Taxonomic classification of planning decisions in health care: a review of the state of the art in OR/MS

We provide a structured overview of the typical decisions to be made in resource capacity planning and control in health care, and a review of relevant OR/MS articles for each planning decision. The contribution of this paper is twofold. First, to position the planning decisions, a taxonomy is presented. This taxonomy provides health care managers and OR/MS researchers with a method to identify, break down and classify planning and control decisions. Second, following the taxonomy, for six health care services, we provide an exhaustive specification of planning and control decisions in resource capacity planning and control. For each planning and control decision, we structurally review the key OR/MS articles and the OR/MS methods and techniques that are applied in the literature to support decision making

Geriatric oncology: problems with under-treatment within this population

We are currently faced with an aging population, which is rapidly growing worldwide. Two thirds of cancer occurs in the over 65-year age group. Societal conceptions from the past have created ageist stereotypes; old age is associated with frailty and the elderly are perceived to be destined for deterioration and loss of independence. Cancer within the elderly is also subject to these stereotypes, with elderly cancer patients considered by some not as likely to recover as younger patients with cancer. We summarise and review the current concerns regarding elderly management and treatments utilised for the management of oncological disease in the elderly, and discuss the impact of under-treatment within this population

The varying role of the GP in the pathway between colonoscopy and surgery for colorectal cancer: a retrospective cohort study

Extent: 11p.Objectives: To describe general practitioner (GP) involvement in the treatment referral pathway for colorectal cancer (CRC) patients. Design: A retrospective cohort analysis of linked data. Setting: A population-based sample of CRC patients diagnosed from August 2004 to December 2007 in New South Wales, Australia, using the 45 and Up Study, cancer registry diagnosis records, inpatient hospital records and Medicare claims records. Participants: 407 CRC patients who had a colonoscopy followed by surgery. Primary outcome measures: Patterns of GP consultations between colonoscopy and surgery (ie, between diagnosis and treatment). We investigated whether consulting a GP presurgery was associated with time to surgery, postsurgical GP consultations or rectal cancer cases having surgery in a centre with radiotherapy facilities. Results: Of the 407 patients, 43% (n=175) had at least one GP consultation between colonoscopy and surgery. The median time from colonoscopy to surgery was 27 days for those with an intervening GP consultation and 15 days for those without the consultation. 55% (n=223) had a GP consultation up to 30 days postsurgery; it was more common in cases of patients who consulted a GP presurgery than for those who did not (65% and 47%, respectively, adjusted OR 2.71, 95% CI 1.50 to 4.89, p=0.001). Of the 142 rectal cancer cases, 23% (n=33) had their surgery in a centre with radiotherapy facilities, with no difference between those who did and did not consult a GP presurgery (21% and 25% respectively, adjusted OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.27 to 2.63, p=0.76). Conclusions: Consulting a GP between colonoscopy and surgery was associated with a longer interval between diagnosis and treatment, and with further GP consultations postsurgery, but for rectal cancer cases it was not associated with treatment in a centre with radiotherapy facilities. GPs might require a more defined and systematic approach to CRC management.David Goldsbury, Mark Harris, Shane Pascoe, Michael Barton, Ian Olver, Allan Spigelman, Justin Beilby, Craig Veitch, David Weller, Dianne L O'Connel

The impact of Coronavirus (COVID-19) on head and neck cancer patients' care

The impact of Coronavirus (COVID-19) on head and neck cancer patients' care

International consensus recommendations on key outcome measures for organ preservation after (chemo)radiotherapy in patients with rectal cancer

Multimodal treatment strategies for patients with rectal cancer are increasingly including the possibility of organ preservation, through nonoperative management or local excision. Organ preservation strategies can enable patients with a complete response or near-complete clinical responses after radiotherapy with or without concomitant chemotherapy to safely avoid the morbidities associated with radical surgery, and thus to maintain anorectal function and quality of life. However, standardization of the key outcome measures of organ preservation strategies is currently lacking; this includes a lack of consensus of the optimal definitions and selection of primary end points according to the trial phase and design; the optimal time points for response assessment; response-based decision-making; follow-up schedules; use of specific anorectal function tests; and quality of life and patient-reported outcomes. Thus, a consensus statement on outcome measures is necessary to ensure consistency and facilitate more accurate comparisons of data from ongoing and future trials. Here, we have convened an international group of experts with extensive experience in the management of patients with rectal cancer, including organ preservation approaches, and used a Delphi process to establish the first international consensus recommendations for key outcome measures of organ preservation, in an attempt to standardize the reporting of data from both trials and routine practice in this emerging area.Patients with early-stage rectal cancer might potentially benefit from treatment with an organ-sparing approach, which preserves quality of life owing to avoidance of the need for permanent colostomy. Trials conducted to investigate this have so far been hampered by considerable inter-trial heterogeneity in several key features. In this Consensus Statement, the authors provide guidance on the optimal end points, response assessment time points, follow-up procedures and quality of life measures in an attempt to improve the comparability of clinical research in this area

Clinical predictive factors of pathologic complete response in locally advanced rectal cancer

Background: Predictive factors of pathologic complete response (pCR) after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) are still not identified. The purpose of this study was to define them. Materials and Methods: Data from consecutive LARC patients treated between January 2008 and June 2014 at our Institution were included in the analysis. All patients were treated with a long course of nCRT. Demographics, initial diagnosis and tumor extension details, as well as treatment modalities characteristics were included in the univariate and logistic regression analysis. Results: In total 99 patients received nCRT, of whom 23 patients (23.2%) achieved pCR. Patients with and without pCR were similar in term of age, sex, comobidities, BMI and tumor characteristics. Multivariate logistic regression indicated that pre-treatment tumor size <= 5 cm was a significant predictor for pCR (p = 0.035), whereas clinical N stage only showed a positive trend (p = 0.084). Conclusions: Tumor size at diagnosis could be used to predict pCR, and thus to individualize therapy in LARC patients management. Validation in other studies is needed

Multimodal treatment for local recurrent malignant gliomas: resurgery and/or reirradiation followed by chemotherapy

The therapeutic management of recurrent malignant gliomas (MGs) is not determined. Therefore, the efficacy of a multimodal approach and a combination systemic therapy was investigated. A retrospective analysis of 26 MGs patients at first relapse treated with multimodal therapy (chemotherapy plus surgery and/or reirradiation) or chemotherapy alone was performed. Second-line chemotherapy consisted of fotemustine (FTM) in combination with bevacizumab (BEV) (cFTM/BEV) or followed by third-line BEV (sFTM/BEV). Subgroup analyses were performed. Multimodal therapy provided a higher overall response rate (ORR) (73 vs. 47%), disease control rate (DCR) (82 vs. 67%), median progression-free survival (mPFS) (11 vs. 7 months; P=0.08) and median overall survival (mOS) (13 vs. 8 months; P=0.04) compared with chemotherapy. Concomitant FTM/BEV resulted in higher ORR (84 vs. 36%), DCR (92 vs. 57%), mPFS (10 vs. 5 months; P=0.22) and mOS (11 vs. 5.2 months; P=0.15) compared with sFTM/BEV. Methylated patients did not experience additional survival benefits with multimodality treatment but had higher mPFS (10 vs 7.1 months; P=0.33) and mOS (11 vs. 8 months; P=0.33) with cFTM/BEV. Unmethylated patients experienced the greatest survival benefit with the multimodal approach (mPFS: 10 vs. 5 months; mOS 11 vs 6 months; both P=0.02) and cFTM/BEV (mPFS: 5 vs. 2 months; mOS 6 vs. 3.2 months; both P=0.01). In conclusion, in recurrent MGs, multimodal therapy and cFTM/BEV provide survival and response benefits. Methylated patients benefit from a cFTM/BEV but not from a multimodal approach. Notably, unmethylated patients had the highest survival benefit with the two strategies