Surgeon volume and 30 day mortality for brain tumours in England.

BACKGROUND: There is evidence that surgeons who perform more operations have better outcomes. However, in patients with brain tumours, all of the evidence comes from the USA. METHODS: We examined all English patients with an intracranial neoplasm who had an intracranial resection in 2008-2010. We included surgeons who performed at least six operations over 3 years, and at least one operation in the first and last 6 months of the period. RESULTS: The analysis data set comprised 9194 operations, 163 consultant neurosurgeons and 30 centres. Individual surgeon volumes varied widely (7-272; median=46). 72% of operations were on the brain, and 30 day mortality was 3%. A doubling of surgeon load was associated with a 20% relative reduction in mortality. Thirty day mortality varied between centres (0·95-8·62%) but was not related to centre workload. CONCLUSIONS: Individual surgeon volumes correlated with patient 30 day mortality. Centres and surgeons in England are busier than surgeons and centres in the USA. There is no relationship between centre volume and 30 day mortality in England. Services in the UK appear to be adequately arranged at a centre level, but would benefit from further surgeon sub-specialisation

Will Patients Benefit from Regionalization of Gynecologic Cancer Care?

OBJECTIVE: Patient chances for cure and palliation for a variety of malignancies may be greatly affected by the care provided by a treating hospital. We sought to determine the effect of volume and teaching status on patient outcomes for five gynecologic malignancies: endometrial, cervical, ovarian and vulvar carcinoma and uterine sarcoma. METHODS: The Florida Cancer Data System dataset was queried for all patients undergoing treatment for gynecologic cancers from 1990-2000. RESULTS: Overall, 48,981 patients with gynecologic malignancies were identified. Endometrial tumors were the most common, representing 43.2% of the entire cohort, followed by ovarian cancer (30.9%), cervical cancer (20.8%), vulvar cancer (4.6%), and uterine sarcoma (0.5%). By univariate analysis, although patients treated at high volume centers (HVC) were significantly younger, they benefited from an improved short-term (30-day and/or 90-day) survival for cervical, ovarian and endometrial cancers. Multivariate analysis (MVA), however, failed to demonstrate significant survival benefit for gynecologic cancer patients treated at teaching facilities (TF) or HVC. Significant prognostic factors at presentation by MVA were age over 65 (HR = 2.6, p<0.01), African-American race (HR = 1.36, p<0.01), and advanced stage (regional HR = 2.08, p<0.01; advanced HR = 3.82, p<0.01, respectively). Surgery and use of chemotherapy were each significantly associated with improved survival. CONCLUSION: No difference in patient survival was observed for any gynecologic malignancy based upon treating hospital teaching or volume status. Although instances of improved outcomes may occur, overall further regionalization would not appear to significantly improve patient survival

Treatment in advanced colorectal cancer: what, when and how?

Treatment of advanced colorectal cancer (CRC) increasingly requires a multidisciplinary approach and multiple treatment options add to the complexity of clinical decision-making. Recently novel targeted therapy against angiogenesis and epidermal growth factor receptor completed a plethora of phase III studies. The addition of bevacizumab to chemotherapy improved the efficacy over chemotherapy alone in both first and second line settings, although the magnitude of benefit may not be as great when a more optimal chemotherapy platform is used. Studies performed thus far did not address conclusively whether bevacizumab should be continued in subsequent lines of treatment. Anti-angiogenesis tyrosine kinase inhibitors have not shown any additional benefit over chemotherapy alone so far. Although some benefits were seen with cetuximab in all settings of treating advanced CRC, K-ras mutation status provides an important determinant of who would not benefit from such a treatment. Caution should be exercised in combining anti-angiogenesis with anti-EGFR strategy until further randomised data become available. In this review, we have focused on the implications of these trial results on the everyday management decisions of treating advanced CRC