification after cure of hepatitis C in patients with compensated advanced chronic liver disease. J Hepatol 2022; 76: 812‐821.
      • 65. Perumpail RB, Wong RJ, Ahmed A, et al. Hepatocellular carcinoma in the setting of non‐cirrhotic nonalcoholic fatty liver disease and the metabolic syndrome: US experience. Dig Dis Sci 2015; 60: 3142‐3148.
      • 66. Pinyopornpanish K, Khoudari G, Saleh MA, et al. Hepatocellular carcinoma in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease with or without cirrhosis: a population‐based study. BMC Gastroenterol 2021; 21: 394.
      • 67. Farinati F, Marino D, De Giorgio M, et al. Diagnostic and prognostic role of α‐fetoprotein in hepatocellular carcinoma: both or neither? Am J Gastroenterol 2006; 101: 524‐532.
      • 68. Tzartzeva K, Obi J, Rich NE, et al. Surveillance imaging and alpha fetoprotein for early detection of hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with cirrhosis: a meta‐analysis. Gastroenterology 2018; 154: 1706‐1718.e1.
      • 69. Liebman HA, Furie BC, Tong MJ, et al. Des‐gamma‐carboxy (abnormal) prothrombin as a serum marker of primary hepatocellular carcinoma. N Engl J Med 1984; 310: 1427‐1431.
      • 70. Taketa K, Endo Y, Sekiya C, et al. A collaborative study for the evaluation of lectin‐reactive alpha‐fetoproteins in early detection of hepatocellular carcinoma. Cancer Res 1993; 53: 5419‐5423.
      • 71. Li C, Zhang Z, Zhang P, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of des‐gamma‐carboxy prothrombin versus α‐fetoprotein for hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review. Hepatol Res 2014; 44: E11‐25.
      • 72. Johnson PJ, Pirrie SJ, Cox TF, et al. The detection of hepatocellular carcinoma using a prospectively developed and validated model based on serological biomarkers. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2014; 23: 144‐153.
      • 73. Chan H, Vogel A, Berg T, et al. A comparative analysis of Elecsys GALAD and Elecsys GAAD score to detect early‐stage hepatocellular carcinoma in an international cohort. J Hepatol 2022; 77: S937.
      • 74. Singal AG, Tayob N, Mehta A, et al. GALAD demonstrates high sensitivity for HCC surveillance in a cohort of patients with cirrhosis. Hepatology 2022; 75: 541‐549.
      • 75. Yang JD, Addissie BD, Mara KC, et al. GALAD score for hepatocellular carcinoma detection in comparison with liver ultrasound and proposal of GALADUS score. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2019; 28: 531‐538.
      • 76. Singal AG, Hoshida Y, Pinato DJ, et al. International Liver Cancer Association (ILCA) white paper on biomarker development for hepatocellular carcinoma. Gastroenterology 2021; 160: 2572‐2584.
      • 77. Yoon JH, Lee JM, Lee DH, et al. A comparison of biannual two‐phase low‐dose liver CT and US for HCC surveillance in a group at high risk of HCC development. Liver Cancer 2020; 9: 503‐517.
      • 78. Pocha C, Dieperink E, McMaken KA, et al. Surveillance for hepatocellular cancer with ultrasonography vs. computed tomography – a randomised study. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2013; 38: 303‐312.
      • 79. Kim SY, An J, Lim Y‐S, et al. MRI with liver‐specific contrast for surveillance of patients with cirrhosis at high risk of hepatocellular carcinoma. JAMA Oncol 2017; 3: 456‐463.
      • 80. Chan MV, Huo YR, Trieu N, et al. Noncontrast MRI for hepatocellular carcinoma detection: a systematic review and meta‐analysis – a potential surveillance tool? Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2022; 20: 44‐56.e2.
      • 81. Lew JB, Feletto E, Wade S, et al. Benefits, harms and cost‐effectiveness of cancer screening in Australia: an overview of modelling estimates. Public Health Res Pract 2019; 29: 29121913.
      • 82. Carter HE, Jeffrey GP, Ramm GA, et al. Cost‐effectiveness of a serum biomarker test for risk‐stratified liver ultrasound screening for hepatocellular carcinoma. Value Health 2021; 24: 1454‐1462.
      Online responses are no longer available. Please refer to our instructions for authors page for more information.

        The National Indigenous Kidney Transplantation Taskforce: changing systems to achieve equitable access to kidney transplantation

        Jaquelyne T Hughes, Katie Cundale, Kelli J Owen and Stephen P McDonald
        Med J Aust 2023; 219 (8): . || doi: 10.5694/mja2.52107
        Published online: 16 October 2023

        Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people with chronic kidney disease seek good health, good kidney health, and good experiences of health care at all stages of their kidney journeys.1,2,3 Kidney replacement therapy is crucial for people with kidney failure, so needs to be accessed regularly, safely and sustainably alongside high quality cultural and clinical support. However, access to kidney transplantation, often the best kidney replacement therapy option, is not equally available to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in Australia.4

        Please login with your free MJA account to view this article in full

        LOGIN
        CREATE AN ACCOUNT

        Please note: institutional and Research4Life access to the MJA is now provided through Wiley Online Library.

        View on Wiley Online Library

        • 1 Rural and Remote Health, Flinders University, Darwin, NT
        • 2 Royal Darwin Hospital, Darwin, NT
        • 3 National Indigenous Kidney Transplantation Taskforce (NIKTT), South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute, Adelaide, SA
        • 4 Adelaide Medical School, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA
        • 5 Central and Northern Adelaide Renal and Transplantation, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, SA
        • 6 Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry (ANZDATA), South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute, Adelaide, SA


        Correspondence: katie@anzdata.org.au
        Acknowledgements: 

        We acknowledge and thank the Australian Government, represented by the Department of Health and Aged Care, for their funding of the National Indigenous Kidney Transplantation Taskforce (NIKTT) through an Indigenous Australians’ Health Programme grant. This funding enabled the work described here to be undertaken, as well as the publication of the supplement that accompanies this issue of the MJA. We thank the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people living with kidney disease and transplantation who have worked with the NIKTT. We acknowledge that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in Australia face inequities in accessing transplantation because of the barriers that exist within our health care system due to the lasting and ongoing impacts of colonisation. We thank everyone who has helped us to work towards improving access to transplantation. We thank and acknowledge the dedicated members of the NIKTT who have walked with us for the past few years, as well as the partner organisations and societies with whom we work on advancing access to kidney transplantation.

        Competing interests:

        No relevant disclosures.

        • 1. Devitt J, Anderson K, Cunningham J, et al. Difficult conversations: Australian Indigenous patients’ views on kidney transplantation. BMC Nephrol 2017; 18: 1‐14.
        • 2. Hughes JT, Dembski L, Kerrigan V, et al. Gathering perspectives – finding solutions for chronic and end stage kidney disease. Nephrology (Carlton) 2017; 23: 5‐13.
        • 3. Cormick A, Owen K, Turnbull D, et al. Renal healthcare: voicing recommendations from the journey of an Aboriginal woman with chronic kidney disease. Ren Soc Australas J 2022; 18: 88‐100.
        • 4. Wyld ML, Wyburn KR, Chadban SJ. Global perspective on kidney transplantation: Australia. Kidney360 2021; 2: 1641.
        • 5. Hughes, JT. Kidney health equity for Indigenous Australians: an achievable goal. Nat Rev Nephrol 2021; 17: 505.
        • 6. Mick‐Ramsamy L, Kelly J, Duff D, et al. Catching some air: asserting Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander information rights in renal disease – the final report. Darwin: Menzies School of Health Research, 2019. https://www.menzies.edu.au/icms_docs/307210_Catching_Some_Air.pdf (viewed Dec 2022).
        • 7. Hoy WE, Mott SA, McDonald SP. An update on chronic kidney disease in Aboriginal Australians. Clin Nephrol 2020; 93: 124‐128.
        • 8. Garrard E, McDonald SP. Improving access to and outcomes of kidney transplantation for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander People in Australia: performance report. Sydney: TSANZ, 2019. https://tsanz.com.au/storage/NIKTT/TSANZ‐Performance‐Report‐‐‐Improving‐Indigenous‐Transplant‐Outcomes‐Final‐edited‐1.pdf (viewed Dec 2022).
        • 9. Tiong MK, Thomas S, Fernandes DK, Cherian S. Examining barriers to timely waitlisting for kidney transplantation for Indigenous Australians in Central Australia. Intern Med J 2022; 52: 288‐294.
        • 10. Sypek MP, Clayton PA, Lim W, et al. Access to waitlisting for deceased donor kidney transplantation in Australia. Nephrology (Carlton) 2019; 24: 758‐766.
        • 11. Hughes JT, Cundale K, Owen K, McDonald SP. Advancing accessible kidney transplantation for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples: the National Indigenous Kidney Transplantation Taskforce. Med J Aust 2023; 219 (8 Suppl): S3‐S6.
        • 12. Cundale K, McDonald SP, Irish A, et al. Improving equity in access to kidney transplantation: implementing targeted models of care focused on improving timely access to waitlisting. Med J Aust 2023; 219 (8 Suppl): S7‐S10.
        • 13. Hughes JT, Owen K, Kelly J, et al. Cultural bias in kidney care and transplantation: review and recommendations to improve kidney care for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. Med J Aust 2023; 219 (8 Suppl): S11‐S14.
        • 14. Owen K, Cundale K, Hughes JT, et al. From talk to action: Indigenous reference groups drive practice change in kidney transplantation care. Med J Aust 2023; 219 (8 Suppl): S15‐S18.
        • 15. Hughes JT, Cundale K, Webster AC, et al. Towards equity in kidney transplantation: the next steps. Med J Aust 2023; 219 (8 Suppl): S19‐S22.
        Online responses are no longer available. Please refer to our instructions for authors page for more information.

          Dietary management of eosinophilic oesophagitis

          Jessica Fitzpatrick, Sarah L Melton and Rebecca E Burgell
          Med J Aust 2023; 219 (8): . || doi: 10.5694/mja2.52101
          Published online: 16 October 2023

          Eosinophilic oesophagitis is a chronic inflammatory disease characterised by eosinophilic inflammation of the oesophagus and sometimes scarring, and is associated with difficulty swallowing, dyspepsia and choking. Since spontaneous resolution is rare, therapeutic options have centred around use of medication or dietary manipulation. First described in the mid‐1990s, the condition is now recognised to affect about 42 per 100 000 of the adult population and 34 per 100 000 of the paediatric population.1 These data may be an underestimate of the true prevalence of eosinophilic oesophagitis due to the diagnosis requiring oesophageal biopsies and a high index of suspicion. Up to 12–23% of patients undergoing endoscopy for dysphagia and 50% of those presenting with food bolus obstruction have eosinophilic oesophagitis as the cause of their symptoms.2,3 The prevalence of eosinophilic oesophagitis has steadily (and in some populations exponentially) increased, and although prevalence data from Australia are lacking, anecdotally a similar phenomenon has been observed.2,4

          Please login with your free MJA account to view this article in full

          LOGIN
          CREATE AN ACCOUNT

          Please note: institutional and Research4Life access to the MJA is now provided through Wiley Online Library.

          View on Wiley Online Library

          • 1 Alfred Health, Melbourne, VIC
          • 2 Monash University, Melbourne, VIC



          Open access:

          Open access publishing facilitated by Monash University, as part of the Wiley – Monash University agreement via the Council of Australian University Librarians.

          Acknowledgements: 

          Jessica Fitzpatrick and Sarah Melton are supported by a Crohn's Colitis Australia PhD Scholarship.

          Competing interests:

          Rebecca Burgell has received speaker fees from Falk Pharmaceutical. Jessica Fitzpatrick has received speaker fees from Pepsi Co.

          • 1. Navarro P, Arias Á, Arias‐González L, et al. Systematic review with meta‐analysis: the growing incidence and prevalence of eosinophilic oesophagitis in children and adults in population‐based studies. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2019; 49: 1116‐1125.
          • 2. Dellon ES, Hirano I. Epidemiology and natural history of eosinophilic esophagitis. Gastroenterology 2018; 154: 319‐332.
          • 3. Kerlin P, Jones D, Remedios M, Campbell C. Prevalence of eosinophilic esophagitis in adults with food bolus obstruction of the esophagus. J Clin Gastroenterol 2007; 41: 356‐361.
          • 4. Cherian S, Smith NM, Forbes DA. Rapidly increasing prevalence of eosinophilic oesophagitis in Western Australia. Arch Dis Child 2006; 91: 1000‐1004.
          • 5. Straumann A, Katzka DA. Diagnosis and treatment of eosinophilic esophagitis. Gastroenterology 2018; 154: 346‐359.
          • 6. Dellon ES, Liacouras CA, Molina‐Infante J, et al. Updated international consensus diagnostic criteria for eosinophilic esophagitis: proceedings of the AGREE Conference. Gastroenterology 2018; 155: 1022‐1033.
          • 7. Mayerhofer C, Kavallar AM, Aldrian D, et al. Efficacy of elimination diets in eosinophilic esophagitis: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2023; 21: 2197‐2210.
          • 8. Dhar A, Haboubi HN, Attwood SE, et al. British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) and British Society of Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition (BSPGHAN) joint consensus guidelines on the diagnosis and management of eosinophilic oesophagitis in children and adults. Gut 2022; 71: 1459‐1487.
          • 9. Lucendo AJ, Arias Á, Molina‐Infante J. Efficacy of proton pump inhibitor drugs for inducing clinical and histologic remission in patients with symptomatic esophageal eosinophilia: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2016; 14: 13‐22.
          • 10. Rank MA, Sharaf RN, Furuta GT, et al. Technical review on the management of eosinophilic esophagitis: a report from the AGA Institute and the Joint Task Force on Allergy‐Immunology Practice Parameters. Gastroenterology 2020; 158: 1789‐1810.
          • 11. Arias A, González‐Cervera J, Tenias JM, Lucendo AJ. Efficacy of dietary interventions for inducing histologic remission in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Gastroenterology 2014; 146: 1639‐1648.
          • 12. Kagalwalla AF, Sentongo TA, Ritz S, et al. Effect of six‐food elimination diet on clinical and histologic outcomes in eosinophilic esophagitis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2006; 4: 1097‐1102.
          • 13. Spergel JM, Beausoleil JL, Mascarenhas M, Liacouras CA. The use of skin prick tests and patch tests to identify causative foods in eosinophilic esophagitis. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2002; 109: 363‐368.
          • 14. Molina‐Infante J, Arias Á, Alcedo J, et al. Step‐up empiric elimination diet for pediatric and adult eosinophilic esophagitis: the 2‐4‐6 study. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2018; 141: 1365‐1372.
          • 15. Eckmann JD, Ravi K, Katzka DA, et al. Efficacy of atopy patch testing in directed dietary therapy of eosinophilic esophagitis: a pilot study. Dig Dis Sci 2018; 63: 694‐702.
          • 16. Wechsler JB, Schwartz S, Arva NC, et al. A single‐food milk elimination diet is effective for treatment of eosinophilic esophagitis in children. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2022; 20: 1748‐1756.
          • 17. Teoh T, Mill C, Chan E, et al. Liberalized versus strict cow's milk elimination for the treatment of children with eosinophilic esophagitis. J Can Assoc Gastroenterol 2019; 2: 81‐85.
          • 18. de Rooij WE, Vlieg‐Boerstra B, Warners MJ, et al. Effect of amino acid‐based formula added to four‐food elimination in adult eosinophilic esophagitis patients: a randomized clinical trial. Neurogastroenterol Motil 2022; 34: e14291.
          • 19. Kliewer KL, Gonsalves N, Dellon ES, et al. One‐food versus six‐food elimination diet therapy for the treatment of eosinophilic oesophagitis: a multicentre, randomised, open‐label trial. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol 2023; 8: 408‐421.
          • 20. Sheedy K, Patel N, Porter J, Silva H. Cost and accessibility of empiric food elimination diets for treatment of eosinophilic oesophagitis. Nutr Diet 2022; 79: 238‐246.
          • 21. Wang L, Mara KC, Ravi K, et al. Predictors of histologic response to dietary therapy in eosinophilic oesophagitis. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2022; 56: 1444‐1452.
          • 22. Egan M, Atkins D. What is the relationship between eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) and aeroallergens? Implications for allergen immunotherapy. Curr Allergy Asthma Rep 2018; 18: 43.
          • 23. Safroneeva E, Straumann A, Coslovsky M, et al. Symptoms have modest accuracy in detecting endoscopic and histologic remission in adults with eosinophilic esophagitis. Gastroenterology 2016; 150: 581‐590.
          • 24. Philpott H, Dellon E. Histologic improvement after 6 weeks of dietary elimination for eosinophilic esophagitis may be insufficient to determine efficacy. Asia Pac Allergy 2018; 8: e20.
          • 25. Chang JW, Kliewer K, Haller E, et al. Development of a practical guide to implement and monitor diet therapy for eosinophilic esophagitis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2023; 21: 1690‐1698.
          • 26. Katzka DA, Smyrk TC, Alexander JA, et al. Accuracy and safety of the cytosponge for assessing histologic activity in eosinophilic esophagitis: a two‐center study. Am J Gastroenterol 2017; 112: 1538‐1544.
          • 27. Philpott H, Nandurkar S, Royce SG, Gibson PR. Ultrathin unsedated transnasal gastroscopy in monitoring eosinophilic esophagitis. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2016; 31: 590‐594.
          Online responses are no longer available. Please refer to our instructions for authors page for more information.

            Undiagnosed coeliac disease identified by active case finding in first degree relatives of people with coeliac disease in Australia: a prospective observational study

            Richard Muir, Anuj Sehgal, Jason A Tye‐Din and A James M Daveson
            Med J Aust || doi: 10.5694/mja2.52105
            Published online: 2 October 2023

            Coeliac disease is a lifelong, systemic inflammatory disease triggered by dietary gluten.1 Expeditious diagnosis and treatment can reduce morbidity and the impact on quality of life, but many people with the disorder have not been tested and consequently have not been diagnosed.2 A family history of coeliac disease is the strongest risk factor,3 and active case finding among people in at‐risk groups is appropriate. A meta‐analysis found that the pooled prevalence of coeliac disease among 10 252 first degree relatives of people with diagnosed coeliac disease was 7.5%, but the local prevalence differed widely between Asia, Europe, North America, and South America.4

            Please login with your free MJA account to view this article in full

            LOGIN
            CREATE AN ACCOUNT

            Please note: institutional and Research4Life access to the MJA is now provided through Wiley Online Library.

            View on Wiley Online Library

            • 1 The Wesley Hospital, Brisbane, QLD
            • 2 St Andrew's War Memorial Hospital, Brisbane, QLD
            • 3 Wesley Research Institute, Brisbane, QLD
            • 4 The Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research, Melbourne, VIC
            • 5 The Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, VIC
            • 6 The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD


            Correspondence: jamesdaveson@uq.edu.au


            Open access:

            Open access publishing facilitated by The University of Queensland, as part of the Wiley – The University of Queensland agreement via the Council of Australian University Librarians.

            Acknowledgements: 

            This analysis was supported by direct funding for the Coeliac Disease and Immune Health Program at Wesley Research Institute.

            Competing interests:

            No relevant disclosures.

            • 1. Catassi C, Verdu EF, Bai JC, Lionetti E. Coeliac disease. Lancet 2022; 399: 2413‐2426.
            • 2. Anderson RP, Henry MJ, Taylor R, et al. A novel serogenetic approach determines the community prevalence of celiac disease and informs improved diagnostic pathways. BMC Med 2013; 11: 188.
            • 3. Elwenspoek MMC, Thom H, Sheppard A, et al. Defining the optimum strategy for identifying adults and children with coeliac disease: a systematic review and economic modelling. Health Technol Assess 2022; 26: 1‐310.
            • 4. Singh P, Arora S, Lal S, et al. Risk of celiac disease in the first‐ and second‐degree relatives of patients with celiac disease: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Am J Gastroenterol 2015; 110: 1539‐1548.
            • 5. Oberhuber G, Granditsch G, Vogelsang H, et al. The histopathology of celiac disease: time for a standardized report scheme for pathologists. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 1999; 11: 1185‐1194.
            • 6. Martínez‐Ojinaga E, Moline M, Polanco I, et al. HLA‐DQ distribution and risk assessment of celiac disease in a Spanish center. Rev Esp Enferm Dis 2018;1107: 421‐426.
            • 7. Singh P, Arora A, Strand TA, et al. Global prevalence of celiac disease: systematic review and meta‐analysis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2018; 16: 823‐836.
            • 8. Tye‐Din. Interpreting tests for coeliac disease: tips, pitfalls and updates. Aust J Gen Pract 2018; 47: 28‐33.
            • 9. Downey L, Houten R, Murch S, Longson D; Guideline Development Group. Recognition, assessment, and management of coeliac disease: summary of updated NICE guidance. BMJ 2015; 351: h4513.
            • 10. Al‐Toma A, Volta U, Auricchio R, et al. European Society for the Study of Coeliac Disease (ESsCD) guideline for coeliac disease and other gluten‐related disorders. United European Gastroenterol J 2019; 7: 583‐613.
            • 11. Rubio‐Tapia A, Hill ID, Kelly CP, et al; American College of Gastroenterology. ACG clinical guidelines: diagnosis and management of celiac disease. Am J Gastroenterol 2013; 108: 656‐676.
            Online responses are no longer available. Please refer to our instructions for authors page for more information.

              Child abuse and premature mortality: disrupting the harm cascade

              Leonie Segal and Harriet Hiscock
              Med J Aust 2023; 219 (7): . || doi: 10.5694/mja2.52092
              Published online: 2 October 2023

              In this issue of the MJA,1 Papalia and colleagues report extremely high age‐ and sex‐standardised rates of death before age 50 years among people who had experienced medically confirmed sexual abuse in Victoria before the age of 16 years. The all‐cause mortality incidence rate was more than eight times as high for this cohort as for the general population (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 8.25; 95% confidence interval [CI], 5.92–11.5); the difference with regard to external cause deaths (suicide, accidents, assaults) was greater following penetrative (IRR, 14.9; 95% CI, 10.9–20.5) than non‐penetrative sexual abuse (IRR, 8.92; 95% CI, 5.35–14.9).1 The reported risk ratios are higher than those reported for outcomes in other studies; for example, we found that the mortality risk (between the ages of 16 and 33 years) was 5.77 times as high for people removed to out‐of‐home care after the age of three years as for people who had no contact with child protection services.2 However, the magnitude of the reported IRRs are consistent with other studies; for instance, that the risk of attempted suicide by boys subjected to familial child sexual abuse is fifteen times the population level.3


              • 1 The University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA
              • 2 Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne, VIC


              Correspondence: leonie.segal@unisa.edu.au
              Competing interests:

              No relevant disclosures.

              • 1. Papalia N, Spivak BL, Ashford L, et al. Sexual abuse during childhood and all‐cause mortality into middle adulthood: an Australian cohort study. Med J Aust 2023; 219: 310‐315.
              • 2. Segal L, Armfield JM, Gnanamanickam ES, et al. Child maltreatment and mortality in young adults. Pediatrics 2021; 147: e2020023416.
              • 3. Duke NN, Pettingell SL, McMorris BJ, Borowsky IW. Adolescent violence perpetration: associations with multiple types of adverse childhood experiences, Pediatrics 2010; 125: e778.
              • 4. US Department of Health and Human Services. Child maltreatment and brain development: a primer for child welfare professionals. Child Welfare Information Gateway; Mar 2023. https://www.childwelfare.gov/pubpdfs/brain_development.pdf (viewed Aug 2023).
              • 5. Shonkoff JP, Garner AS; Committee on Psychosocial Aspects of Child and Family Health; Committee on Early Childhood, Adoption, and Dependent Care; Section on Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics. The lifelong effects of early childhood adversity and toxic stress. Pediatrics 2012; 129: e232‐e246.
              • 6. Amos J, Segal L. Disrupting intergenerational maternal maltreatment in middle childhood: therapeutic objectives and clinical translation. Front Psychiatry 2018; 9: 623.
              • 7. Bellis MA, Hughes K, Quigg Z, et al. Tackling adverse childhood experiences (ACEs): state of the art and options for action. 9 Mar 2023. https://phwwhocc.co.uk/resources/tackling‐adverse‐childhood‐experiences‐aces‐state‐of‐the‐art‐and‐options‐for‐action (viewed Aug 2023).
              • 8. Amos J, Todd B, Gibson B, et al. Using the Adult Exploration of Attachment Interview (AEAI) to break the cycle of intergenerational trauma: illustrations from a family reunification program. Aust N Z J Fam Ther 2022; 43: 168‐181.
              • 9. Armfield JM, Gnanamanickam ES, Johnston DW, et al. Intergenerational transmission of child maltreatment in South Australia, 1986–2017: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet Public Health 2021; 6: e450‐e461.
              • 10. Mulraney M, Hiscock H, Sciberras E, et al. Mental health difficulties across childhood and mental health service use: findings from a longitudinal population‐based study. Br J Psychiatry 2020; 217: 364‐369.
              • 11. Gnanamanickam ES, Nguyen H, Armfield JM, et al. Child maltreatment and emergency department visits: a longitudinal birth cohort study from infancy to early adulthood. Child Abuse Neglect 2022; 123: 105397.
              • 12. Australian Department of Health and Aged Care. Head to Health. Undated. https://www.headtohealth.gov.au (viewed Aug 2023).
              • 13. Ministry for Mental Health (Victoria). One‐stop mental health hubs for families a step closer [media release]. 13 July 2022. https://www.premier.vic.gov.au/one‐stop‐mental‐health‐hubs‐families‐step‐closer (viewed Aug 2023).
              Online responses are no longer available. Please refer to our instructions for authors page for more information.

                Consensus statement for the management of incidentally found brain white matter hyperintensities in general medical practice

                Thomas P Ottavi, Elizabeth Pepper, Grant Bateman, Mark Fiorentino and Amy Brodtmann
                Med J Aust 2023; 219 (6): . || doi: 10.5694/mja2.52079
                Published online: 18 September 2023

                Abstract

                Introduction: There is a paradigm shift in our understanding of white matter hyperintensities (WMH) found on brain imaging. They were once thought to be a normal phenomenon of ageing and, therefore, warranted no further investigation. However, evidence now suggests these lesions are markers of poor brain and cardiovascular health, portending an increased risk of stroke, cognitive decline, depression and death. Nevertheless, no specific guidelines exist for the management of incidentally found WMH for general medical practitioners and other clinicians ordering brain magnetic resonance imaging scans for diverse clinical indications. Informed by a literature review and expert opinion gleaned from stroke neurologists, medical and imaging specialists, and general practitioners, we present our consensus statement to guide the management of incidentally found WMH in adults.

                Main recommendations: When incidental WMH are found on brain imaging:

                • Perform a detailed history and examination to screen for neurological events.
                • Investigate for potential undiagnosed or undertreated cardiovascular risk factors, especially hypertension and diabetes mellitus.
                • Commence intensive and individualised cardiovascular risk management when risk factors are uncovered.
                • Treat underlying risk factors via accepted guidelines but note that antiplatelet and anticoagulant medications should not be prescribed for incidental WMH in the absence of an alternative indication.

                Changes to management as a result of this consensus statement: A brain health opportunity. We consider the discovery of incidental WMH on brain imaging to represent an opportunity to investigate for common cardiovascular risk factors and to optimise brain health. This can be commenced and monitored by the general practitioner or physician without delay in waiting for an outpatient neurology review.

                Please login with your free MJA account to view this article in full

                LOGIN
                CREATE AN ACCOUNT

                Please note: institutional and Research4Life access to the MJA is now provided through Wiley Online Library.

                View on Wiley Online Library

                • 1 John Hunter Hospital, Newcastle, NSW
                • 2 Monash University, Melbourne, VIC



                Open access:

                Open access publishing facilitated by Monash University, as part of the Wiley ‐ Monash University agreement via the Council of Australian University Librarians.

                Acknowledgements: 

                We thank and acknowledge Darshan Ghia, Bernard Yan, Mark Parsons, Andrew Wong, Neil Spratt, Ben Clissold, Anna Holwell, Henry Ma, Claire Muller, Kenneth Butcher, Candice Delcourt, Teddy Wu, and Anna Ranta for their contributions as the expert panel and their review of the manuscript. We also thank and acknowledge Andrew Lee, Rebecca Moore, Gregory Carter, and Kichu Nair for reviewing the manuscript.

                Competing interests:

                No relevant disclosures.

                • 1. Wardlaw JM, Smith EE, Biessels GJ, et al. Neuroimaging standards for research into small vessel disease and its contribution to ageing and neurodegeneration. Lancet Neurol 2013; 12: 822‐838.
                • 2. Wen W, Sachdev PS, Li JJ, et al. White matter hyperintensities in the forties: their prevalence and topography in an epidemiological sample aged 44–48. Hum Brain Mapp 2009; 30: 1155‐1167.
                • 3. de Leeuw FE, de Groot JC, Achten E, et al. Prevalence of cerebral white matter lesions in elderly people: a population based magnetic resonance imaging study. The Rotterdam Scan Study. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2001; 70: 9‐14.
                • 4. Debette S, Schilling S, Duperron MG, et al. Clinical significance of magnetic resonance imaging markers of vascular brain injury: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. JAMA Neurol 2019; 76: 81‐94.
                • 5. Hu HY, Ou YN, Shen XN, et al. White matter hyperintensities and risks of cognitive impairment and dementia: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of 36 prospective studies. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 2021; 120: 16‐27.
                • 6. Herrmann LL, Le Masurier M, Ebmeier KP. White matter hyperintensities in late life depression: a systematic review. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2008; 79: 619‐624.
                • 7. Lin J, Wang D, Lan L, et al. Multiple factors involved in the pathogenesis of white matter lesions. Biomed Res Int 2017; 2017: 9372050.
                • 8. Ferguson KJ, Cvoro V, MacLullich AMJ, et al. Visual rating scales of white matter hyperintensities and atrophy: comparison of computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis 2018; 27: 1815‐1821.
                • 9. Fazekas F, Chawluk JB, Alavi A, et al. MR signal abnormalities at 1.5 T in Alzheimer's dementia and normal aging. Am J Roentgenol 1987; 149: 351‐356.
                • 10. Griffanti L, Jenkinson M, Suri S, et al. Classification and characterization of periventricular and deep white matter hyperintensities on MRI: a study in older adults. Neuroimage 2018; 170: 174‐181.
                • 11. Bolandzadeh N, Davis JC, Tam R, et al. The association between cognitive function and white matter lesion location in older adults: a systematic review. BMC Neurology 2012; 12: 126.
                • 12. Scharf EL, Graff‐Radford J, Przybelski SA, et al. Cardiometabolic health and longitudinal progression of white matter hyperintensity: the Mayo Clinic Study of Aging. Stroke 2019; 50: 3037‐3044.
                • 13. Brown R, Low A, Markus HS. Rate of, and risk factors for, white matter hyperintensity growth: a systematic review and meta‐analysis with implications for clinical trial design. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2021; 92: 1271‐1277.
                • 14. Chokesuwattanaskul A, Lertjitbanjong P, Thongprayoon C, et al. Impact of obstructive sleep apnea on silent cerebral small vessel disease: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Sleep Med 2020; 68: 80‐88.
                • 15. Huang Y, Yang C, Yuan R, et al. Association of obstructive sleep apnea and cerebral small vessel disease: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Sleep 2020; 43: zsz264.
                • 16. Bashir A, Lipton RB, Ashina S, et al. Migraine and structural changes in the brain: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Neurology 2013; 81: 1260‐1268.
                • 17. Dobrynina LA, Suslina AD, Gubanova MV, et al. White matter hyperintensity in different migraine subtypes. Sci Rep 2021; 11: 10881.
                • 18. Mao YT, Goh E, Churilov L, et al. White matter hyperintensities on brain magnetic resonance imaging in people with epilepsy: a hospital‐based study. CNS Neurosci Ther 2016; 22: 758‐763.
                • 19. Mancuso M, Arnold M, Bersano A, et al. Monogenic cerebral small‐vessel diseases: diagnosis and therapy. consensus recommendations of the European Academy of Neurology. Eur J Neurol 2020; 27: 909‐927.
                • 20. Brouwers MC, Kho ME, Browman GP, et al. Development of the AGREE II, part 2: assessment of validity of items and tools to support application. CMAJ 2010; 182: E472‐E478.
                • 21. Atkins D, Best D, Briss PA, et al. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 2004; 328: 1490‐1488.
                • 22. Trevelyan EG, Robinson PN. Delphi methodology in health research: how to do it? Eur J Integr Med 2015; 7: 423‐428.
                • 23. van Middelaar T, Argillander TE, Schreuder FHBM, et al. Effect of antihypertensive medication on cerebral small vessel disease: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Stroke 2018; 49: 1531‐1533.
                • 24. Murray AM, Hsu FC, Williamson JD, et al. ACCORDION MIND: results of the observational extension of the ACCORD MIND randomised trial. Diabetologia 2017; 60: 69‐80.
                • 25. Wardlaw JM, Chappell FM, Valdés Hernández MDC, et al. White matter hyperintensity reduction and outcomes after minor stroke. Neurology 2017; 89: 1003‐1010.
                • 26. Su C, Wu H, Yang X, et al. The relation between antihypertensive treatment and progression of cerebral small vessel disease: a systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials. Medicine (Baltimore) 2021; 100: e26749‐e26749.
                • 27. Smith EE, Barber P, Field TS, et al. Canadian Consensus Conference on Diagnosis and Treatment of Dementia (CCCDTD) 5: guidelines for management of vascular cognitive impairment. Alzheimers Dementia (N Y) 2020; 6: e12056.
                • 28. SPRINT MIND Investigators for the SPRINT Research Group; Williamson JD, Pajewski NM, Auchus AP, et al. Effect of intensive vs standard blood pressure control on probable dementia: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2019; 321: 553‐561.
                • 29. Katsanos AH, Lioutas VA, Charidimou A, et al. Statin treatment and accrual of covert cerebral ischaemia on neuroimaging: a systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized trials. Eur J Neurol 2020; 27: 1023‐1027.
                • 30. Ji T, Zhao Y, Wang J, et al. Effect of low‐dose statins and apolipoprotein E genotype on cerebral small vessel disease in older hypertensive patients: a subgroup analysis of a randomized clinical trial. J Am Med Dir Assoc 2018; 19: 995‐1002.
                • 31. ten Dam VH, van den Heuvel DM, van Buchem MA, et al. Effect of pravastatin on cerebral infarcts and white matter lesions. Neurology 2005; 64: 1807‐1809.
                • 32. Fu JH, Mok V, Lam W, et al. Effects of statins on progression of subclinical brain infarct. Cerebrovasc Dis 2010; 30: 51‐56.
                • 33. Zhang H, Cui Y, Zhao Y, et al. Effects of sartans and low‐dose statins on cerebral white matter hyperintensities and cognitive function in older patients with hypertension: a randomized, double‐blind and placebo‐controlled clinical trial. Hypertens Res 2019; 42: 717‐729.
                • 34. Zhang J, Liu N, Yang C. Effects of rosuvastatin in combination with nimodipine in patients with mild cognitive impairment caused by cerebral small vessel disease. Panminerva Med 2019; 61: 439‐443.
                • 35. McNeil JJ, Woods RL, Nelson MR, et al. Effect of aspirin on disability‐free survival in the healthy elderly. N Engl J Med 2018; 379: 1499‐1508.
                • 36. Sharma M, Hart RG, Connolly SJ, et al. Stroke outcomes in the COMPASS trial. Circulation 2019; 139: 1134‐1145.
                • 37. Sharma M, Hart RG, Smith EE, et al. Rivaroxaban for prevention of covert brain infarcts and cognitive decline: the COMPASS MRI substudy. Stroke 2020; 51: 2901‐2909.
                • 38. Alberti KGMM, Eckel RH, Grundy SM, et al. Harmonizing the metabolic syndrome: a joint interim statement of the International Diabetes Federation Task Force on Epidemiology and Prevention; National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; American Heart Association; World Heart Federation; International Atherosclerosis Society; and International Association for the Study of Obesity. Circulation 2009; 120: 1640‐1645.
                • 39. Bokura H, Yamaguchi S, Iijima K, et al. Metabolic syndrome is associated with silent ischemic brain lesions. Stroke 2008; 39: 1607‐1609.
                • 40. Park K, Yasuda N, Toyonaga S, et al. Significant association between leukoaraiosis and metabolic syndrome in healthy subjects. Neurology 2007; 69: 974‐978.
                • 41. Espeland MA, Erickson K, Neiberg RH, et al. Brain and white matter hyperintensity volumes after 10 years of random assignment to lifestyle intervention. Diabetes Care 2016; 39: 764‐771.
                • 42. Verdelho A, Madureira S, Ferro JM, et al. Physical activity prevents progression for cognitive impairment and vascular dementia: results from the LADIS (Leukoaraiosis and Disability) study. Stroke 2012; 43: 3331‐3335.
                • 43. Bolandzadeh N, Tam R, Handy TC, et al. Resistance training and white matter lesion progression in older women: exploratory analysis of a 12‐month randomized controlled trial. J Am Geriatr Soc 2015; 63: 2052‐2060.
                • 44. Kono Y, Yamada S, Yamaguchi J, et al. Secondary prevention of new vascular events with lifestyle intervention in patients with noncardioembolic mild ischemic stroke: a single‐center randomized controlled trial. Cerebrovasc Dis 2013; 36: 88‐97.
                • 45. Kleindorfer DO, Towfighi A, Chaturvedi S, et al. 2021 Guideline for the prevention of stroke in patients with stroke and transient ischemic attack: a guideline from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke 2021; 52: e364‐e467.
                • 46. Commonwealth of Australia as represented by the Department of Health and Aged Care. Australian guideline for assessing and managing cardiovascular disease risk, 2023. https://www.cvdcheck.org.au/overview (viewed Aug 2023).
                • 47. Gons RAR, van Norden AGW, de Laat KF, et al. Cigarette smoking is associated with reduced microstructural integrity of cerebral white matter. Brain 2011; 134: 2116‐2124.
                • 48. Power MC, Deal JA, Sharrett AR, et al. Smoking and white matter hyperintensity progression: the ARIC‐MRI Study. Neurology 2015; 84: 841‐848.
                • 49. Wardlaw JM, Debette S, Jokinen H, et al. ESO guideline on covert cerebral small vessel disease. Eur Stroke J 2021; 6: CXI‐CLXII.
                • 50. Jackson CL, Redline S, Emmons KM. Sleep as a potential fundamental contributor to disparities in cardiovascular health. Annu Rev Public Health 2015; 36: 417‐440.
                • 51. Nishibayashi M, Miyamoto M, Miyamoto T, et al. Correlation between severity of obstructive sleep apnea and prevalence of silent cerebrovascular lesions. J Clin Sleep Med 2008; 4: 242‐247.
                • 52. Kim H, Yun C‐H, Thomas RJ, et al. Obstructive sleep apnea as a risk factor for cerebral white matter change in a middle‐aged and older general population. Sleep 2013; 36: 709‐715.
                • 53. Ho BL, Tseng PT, Lai CL, et al. Obstructive sleep apnea and cerebral white matter change: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. J Neurol 2018; 265: 1643‐1653.
                • 54. Bassetti CLA, Randerath W, Vignatelli L, et al. EAN/ERS/ESO/ESRS statement on the impact of sleep disorders on risk and outcome of stroke. European Journal of Neurology. 2020;27(7):1117‐1136.
                Online responses are no longer available. Please refer to our instructions for authors page for more information.

                  Financial support provided to male and female physicians by pharmaceutical companies in New Zealand: a cross‐sectional study

                  Leah Jones
                  Med J Aust 2023; 219 (6): . || doi: 10.5694/mja2.52057
                  Published online: 18 September 2023

                  Despite progress, gender differences persist in many areas of medicine. In the United States, female physicians are paid less, are promoted more slowly, and fewer hold leadership or senior academic positions than male physicians.1

                  Please login with your free MJA account to view this article in full

                  LOGIN
                  CREATE AN ACCOUNT

                  Please note: institutional and Research4Life access to the MJA is now provided through Wiley Online Library.

                  View on Wiley Online Library

                  • Te Whatu Ora Health New Zealand Te Toka Tumai, Auckland, New Zealand


                  Correspondence: leahjones@adhb.govt.nz

                  Correspondence: lkjones@hotmail.co.nz

                  Competing interests:

                  No relevant disclosures.

                  Online responses are no longer available. Please refer to our instructions for authors page for more information.

                    Lung cancer screening for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples: an opportunity to address health inequities

                    Alison Brown, Gail Garvey, Nicole M Rankin, Claire Nightingale and Lisa J Whop
                    Med J Aust || doi: 10.5694/mja2.52084
                    Published online: 11 September 2023

                    The implementation of a national Lung Cancer Screening Program (LCSP), commencing in July 2025, presents a significant opportunity to have an impact on an intractable health problem for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities.1 Lung cancer is the most common cancer and the leading cause of cancer death for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.2 The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander age‐standardised incidence rate was 85.2 cases per 100 000 for 2009–2013 and the mortality rate was 56.8 deaths per 100 000, which are double the rates found in non‐Indigenous populations.2 Lung cancer mortality rates for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are increasing, in contrast to falling rates in non‐Indigenous Australians.2 These diverging trends are expected to increase disparities for many years to come and clearly demonstrate the health system is failing Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. The disproportionate lung cancer burden means that an LCSP could deliver greater benefits to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities and reduce the disparity with non‐Indigenous Australians.

                    Please login with your free MJA account to view this article in full

                    LOGIN
                    CREATE AN ACCOUNT

                    Please note: institutional and Research4Life access to the MJA is now provided through Wiley Online Library.

                    View on Wiley Online Library

                    • 1 University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC
                    • 2 University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD
                    • 3 National Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT


                    Correspondence: alison.brown@unimelb.edu.au


                    Open access:

                    Open access publishing facilitated by The University of Melbourne, as part of the Wiley – The University of Melbourne agreement via the Council of Australian University Librarians.

                    Acknowledgements: 

                    Lisa Whop is supported by a National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Investigator Grant (2009380). Gail Garvey is funded by an NHMRC Investigator Grant (1176651). Claire Nightingale is supported by a Mid‐Career Research Fellowship (MCRF21039) from the Victorian Government acting through the Victorian Cancer Agency. Nicole Rankin is funded by an NHMRC Ideas Grant (2019/GA65812) and a Medical Research Future Fund Grant (2019/MRF2008603). The funding sources had no role in the content of this article.

                    Competing interests:

                    We received funding from Cancer Australia for conducting consultations with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander workforce around lung cancer screening but we were not directly funded for the publication of this article.

                    Online responses are no longer available. Please refer to our instructions for authors page for more information.

                      Prevalence, patterns of use, and socio‐demographic features of e‐cigarette use by Australian adolescents: a survey

                      Lauren A Gardner, Siobhan O'Dean, Katrina E Champion, Emily Stockings, Amy‐Leigh Rowe, Maree Teesson, Nicola C Newton, Lauren A Gardner, Siobhan O'Dean, Katrina E Champion, Emily Stockings, Amy‐Leigh Rowe, Maree Teesson and Nicola C Newton
                      Med J Aust || doi: 10.5694/mja2.52075
                      Published online: 11 September 2023

                      Adolescent e‐cigarette use (vaping) and its harms are public health concerns.1 A national survey in 2019 found that 10% of 14–17‐year‐old Australians had used e‐cigarettes.2 More recent studies, smaller or non‐representative, have suggested that the rate is rapidly increasing.3,4 Little is known about how e‐cigarette use varies by socio‐demographic factors, such as gender, socio‐economic status, and residential remoteness.

                      Please login with your free MJA account to view this article in full

                      LOGIN
                      CREATE AN ACCOUNT

                      Please note: institutional and Research4Life access to the MJA is now provided through Wiley Online Library.

                      View on Wiley Online Library

                      • 1 The Matilda Centre for Research in Mental Health and Substance Use, the University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW
                      • 1 The Matilda Centre for Research in Mental Health and Substance Use, the University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW



                      Open access:

                      Open access publishing facilitated by The University of Sydney, as part of the Wiley – The University of Sydney agreement via the Council of Australian University Librarians.

                      Acknowledgements: 

                      The Health4Life study was funded by the Paul Ramsay Foundation and the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC; Centre of Research Excellence in the Prevention and Early Intervention in Mental Illness and Substance Use [PREMISE]: APP11349009). Katrina Champion (APP1120641), Maree Teesson (APP1078407), and Nicola Newton (APP1166377) are supported by NHMRC fellowships. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

                      The Health4Life study was led by researchers at the Matilda Centre at the University of Sydney, Curtin University, the University of Queensland, the University of Newcastle, Northwestern University, and UNSW Sydney. We acknowledge all the investigators and research staff who have worked on the study, as well as the participating schools, students, and teachers. The research team also acknowledges the assistance of the New South Wales Department of Education, the Catholic Education Diocese of Bathurst, the Catholic Schools Office Diocese of Maitland–Newcastle, Edmund Rice Education Australia, the Brisbane Catholic Education Committee, and Catholic Education Western Australia for access to their schools.

                      Competing interests:

                      No relevant disclosures.

                      Online responses are no longer available. Please refer to our instructions for authors page for more information.
                      Subscribe to