Global wealth disparities drive adherence to COVID-safe pathways in head and neck cancer surgery

Peer reviewe

Effects of hospital facilities on patient outcomes after cancer surgery: an international, prospective, observational study

Background Early death after cancer surgery is higher in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) compared with in high-income countries, yet the impact of facility characteristics on early postoperative outcomes is unknown. The aim of this study was to examine the association between hospital infrastructure, resource availability, and processes on early outcomes after cancer surgery worldwide.Methods A multimethods analysis was performed as part of the GlobalSurg 3 study-a multicentre, international, prospective cohort study of patients who had surgery for breast, colorectal, or gastric cancer. The primary outcomes were 30-day mortality and 30-day major complication rates. Potentially beneficial hospital facilities were identified by variable selection to select those associated with 30-day mortality. Adjusted outcomes were determined using generalised estimating equations to account for patient characteristics and country-income group, with population stratification by hospital.Findings Between April 1, 2018, and April 23, 2019, facility-level data were collected for 9685 patients across 238 hospitals in 66 countries (91 hospitals in 20 high-income countries; 57 hospitals in 19 upper-middle-income countries; and 90 hospitals in 27 low-income to lower-middle-income countries). The availability of five hospital facilities was inversely associated with mortality: ultrasound, CT scanner, critical care unit, opioid analgesia, and oncologist. After adjustment for case-mix and country income group, hospitals with three or fewer of these facilities (62 hospitals, 1294 patients) had higher mortality compared with those with four or five (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 3.85 [95% CI 2.58-5.75]; p<0.0001), with excess mortality predominantly explained by a limited capacity to rescue following the development of major complications (63.0% vs 82.7%; OR 0.35 [0.23-0.53]; p<0.0001). Across LMICs, improvements in hospital facilities would prevent one to three deaths for every 100 patients undergoing surgery for cancer.Interpretation Hospitals with higher levels of infrastructure and resources have better outcomes after cancer surgery, independent of country income. Without urgent strengthening of hospital infrastructure and resources, the reductions in cancer-associated mortality associated with improved access will not be realised

The impact of surgical delay on resectability of colorectal cancer: An international prospective cohort study

AIM: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has provided a unique opportunity to explore the impact of surgical delays on cancer resectability. This study aimed to compare resectability for colorectal cancer patients undergoing delayed versus non-delayed surgery. METHODS: This was an international prospective cohort study of consecutive colorectal cancer patients with a decision for curative surgery (January-April 2020). Surgical delay was defined as an operation taking place more than 4 weeks after treatment decision, in a patient who did not receive neoadjuvant therapy. A subgroup analysis explored the effects of delay in elective patients only. The impact of longer delays was explored in a sensitivity analysis. The primary outcome was complete resection, defined as curative resection with an R0 margin. RESULTS: Overall, 5453 patients from 304 hospitals in 47 countries were included, of whom 6.6% (358/5453) did not receive their planned operation. Of the 4304 operated patients without neoadjuvant therapy, 40.5% (1744/4304) were delayed beyond 4 weeks. Delayed patients were more likely to be older, men, more comorbid, have higher body mass index and have rectal cancer and early stage disease. Delayed patients had higher unadjusted rates of complete resection (93.7% vs. 91.9%, P = 0.032) and lower rates of emergency surgery (4.5% vs. 22.5%, P < 0.001). After adjustment, delay was not associated with a lower rate of complete resection (OR 1.18, 95% CI 0.90-1.55, P = 0.224), which was consistent in elective patients only (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.69-1.27, P = 0.672). Longer delays were not associated with poorer outcomes. CONCLUSION: One in 15 colorectal cancer patients did not receive their planned operation during the first wave of COVID-19. Surgical delay did not appear to compromise resectability, raising the hypothesis that any reduction in long-term survival attributable to delays is likely to be due to micro-metastatic disease

MiR-590-3p promotes ovarian cancer growth and metastasis via a novel FOXA2-versican pathway

Abstract miRNAs play important roles in gene regulation, and their dysregulation is associated with many diseases, including epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). In this study, we determined the expression and function of miR-590-3p in EOC. miR-590-3p levels were higher in high-grade carcinoma when compared with low-grade or tumors with low malignant potential. Interestingly, plasma levels of miR-590-3p were significantly higher in patients with EOC than in subjects with benign gynecologic disorders. Transient transfection of miR-590-3p mimics or stable transfection of mir-590 increased cell proliferation, migration, and invasion. In vivo studies revealed that mir-590 accelerated tumor growth and metastasis. Using a cDNA microarray, we identified forkhead box A2 (FOXA2) and versican (VCAN) as top downregulated and upregulated genes by mir-590, respectively. miR-590-3p targeted FOXA2 3′ UTR to suppress its expression. In addition, knockdown or knockout of FOXA2 enhanced cell proliferation, migration, and invasion. Overexpression of FOXA2 decreased, whereas knockout of FOXA2 increased VCAN mRNA and protein levels, which was due to direct binding and regulation of the VCAN gene by FOXA2. Interrogation of the TCGA ovarian cancer database revealed a negative relationship between FOXA2 and VCAN mRNA levels in EOC tumors, and high FOXA2/low VCAN mRNA levels in tumors positively correlated with patient survival. Finally, overexpression of FOXA2 or silencing of VCAN reversed the effects of mir-590. These findings demonstrate that miR-590-3p promotes EOC development via a novel FOXA2–VCAN pathway. Significance: Low FOXA2/high VCAN levels mediate the tumor-promoting effects of miR-590-3p and negatively correlate with ovarian cancer survival. Cancer Res; 78(15); 4175–90. ©2018 AACR.</jats:p

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Gestational Trophoblastic Disease

© 2019 American College of Radiology Gestational trophoblastic disease (GTD), a rare complication of pregnancy, includes both benign and malignant forms, the latter collectively referred to as gestational trophoblastic neoplasia (GTN). When metastatic, the lungs are the most common site of initial spread. Beta-human chorionic gonadotropin, elaborated to some extent by all forms of GTD, is useful in facilitating disease detection, diagnosis, monitoring treatment response, and follow-up. Imaging evaluation depends on whether GTD manifests in one of its benign forms or whether it has progressed to GTN. Transabdominal and transvaginal ultrasound with duplex Doppler evaluation of the pelvis are usually appropriate diagnostic procedures in either of these circumstances, and in posttreatment surveillance. The appropriateness of more extensive imaging remains dependent on a diagnosis of GTN and on other factors. The use of imaging to assess complications, typically hemorrhagic, should be guided by the location of clinical signs and symptoms. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Pretreatment Evaluation and Follow-Up of Endometrial Cancer

To date, there is little consensus on the role of pelvic imaging in assessing local disease extent during initial staging in patients with endometrial carcinoma, with practices differing widely across centers. However, when pretreatment assessment of local tumor extent is indicated, MRI is the preferred imaging modality. Preoperative imaging of endometrial carcinoma can define the extent of disease and indicate the need for subspecialist referral in the presence of deep myometrial invasion, cervical extension, or suspected lymphadenopathy. If distant metastatic disease is clinically suspected, preoperative assessment with cross-sectional imaging or PET/CT may be performed. However, most patients with low-grade disease are at low risk of lymph node and distant metastases. Thus, this group may not require a routine pretreatment evaluation for distant metastases. Recurrence rates in patients with endometrial carcinoma are infrequent. Therefore, radiologic evaluation is typically used only to investigate suspicion of recurrent disease due to symptoms or physical examination and not for routine surveillance after treatment. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment

ACR Appropriateness Criteria \u3csup\u3e®\u3c/sup\u3e Clinically Suspected Adnexal Mass, No Acute Symptoms

© 2019 American College of Radiology There are approximately 9.1 pelvic surgeries performed for every histologically confirmed adnexal malignancy in the United States, compared to 2.3 surgeries per malignancy (in oncology centers) and 5.9 surgeries per malignancy (in other centers) in Europe. An important prognostic factor in the long-term survival in patients with ovarian malignancy is the initial management by a gynecological oncologist. With high accuracy of imaging for adnexal mass characterization and consequent appropriate triage to subspecialty referral, the better use of gynecologic oncology can improve treatment outcomes. Ultrasound, including transabdominal, transvaginal, and duplex ultrasound, combined with MRI with contrast can diagnose adnexal masses as benign with specific features (ie, functional masses, dermoid, endometrioma, fibroma, pedunculated fibroid, hydrosalpinx, peritoneal inclusion cyst, Tarlov cyst), malignant, or indeterminate. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment

Global variation in postoperative mortality and complications after cancer surgery: a multicentre, prospective cohort study in 82 countries

Background: 80% of individuals with cancer will require a surgical procedure, yet little comparative data exist on early outcomes in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). We compared postoperative outcomes in breast, colorectal, and gastric cancer surgery in hospitals worldwide, focusing on the effect of disease stage and complications on postoperative mortality. Methods: This was a multicentre, international prospective cohort study of consecutive adult patients undergoing surgery for primary breast, colorectal, or gastric cancer requiring a skin incision done under general or neuraxial anaesthesia. The primary outcome was death or major complication within 30 days of surgery. Multilevel logistic regression determined relationships within three-level nested models of patients within hospitals and countries. Hospital-level infrastructure effects were explored with three-way mediation analyses. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03471494. Findings: Between April 1, 2018, and Jan 31, 2019, we enrolled 15 958 patients from 428 hospitals in 82 countries (high income 9106 patients, 31 countries; upper-middle income 2721 patients, 23 countries; or lower-middle income 4131 patients, 28 countries). Patients in LMICs presented with more advanced disease compared with patients in high-income countries. 30-day mortality was higher for gastric cancer in low-income or lower-middle-income countries (adjusted odds ratio 3·72, 95% CI 1·70–8·16) and for colorectal cancer in low-income or lower-middle-income countries (4·59, 2·39–8·80) and upper-middle-income countries (2·06, 1·11–3·83). No difference in 30-day mortality was seen in breast cancer. The proportion of patients who died after a major complication was greatest in low-income or lower-middle-income countries (6·15, 3·26–11·59) and upper-middle-income countries (3·89, 2·08–7·29). Postoperative death after complications was partly explained by patient factors (60%) and partly by hospital or country (40%). The absence of consistently available postoperative care facilities was associated with seven to 10 more deaths per 100 major complications in LMICs. Cancer stage alone explained little of the early variation in mortality or postoperative complications. Interpretation: Higher levels of mortality after cancer surgery in LMICs was not fully explained by later presentation of disease. The capacity to rescue patients from surgical complications is a tangible opportunity for meaningful intervention. Early death after cancer surgery might be reduced by policies focusing on strengthening perioperative care systems to detect and intervene in common complications. Funding: National Institute for Health Research Global Health Research Unit