15 research outputs found

    Different quality of treatment in retroperitoneal sarcomas (RPS) according to hospital-case volume and surgeon-case volume: a retrospective regional analysis in Italy

    Get PDF
    Abstract Background Retroperitoneal sarcomas (RPS) should be surgically managed in specialized sarcoma centers. However, it is not clearly demonstrated if clinical outcome is more influenced by Center Case Volume (CCV) or by Surgeon Case Volume (SCV). The aim of this study is to retrospectively explore the relationship between CCV and SCV and the quality of surgery in a wide region of Northern Italy. Methods We retrospectively collected data about patients M0 surgically treated for RPSs in 22 different hospitals from 2006 to 2011, dividing them in two hospital groups according to sarcoma clinical activity volume (HCV, high case volume or LCV, low case volume hospitals). The HCV group (> 100 sarcomas observed per year) included a Comprehensive Cancer Center (HVCCC) with a high sarcoma SCV (> 20 cases/year), and a Tertiary Academic Hospital (HVTCA) with multiple surgeon teams and a low sarcoma SCV (≤ 5 cases/year for each involved surgeon). All other hospitals were included in the LCV group (< 100 sarcomas observed per year). Results Data regarding 138 patients were collected. Patients coming from LCV hospitals (66) were excluded from the analysis as prognostic data were frequently not available. Among the 72 remaining cases of HCV hospitals 60% of cases had R0/R1 margins, with a more favorable distribution of R0/R1 versus R2 in HVCCC compared to HVTCA. Conclusions In HCV hospitals, sarcoma SCV may significantly influence RPS treatment quality. In low-volume centers surgical reports can often miss important prognostic issues and surgical quality is generally poor

    Baseline selection on a collider: a ubiquitous mechanism occurring in both representative and selected cohort studies.

    Get PDF
    There is debate as to whether cohort studies are valid when they are based on a source population that is non-representative of a given general population. This baseline selection may introduce collider bias if the exposure of interest and some other outcome risk factors affect the probability of being in the source population, thus altering the associations between the exposure and those risk factors. We argue that this mechanism is not specific to 'selected cohorts' and also occurs in 'representative cohorts' due to the selection processes that occur in any population. These selection processes are for example linked to the life status, immigration and emigration, which, in turn, may be affected by environmental and social determinants, lifestyles and genetics. We provide real-world examples of this phenomenon using data on the population of the Piedmont region, Italy. In addition to well-recognised mechanisms, such as shared common causes, the associations between the exposure of interest and the risk factors for the outcome of interest in any source population are potentially shaped by collider bias due to the underlying selection processes. We conclude that, when conducting a cohort study, different source populations, whether 'selected' or 'representative', may lead to different exposure-outcome risk factor associations, and thus different degrees of lack of exchangeability, but that one approach is not inherently more or less biased than the other. The key issue is whether the relevant risk factors can be identified and controlled
    corecore