Association of time spent on social media with youth cigarette smoking and e-cigarette use in the UK: a national longitudinal study

BACKGROUND

Social media may influence children and young people's health behaviour, including cigarette and e-cigarette use.

METHODS

We analysed data from participants aged 10-25 years in the UK Household Longitudinal Study 2015-2021. The amount of social media use reported on a normal weekday was related to current cigarette smoking and e-cigarette use. Generalised estimating equation (GEE) logistic regression models investigated associations of social media use with cigarette smoking and e-cigarette use. Models controlled for possible confounders including age, sex, country of UK, ethnicity, household income and use of cigarette/e-cigarettes by others within the home.

RESULTS

Among 10 808 participants with 27 962 observations, current cigarette smoking was reported by 8.6% of participants for at least one time point, and current e-cigarette use by 2.5% of participants. In adjusted GEE models, more frequent use of social media was associated with greater odds of current cigarette smoking. This was particularly apparent at higher levels of use (eg, adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 3.60, 95% CI 2.61 to 4.96 for ≥7 hours/day vs none). Associations were similar for e-cigarettes (AOR 2.73, 95% CI 1.40 to 5.29 for ≥7 hours/day social media use vs none). There was evidence of dose-response in associations between time spent on social media and both cigarette and e-cigarette use (both p<0.001). Analyses stratified by sex and household income found similar associations for cigarettes; however, for e-cigarettes associations were concentrated among males and those from higher household income groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Social media use is associated with increased risk of cigarette smoking and e-cigarette use. There is a need for greater research on this issue as well as potential policy responses.

Changes in diet and physical activity following a community-wide pilot intervention to tackle childhood obesity in a deprived inner-London ward

BACKGROUND

Local authorities in England have an important role in shaping healthy local environments contributing to childhood obesity. This study examined changes in diet and physical activity in primary school children following a three-year, complex, community-based intervention in Golborne ward, the second most deprived ward in London.

METHODS

The Go-Golborne intervention aimed to shape the local environment across multiple settings with the engagement of a large number of local government and community stakeholders in a joint approach. Activities focused on six co-created themes to make changes to local environments and reduce sugary snacks and beverage consumption, increase fruit and vegetable intake, promote healthy snacks, increase active play and travel, and reduce screen time. We analysed changes in self-reported diet and physical activity, collected annually between 2016 and 2019, from 1,650 children aged 6-11 years through six local schools, who all received the intervention. We used multilevel, linear and logistic random-slope regression models adjusted for time on study, baseline age, gender, ethnicity, deprivation quintile, school, and baseline weight status.

RESULTS

After three years of follow-up, there were reductions in sugar-sweetened beverage consumption (adjusted beta -0·43 occasions/day, 95% CI -0·55 to -0·32), fruit and vegetable consumption (adjusted beta -0.22 portions, 95% CI -0.44 to 0.001) and car travel to and from school (adjusted OR 0·19, 95% CI 0·06 to 0·66), while screen time increased (high versus moderate/low: OR 2·30, 95% CI 1·36 to 3·90). For other behavioural outcomes, there was no statistically significant evidence of changes.

CONCLUSION

Local authorities have substantial powers to make positive changes to the obesogenic environment but programmes remain under-evaluated. Results from the ambitious Go-Golborne intervention demonstrated mixed results in health behaviours following programme implementation. These results underline the importance of a coordinated and comprehensive policy response to support changes in wider environmental and social conditions as well as appropriate and holistic evaluations of initiatives to inform local actions on obesogenic environments.

Associations of social media use with smoking and e-cigarettes: a national longitudinal study

BACKGROUND

Social media use is high among children and young people and might influence health behaviours. We examined social media use and use of tobacco and e-cigarettes in the UK.

METHODS

We used data from participants aged 10-25 years from the UK Household Longitudinal Study (January 2015-January 2022). Participants were asked: "On a normal weekday, that is Monday to Friday, how many hours do you spend chatting or interacting with friends through a social website or app like that?". Specific social media platforms were not specified. Responses were none, less than 1 h, 1-3 h, 4-6 h, 7 h or more. Outcomes were current tobacco smoking and e-cigarette use. Generalised Estimating Equation (GEE) logistic regression models investigated associations of social media use with tobacco and e-cigarette use, and fixed effects analyses investigated changes in social media use with uptake of both products. Models included possible confounders such as age, sex, household income, ethnicity (White vs non-White) and use of tobacco or e-cigarettes by others within the home. All participants gave written informed consent.

FINDINGS

The analytic sample included 10 808 participants with 27 962 observations (mean age 15·7 years [SD 3·8], 5080 [47%] male, 5728 [53%] female, and 7868 [73%] White). Current tobacco smoking was reported at one or more timepoints by 929 (8·6%) participants, and current e-cigarette use by 270 (2·5%) participants. In adjusted GEE models, all levels of social media use were associated with greater odds of current smoking than no use. This association was particularly apparent at higher levels of use adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 3·11, 95% CI 2·41-4·03 for ≥7 h use vs no use), with similar associations for e-cigarettes (aOR 3·04, 2·11-4·40 for ≥7 h use vs no use). Fixed effects analyses also found increased use of social media to be associated with increased uptake of both products (eg, changing to using social media for ≥7 h/day was associated with >2 times the odds of taking up tobacco smoking [aOR 2·33, 1·28-4·24]).

INTERPRETATION

These analyses suggest an association between social media use and e-cigarette and tobacco use. Potential pathways include promotion of these products on social media. Further research with details on specific platforms would be useful as well as with longer follow-up time.

FUNDING

Cancer Research UK.

Patterns of cigarette and e-cigarette use among UK adolescents: a latent class analysis of the Millennium Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Patterning of cigarette and e-cigarette use among young people remains poorly characterized. We aimed to describe these patterns in the UK Millennium Cohort Study at age 14 and 17 years.

METHODS

Data on cigarette and e-cigarette use come from 9731 adolescents. Latent class analysis assigned participants to membership of classes of product use and multinomial logistic regression analyses assessed differences in the likelihood of belonging to classes by sociodemographic (age, gender, ethnicity, household income, maternal education and country of residence) and smoking-related social factors (caregiver tobacco use, caregiver e-cigarette use and peer smoking).

RESULTS

We identified four classes of use: 45.8% of adolescents 'continued to abstain' from cigarettes or e-cigarettes; 21.3% 'experimented' (used once or in the past but not currently) with cigarettes and/or e-cigarettes by age 17 but were not current users; 19.0% were 'late adopters', characterized by low levels of use at age 14 but high levels of experimentation and current use at age 17; and 13.9% were 'early adopters', characterized by high levels of experimentation and current use at ages 14 and 17. At age 17, 70.4% of 'early adopters' smoked cigarettes regularly plus an additional 27.3% experimented with cigarettes. Corresponding percentages for e-cigarettes were 37.9% and 58.9%. Tobacco and e-cigarette use by caregivers, and cigarette use by peers, were associated with being both 'late adopters' and 'early adopters'.

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately one in seven adolescents in the UK are 'early adopters' of nicotine products. This highlights the need to develop and implement effective policies to prevent nicotine use uptake.

Changing awareness and sources of tobacco and e-cigarettes among children and adolescents in Great Britain

INTRODUCTION

It is illegal in the UK to sell tobacco or nicotine e-cigarettes to people under the age of 18 years, as is displaying tobacco cigarettes at the point of sale. This paper examined changes in exposure to display of these products in shops and sources of these products among children and adolescent users over time METHODS: Data from representative repeated online cross-sectional surveys of youth in Great Britain (11-18 years) were used (2018-2022; n=12 445). Outcome measures included noticing product displays and sources of e-cigarettes and tobacco cigarettes. Logistic regressions examined the associations of these outcome variables over time and with sociodemographic variables.

RESULTS

Of 12 040 participants with complete data, 10.1% used some form of nicotine product (4.2% cigarettes, 2.9% e-cigarettes, 3.0% both) at least occasionally. The likelihood of noticing tobacco cigarettes on display fell over time for both supermarkets (2018: 67.1% to 2022: 58.5%) and small shops (2018: 81.3% to 2022: 66.3%), but the likelihood of noticing e-cigarettes in supermarkets rose (2018: 57.4% to 2022: 66.5%). Sources of tobacco cigarettes did not differ over time, but e-cigarette users were more likely to get their e-cigarettes from small shops in 2022 (51.2%) vs 2019 (34.2%) (OR 2.02, 95% CI 1.24, 3.29).

CONCLUSION

This study provides evidence that current policies to limit awareness of and access to both tobacco and e-cigarettes among adolescents in the UK may not be effective. UK policies on the advertising, promotion and sale of both tobacco and e-cigarettes need to be reinforced to deter use among children and adolescents.

Multistate transition modelling of e-cigarette use and cigarette smoking among youth in the UK

INTRODUCTION

E-cigarette use remains a controversial topic, with questions over how people transition between e-cigarette use and cigarette smoking. This paper examined transitions into and out of nicotine product use in a representative sample of UK youth.

METHODS

We used Markov multistate transition probability models on data from 10 229 participants (10-25 years old) in the UK Household Longitudinal Study (2015-2021). We used four product use states ('never', 'non-current use', 'e-cigarette only' and 'smoking and dual use') and estimated likelihood of transitions according to sociodemographic characteristics.

RESULTS

Among participants who had never used nicotine products, most were still non-users a year later (92.9% probability; 95% CI 92.6%, 93.2%); a small proportion transitioned to using e-cigarettes only (4.0%; 95% CI 3.7%, 4.2%) and cigarettes (2.2%; 95% CI 2.0%, 2.4%). Those aged 14-17 years were the most likely to start using a nicotine product. E-cigarette use was less persistent overtime than cigarette smoking, with a 59.1% probability (95% CI 56.9%, 61.0%) of e-cigarette users still using after 1 year compared with 73.8% (95% CI 72.1%, 75.4%) for cigarette smoking. However, there was a 14% probability (95% CI 12.8%, 16.2%) that e-cigarette users went onto smoke cigarettes after 1 year, rising to 25% (95% CI 23%, 27%) after 3 years.

CONCLUSION

This study found that although overall nicotine product use was relatively rare, participants were more likely to experiment with e-cigarette use than cigarette smoking. This was mostly not persistent over time; however, approximately one in seven transitioned to cigarette smoking. Regulators should aim to deter all nicotine product use among children.

Changes in diet and physical activity after a pilot intervention to tackle childhood obesity in a deprived inner-London community: an observational cohort study

BACKGROUND

Local authorities in England are uniquely positioned to modify obesogenic local environments contributing to childhood obesity. Evaluating the effects of local authority-led, community-wide approaches is challenging. This study examines changes in diet and physical activity in children aged 6-11 years after a 4-year, complex, community-based, pilot intervention in Golborne, one of the most deprived areas in London.

METHODS

The Go-Golborne intervention aimed to shape the local environment by building on local assets, connecting stakeholders in local government and the community, and synchronising existing activities. Activities focused on six themes to make changes to local environments and reduce the consumption of sugary snacks and beverages, increase fruit and vegetable intake, promote healthy snacks, increase active play and travel, and reduce screen time. We analysed changes in self-reported diet and physical activity, collected annually in 2016-19, from children from six local schools. Results were compared with the data collected at baseline. We used multilevel, linear (for dietary outcomes), and logistic (for physical activity) random-slope regression models to examine changes in diet and physical activity by time on study, adjusting for baseline age, sex, ethnicity, deprivation quintile, school, and baseline weight status. Dietary outcomes were calculated by summing the total occasions a participant indicated they ate or drank a certain food or drink (reported as portions per day, expressed as a β coefficient). The physical activity outcomes were developed by creating six binary variables to distinguish those who were most active from those who were least active.

FINDINGS

1650 children (mean age 7·9 years [SD:1·6]; 808 [49%] girls and 842 [51%] boys) were included. After 3 years of follow-up, we noted reductions in sugary beverage consumption (adjusted β -0·43 portions [95% CI -0·55 to -0·32]; p<0·0001) and car travel to and from school (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0·19 [95% CI 0·06 to 0·66]; p<0·0001), whereas screen time increased (high vs moderate or low; 2·30 [1·36 to 3·90]; p=0·0021). For other dietary and physical activity outcomes, no evidence of changes and no variation by subgroups were noted.

INTERPRETATION

Local authorities can make changes to the obesogenic environment, and mixed results from the Go-Golborne intervention show that collaboration is possible between academics, local authorities, and the community, highlighting the need for robust intervention design in real-world settings, where the need for practical community interventions are met alongside academic rigour.

FUNDING

Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea. CB is funded by the School for Public Health Research of the National Institute for Health and Care Research (grant reference PD-SPH-2015). CJ is partly funded by Public Health at the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea and by the National Institute for Health and Care Research Applied Research Collaborative. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the National Institute for Health and Care Research or the Department of Health and Social Care.

Risk factors for adolescent smoking uptake: an analysis of prospective data from the Millennium Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Preventing smoking uptake among adolescents is essential to achieve a smoke-free generation. The aim of this study was to assess risk factors for smoking in late adolescence and smoking uptake between early and late adolescence, using data from the Millennium Cohort Study. We also present estimates of numbers of smokers and smoking uptake.

METHODS

Adolescents aged 14-17 years were included in the analysis. In separate logistic regression models, we assessed associations between age, sex, ethnicity, household income, country of residence, current smoking of a caregiver, current smoking of peers and use of social media, and regular smoking (defined as smoking at least one cigarette per week) at the age of 17 years and smoking uptake between the ages of 14 and 17 years (defined as being a never-smoker at the age of 14 years and a regular smoker at the age of 17 years). We also estimated numbers of regular smoking and smoking uptake using the Office for National Statistics 2018-19 population estimates.

FINDINGS

Data from 8944 adolescents aged 14-17 years with smoking data available were included, 948 (10·6%) of which were regular tobacco smokers at the age of 17 years. 488 (51·5%) of these 948 started smoking between the ages of 14 years and 17 years. Smoking uptake was more common among adolescents reporting caregiver smoking (162 [13·6%] of 1188 vs 324 [5·0%] of 6538 with non-smoking caregivers; p<0·0001); peers smoking (223 [12·6%] of 1764 vs 229 [4·3%] of 5350 without smoking peers; p<0·0001), and those reporting higher (at least 5 h/weekday) social media use (115 [9·8%] of 1176 vs 120 [4·1%] of 2947 with lower [less than 1 h/weekday] social media use; p=0·0059), among 7786 adolescents who did not smoke at age 14. We estimated that 164 313 (95% CI 146 815-181 811) adolescents were regular smokers by the age of 17 years, of whom 101 715 (85 994-117 435) took up the habit between the age of 14 years and 17 years.

INTERPRETATION

Our findings are a reminder of the transmissibility of the smoking epidemic. Although we only assessed social media use, not actual exposure to online tobacco advertising, our findings strengthen calls for awareness of the changing landscape of tobacco advertising.

FUNDING

Cancer Research UK (grant reference PPRCTAGPJT\100005) and the UK National Institute for Health and Care Research School for Public Health Research. The funders had no role in the writing of the manuscript or the decision to submit for publication.

Early perceptions and behavioural responses during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional survey of UK adults

OBJECTIVE

To examine risk perceptions and behavioural responses of the UK adult population during the early phase of the COVID-19 epidemic in the UK.

DESIGN

A cross-sectional survey.

SETTING

Conducted with a nationally representative sample of UK adults within 48 hours of the UK Government advising the public to stop non-essential contact with others and all unnecessary travel.

PARTICIPANTS

2108 adults living in the UK aged 18 years and over. Response rate was 84.3% (2108/2500). Data collected between 17 March and 18 March 2020.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Descriptive statistics for all survey questions, including number of respondents and weighted percentages. Robust Poisson regression used to identify sociodemographic variation in: (1) adoption of social distancing measures, (2) ability to work from home, and (3) ability and (4) willingness to self-isolate.

RESULTS

Overall, 1992 (94.2%) respondents reported at least one preventive measure: 85.8% washed their hands with soap more frequently; 56.5% avoided crowded areas and 54.5% avoided social events. Adoption of social distancing measures was higher in those aged over 70 years compared with younger adults aged 18-34 years (adjusted relative risk/aRR: 1.2; 95% CI: 1.1 to 1.5). Those with lowest household income were three times less likely to be able to work from home (aRR: 0.33; 95% CI: 0.24 to 0.45) and less likely to be able to self-isolate (aRR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.88 to 0.96). Ability to self-isolate was also lower in black and minority ethnic groups (aRR: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.79 to 1.0). Willingness to self-isolate was high across all respondents.

CONCLUSIONS

Ability to adopt and comply with certain non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) is lower in the most economically disadvantaged in society. Governments must implement appropriate social and economic policies to mitigate this. By incorporating these differences in NPIs among socioeconomic subpopulations into mathematical models of COVID-19 transmission dynamics, our modelling of epidemic outcomes and response to COVID-19 can be improved.

Early perceptions and behavioural responses during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional survey of UK adults

OBJECTIVE

To examine risk perceptions and behavioural responses of the UK adult population during the early phase of the COVID-19 epidemic in the UK.

DESIGN

A cross-sectional survey.

SETTING

Conducted with a nationally representative sample of UK adults within 48 hours of the UK Government advising the public to stop non-essential contact with others and all unnecessary travel.

PARTICIPANTS

2108 adults living in the UK aged 18 years and over. Response rate was 84.3% (2108/2500). Data collected between 17 March and 18 March 2020.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Descriptive statistics for all survey questions, including number of respondents and weighted percentages. Robust Poisson regression used to identify sociodemographic variation in: (1) adoption of social distancing measures, (2) ability to work from home, and (3) ability and (4) willingness to self-isolate.

RESULTS

Overall, 1992 (94.2%) respondents reported at least one preventive measure: 85.8% washed their hands with soap more frequently; 56.5% avoided crowded areas and 54.5% avoided social events. Adoption of social distancing measures was higher in those aged over 70 years compared with younger adults aged 18-34 years (adjusted relative risk/aRR: 1.2; 95% CI: 1.1 to 1.5). Those with lowest household income were three times less likely to be able to work from home (aRR: 0.33; 95% CI: 0.24 to 0.45) and less likely to be able to self-isolate (aRR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.88 to 0.96). Ability to self-isolate was also lower in black and minority ethnic groups (aRR: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.79 to 1.0). Willingness to self-isolate was high across all respondents.

CONCLUSIONS

Ability to adopt and comply with certain non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) is lower in the most economically disadvantaged in society. Governments must implement appropriate social and economic policies to mitigate this. By incorporating these differences in NPIs among socioeconomic subpopulations into mathematical models of COVID-19 transmission dynamics, our modelling of epidemic outcomes and response to COVID-19 can be improved.

Early perceptions and behavioural responses during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional survey of UK adults

OBJECTIVE

To examine risk perceptions and behavioural responses of the UK adult population during the early phase of the COVID-19 epidemic in the UK.

DESIGN

A cross-sectional survey.

SETTING

Conducted with a nationally representative sample of UK adults within 48 hours of the UK Government advising the public to stop non-essential contact with others and all unnecessary travel.

PARTICIPANTS

2108 adults living in the UK aged 18 years and over. Response rate was 84.3% (2108/2500). Data collected between 17 March and 18 March 2020.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Descriptive statistics for all survey questions, including number of respondents and weighted percentages. Robust Poisson regression used to identify sociodemographic variation in: (1) adoption of social distancing measures, (2) ability to work from home, and (3) ability and (4) willingness to self-isolate.

RESULTS

Overall, 1992 (94.2%) respondents reported at least one preventive measure: 85.8% washed their hands with soap more frequently; 56.5% avoided crowded areas and 54.5% avoided social events. Adoption of social distancing measures was higher in those aged over 70 years compared with younger adults aged 18-34 years (adjusted relative risk/aRR: 1.2; 95% CI: 1.1 to 1.5). Those with lowest household income were three times less likely to be able to work from home (aRR: 0.33; 95% CI: 0.24 to 0.45) and less likely to be able to self-isolate (aRR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.88 to 0.96). Ability to self-isolate was also lower in black and minority ethnic groups (aRR: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.79 to 1.0). Willingness to self-isolate was high across all respondents.

CONCLUSIONS

Ability to adopt and comply with certain non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) is lower in the most economically disadvantaged in society. Governments must implement appropriate social and economic policies to mitigate this. By incorporating these differences in NPIs among socioeconomic subpopulations into mathematical models of COVID-19 transmission dynamics, our modelling of epidemic outcomes and response to COVID-19 can be improved.

Availability, accessibility and delivery to patients of the 28 orphan medicines approved by the European Medicine Agency for hereditary metabolic diseases in the MetabERN network

Background

The European Medicine Agency granted marketing approval to 164 orphan medicinal products for rare diseases, among which 28 products intended for the treatment of hereditary metabolic diseases. Taking advantage of its privileged connection with 69 healthcare centres of excellence in this field, MetabERN, the European Reference Network for hereditary metabolic diseases, performed a survey asking health care providers from 18 European countries whether these products are available on the market, reimbursed and therefore accessible for prescription, and actually delivered in their centre.

Results

Responses received from 52 centres (75%) concerned the design of treatment plans, the access to marketed products, and the barriers to delivery. Treatment options are always discussed with patients, who are often involved in their treatment plan. Most products (26/28) are available in most countries (15/18). Among the 15 broadly accessible products (88.5% of the centres), 9 are delivered to most patients (mean 70.1%), and the others to only few (16.5%). Among the 10 less accessible products (40.2% of the centres), 6 are delivered to many patients (66.7%), and 4 are rarely used (6.3%). Information was missing for 3 products. Delay between prescription and delivery is on average one month. Beside the lack of availability or accessibility, the most frequent reasons for not prescribing a treatment are patients’ clinical status, characteristic, and personal choice.

Conclusions

Data collected from health care providers in the MetabERN network indicate that two-third of the orphan medicines approved by EMA for the treatment of hereditary metabolic diseases are accessible to treating patients, although often less than one-half of the patients with the relevant conditions actually received the approved product to treat their disease. Thus, in spite of the remarkable achievement of many products, patients concerned by EMA-approved orphan medicinal products have persistent unmet needs, which deserve consideration. The enormous investments made by the companies to develop products, and the high financial burden for the Member States to purchase these products emphasize the importance of a scrupulous appreciation of treatment value involving all stakeholders at early stage of development, before marketing authorization, and during follow up.

Cancer worry frequency vs. intensity and self-reported colorectal cancer screening uptake: A population-based study

Objectives

Many studies of cancer worry use items measuring frequency or intensity. Little is known about how each of these relate to cancer screening uptake. This study compared the association between worry frequency vs. intensity and colorectal cancer screening intention/uptake.

Methods

Across four surveys (2014–2016), we collected data from 2878 screening-eligible men and women (aged 60–70) in England. Measures included single-items assessing cancer worry frequency and intensity, and a derived combination of both. We also assessed self-reported past faecal occult blood testing uptake (ever vs. never), intention to participate when next invited (yes vs. no), and demographics. Using logistic regression, we compared a model containing sociodemographic characteristics (Model 1), with four models adding cancer worry frequency (Model 2), intensity (Model 3), both (Model 4), or the combined measure (Model 5).

Results

A model with cancer worry intensity and demographics (Model 3) explained significantly more variance in uptake and intention (R 2 = 0.068 and 0.062, respectively) than demographics alone (Model 1: R 2 = 0.058 and 0.042; p  < 0.001), or a model with demographics and cancer worry frequency (Model 2: R 2 = 0.059 and 0.052; p  < 0.001). The model was also equally as effective as models including both the frequency and intensity items (Model 4: R 2 = 0.070 n.s. and 0.062 n.s.), or using the derived combination of both (Model 5: R 2 = 0.063 n.s. and 0.053 n.s.).

Conclusion

A single item measure of cancer worry intensity appeared to be most parsimonious for explaining variance in colorectal cancer screening intention and uptake.

Cancer stigma and cancer screening attendance: a population based survey in England

Background

Cancer-related stigma attracts considerable research interest, but few studies have examined stigmatisation in the healthy population. Qualitative studies suggest that stigma can discourage people from attending cancer screening. We aimed to quantify the prevalence and socio-demographic patterning of cancer stigma in the general population and to explore its association with cancer screening attendance.

Methods

In 2016, 1916 adults aged 18–70 years took part in home-based interviews in England. Measures assessed demographic characteristics, self-reported screening uptake for cervical (n = 681), breast (n = 326) and colorectal cancer (n = 371), and cancer stigma. Cancer stigma was measured with the validated Cancer Stigma Scale which assesses six subdomains (Severity, Personal Responsibility, Awkwardness, Avoidance, Policy Opposition, and Financial Discrimination), from which a mean score was calculated. Logistic regression analyses examined the association between cancer stigma and having been screened as recommended versus not.

Results

Levels of cancer stigma were low, but varied across the six subdomains. Items regarding the severity of a cancer diagnosis attracted the highest levels of agreement (30–51%), followed by statements about the acceptability of making financial decisions on the basis of a cancer diagnosis such as allowing banks to refuse a mortgage (16–31%) and policy opposition statements such as not having a responsibility to provide the best possible care for cancer patients (10–17%). A similar proportion anticipated feeling awkward around someone with cancer (10–17%). Only 8–11% agreed with personal responsibility statements, such as that a person with cancer is to blame for their condition, while 4–5% of adults anticipated avoiding someone with cancer. Stigma was significantly higher in men (p < .05) and in those from ethnic minority backgrounds (p < .001). Higher cancer stigma was associated with not being screened as recommended for all three screening programmes (cervical: adjusted OR 1.59, 95% CI 1.15–2.20; breast: adjusted OR = 1.97, 95% CI 1.17–3.32; colorectal: adjusted OR = 1.59, 95% CI 1.06–2.38).

Conclusions

Cancer stigma is generally low, but some aspects of stigma are more prevalent than others. Stigma is more prevalent in certain population subgroups and is negatively associated with cancer screening uptake. These benchmark findings may help track and reduce cancer stigma over time.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12885-019-5787-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Lifestyle changes associated with participation in colorectal cancer screening: Prospective data from the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing

OBJECTIVES

Population-based cancer screening has been described as a teachable moment for behaviour change. This research examined the effect of faecal occult blood testing (FOBT) participation on smoking, alcohol consumption, fruit and vegetable consumption and physical activity.

SETTING

Data were from screening-naïve men within the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing, receiving their first FOBT invitation (n = 774). Four waves of data were included in analyses (wave 4, 2008/2009 - wave 7, 2014/2015). Baseline data were from the wave prior to FOBT invitation, and follow-up data were from the next consecutive wave (two years later).

METHODS

The effects of FOBT participation, time and group-by-time interactions on health behaviours were investigated using generalised estimating equations. Almost two-thirds of the sample (62.5%; n = 484) had participated in FOBT.

RESULTS

Screening participants were less likely to smoke (odds ratio (OR): 0.45, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.29-0.68) and more likely to meet fruit and vegetable consumption guidelines (OR: 1.70, 95% CI: 1.14-2.55). Smoking decreased over time (OR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.62-0.89), but adherence to alcohol guidelines also decreased (OR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.53-0.91). A group-by-time interaction was found for vigorous physical activity; the odds of taking part in vigorous physical activity increased for FOBT participants, but decreased for non-participants (OR: 1.40, 95% CI: 1.01-1.95).

CONCLUSIONS

This research provides tentative support for FOBT as a teachable moment for increasing vigorous physical activity. However, overall, there was limited evidence for spontaneous improvement in multiple health behaviours following participation.

Acceptability of receiving lifestyle advice at cervical, breast and bowel cancer screening

Cancer screening could be an opportunity to deliver cancer prevention advice, but it is not known how such information would be received. We explored willingness to receive lifestyle advice in the context of the English National Health Service cervical, breast, and bowel (FS; flexible sigmoidoscopy) screening programmes. A population-based survey was conducted in 2016 to collect nationally representative data on willingness to receive lifestyle advice across cervical (n = 768), breast (n = 420) and FS (n = 308) screening programmes. Additional items assessed the impact of lifestyle advice on screening attendance, preference for receiving advice in the event of an abnormal screening result, and timing of advice. Most respondents were willing to receive lifestyle advice around the time of cancer screening (cervical 78.9%, breast 79.4%, FS 81.8%), and if their results were abnormal (cervical 86.3%, breast 83.0%, FS 85.1%). A small proportion indicated it may discourage future attendance (cervical 4.9%, breast 7.0%, FS 8.8%). Most preferred information to be delivered at the screening appointment (cervical 69.8%, breast 72.6%, FS 70.7%). There were no associations between sociodemographic characteristics and willingness to receive lifestyle advice at breast screening. For those intending to attend cervical screening, non-White ethnicity and higher education were associated with increased willingness to receive lifestyle advice. Women were more likely to be willing to receive advice at FS screening than men. Providing lifestyle advice at cancer screening is likely to be acceptable to the general population. The optimal approach for delivery needs careful consideration to minimise potential negative effects on screening attendance.

Interest in lifestyle advice at lung cancer screening: Determinants and preferences

BACKGROUND

Lung cancer screening could be a 'teachable moment' for behaviour change. Little is known about how advice about smoking cessation, or other behavioural cancer risk factors, would be received in this setting.

METHODS

Using a population-based survey of 459 English adults (current smokers and recent quitters aged 50-75) we assessed willingness to receive lifestyle advice (about smoking, diet, weight, physical activity, alcohol consumption) at lung screening. Additional items assessed whether advice should be provided following abnormal screening results, the potential impact of advice on screening uptake, and preferred timing of advice.

RESULTS

Overall, 64% (n = 292) of participants were willing to receive lifestyle advice at lung screening. A greater proportion of participants were willing to receive advice in a scenario where results required further investigation (83%; p < 0.01). However, 14% indicated the provision of lifestyle advice would make them less willing to attend lung screening. Non-White ethnicity and greater cancer risk factor awareness were associated with willingness to receive advice (p < 0.05). Half of smokers (51%) were willing to receive cessation advice. There was also interest in advice about diet (47%), weight (43%), physical activity (32%), and alcohol consumption (17%) among people not meeting current recommendations for these behaviours. There was a preference for advice to be delivered at the screening appointment (38%, n = 108) over other time-points.

CONCLUSIONS

Lung screening may offer an opportunity to provide advice about behavioural cancer risk factors. Future work should consider how to deliver effective interventions in this setting to support behaviour change, without affecting screening uptake.

Cancer worries and uptake of breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening: A population-based survey in England

OBJECTIVE

Some degree of general worry about cancer may facilitate screening participation, but specific worries about the potential consequences (e.g. treatment, death) may act as deterrents. No studies have examined these associations in the same sample. We assessed associations between general versus specific cancer worries and cancer screening participation.

METHODS

In 2016, a population-based cross-sectional survey of adults living in England was carried out. This paper reports analyses of a subsample (n = 1694). Measures included (i) frequency of general cancer worry, (ii) specific worries about the emotional and physical consequences of a cancer diagnosis, and (iii) specific worries about the social consequences of a cancer diagnosis. Logistic regression analyses examined their association with self-reported screening uptake among participants eligible for cervical (n = 671), breast (n = 323), and colorectal (n = 368) cancer screening.

RESULTS

Frequency of general cancer worry was not associated with screening participation. Specific worry about the emotional and physical consequences increased the odds of participants reporting regular uptake of colorectal screening (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.04-1.90). Specific worry about the social consequences of diagnosis was negatively associated with regular attendance for cervical and breast screening in unadjusted analyses only. In adjusted models, the associations were no longer statistically significant for cervical (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.65-1.03) or breast (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.45-1.04) screening.

CONCLUSIONS

Specific worries about cancer may be differentially associated with participation across screening programmes. Further research is needed, as interventions to optimise informed participation may be improved if the specific worries associated with low participation in each programme are understood.

Determinants of willingness to receive healthy lifestyle advice in the context of cancer screening

BACKGROUND

Providing lifestyle advice at cancer screening may help reduce the cancer burden attributable to health-related behaviour. We examined determinants of willingness to receive advice about several behavioural cancer risk factors.

METHODS

A population-based sample of English adults eligible for cancer screening (n = 1221) completed items on willingness to receive lifestyle advice. Sociodemographic, psychological (risk perceptions, cancer risk factor awareness) and behavioural factors were used to predict interest in advice about diet, weight, physical activity, smoking and alcohol consumption.

RESULTS

Two thirds (62-67%) reported interest in advice about diet, weight, and physical activity; 17% were willing to receive advice about smoking, and 32% about alcohol consumption. Willingness to receive advice was higher in those not adhering to guidelines for weight, physical activity, smoking and alcohol consumption (all p < 0.01). Non-White ethnicity was associated with interest in advice about diet, physical activity and smoking (all p < 0.01). Willingness to receive advice about diet, weight, physical activity and alcohol consumption increased with greater recognition of cancer risk factors (all p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Willingness to receive lifestyle advice at cancer screening was high, suggesting this context may provide an opportunity to support behaviour change. Increasing awareness of cancer risk factors may facilitate interest in lifestyle advice.

Public understanding of the purpose of cancer screening: A population-based survey

Objectives In examining informed choice in cancer screening, we investigated public awareness that some screening programmes aim to prevent cancer, while others seek to detect cancer at an early stage. Methods A population-based survey of adults aged 50-70 in England (n = 1433), including data on demographic characteristics and screening experience. Participants were asked to select the main purpose of cervical, breast, and colorectal cancer screening (both faecal occult blood testing and flexible sigmoidoscopy). Results Across all four screening programmes, most people thought the main aim was to catch cancer early (71-78%). Only 18 and 14% knew that cervical screening and flexible sigmoidoscopy, respectively, are primarily preventive. Knowledge of the preventive aspect of these two programmes was low across the board, with few demographic patterns. By contrast, 78 and 73% of the sample were aware that breast screening and the faecal occult blood test, respectively, predominantly aim to detect cancer early. For these programmes, accurate knowledge was socially graded, lower in ethnic minority groups, and positively associated with previous participation in the programmes. Conclusions Our findings suggest that although awareness of the purpose of early detection screening is high, awareness that screening can prevent cancer is low across all demographic groups. Understanding the purpose of screening is a key aspect of informed choice but despite current communication strategies highlighting these differences, people do not seem to have a nuanced understanding of these differing aims. Our findings may be indicative of a broader public scepticism about the preventability of cancer.

Smokers' interest in a lung cancer screening programme: a national survey in England

BACKGROUND

Following the recommendation of lung cancer screening in the US, screening committees in several European countries are reviewing the evidence for implementing national programmes. However, inadequate participation from high-risk groups poses a potential barrier to its effectiveness. The present study examined interest in a national lung cancer screening programme and modifiable attitudinal factors that may affect participation by smokers.

METHODS

A population-based survey of English adults (n = 1464; aged 50-70 years) investigated screening intentions in different invitation scenarios, beliefs about lung cancer, early detection and treatment, worry about lung cancer risk, and stigma. Data on smoking status and perceived chances of quitting were also collected, but eligibility for lung screening in the event of a national programme was unknown.

RESULTS

Intentions to be screened were high in all three invitation scenarios for both current (≥ 89%) and former (≥ 94%) smokers. However, smokers were less likely to agree that early-stage survival is good (43% vs. 53%; OR: 0.64, 0.46-0.88) or be willing to have surgery for an early stage, screen-detected cancer (84% vs. 94%; OR: 0.38, 0.21-0.68), compared with former smokers. Willingness to have surgery was positively associated with screening intentions; with absolute differences of 25% and 29%. Worry about lung cancer risk was also most common among smokers (48%), and one fifth of respondents thought screening smokers was a waste of NHS money.

CONCLUSIONS

A national lung cancer screening programme would be well-received in principle. To improve smokers' participation, care should be taken to communicate the survival benefits of early-stage diagnosis, address concerns about surgery, and minimise anxiety and stigma related to lung cancer risk.

What is it about a cancer diagnosis that would worry people? A population-based survey of adults in England

Background

Surveys indicate quite high prevalence of cancer worry in the general population, but little is known about what it is about cancer that worries people. A better understanding of the origins of cancer worry may help elucidate previously found inconsistencies in its behavioural effect on cancer prevention, screening uptake, and help-seeking for symptoms. In this study, we explore the prevalence and population distribution of general cancer worry and worries about specific aspects of cancer previously identified.

Methods

A population-based survey of 2048 English adults (18–70 years, April–May 2016), using face-to-face interviews to assess demographic characteristics, general cancer worry and twelve sources of cancer worry (adapted from an existing scale), including the emotional, physical, and social consequences of a diagnosis.

Results

In general, a third of respondents (37%) never worried about cancer, 57% worried occasionally/sometimes, and 6% often/very often. In terms of specific worries, two thirds would be ‘quite a bit’ or ‘extremely’ worried about the threat to life and emotional upset a diagnosis would cause. Half would worry about surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and loss of control over life. Worries about the social consequences were less commonly anticipated: just under half would worry about financial problems or their social roles, and a quarter would be worried about effects on identity, important relationships, gender role, and sexuality. Women and younger people reported more frequent worry about getting cancer, and would be more worried about the emotional, physical, and social consequences of a cancer diagnosis (p < .001). Those from ethnic minority backgrounds reported less frequent worry about getting cancer than their white counterparts, but would be equally worried about the emotional and physical impact of a cancer diagnosis, and worried more about the social consequences of a cancer diagnosis (p < .05).

Conclusions

The majority of English adults worry at least occasionally about getting cancer, and would be most worried about the emotional and physical impact of a cancer diagnosis. Distinguishing between the various worries that cancer can evoke may help inform efforts to allay undue worries in those who are deterred by them from engaging with cancer prevention and early detection.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12885-017-3963-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Understanding middle-aged and older adults' first associations with the word "cancer": A mixed methods study in England

Objective

Cancer is still widely feared and often associated with death. Fatalistic beliefs adversely affect help‐seeking for cancer symptoms and engagement in cancer prevention. This study aims to understand middle‐aged and older adults' first association with the word “cancer” and their relationship with sociodemographic factors, cancer fear, and cancer information avoidance.

Methods

We conducted a cross‐sectional survey of 1464 community‐based adults aged 50 to 70 living in England in April 2015. First associations with cancer were measured qualitatively and analysed using content analysis. We used binary logistic regression to analyse associations between the most common first association of cancer and sociodemographic characteristics, cancer fear, and cancer information avoidance.

Results

Cancer was most commonly associated with “death” (26%). Respondents with lower levels of education, living in the Midlands or North of England where cancer mortality is higher, or with close friends or family members with a cancer history, were more likely to associate cancer with death. Cancer fear was significantly associated with death associations, but cancer information avoidance was not.

Conclusions

Despite improved cancer outcomes, middle‐aged and older adults often associate cancer with death. Further efforts to decrease fatalistic associations in this age group may be needed.

Aggregated N-of-1 trials for unlicensed medicines for small populations: an assessment of a trial with ephedrine for myasthenia gravis

Background

Inexpensive medicines with a long history of use may currently be prescribed off-label for rare indications. Reimbursement is at the discretion of health insurance companies, and may be unpredictable. The example addressed was ephedrine as add-on treatment for myasthenia gravis. Stakeholders from academia, a patient organization, the Dutch National Health Care Institute (NHCI) and Dutch Medicines Evaluation Board (MEB) advised on the trial design. The NHCI and MEB agreed to provide scientific advice on the suitability of the evidence generated by the trial, for regulatory decisions. This paper describes the feasibility of the trial and the utility of its aggregated results.

Results

The trialists experienced the trial as feasible. Retrospective interviews showed that the trial as performed was acceptable to patients. The treatment effect in the primary outcome measure, muscle strength, was statistically significant when inferred to the population level, though the effect size was modest. Secondary outcomes were statistically significant in a preplanned, fixed effects analysis within the four patients. The NHCI advised that it could potentially make reimbursement decisions based on the Fitting Evidence framework, should the trialists decide to apply for reimbursement. The MEB advised that for a licensing decision, the N-of-1 design is a last-resort option for demonstrating treatment benefit in a rare disease. N-of-1 trials alone do not provide enough evidence on potential risk. The MEB found the current trial inconclusive. It suggested doing a 2-armed trial of longer duration, possibly with a different outcome measure (postponement of corticosteroid use). It suggested engaging a consultancy or commercial sponsor, should the trialists decide to seek market authorization of the drug.

Conclusions

In theory, evidence from aggregated N-of-1 trials is suitable for use in licensing and reimbursement decisions. The current example illustrates differences in interpretation of N-of-1 results by health authorities. In the era of personalized medicine, consensus is required on the interpretation of data from study designs geared to small groups. Demonstrating effectiveness of inexpensive medicines in small populations may require involvement of non-commercial parties, to preserve affordability.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13023-017-0636-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Does psychosocial stress exacerbate avoidant responses to cancer information in those who are afraid of cancer? A population-based survey among older adults in England

OBJECTIVE

Communication of cancer information is an important element of cancer control, but cancer fear may lead to information avoidance, especially when coping is low. We examined the association between cancer fear and cancer information avoidance, and tested whether this was exacerbated by psychosocial stress.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional survey of 1258 population-based adults (58-70 years) in England.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Cancer fear (intensity and frequency), perceived psychosocial stress and cancer information avoidance. Control variables were age, gender, ethnicity, marital status and education.

RESULTS

A quarter (24%) of respondents avoided cancer information. Ordinal logistic regression analyses showed main effects of psychosocial stress (OR = 1.17, 95% CI 1.07-1.29) and cancer fear: cancer information avoidance was lowest in those with no cancer fear (13%), followed by those with moderate (24%; OR = 2.15, 95% CI: 1.49-3.12), and high cancer fear (35%; OR = 3.90, 95% CI: 2.65-5.73). In the adjusted model, the interaction between cancer fear and stress was significant (OR = 1.14, 95% CI 1.004-1.29, p < .05): 40% of those with high fear/high stress avoided cancer information compared with 29% with high fear/low stress.

CONCLUSION

Cancer fear and psychosocial stress interact to produce disengagement with cancer-related information, highlighting the importance of affective processes to cancer control efforts.

What do people fear about cancer? A systematic review and meta-synthesis of cancer fears in the general population

Background

Cancer has long inspired fear, but the effect of fear is not well understood; it seems both to facilitate and to deter early diagnosis behaviours. To elucidate fear's behavioural effects, we systematically reviewed and synthesised qualitative literature to explore what people fear about cancer.

Methods

We searched Medline, Embase, PsycInfo, Web of Science, AnthroSource, and Anthrobase for studies on cancer fear in breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening and analysed 102 studies from 26 countries using thematic synthesis.

Results

Fears of cancer emanated from a core view of cancer as a vicious, unpredictable, and indestructible enemy, evoking fears about its proximity, the (lack of) strategies to keep it at bay, the personal and social implications of succumbing, and fear of dying from cancer.

Conclusions

This view of cancer as ‘an enemy’ reprises the media's ‘war on cancer’ theme and may affect the acceptance of cancer early detection and prevention messages, since cancer's characteristics influenced whether ‘fight’ or ‘flight’ was considered appropriate.

Cancer fear and fatalism among ethnic minority women in the United Kingdom

Background:

Cancer fear and fatalism are believed to be higher in ethnic minorities and may contribute to lower engagement with cancer prevention and early detection. We explored the levels of cancer fear and fatalism in six ethnic groups in the United Kingdom and examined the contribution of acculturation and general fatalism.

Methods:

A cross-sectional survey of 720 White British, Caribbean, African, Indian, Pakistani, and Bangladeshi women (120 of each) was conducted. Three items assessed cancer fear and two cancer fatalism. Acculturation was assessed using (self-reported) migration status, ability to speak English, and understanding of health leaflets; general fatalism with a standard measure.

Results:

Relative to White British women, African and Indian women were more fearful of cancer, Bangladeshi women less fearful, and Pakistani and Caribbean women were similar to White British women. Cancer fatalism was higher in all the ethnic minority groups compared with White British women. Less acculturated women were less likely to worry (ORs 0.21–0.45, all P<0.05) or feel particularly afraid (ORs 0.11–0.31, all P<0.05) but more likely to feel uncomfortable about cancer (ORs 1.97–3.03, all P<0.05). Lower acculturation (ORs 4.30–17.27, P<0.05) and general fatalism (OR 2.29, P<0.05) were associated with the belief that cancer is predetermined.

Conclusions:

In general, cancer fear and fatalism are more prevalent among ethnic minority than White British women and even more so in less acculturated ethnic minorities. This may affect their participation in cancer prevention and early detection.

Cancer fear: facilitator and deterrent to participation in colorectal cancer screening

BACKGROUND

Cancer fear has been associated with higher and lower screening uptake across different studies, possibly because different aspects of cancer fear have different effects on intentions versus behavior. The present study examined associations of three aspects of cancer fear with intention and uptake of endoscopic screening for colorectal cancer.

METHODS

A subsample of UK Flexible Sigmoidoscopy (FS) Trial participants received a baseline questionnaire that included three cancer fear items from a standard measure asking if: (i) cancer was feared more than other diseases, (ii) cancer worry was experienced frequently, and (iii) thoughts about cancer caused discomfort. Screening intention was assessed by asking participants whether, if invited, they would accept an invitation for FS screening. Positive responders were randomized to be invited or not in a 1:2 ratio. The behavioral outcome was clinic-recorded uptake. Control variables were age, gender, ethnicity, education, and marital status.

RESULTS

The questionnaire return rate was 60% (7,971/13,351). The majority (82%) intended to attend screening; 1,920 were randomized to receive an invitation, and 71% attended. Fearing cancer more than other diseases (OR = 2.32, P < 0.01) and worrying a lot about cancer (OR = 2.34, P < 0.01) increased intentions to attend screening, but not uptake. Finding thoughts about cancer uncomfortable did not influence intention, but predicted lower uptake (OR = 0.72, P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Different aspects of cancer fear have different effects on the decision and action processes leading to screening participation.

IMPACT

Knowledge of the different behavioral effects of cancer fear may aid the design of effective public health messages.

Self-Reported And Objectively Recorded Colorectal Cancer Screening Participation In England

Objective

To compare self-reported with objectively recorded participation in Faecal Occult Blood testing (FOBt) colorectal cancer (CRC) screening in a national programme.

Methods

Survey respondents living in England who were eligible for screening were asked in face-to-face interviews if they had ever been invited to do a CRC screening test, how many times they had been invited, and how many times they had participated. National Health Service (NHS) Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (BCSP) records were consulted for respondents who had consented to a record check. The outcome measures were ‘ever uptake’ (responded to ≥1 invitation), ‘repeat uptake’ (responded to ≥2 invitations), and ‘consistent uptake’ (responded to all invitations).

Results

In the verified group, self-reported ever uptake was highly consistent with recorded ever uptake (87.0% vs. 87.8%). Among those who indicated that they had been invited more than once, self-reported repeat uptake was 89.8% compared with 84.8% recorded repeat uptake. Among those with more than one recorded invitation, self-reported repeat uptake was 72.7% compared with 77.2% recorded repeat uptake, and self-reported consistent uptake was 81.6% compared with 65.6% recorded consistent uptake.

Conclusion

Our results suggest that people can accurately report whether they have ever taken part in CRC screening. The vast majority of those whose records were verified could also accurately report whether they had taken part in screening at least twice. They were somewhat less accurate in reporting whether they had responded to all screening invitations.

Ephedrine as add-on therapy for patients with myasthenia gravis: protocol for a series of randomised, placebo-controlled n-of-1 trials

INTRODUCTION

Myasthenia gravis (MG), a rare neuromuscular disease, is often initially treated using acetylcholinesterase inhibitors. Patients who do not respond adequately depend on the use of corticosteroids or other immunosuppressive medication, but these may have serious side effects. Clinical observations suggest that ephedrine can diminish, postpone or even prevent the need for immunosuppressive therapy when added to acetylcholinesterase inhibitors or low-dose prednisone. In the Netherlands, ephedrine is not licensed for MG nor is reimbursement guaranteed. MG is a rare condition, and ephedrine might be indicated only in a subset of patients. Thus, randomised controlled trials comparing large groups are difficult to conduct. We, therefore, aim to aggregate data from a small series of n-of-1 trials (also known as single patient trials) to assess the effect of ephedrine as add-on treatment for MG.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Single-centre, placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomised, multiple crossover n-of-1 studies in 4 adult patients with generalised MG who show inadequate improvement on pyridostigmine and/or immunosuppressive drugs. Each n-of-1 trial has 3 cycles of two 5-day intervention periods.

TREATMENT

25 mg ephedrine or placebo, twice daily.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Quantitative Myasthenia Gravis (QMG) test.

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

fixed effects linear model for QMG for all patients combined.

SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Clinical: effects on MG-Composite and MG-Activities of Daily Living (MG-ADL) scales; QMG at individual level; adverse events. Acceptability of trial design: number of patients eligible and enrolled; number of treatment cycles completed; patients' and caregivers' experiences.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study was approved by the Medical Ethics Committee of Leiden University Medical Center, No. P14.108. Results of the trial will be reported in a peer-reviewed publication. Regulatory stakeholders will comment on the suitability of the trial for market authorisation and reimbursement purposes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

This study is registered under EudraCT number 2014-001355-23, protocol no. 40960, V.1.0, registration date 27 March 2014.

Micro actions in colorectal cancer screening participation: a population-based survey study

Background

Low uptake of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is a cause for concern. This study explored people’s anticipated response to receiving the test kit to shed light on past screening uptake and help inform future interventions to increase participation.

Methods

Face-to-face interviews were conducted with respondents living in England who were eligible for CRC screening as part of a population-based ‘omnibus’ survey. Respondents were asked what they would do (‘micro actions’) if they received a CRC screening test kit through the mail (apart from completing it or not), and their unprompted responses were coded (multiple codes allowed). Past ‘ever’ uptake and screening intention were also recorded. The final analysis included 1237 respondents aged 60–70.

Results

Respondents who said that they would decide after some thought’ (p < .001), ‘put [it] aside to deal with later’ (p < .001), ‘put it on the “to do list/ pile”’ (p < .05) or ‘discuss it with a health care professional’ (p < .01) had decreased odds of having participated. Those who said they would ‘read the instruction leaflet’ (p < .001), ‘put the kit near the toilet’ (p < .001) or ‘decide when to do the test’ (p < .05) were more likely to have taken part in CRC screening. With the exception of ‘decide when to do the test’ and ‘discuss it with a health care professional’, all associations with past uptake remained significant after adjusting for other micro actions and screening intention. ‘Make a note somewhere (to remind myself)’ was mentioned by less than 1 % of respondents.

Conclusions

Delay-causing and preparatory micro actions were associated with past CRC screening uptake. Self-regulatory micro actions (e.g. making a note to remind oneself) were rarely mentioned as responses to receiving a screening invitation. Interventions aimed at reducing delay and facilitating preparatory and self-regulatory behaviours might help increase uptake. The behaviour-focused survey method is a promising avenue for future health behaviour research.

Ephedrine for myasthenia gravis, neonatal myasthenia and the congenital myasthenic syndromes

BACKGROUND

Myasthenia is a condition in which neuromuscular transmission is affected by antibodies against neuromuscular junction components (autoimmune myasthenia gravis, MG; and neonatal myasthenia gravis, NMG) or by defects in genes for neuromuscular junction proteins (congenital myasthenic syndromes, CMSs). Clinically, some individuals seem to benefit from treatment with ephedrine, but its effects and adverse effects have not been systematically evaluated.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects and adverse effects of ephedrine in people with autoimmune MG, transient neonatal MG, and the congenital myasthenic syndromes.

SEARCH METHODS

On 17 November 2014, we searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Group Specialized Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and EMBASE. We also searched reference lists of articles, conference proceedings of relevant conferences, and prospective trial registers. In addition, we contacted manufacturers and researchers in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing ephedrine as a single or add-on treatment with any other active treatment, placebo, or no treatment in adults or children with autoimmune MG, NMG, or CMSs.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed study design and quality, and extracted data. We contacted study authors for additional information. We collected information on adverse effects from included articles, and contacted authors.

MAIN RESULTS

We found no RCTs or quasi-RCTs, and therefore could not establish the effect of ephedrine on MG, NMG and CMSs. We describe the results of 53 non-randomised studies narratively in the Discussion section, including observations of endurance, muscle strength and quality of life. Effects may differ depending on the type of myasthenia. Thirty-seven studies were in participants with CMS, five in participants with MG, and in 11 the precise form of myasthenia was unknown. We found no studies for NMG. Reported adverse effects included tachycardia, sleep disturbances, nervousness, and withdrawal symptoms.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There was no evidence available from RCTs or quasi-RCTs, but some observations from non-randomised studies are available. There is a need for more evidence from suitable forms of prospective RCTs, such as series of n-of-one RCTs, that use appropriate and validated outcome measures.

The structure and demographic correlates of cancer fear

Background

Cancer is often described as the ‘number one’ health fear, but little is known about whether this affects quality of life by translating into high levels of worry or distress in everyday life, or which population groups are most affected. This study examined the prevalence of three components of cancer fear in a large community sample in the UK and explored associations with demographic characteristics.

Methods

Questions on cancer fear were included in a survey mailed to a community sample of adults (n = 13,351; 55–64 years). Three items from a standard measure of cancer fear assessed: i) whether cancer was feared more than other diseases, ii) whether thinking about cancer caused discomfort, and iii) whether cancer worry was experienced frequently. Gender, marital status, education, and ethnicity were assessed with simple questions. Anxiety was assessed with the brief STAI and a standard measure of self-rated health was included.

Results

Questionnaire return rate was 60% (7,971/13,351). The majority of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that they feared cancer more than other diseases (59%), and felt uncomfortable thinking about it (52%), and a quarter (25%) worried a lot about cancer. All items were significantly inter-correlated (r = .35 to .42, p’s < .001), and correlated with general anxiety (r = .16 to .28, p’s < .001) and self-rated health (r = -.07 to -.16, p’s < .001). In multivariable analyses including anxiety and general health, all cancer fear indicators were significantly higher in women (ORs between 1.15 and 1.48), respondents with lower education (ORs between 1.40 and 1.66), and those with higher general anxiety (ORs between 1.50 and 2.11). Ethnic minority respondents (n = 285; 4.4%) reported more worry (OR: 1.85).

Conclusions

More than half of this older adult sample in the UK had cancer as greatest health fear and this was associated with feeling uncomfortable thinking about it and worrying more about it. Women and respondents with less education or from ethnic minority backgrounds were disproportionately affected by cancer fear. General anxiety and poor health were associated with cancer fear but did not explain the demographic differences.