Influence of neutropenia on mortality of critically ill cancer patients : results of a meta-analysis on individual data

Background: The study objective was to assess the influence of neutropenia on outcome of critically ill cancer patients by meta-analysis of individual data. Secondary objectives were to assess the influence of neutropenia on outcome of critically ill patients in prespecified subgroups (according to underlying tumor, period of admission, need for mechanical ventilation and use of granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF)). Methods: Data sources were PubMed and the Cochrane database. Study selection included articles focusing on critically ill cancer patients published in English and studies in humans from May 2005 to May 2015. For study selection, the study eligibility was assessed by two investigators. Individual data from selected studies were obtained from corresponding authors. Results: Overall, 114 studies were identified and authors of 30 studies (26.3% of selected studies) agreed to participate in this study. Of the 7515 included patients, three were excluded due to a missing major variable (neutropenia or mortality) leading to analysis of 7512 patients, including 1702 neutropenic patients (22.6%). After adjustment for confounders, and taking study effect into account, neutropenia was independently associated with mortality (OR 1.41; 95% CI 1.23-1.62; P = 0.03). When analyzed separately, neither admission period, underlying malignancy nor need for mechanical ventilation modified the prognostic influence of neutropenia on outcome. However, among patients for whom data on G-CSF administration were available (n = 1949; 25.9%), neutropenia was no longer associated with outcome in patients receiving G-CSF (OR 1.03; 95% CI 0.70-1.51; P = 0.90). Conclusion: Among 7512 critically ill cancer patients included in this systematic review, neutropenia was independently associated with poor outcome despite a meaningful survival. Neutropenia was no longer significantly associated with outcome in patients treated by G-CSF, which may suggest a beneficial effect of G-CSF in neutropenic critically ill cancer patients

“COLONAV – Navigateur de patients pour le dépistage du cancer colorectal dans les zones défavorisées”, volume 64, supplément 4

International audienc

“COLONAV – Navigateur de patients pour le dépistage du cancer colorectal dans les zones défavorisées”, volume 64, supplément 4

International audienc

COLONAV - Navigateur de patients pour le dépistage du cancer colorectal dans les zones défavorisées

International audienceLe dépistage organisé du cancer colorectal a été généralisé en France en 2008 et concerne 16 millions de français âgés de 50 à 74 ans. Le faible taux de participation parmi les populations défavorisées est un facteur d’accroissement des inégalités sociales de santé. Les programmes de « patient navigation », mis en place pour la première fois dans les années 1990 aux États-Unis, ont prouvé leur efficacité pour promouvoir l’accès au dépistage. La caractéristique de ces programmes est que les « navigateurs » sont des « pairs », issus des mêmes quartiers que la population ciblée et non des professionnels de santé.COLONAV est une étude d’implémentation en population dont l’objectif est d’augmenter le taux de participation au dépistage du cancer colorectal dans des zones défavorisées. Un essai pragmatique contrôlé randomisé en clusters, multicentrique, a été mené sur une durée de 18 mois auprès d’habitants vivant dans des zones défavorisées et invités à participer au dépistage organisé du cancer colorectal. Ces zones sont réparties dans cinq départements : l’Ardèche, la Côte-d’Or, la Loire, le Rhône et le Val-de-Marne. Dans ces départements, une zone d’intervention et deux zones de contrôles ont été tirées au sort. Cinq navigateurs ont été recrutés mi 2013 par les comités départementaux de la Ligue contre le cancer. La mission principale des navigateurs était de contacter les personnes invitées par la structure de dépistage et habitant dans une zone d’intervention et de les accompagner à la réalisation du test Hemoccult®, voire d’examens complémentaires en cas de test positif. Le critère de jugement principal pour évaluer l’efficacité de l’intervention sera mesuré par l’écart de l’indicateur avant/après dans les zones d’intervention et contrôle. L’indicateur sera le taux de participation 18 mois après le début de l’intervention dans les zones concernées

Outcomes Definitions and Statistical Tests in Oncology Studies: A Systematic Review of the Reporting Consistency.

Quality of reporting for Randomized Clinical Trials (RCTs) in oncology was analyzed in several systematic reviews, but, in this setting, there is paucity of data for the outcomes definitions and consistency of reporting for statistical tests in RCTs and Observational Studies (OBS). The objective of this review was to describe those two reporting aspects, for OBS and RCTs in oncology.From a list of 19 medical journals, three were retained for analysis, after a random selection: British Medical Journal (BMJ), Annals of Oncology (AoO) and British Journal of Cancer (BJC). All original articles published between March 2009 and March 2014 were screened. Only studies whose main outcome was accompanied by a corresponding statistical test were included in the analysis. Studies based on censored data were excluded. Primary outcome was to assess quality of reporting for description of primary outcome measure in RCTs and of variables of interest in OBS. A logistic regression was performed to identify covariates of studies potentially associated with concordance of tests between Methods and Results parts.826 studies were included in the review, and 698 were OBS. Variables were described in Methods section for all OBS studies and primary endpoint was clearly detailed in Methods section for 109 RCTs (85.2%). 295 OBS (42.2%) and 43 RCTs (33.6%) had perfect agreement for reported statistical test between Methods and Results parts. In multivariable analysis, variable "number of included patients in study" was associated with test consistency: aOR (adjusted Odds Ratio) for third group compared to first group was equal to: aOR Grp3 = 0.52 [0.31-0.89] (P value = 0.009).Variables in OBS and primary endpoint in RCTs are reported and described with a high frequency. However, statistical tests consistency between methods and Results sections of OBS is not always noted. Therefore, we encourage authors and peer reviewers to verify consistency of statistical tests in oncology studies

Impact of Medical Specialties on Diagnostic and Therapeutic Management of Elderly Cancer Patients

The management (diagnostic and therapeutic) of cancer in the geriatric population involves a number of complex difficulties. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of a medical specialty on the diagnostic and therapeutic management of elderly cancer patients. Four clinical scenarios of cancer in the geriatric population, with a dedicated survey to gather information regarding each clinical case’s diagnostic and therapeutic approaches, as well as the different criteria influencing physicians’ therapeutic decisions, were exposed to geriatricians, oncologists, and radiotherapists in Saint-Etienne. The surveys were filled out by 13 geriatricians, 11 oncologists, and 7 radiotherapists. There was a homogeneity of responses regarding the confirmation of cancer diagnostics in the elderly. There were strong disparities (inter- and intra-specialties) for several clinical situations regarding the therapeutic management of cancer. There were significant disparities in terms of surgical management, the implementation of a chemotherapy protocol, and the adaptation of the chemotherapy dosage. Contrary to oncologists, who primarily consider the G8 and the Karnofsky score, geriatric autonomy scores and frailty with cognitive assessment were the key factors determining diagnostic/therapeutic therapy for geriatricians. These results raise important ethical questions, requiring specific studies in geriatric populations to provide the homogenous management of elderly patients with cancer

Design and validation of a self-administered questionnaire as an aid to detection of occupational exposure to lung carcinogens

Ten to thirty percent of lung cancer is thought to be of occupational origin. Lung cancer is under-declared as an occupational disease in Europe, and most declarations of occupational disease concern asbestos. The purpose of this study was to design and validate a short, sensitive self-administered questionnaire, as an aid for physicians in detecting occupational exposure to asbestos and other lung carcinogens in order to remedy occupational lung cancer under-declaration. A short self-administered questionnaire was drawn up by oncologist-pneumologists and occupational physicians, covering situations of exposure to proven and probable lung carcinogens. Understanding and acceptability were assessed on 15 lung cancer patients. Validity and reliability were assessed on 70 lung cancer patients by comparison against a semi-directive questionnaire considered as gold standard. Sensitivity and specificity were assessed by comparing responses to items on the two questionnaires. Reliability was assessed by analysing the kappa concordance coefficient for items on the two questionnaires. Sensitivity was 0.85 and specificity 0.875. Concordance between responses on the two questionnaires was 85.7%, with a kappa coefficient of 0.695 [0.52e0.87]. Mean self-administration time was 3.1 min (versus 8.12 min to administer the gold-standard questionnaire). In 16 patients, the self-administered questionnaire detected lung carcinogen exposure meeting the criteria for occupational disease.Dix à trente pour cent des cancers du poumon pourraient être d'origine professionnelle. Le cancer du poumon est sous - déclaré comme étant une maladie professionnelle en Europe et la plupart d'entre elles concerne l'amiante

Flow chart: selection of studies process.

<p>Flow chart: selection of studies process.</p

Analysis by multivariate logistic regression of perfect statistical tests consistency.

<p>Analysis by multivariate logistic regression of perfect statistical tests consistency.</p

Analysis by univariable logistic regression of perfect statistical tests consistency for selected variables.

<p>Analysis by univariable logistic regression of perfect statistical tests consistency for selected variables.</p