Variation in head and neck cancer care in the Netherlands: A retrospective cohort evaluation of incidence, treatment and outcome

Optimizing margin status for improving prognosis in patients with oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma: A retrospective study from the two highest-volume Taiwanese hospitals

Background

In the treatment of oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma (OCSCC), surgical quality measures which are expected to affect outcomes, including the achievement of a clear margin, are surgeon-dependent but might not be invariably associated with hospital volume. Our objective was to explore surgical margin variations and survival differences of OCSCC between two highest-volume hospitals in Taiwan.

Materials and methods

A total of 2009 and 1019 patients with OCSCC who were treated at the two highest-volume Taiwanese hospitals (termed Hospital 1 and Hospital 2, respectively) were included. We examined how a pathological margin <5 mm impacted patient outcomes before and after propensity score (PS) matching.

Results

The prevalence of margins <5 mm was markedly lower in Hospital 1 than in Hospital 2 (34.5%/65.2%, p<0.0001). Compared with Hospital 2, tumor severity was higher in Hospital 1. On univariable analysis, being treated in Hospital 2 (versus Hospital 1; hazard ratio [HR] for 5-year disease-specific survival [DSS] = 1.34, p=0.0002; HR for 5-year overall survival [OS] = 1.17, p=0.0271) and margins <5 mm (versus ≥5 mm; HR for 5-year DSS = 1.63, p<0.0001; HR for 5-year OS = 1.48, p<0.0001) were identified as adverse factors. The associations of treatment in Hospital 2 and margins <5 mm with less favorable outcomes remained significant after adjustment for potential confounders in multivariable analyses, as well as in the PS-matched cohort. The 5-year survival differences between patients operated in Hospital 1 and Hospital 2 were even more pronounced in the PS-matched cohort (before PS matching: DSS, 79%/74%, p=0.0002; OS, 71%/68%, p=0.0269; after PS matching: DSS, 84%/72%, p<0.0001; OS, 75%/66%, p<0.0001). In the entire cohort, the rate of adjuvant therapy was found to be lower in patients with margins ≥5 mm than in those with margins <5 mm (42.7%/57.0%, p<0.0001).

Conclusions

Within the two highest-volume hospitals in Taiwan, patients with OCSCC with a clear margin status (≥5 mm) achieved more favorable outcomes. These results have clinical implications and show how initiatives aimed at improving the margin quality can translate in better outcomes. A clear margin status can reduce the need for adjuvant therapy, ultimately improving quality of life.

Hospital volume and 5-year survival in head and neck cancer patients in Osaka, Japan

BACKGROUND

Few previous studies have examined the relationship between hospital volume and hazard of death for head and neck cancer patients. The purpose of this study was to examine the association between hospital volume and 5-year survival from diagnosis among head and neck cancer patients.

METHODS

Using data from the population-based Osaka Cancer Registry, hospital volume was divided into three volume groups according to the number of head and neck cancer treatments identified between 2009 and 2011. We analysed the association between hospital volume and 5-year survival among 3069 patients aged 0-79 using Cox proportional hazard models, adjusting for characteristics of patients.

RESULTS

Compared with head and neck cancer patients in high-hospital volume, patients treated in middle- and low-hospital volume were found to have a higher risk of death (middle-hospital volume: hazard ratio = 1.26; 95% confidence interval, 1.09-1.46, low-hospital volume: hazard ratio = 1.24; 95% confidence interval, 1.06-1.46).

CONCLUSIONS

We found a significantly higher risk of hazard of death in middle- and low-hospital volume than in high-hospital volume for head and neck cancer.

Head and neck cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic: An international, multicenter, observational cohort study

BACKGROUND

The aims of this study were to provide data on the safety of head and neck cancer surgery currently being undertaken during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.

METHODS

This international, observational cohort study comprised 1137 consecutive patients with head and neck cancer undergoing primary surgery with curative intent in 26 countries. Factors associated with severe pulmonary complications in COVID-19-positive patients and infections in the surgical team were determined by univariate analysis.

RESULTS

Among the 1137 patients, the commonest sites were the oral cavity (38%) and the thyroid (21%). For oropharynx and larynx tumors, nonsurgical therapy was favored in most cases. There was evidence of surgical de-escalation of neck management and reconstruction. Overall 30-day mortality was 1.2%. Twenty-nine patients (3%) tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) within 30 days of surgery; 13 of these patients (44.8%) developed severe respiratory complications, and 3.51 (10.3%) died. There were significant correlations with an advanced tumor stage and admission to critical care. Members of the surgical team tested positive within 30 days of surgery in 40 cases (3%). There were significant associations with operations in which the patients also tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 within 30 days, with a high community incidence of SARS-CoV-2, with screened patients, with oral tumor sites, and with tracheostomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Head and neck cancer surgery in the COVID-19 era appears safe even when surgery is prolonged and complex. The overlap in COVID-19 between patients and members of the surgical team raises the suspicion of failures in cross-infection measures or the use of personal protective equipment.

LAY SUMMARY

Head and neck surgery is safe for patients during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic even when it is lengthy and complex. This is significant because concerns over patient safety raised in many guidelines appear not to be reflected by outcomes, even for those who have other serious illnesses or require complex reconstructions. Patients subjected to suboptimal or nonstandard treatments should be carefully followed up to optimize their cancer outcomes. The overlap between patients and surgeons testing positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 is notable and emphasizes the need for fastidious cross-infection controls and effective personal protective equipment.

Accuracy of parotid gland FNA cytology and reliability of the Milan System for Reporting Salivary Gland Cytopathology in clinical practice

Background

Differentiating between malignant and benign salivary gland tumors with fine‐needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) can be challenging. This study was aimed at testing the validity of the Milan System for Reporting Salivary Gland Cytopathology (MSRSGC) and at assessing possible differences in the sensitivity and specificity of parotid gland FNAC between dedicated head and neck (H&N) centers, subdivided into head and neck oncology centers (HNOCs) and head and neck oncology affiliated centers (HNOACs), and general hospitals (GHs).

Methods

The Dutch Pathology Registry (PALGA) database was searched for patients who had undergone a salivary gland resection between January 1, 2006, and January 1, 2017, and had a preoperative FNAC result. The FNAC reports were retrospectively assigned to MSRSGC categories. The risk of malignancy (ROM) was calculated for each category. The sensitivity and specificity for diagnosing malignancy were calculated and compared among HNOCs, HNOACs, and GHs.

Results

In all, 12,898 FNAC aspirates were evaluated. The ROMs for each category were as follows: 12.5% in MSRSGC I, 10.3% in MSRSGC II, 29% in MSRSGC III, 2.3% in MSRSGC IVa, 28.6% in MSRSGC IVb, 83% in MSRSGC V, and 99.3% in MSRSGC VI. The sensitivity of FNAC was highest in HNOCs (88.1%), HNOACs scored lower (79.7%), and GHs had a sensitivity of 75.0%.

Conclusions

The MSRSGC is a valid tool for reporting parotid gland FNAC; therefore, these results strongly advocate its use. On the basis of the higher sensitivity of FNAC in dedicated H&N centers, the authors recommend that GHs use the presented management strategies to help to minimize the chances of a preoperative misdiagnosis.

The Milan System for Reporting Salivary Gland Cytopathology is a valid tool for reporting parotid gland fine‐needle aspiration cytology. The sensitivity of fine‐needle aspiration cytology is higher at dedicated head and neck centers.

Reorganizing the Multidisciplinary Team Meetings in a Tertiary Centre for Gastro-Intestinal Oncology Adds Value to the Internal and Regional Care Pathways. A Mixed Method Evaluation

Introduction:

The reorganisation of the structure of a Gastro-Intestinal Oncology Multidisciplinary Team Meeting (GIO-MDTM) in a tertiary centre with three care pathways is evaluated on added value.

Methods:

In a mixed method investigation, process indicators such as throughput times were analysed and stakeholders were interviewed regarding benefits and drawbacks of the reorganisation and current MDTM functioning.

Results:

For the hepatobiliary care pathway, the time to treatment plan increased, but the time to start treatment reduced significantly. The percentage of patients treated within the Dutch standard of 63 days increased for the three care pathways. From the interviews, three themes emerged: added value of MDTMs, focus on planning integrated care and awareness of possible improvements.

Discussion:

The importance of evaluating interventions in oncology care pathways is shown, including detecting unexpected drawbacks. The evaluation provides insight into complex dynamics of the care pathways and contributes with recommendations on functioning of an MDTM.

Conclusions:

Throughput times are only partly determined by oncology care pathway management, but have influence on the functioning of MDTMs. Process indicator information can help to reflect on integration of care in the region, resulting in an increase of patients treated within the Dutch standard.

Prognostic factors analysis for oral cavity cancer survival in the Netherlands and Taiwan using a privacy-preserving federated infrastructure

The difference in incidence of oral cavity cancer (OCC) between Taiwan and the Netherlands is striking. Different risk factors and treatment expertise may result in survival differences between the two countries. However due to regulatory restrictions, patient-level analyses of combined data from the Netherlands and Taiwan are infeasible. We implemented a software infrastructure for federated analyses on data from multiple organisations. We included 41,633‬ patients with single-tumour OCC between 2004 and 2016, undergoing surgery, from the Taiwan Cancer Registry and Netherlands Cancer Registry. Federated Cox Proportional Hazard was used to analyse associations between patient and tumour characteristics, country, treatment and hospital volume with survival. Five factors showed differential effects on survival of OCC patients in the Netherlands and Taiwan: age at diagnosis, stage, grade, treatment and hospital volume. The risk of death for OCC patients younger than 60 years, with advanced stage, higher grade or receiving adjuvant therapy after surgery was lower in the Netherlands than in Taiwan; but patients older than 70 years, with early stage, lower grade and receiving surgery alone in the Netherlands were at higher risk of death than those in Taiwan. The mortality risk of OCC in Taiwanese patients treated in hospitals with higher hospital volume (≥ 50 surgeries per year) was lower than in Dutch patients. We conducted analyses without exchanging patient-level information, overcoming barriers for sharing privacy sensitive information. The outcomes of patients treated in the Netherlands and Taiwan were slightly different after controlling for other prognostic factors.

Value and Quality of Care in Head and Neck Oncology

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The concept of value-based health care (VBHC) was articulated more than a decade ago. However, its clinical implementation remains an on-going process and a particularly demanding one for the domain of head and neck cancer (HNC). These cancers often present with fast growing tumors in functionally and cosmetically sensitive sites and afflict patients with differing circumstances and comorbidity. Moreover, the various treatment modalities and protocols have different effects on functional outcomes. Hence, the interpretation of what constitutes VBHC in head and neck oncology remains challenging.

RECENT FINDINGS

This monograph reviews developments in specific aspects of VBHC for HNC patients, including establishment of registries and quality indices (such as infrastructure, process, and outcome indicators). It emphasizes the importance of the multidisciplinary team, "time to treatment intervals," and adherence to guidelines. The discussion addresses major indicators including survival, quality of life and functional outcomes, and adverse events. Also, strengths and weaknesses of nomograms, prognostic and decision models, and variation of care warrant attention. Health care professionals, together with patients, must properly define quality and relevant outcomes, both for the individual patient as well as the HNC population. It is essential to capture and organize the relevant data so that they can be analyzed and the results used to improve both outcomes and value.

Survival trends of patients with oral and oropharyngeal cancer treated at a cancer center in São Paulo, Brazil

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to estimate the overall survival (OS) and conditional survival (CS) in patients diagnosed with oral and oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) and to determine their survival trends.

METHODS

The study included all consecutive patients treated at the A.C. Camargo Cancer Center for oral or oropharyngeal SCC between 2001 and 2012. Data were obtained from the Hospital Cancer Registry. OS and CS were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method to evaluate the probability of survival with Cox predictor models.

RESULTS

Data of 505 oral and 380 oropharyngeal SCC patients obtained in 2001-2006 and 2007-2012 were analyzed. Most of the oral SCC (59%) and oropharyngeal SCC (90%) patients had stages III-IV SCC. The 5-year OS for patients with oral SCC was 51.7%, with no significant difference between the first and second periods. The CS rates in 2007-2012 were 65% after the first year and 86% up to the fifth year. For oropharyngeal SCC, the 5-year OS rate was 45.0% in the first period. The survival rate increased to 49.1% from 2007 to 2012, with a reduction in the risk of death (HR=0.69;0.52-09.2). The CS estimates from 2007 to 2012 were 59% after the first year and 75% up to the fifth year.

CONCLUSION

Survival across the two time periods remained stable for oral SCC but showed a significant increase for oropharyngeal SCC, possibly because of improvements in the patients' response to radiotherapy, such as intensity-modulated radiation therapy, and the use of more accurate diagnostic imaging approaches.

Does multidisciplinary videoconferencing between a head-and-neck cancer centre and its partner hospital add value to their patient care and decision-making? A mixed-method evaluation

OBJECTIVES

Given the difficulties in diagnosing and treating head-and-neck cancer, care is centralised in the Netherlands in eight head-and-neck cancer centres and six satellite regional hospitals as preferred partners. A requirement is that all patients of the partner should be discussed in a multidisciplinary team meeting (MDT) with the head-and-neck centre as part of a Dutch health policy rule. In this mixed-method study, we evaluate the value that the video-conferenced MDT adds to the MDTs in the care pathway, quantitative regarding recommendations given and qualitative in terms of benefits for the teams and the patient.

DESIGN

A sequential mixed-method study.

SETTING

One oncology centre and its partner in the Northern part of the Netherlands.

PARTICIPANTS

Head-and-neck cancer specialists presenting patient cases during video-conferenced MDT over a period of 6 months. Semistructured interviews held with six medical specialists, three from the centre and three from the partner.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Percentage of cases in which recommendations were given on diagnostic and/or therapeutic plans during video-conferenced MDT.

RESULTS

In eight of the 336 patient cases presented (2%), specialists offered recommendations to the collaborating team (three given from centre to partner and five from partner to centre). Recommendations mainly consisted of alternative diagnostic modalities or treatment plans for a specific patient. Interviews revealed that specialists perceive added value in discussing complex cases because the other team offered a fresh perspective by hearing the case 'as new'. The teams recognise the importance of keeping their medical viewpoints aligned, but the requirement (that the partner should discuss all patients) was seen as outdated.

CONCLUSIONS

The added value of the video-conferenced MDT is small considering patient care, but the specialists recognised that it is important to keep their medical viewpoints aligned and that their patients benefit from the discussions on complex cases.

Advancing interdisciplinary research in head and neck cancer through a multicenter longitudinal prospective cohort study: the NETherlands QUality of life and BIomedical Cohort (NET-QUBIC) data warehouse and biobank

Background

Worldwide, over 500,000 people are diagnosed with head and neck cancer each year, a disease with major impact on life expectancy and quality of life. The purpose of the Netherlands Quality of life and Biomedical Cohort study (NET-QUBIC) is to advance interdisciplinary research that aims to optimize diagnosis, treatment, and supportive care for head and neck cancer patients and their informal caregivers.

Methods

Using an extensive assessment protocol (electronic clinical record form, patient reported outcome measures and fieldwork (interviews and physical tests)), clinical data and data on quality of life, demographic and personal factors, psychosocial (depression, anxiety, fatigue, pain, sleep, mental adjustment to cancer, posttraumatic stress), physical (speech, swallowing, oral function, malnutrition, physical fitness, neurocognitive function, sexual function), lifestyle (physical activity, nutrition, smoking, alcohol, drugs), and social factors (social function, social support, work, health care use, and costs) are collected and stored in the data warehouse. A longitudinal biobank is built with tumor tissue, blood and blood components, saliva samples, and oral rinses. An infrastructure for fieldwork and laboratory protocols is established at all participating centers. All patients fill out patient reported outcome measures before treatment and at 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48, and 60 months follow-up. The interviews, physical tests and biological sample collection are at baseline and 6, 12, and 24 months follow-up. The protocol for caregivers includes blood sampling and oral rinses at baseline and a tailored list of questionnaires, administered at the same time points as the patients. In total, 739 HNC patients and 262 informal caregivers have been included in 5 out of the 8 HNC centers in the Netherlands.

Discussion

By granting access to researchers to the NET-QUBIC data warehouse and biobank, we enable new research lines in clinical (e.g. treatment optimization in elderly patients), biological (e.g. liquid biopsy analysis for relapse detection), health related quality of life (e.g. the impact of toxicity on quality of life), and interrelated research (e.g. health related quality of life in relation to biomarkers and survival).

Update on Neurocritical Care of Stroke

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review will highlight the recent advancements in acute ischemic stroke diagnosis and treatment, with special attention to new features and recommendations of stroke care in the neurocritical care unit.

RECENT FINDINGS

New studies suggest that pre-hospital treatment of stroke with mobile stroke units and telestroke technology may lead to earlier stroke therapy with intravenous tissue plasminogen activator (tPA), and recent studies show tPA can be given in previously contraindicated situations. More rapid automated CT perfusion and angiography may demonstrate a vascular penumbra for neuroendovascular intervention. Further, the greatest advance in acute stroke treatment since 2014 is the demonstration that neuroendovascular catheter-based thrombectomy with stent retrievers recanalizing intracranial large vessel occlusion (LVO) improves both recanalization and long-term outcomes in several trials. Hemorrhagic transformation and severe large infarct cerebral edema remain serious post-stroke challenges, with new guidelines describing who and when patients should get medical or surgical intervention. The adage "time is brain" directs the most evidence-based approach for rapid stroke diagnosis for tPA eligible and LVO recanalization using an orchestrated team approach. The neurocritical care unit is the appropriate location to optimize stroke outcomes for the most severely affected stroke patients.

The Case Volume Issue in Head and Neck Oncology

OPINION STATEMENT

In the past few years, several evidences reported better outcomes, in terms of reduced toxicities and longer survival, for head and neck cancer (HNC) patients when "regionalized," namely if they are managed at "high-volume" cancer referral centers (CRC). The benefit of case volume has been demonstrated in HNC patients primarily treated with surgery and in those receiving curative radiotherapy and chemotherapy. Many factors could explain these positive results: organization, facilities, processes of care, quality assurance programs, professional expertise, technology, and patient referral bias. In other words, the "high volume" could be linked both to all hospital-related volume and to the expertise of each involved professional figure (e.g., surgeon, radiation oncologist, medical oncologist, etc.). In this context, it is still debatable whether there is a need to understand which one of these factors is more able to influence the final outcomes of HNC patients. Considering the complexity and heterogeneity of HNC, all of these aspects are likely to impact and plot each other. However, there is no consensus regarding the criteria and the cut-off used to define as "high" the case volume. Moreover, some limitations or biases of the regionalization process have to be highlighted: (1) personal and financial discomfort of patients, their caregivers, and families; (2) a frequent referral of the healthiest or youngest patients to CRC could change the survival outcomes; (3) potential higher difficulties for colleagues working outside of CRC in the emergency. Nevertheless, the case volume represents one of the factors impacting on the quality of the treatment itself, in terms of reduced toxicity and better treatment outcome. Therefore, it should be considered as a stratifying factor in randomized controlled trials for HNC patients.