Utility of routine data sources for feedback on the quality of cancer care: an assessment based on clinical practice guidelines

Background Not all cancer patients receive state-of-the-art care and providing regular feedback to clinicians might reduce this problem. The purpose of this study was to assess the utility of various data sources in providing feedback on the quality of cancer care. Methods Published clinical practice guidelines were used to obtain a list of processes-of-care of interest to clinicians. These were assigned to one of four data categories according to their availability and the marginal cost of using them for feedback. Results Only 8 (3%) of 243 processes-of-care could be measured using population-based registry or administrative inpatient data (lowest cost). A further 119 (49%) could be measured using a core clinical registry, which contains information on important prognostic factors (e.g., clinical stage, physiological reserve, hormone-receptor status). Another 88 (36%) required an expanded clinical registry or medical record review; mainly because they concerned long-term management of disease progression (recurrences and metastases) and 28 (11.5%) required patient interview or audio-taping of consultations because they involved information sharing between clinician and patient. Conclusion The advantages of population-based cancer registries and administrative inpatient data are wide coverage and low cost. The disadvantage is that they currently contain information on only a few processes-of-care. In most jurisdictions, clinical cancer registries, which can be used to report on many more processes-of-care, do not cover smaller hospitals. If we are to provide feedback about all patients, not just those in larger academic hospitals with the most developed data systems, then we need to develop sustainable population-based data systems that capture information on prognostic factors at the time of initial diagnosis and information on management of disease progression

Sensitivity of imaging for multifocal-multicentric breast carcinoma

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>This retrospective study aims to determine: 1) the sensitivity of preoperative mammography (Mx) and ultrasound (US), and re-reviewed Mx to detect multifocal multicentric breast carcinoma (MMBC), defined by pathology on surgical specimens, and 2) to analyze the characteristics of both detected and undetected foci on Mx and US.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Three experienced breast radiologists re-reviewed, independently, digital mammography of 97 women with MMBC pathologically diagnosed on surgical specimens. The radiologists were informed of all neoplastic foci, and blinded to the original mammograms and US reports. With regards to Mx, they considered the breast density, number of foci, the Mx characteristics of the lesions and their BI-RADS classification. For US, they considered size of the lesions, BI-RADS classification and US pattern and lesion characteristics. According to the histological size, the lesions were classified as: index cancer, 2nd lesion, 3rd lesion, and 4th lesion. Any pathologically identified malignant foci not previously described in the original imaging reports, were defined as undetected or missed lesions. Sensitivity was calculated for Mx, US and re-reviewed Mx for detecting the presence of the index cancer as well as additional satellite lesions.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Pathological examination revealed 13 multifocal and 84 multicentric cancers with a total of 303 malignant foci (282 invasive and 21 non invasive). Original Mx and US reports had an overall sensitivity of 45.5% and 52.9%, respectively. Mx detected 83/97 index cancers with a sensitivity of 85.6%. The number of lesions <it>un</it>detected by original Mx was 165/303. The Mx pattern of breasts with undetected lesions were: fatty in 3 (1.8%); scattered fibroglandular density in 40 (24.3%), heterogeneously dense in 91 (55.1%) and dense in 31 (18.8%) cases. In breasts with an almost entirely fatty pattern, Mx sensitivity was 100%, while in fibroglandular or dense pattern it was reduced to 45.5%. Re-reviewed Mx detected only 3 additional lesions. The sensitivity of Mx was affected by the presence of dense breast tissue which obscured lesions or by an incorrect interpretation of suspicious findings.</p> <p>US detected 73/80 index cancers (sensitivity of 91.2%), US missed 117 malignant foci with a mean tumor diameter of 6.5 mm; the sensitivity was 52.9%</p> <p>Undetected lesions by US were those smallest in size and present in fatty breast or in the presence of microcalcifications without a visible mass.</p> <p>US sensitivity was affected by the presence of fatty tissue or by the extent of calcification.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Mx missed MMBC malignant foci more often in dense or fibroglandular breasts. US missed small lesions in mainly fatty breasts or when there were only microcalcifications. The combined sensitivity of both techniques to assess MMBC was 58%. We suggest larger studies on multimodality imaging.</p

Surgical treatment of early stage breast cancer in elderly: an international comparison

Over 40% of breast cancer patients are diagnosed above the age of 65. Treatment of these elderly patients will probably vary over countries. The aim of this study was to make an international comparison (several European countries and the US) of surgical and radiation treatment for elderly women with early stage breast cancer. Survival comparisons were also made. Data were obtained from national or regional population-based registries in the Netherlands, Switzerland, Ireland, Belgium, Germany, and Portugal. For the US patients were selected from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Early stage breast cancer patients aged ≥65 diagnosed between 1995 and 2005 were included. An international comparison was made for breast and axillary surgery, radiotherapy after breast conserving surgery (BCS), and relative or cause-specific survival. Overall, 204.885 patients were included. The proportion of patients not receiving any surgery increased with age in many countries; however, differences between countries were large. In most countries more than half of all elderly patients received breast conserving surgery (BCS), with the highest percentage in Switzerland. The proportion of elderly patients that received radiotherapy after BCS decreased with age in all countries. Moreover, in all countries the proportion of patients who do not receive axillary surgery increased with age. No large differences in survival between countries were recorded. International comparisons of surgical treatment for elderly women with early stage breast cancer are scarce. This study showed large international differences in treatment of elderly early stage breast cancer patients, with the most striking result the large proportion of elderly who did not undergo surgery at all. Despite large treatment differences, survival does not seem to be affected in a major way