Obstructing colorectal cancer: a population-based review of colonic stenting in Queensland, Australia

Purpose Stenting is a useful treatment option for malignant colonic obstruction, but its role remains unclear. This study was designed to establish how stents have been used in Queensland, Australia, and to review outcomes. Methods Patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer in Queensland from January 1, 2008, to December 31, 2014, who underwent colonic stent insertion were reviewed. Primary outcomes of 5-year survival, 30-day mortality, and overall length of survival were calculated. The secondary outcomes included patient and tumor factors, and stoma rates. Results In total, 319 patients were included, and distant metastases were identified in 183 patients (57.4%). The 30-day mortality rate was 6.6% (n=21), and the 5-year survival was 11.9% (n=38). Median survival was 11 months (interquartile range, 4–27 months). A further operation (hazard ratio [HR], 0.19; P<0.001) and chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy (HR, 0.718; P=0.046) reduced the risk of 5-year mortality. The presence of distant metastases (HR, 2.052; P<0.001) and a comorbidity score of 3 or more (HR, 1.572; P=0.20) increased mortality. Surgery was associated with a reduced risk of mortality even in patients with metastatic disease (HR, 0.14; P<0.001). Twenty-two patients (6.9%) ended the study period with a stoma. Conclusion Colorectal stenting was used in Queensland in several diverse scenarios, in both localized and metastatic disease. Surgery had a survival advantage, even in patients with metastatic disease. There was no survival difference according to whether patients were socioeconomically disadvantaged, diagnosed in a major city or not, or treated at private or public hospitals. Stenting proved a valid treatment option with low stoma rates

Developing an Australian Melanoma Clinical Outcomes Registry (MelCOR): a protocol paper

Introduction Australia has the highest incidence of melanoma in the world with variable care provided by a diverse range of clinicians. Clinical quality registries aim to identify these variations in care and provide anonymised, benchmarked feedback to clinicians and institutions to improve patient outcomes. The Australian Melanoma Clinical Outcomes Registry (MelCOR) aims to collect population-wide, clinical-level data for the early management of cutaneous melanoma and provide anonymised feedback to healthcare providers. Methods and analysis A modified Delphi process will be undertaken to identify key clinical quality indicators for inclusion in the MelCOR pilot. MelCOR will prospectively collect data relevant to these quality indicators, initially for all people over the age of 18 years living in Victoria and Queensland with a melanoma diagnosis confirmed by histopathology, via a two-stage recruitment and consent process. In stage 1, existing State-based cancer registries contact the treating clinician and provide an opportunity for them to opt themselves or their patients out of direct contact with MelCOR. After stage 1, re-identifiable clinical data are provided to the MelCOR under a waiver of consent. In stage 2, the State-based cancer registry will approach the patient directly and invite them to opt in to MelCOR and share identifiable data. If a patient elects to opt in, MelCOR will be able to contact patients directly to collect patient-reported outcome measures. Aggregated data will be used to provide benchmarked, comparative feedback to participating institutions/clinicians. Ethics and dissemination Following the successful collection of pilot data, the feasibility of an Australia-wide roll out will be evaluated. Key quality indicator data will be the core of the MelCOR dataset, with additional data points added later. Annual reports will be issued, first to the relevant stakeholders followed by the public. MelCOR is approved by the Alfred Ethics Committee (58280/127/20)

Regional nodal metastasis and 5-year survival in patients with thin melanoma in Queensland: a population-based study

Background: Optimal management of regional lymph nodes for thin cutaneous melanoma is uncertain. We evaluated regional lymph node involvement and 5-year melanoma-specific survival (MSS) in patients with thin (≤1 mm) primary melanoma. Methods: Patients with a melanoma, American Joint Committee on Cancer Staging 8th Edition pT1a (60 years. The 5-year MSS was similar for observed and SLNB cohorts (99.66% versus 98.92%) but worse for T1b lesions (98.90%) and clinical nodal recurrence (66.89%). Conclusion: Overall prognosis for T1 melanoma is excellent with nodal involvement being rare. However, the American Joint Committee on Cancer 8th Edition T1b melanoma correlates with significantly worse 5-year MSS and increased regional nodal recurrence (notably for 0.8–1.0 mm lesions with ulceration). Further characterization of high-risk groups for nodal positivity that impacts patient outcome is needed for the pT1 melanoma cohort