scholarly journals Predictors of adjuvant treatment for pancreatic adenocarcinoma at the population level

2016 ◽  
Vol 23 (5) ◽  
pp. 334 ◽  
Author(s):  
D.J. Kagedan ◽  
M.E. Dixon ◽  
R.S. Raju ◽  
Q. Li ◽  
M. Elmi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma ◽  
Adjuvant Treatment ◽  
Population Level ◽  
Universal Coverage ◽  
High Volume ◽  
Geographic Region ◽  
Administrative Databases ◽  
Resection Margins ◽  
Curative Intent ◽  
Comorbidity Burden

Background In the present study, we aimed to describe, at the population level, patterns of adjuvant treatment use after curative-intent resection for pancreatic adenocarcinoma (pcc) and to identify independent predictors of adjuvant treatment use.Methods In this observational cohort study, patients undergoing pcc resection in the province of Ontario (population 13 million) during 2005–2010 were identified using the provincial cancer registry and were linked to administrative databases that include all treatments received and outcomes experienced in the province. Patients were defined as having received chemotherapy (ctx), chemoradiation (crt), or observation (obs). Clinicopathologic factors associated with the use of ctx, crt, or obs were identified by chi-square test. Logistic regression analyses were used to identify independent predictors of adjuvant treatment versus obs, and ctx versus crt.Results Of the 397 patients included, 75.3% received adjuvant treatment (27.2% crt, 48.1% ctx) and 24.7% received obs. Within a single-payer health care system with universal coverage of costs for ctx and crt, substantial variation by geographic region was observed. Although the likelihood of receiving adjuvant treatment increased from 2005 to 2010 (p = 0.002), multivariate analysis revealed widespread variation between the treating hospitals (p = 0.001), and even between high-volume hepatopancreatobiliary hospitals (p = 0.0006). Younger age, positive lymph nodes, and positive surgical resection margins predicted an increased likelihood of receiving adjuvant treatment. Among patients receiving adjuvant treatment, positive margins and a low comorbidity burden were associated with crt compared with ctx.Conclusions Interinstitutional medical practice variation contributes significantly to differential patterns in the rate of adjuvant treatment for pcc. Whether such variation is warranted or unwarranted requires further investigation.

Prognostic factors in patients with nonmetastatic gastric cancer treated with contemporary multimodality strategies.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 451-451
Author(s):  
Ariceli Alfaro ◽  
Tuyen Hoang ◽  
Jasmine Huynh ◽  
Jingran Ji ◽  
Andrew H. Ko ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prognostic Factors ◽  
Cox Regression ◽  
Cancer Recurrence ◽  
High Volume ◽  
Multimodality Therapy ◽  
Resection Margins ◽  
Study Cohort ◽  
Curative Intent ◽  
California Cancer Registry ◽  
Positive Resection Margins

451 Background: We conducted a retrospective study to evaluate clinical outcomes in patients with non-metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma (nmGA) treated at two high-volume academic institutions within the University of California (UC) system. Methods: Electronic Health Records and California Cancer Registry of demographic and clinical data were collected for pts with nmGA who underwent surgery with curative intent from 2010-2017. Medical chart reviews were conducted to validate outcomes. We used multivariate Cox regression to determine prognostic factors for cancer recurrence and overall survival. Results: Demographics of study cohort (n = 406): mean age 65 years; 71% male; 58% Caucasian, 26% Asian, 13% Latino. There was an even distribution between pts with locoregionally advanced (defined as pT4 or pN1+) vs. localized (pT1-3, pN0) disease. Tumor histology: 49% intestinal, 19% diffuse, 13% mixed, 19% unknown. Type of surgery: 27% open gastrectomy, 59% laparoscopic, 14% unknown. Multimodality therapy: 29% received perioperative systemic rx alone (48% adjuvant only, 52% neoadjuvant +/- adjuvant), 35% received perioperative systemic rx plus radiation (40% adjuvant only, 60% neoadjuvant +/- adjuvant), 36% underwent surgery only. With median f/u time after surgery of 5 years, 21% of pts developed cancer recurrence and 43% had died. Weight loss prior to diagnosis, locoregional stage, and positive resection margins were a/w recurrence (HR = 1.6-2.5, p < .05). Only locoregional stage was prognostic for worse survival (HR = 2.7, p < .0001). Positive resection margins were seen in 6% of pts and were a/w diffuse histology and tumor size > 4cm (odds ratio = 2.9-8.8, p < .02). Multimodality therapy was not a/w recurrence but was a/w longer survival after adjusting for stage (HR = 0.3, p < .0001). Addition of radiation to systemic rx did not confer further improvements in either recurrence or survival. Conclusions: This study highlights contemporary practice patterns for pts with nmGA and demonstrates a survival benefit with multimodality rx. Additional data are being gathered from other UC medical centers to confirm these findings and explore differences across institutions and ethnicities.

Resected pancreatic cancer (PC): Impact of adjuvant therapy (Rx) at a high-volume center (HVC) on overall survival (OS).

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 191-191 ◽  
Author(s):  
Margaret T Mandelson ◽  
Vincent J. Picozzi
Keyword(s):  
Proportional Hazards ◽  
Average Distance ◽  
Univariate Analysis ◽  
High Volume ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Cox Proportional Hazards ◽  
Resection Margins ◽  
Curative Intent ◽  
The Impact

191 Background: Surgical outcomes for resected PC are known to be superior at HVCs. However, the impact of adjuvant (Rx) performed at HVCs is less studied. We examined the impact of site of adjuvant Rx administration on our resected patients (pts). Methods: Eligible pts were diagnosed 2003-2014 and resected at HVC. Pts were excluded for neoadjuvant Rx, synchronous cancer, death/lost to follow-up within 3 months or contraindications (e.g. morbidity) to adjuvant Rx.. Pts were also excluded if they refused adjuvant treatment or if a community oncologist (CC) was not identified in the medical record or in the western Washington population-based cancer registry. Pt and tumor characteristics were compared in univariate analysis and survival was calculated from date of diagnosis to death or last follow-up. Five year OS was estimated by the Kaplan Meier method and compared using Cox proportional hazards modeling to evaluate the impact of HVC adjuvant Rx on OS while adjusting for potential confounding factors. Results: 245 pts were eligible for study: 139 (57%) treated at HVC, 106 (43%) treated at CC. HVC and CC pts were similar with respect to stage and tumor size, nodal status, resection margins and average distance travelled to HVC. They differed by age (HVC: 63.1, CC: 68.2 p < 0.01). Median and 5-yr OS was 36 mos and 33%. Median OS for HVC vs CC was 44 mos vs. 28 mos (p < 0.01), and 5yr OS was 38.6% vs. 24.8% (p < 0.01), adjustment for age did not alter our findings. Conclusions: 1) With respect to adjuvant Rx for resected PC, HVC and CC pts differed with respect to age only. 2) Both median and 5- yr OS was statistically superior at HVC vs CC. 3) Our study supports the use of HVCs for all Rx components for PC treated with curative intent. 4) Ongoing investigation of patterns of care and their impact on OS in PC is warranted.

scholarly journals Surgical Management of Gastric Cancer: A Systematic Review

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (12) ◽  
pp. 2557
Author(s):  
Lucian Mocan
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Surgical Treatment ◽  
Malignant Tumors ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Neoadjuvant Treatment ◽  
Surgical Care ◽  
High Volume ◽  
Resection Margins ◽  
Curative Intent ◽  
Surgical Aspects

Gastric cancer is the fifth most common cancer worldwide, and it is responsible for 7.7% of all cancer deaths. Despite advances in the field of oncology, where radiotherapy, neo and adjuvant chemotherapy may improve the outcome, the only treatment with curative intent is represented by surgery as part of a multimodal therapy. Two concepts may be adopted in appropriate cases, neoadjuvant treatment before gastrectomy (G) or primary surgical resection followed by chemotherapy. Such an approach, combined with early detection and better screening, has led to a decrease in the overall incidence of gastric cancer. Unfortunately, malignant tumors of the stomach are often diagnosed in locally advanced or metastatic stages when the median overall survival remains poor. Surgical care in these cases must be provided by a multidisciplinary team in a high-volume center. Important surgical aspects such as optimum resection margins, surgical technique, and number of harvested lymph nodes are important factors for patient outcomes. The standardization of surgical treatment of gastric cancer in accordance with the patient’s profile is of decisive importance for a better outcome. This review aims to summarize the current standards in the surgical treatment of gastric cancer.

scholarly journals Benefits of High-Volume Medical Oncology Care for Noncurable Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: A Population-Based Analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 297-303 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julie Hallet ◽  
Laura Davis ◽  
Alyson Mahar ◽  
Michail Mavros ◽  
Kaitlyn Beyfuss ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma ◽  
Medical Oncology ◽  
High Volume ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Care Organization ◽  
Comorbidity Burden ◽  
Provider Volume ◽  
Care Systems ◽  
Oncology Care ◽  
Oncology Providers

Background: Although pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PA) surgery performed by high-volume (HV) providers yields better outcomes, volume–outcome relationships are unknown for medical oncologists. This study examined variation in practice and outcomes in noncurative management of PA based on medical oncology provider volume. Methods: This population-based cohort study linked administrative healthcare datasets and included nonresected PA from 2005 through 2016. The volume of PA consultations per medical oncology provider per year was divided into quintiles, with HV providers (≥16 patients/year) constituting the fifth quintile and low-volume (LV) providers the first to fourth quintiles. Outcomes were receipt of chemotherapy and overall survival (OS). The Brown-Forsythe-Levene (BFL) test for equality of variances was performed to assess outcome variability between provider-volume quintiles. Multivariate regression models were used to examine the association between management by HV provider and outcomes. Results: A total of 7,062 patients with noncurable PA consulted with medical oncology providers. Variability was seen in receipt of chemotherapy and median survival based on provider volume (BFL, P<.001 for both), with superior 1-year OS for HV providers (30.1%; 95% CI, 27.7%–32.4%) compared with LV providers (19.7%; 95% CI, 18.5%–20.6%) (P<.001). After adjustment for age at diagnosis, sex, comorbidity burden, rural residence, income, and diagnosis period, HV provider care was independently associated with higher odds of receiving chemotherapy (odds ratio, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.05–1.34) and with superior OS (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.74–0.84). Conclusions: Significant variation was seen in noncurative management and outcomes of PA based on provider volume, with management by an HV provider being independently associated with superior OS and higher odds of receiving chemotherapy. This information is important to inform disease care pathways and care organization. Cancer care systems could consider increasing the number of HV providers to reduce variation and improve outcomes.

Adjuvant treatment in resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma: A retrospective analysis of survival and prognostic factors in 141 patients

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 15104-15104
Author(s):  
A. Bujold ◽  
R. Létourneau ◽  
R. Lapointe ◽  
M. Dagenais ◽  
A. Roy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prognostic Factors ◽  
Blood Loss ◽  
Retrospective Analysis ◽  
Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma ◽  
Adjuvant Treatment ◽  
Prospective Trial ◽  
Curative Intent ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Treatment Groups ◽  
Ca 19.9

15104 Background: Resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PA) remains highly lethal. It is debatable whether adjuvant therapy can improve prognosis. Furthermore, what treatment should be delivered and for whom it is indicated is still of controversy. Methods: Between 1992–2004, retrospective data from the 141 patients who had a PA resected with curative intent in our centres were reviewed. Adjuvant treatment was as follows: 41 had chemoradiation (CRT), 1 neoadjuvant CRT, 10 chemotherapy alone (CT), 1 radiotherapy alone, and for 7 adjuvant treatment is unknown. The other 81 patients were observed. Overall survival (OS), relapse-free survival (RFS), locoregional and distant failure-free survival (LRFFS and DFFS) were analysed according to published prognostic factors. Kaplan-Meier curves with log-rank tests and Chi-2 coefficients were computed for the analysis. Results: Median age at diagnosis was 61 years. Overall, 63% of the patients were node positive, 67% had lymphovascular invasion (LVI), 71% had elevated CA-19.9 values and 50% operative blood loss >550cc. Table 1 displays these prognostics factors by treatment groups. For the entire cohort, median OS was 16.9 months; 1-year and 3-year OS were 76% and 43% respectively. No influence of treatment arm was found on OS (p=0.71). Negative nodes, normal CA-19.9 values, absence of LVI and blood loss <=550cc had all a positive influence on OS (all p<0.05). RFS and DFFS were not affected by adjuvant treatment (p=0.61 and 0.68, resp.), but a lower LRFFS was associated with it (p=0.006). Conclusions: In this retrospective analysis, despite the imbalance of prognostic factors among treatment groups, toward more ill patients in CT and CRT arms, there is no difference in OS, DFS and DFFS between arms. Therefore, adjuvant treatment seems to counterbalance the effect of poor prognostic factors. A randomized prospective trial would be needed to further address the issue. [Table: see text] No significant financial relationships to disclose.

scholarly journals Angiolymphatic invasion as a prognostic fator in resected N0 pancreatic adenocarcinoma

2017 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 42-46
Author(s):  
Ricardo Vitor Silva de ALMEIDA ◽  
Adhemar Monteiro PACHECO-JR ◽  
Rodrigo Altenfelder SILVA ◽  
André de MORICZ ◽  
Tércio de CAMPOS
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma ◽  
Perineural Invasion ◽  
Prognosis Factor ◽  
Curative Intent ◽  
Angiolymphatic Invasion ◽  
Digestive Cancers ◽  
Cancer Tumor ◽  
Group Survival ◽  
Hematoxylin Eosin

ABSTRACT Background: Pancreatic adenocarcinoma remains one of the worst digestive cancers. Surgical resection is the main target when treating a patient with curative intent. Aim: To assess angiolymphatic invasion as a prognostic factor in resected pN0 pancreatic cancer. Methods: Thirty-eight patients were submitted to pancreatoduodenectomy due to head pancreatic cancer. Tumor size, margins, lymph nodes, pTNM staging, angiolymphatic and perineural invasion were described in the pathologists' reports. Results: Most patients were female. Overall median survival was 13 months. Gemcitabine was the regimen of choice for chemotherapy in selected patients; however, it did not improve overall survival. pR0 resection had better survival compared with pR1. Within the pN0 group, survival was significantly better in patients without angiolymphatic invasion. Conclusion: Angiolymphatic invasion in N0 pancreatoduodenectomy can be demonstrated by the Hematoxylin-Eosin stain and may predict a poor prognosis factor for those patients.

scholarly journals Validation of Carotid Artery Revascularization Coding in Ontario Health Administrative Databases

2016 ◽  
Vol 39 (2) ◽  
pp. 73 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohamad A Hussain ◽  
Muhammad Mamdani ◽  
Gustavo Saposnik ◽  
Jack V Tu ◽  
David Turkel-Parrella ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Carotid Artery ◽  
Administrative Data ◽  
High Volume ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Administrative Databases ◽  
Ontario Health Insurance Plan ◽  
Stroke Registry ◽  
Administrative Records ◽  
Ischemic Attack ◽  
Procedure Codes

Purpose: The positive predictive value (PPV) of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) procedure and post-operative complication coding were assessed in Ontario health administrative databases. Methods: Between 1 April 2002 and 31 March 2014, a random sample of 428 patients were identified using Canadian Classification of Health Intervention (CCI) procedure codes and Ontario Health Insurance Plan (OHIP) billing codes from administrative data. A blinded chart review was conducted at two high-volume vascular centers to assess the level of agreement between the administrative records and the corresponding patients’ hospital charts. PPV was calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to estimate the validity of CEA and CAS coding, utilizing hospital charts as the gold standard. Sensitivity of CEA and CAS coding were also assessed by linking two independent databases of 540 CEA-treated patients (Ontario Stroke Registry) and 140 CAS-treated patients (single-center CAS database) to administrative records. Results: PPV for CEA ranged from 99% to 100% and sensitivity ranged from 81.5% to 89.6% using CCI and OHIP codes. A CCI code with a PPV of 87% (95% CI, 78.8-92.9) and sensitivity of 92.9% (95% CI, 87.4-96.1) in identifying CAS was also identified. PPV for post-admission complication diagnosis coding was 71.4% (95% CI, 53.7-85.4) for stroke/transient ischemic attack, and 82.4% (95% CI, 56.6-96.2) for myocardial infarction. Conclusions: Our analysis demonstrated that the codes used in administrative databases accurately identify CEA and CAS-treated patients. Researchers can confidently use administrative data to conduct population-based studies of CEA and CAS.

scholarly journals Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma from a surgical perspective

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma ◽  
Adjuvant Treatment ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Historical Background ◽  
Ductal Adenocarcinoma ◽  
Curative Intent ◽  
Pancreatic Cancers ◽  
Operative Care ◽  
Histological Staging

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) accounts for more than 90% of pancreatic cancers. Whilst most patients present with locally advanced or metastatic disease, a minority are candidates for curative-intent resection. This review covers the aspects of PDAC which are relevant to the surgeon. Firstly, an up-to-date overview of epidemiology, risk factors and pathogenesis are provided. Secondly, presentation, diagnosis and staging are covered, including a summary of the most recent staging guidelines. The review will then focus on the historical background of the pancreatico-duodenectomy (PD), the modern procedure and post-operative care. Finally, short sections provide the reader with an update on histological staging and adjuvant treatment.

First-Line Palliative Chemotherapy for Esophageal and Gastric Cancer: Practice Patterns and Outcomes in the General Population

2021 ◽  
pp. OP.20.00397
Author(s):  
Shaila J. Merchant ◽  
Weidong Kong ◽  
Bishal Gyawali ◽  
Timothy P. Hanna ◽  
Wiley Chung ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
General Population ◽  
Palliative Chemotherapy ◽  
Administrative Databases ◽  
Routine Practice ◽  
First Line ◽  
Medical Oncologist ◽  
Cancer Specific Survival ◽  
Curative Intent

PURPOSE: Clinical trials have shown that palliative chemotherapy (PC) improves survival in patients with incurable esophageal and gastric cancer; however, outcomes achieved in routine practice are unknown. We describe treatment patterns and outcomes among patients treated in the general population of Ontario, Canada. METHODS: The Ontario Cancer Registry was used to identify patients with esophageal or gastric cancer from 2007 to 2016, and data were linked to other health administrative databases. Patients who received curative-intent surgery or radiotherapy were excluded. Factors associated with the receipt of PC were determined using logistic regression. First-line PC regimens were categorized, and trends over time were reported. Survival was determined using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: The cohort included 9,848 patients; 22% (2,207 of 9,848) received PC. Patients receiving PC were younger (mean age, 63 v 74 years; P < .0001) and more likely male (71% v 65%; P < .0001). Thirty-seven percent of non-PC patients saw a medical oncologist in consultation. Over the study period, utilization of PC increased (from 11% in 2007 to 19% in 2016; P < .0001), whereas the proportion of patients receiving triplet regimens decreased (65% in 2007 to 56% in 2016; P = .04). In the PC group, the median overall and cancer-specific survival from treatment initiation was 7.2 months. CONCLUSION: One fifth of patients with incurable esophageal and gastric cancer in the general population receive PC. Median survival of patients treated in routine practice is inferior to that in clinical trials. Only one third of patients not treated with PC had consultation with a medical oncologist. Further work is necessary to understand low utilization of PC and medical oncology consultation in this patient population.

scholarly journals Use of Electronic Administrative Databases to Measure Quality Indicators of Breast Cancer Care: Experience of Five Regional Oncology Networks in Italy

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. e211-e220 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valentina Guarneri ◽  
Paolo Pronzato ◽  
Oscar Bertetto ◽  
Fausto Roila ◽  
Gianni Amunni ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Quality Indicators ◽  
Administrative Data ◽  
Population Level ◽  
Administrative Databases ◽  
Regional Variability ◽  
Care Experience ◽  
Italian Regions ◽  
Incident Cases

PURPOSE: Assuring quality of care, while maintaining sustainability, in complex conditions such as breast cancer (BC) is an important challenge for health systems. Here, we describe a methodology to define a set of quality indicators, assess their computability from administrative data, and apply them to a large cohort of BC cases. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Clinical professionals from the Italian Regional Oncology Networks identified 46 clinically relevant indicators of BC care; 22 were potentially computable using administrative data. Incident cases of BC diagnosed in 2016 in five Italian regions were identified using administrative databases from regional repositories. Each indicator was calculated through record linkage of anonymized individual data. RESULTS: A total of 15,342 incident BC cases were identified. Nine indicators were actually computable from administrative data (two structure and seven process indicators). Although most indicators were consistent with guidelines, for one indicator (blood tumor markers in the year after surgery, 44.2% to 64.5%; benchmark ≤ 20%), deviation was evident throughout the five regions, highlighting systematic overlooking of clinical recommendations. Two indicators (radiotherapy within 4 months after surgery if no adjuvant chemotherapy; 42% to 83.8%; benchmark ≥ 90%; and mammography 6 to 18 months after surgery, 55.1% to 72.6%; benchmark ≥ 90%) showed great regional variability and were lower than expected, possibly as result of an underestimation in indicator calculation by administrative data. CONCLUSION: Despite highlighting some limitations in the use of administrative data to measure health care performance, this study shows that evaluating the quality of BC care at a population level is possible and potentially useful for guiding quality improvement interventions.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document