Implementation of Novel Molecular Biomarkers for Non-small Cell Lung Cancer in the Netherlands: How to Deal With Increasing Complexity

The diagnostic landscape of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is changing rapidly with the availability of novel treatments. Despite high-level healthcare in the Netherlands, not all patients with NSCLC are tested with the currently relevant predictive tumor markers that are necessary for optimal decision-making for today's available targeted or immunotherapy. An expert workshop on the molecular diagnosis of NSCLC involving pulmonary oncologists, clinical chemists, pathologists, and clinical scientists in molecular pathology was held in the Netherlands on December 10, 2018. The aims of the workshop were to facilitate cross-disciplinary discussions regarding standards of practice, and address recent developments and associated challenges that impact future practice. This paper presents a summary of the discussions and consensus opinions of the workshop participants on the initial challenges of harmonization of the detection and clinical use of predictive markers of NSCLC. A key theme identified was the need for broader and active participation of all stakeholders involved in molecular diagnostic services for NSCLC, including healthcare professionals across all disciplines, the hospitals and clinics involved in service delivery, healthcare insurers, and industry groups involved in diagnostic and treatment innovations. Such collaboration is essential to integrate different technologies into molecular diagnostics practice, to increase nationwide patient access to novel technologies, and to ensure consensus-preferred biomarkers are tested

The Management of Neuroendocrine Tumors of the Lung in MEN1: Results From the Dutch MEN1 Study Group

Item does not contain fulltextINTRODUCTION: Multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 (MEN1)-related neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) of the lung are mostly indolent, with a good prognosis. Nevertheless, cases of aggressive lung NET do occur, and therefore the management of individual patients is challenging. AIM: To assess tumor growth and the survival of patients with MEN1-related lung NETs at long-term follow-up. METHODS: The population-based Dutch MEN1 Study Group database (n = 446) was used to identify lung NETs by histopathological and radiological examinations. Tumor diameter was assessed. Linear mixed models and the Kaplan-Meier method were used for analyzing tumor growth and survival. Molecular analyses were performed on a lung NET showing particularly aggressive behavior. RESULTS: In 102 patients (22.9% of the total MEN1 cohort), 164 lesions suspected of lung NETs were identified and followed for a median of 6.6 years. Tumor diameter increased 6.0% per year. The overall 15-year survival rate was 78.0% (95% confidence interval: 64.6-94.2%) without lung NET-related death. No prognostic factors for tumor growth or survival could be identified. A somatic c.3127A > G (p.Met1043Val) PIK3CA driver mutation was found in a case of rapid growing lung NET after 6 years of indolent disease, presumably explaining the sudden change in course. CONCLUSION: MEN1-related lung NETs are slow growing and have a good prognosis. No accurate risk factors for tumor growth could be identified. Lung NET screening should therefore be based on well-informed, shared decision-making, balancing between the low absolute risk of an aggressive tumor in individuals and the potential harms of frequent thoracic imaging

Effect of an antibiotic checklist on length of hospital stay and appropriate antibiotic use in adult patients treated with intravenous antibiotics: a stepped wedge cluster randomized trial

OBJECTIVES: Quality indicators (QIs) have been developed to define appropriate antibiotic use in hospitalized patients. We evaluated whether a checklist based on these QIs affects appropriate antibiotic use and length of hospital stay. METHODS: An antibiotic checklist for patients treated with intravenous antibiotics was introduced in nine Dutch hospitals in a stepped wedge cluster randomized trial. Prophylaxis was excluded. We included a random sample before (baseline), and all eligible patients after (intervention) checklist introduction. Baseline and intervention outcomes were compared. Primary endpoint was length of stay (LOS), analysed by intention to treat. Secondary endpoints, including QI performances, QI sum score (performance on all QIs per patient), and quality of checklist use, were analysed per protocol. RESULTS: Between 1 November 2014 and 1 October 2015 we included 853 baseline and 5354 intervention patients, of whom 993 (19%) had a completed checklist. The LOS did not change (baseline geometric mean 10.0 days (95% CI 8.6-11.5) versus intervention 10.1 days (95% CI 8.9-11.5), p 0.8). QI performances increased between +3.0% and +23.9% per QI, and the percentage of patients with a QI sum score above 50% increased significantly (OR 2.4 (95% CI 2.0-3.0), p<0.001). Higher QI sum scores were significantly associated with shorter LOS. Discordance existed between checklist-answers and actual performance. CONCLUSIONS: Use of an antibiotic checklist resulted in a significant increase in appropriateness of antibiotic use, but not in a reduction of LOS. Low overall checklist completion rates and discordance between checklist-answers and actual provided care might have attenuated the impact of the checklist