Performance and standards for the process of head and neck cancer care: South and West audit of head and neck cancer 1996-1997 (SWAHN I). South and West Regional Cancer Organisation Tumour Panel for Head and Neck Cancer

Clinical management of adolescents and young adults suffering from sarcoma in the French Rhône-Alpes region: A prospective exhaustive cohort with 10 years follow up

INTRODUCTION

Survival of adolescents and young adults (AYA) with sarcoma is lower than in younger patients. The objective of this study was to describe the regional healthcare circuits, the differences in the management between adult, paediatric and mixed units and to assess the prognostic impact of compliance with clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) on overall survival (OS) and on relapse free survival (RFS).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective analysis of the management and long term follow-up of all 13-25 year old patients with a sarcoma diagnosed in the Rhône-Alpes area between 2000 and 2005.

RESULTS

140 patients satisfied inclusion criteria and were selected. The majority of 13-25 year old patients were treated in paediatric units. Joint management resulted in a higher rate of discussion in multidisciplinary tumour board, inclusion in clinical trials, and fertility preservation. Non-compliance with guidelines was observed in 65% of cases. Overall compliance was not reported to correlate to survival. Compliance of radiotherapy with CPG's seemed associated with a better prognosis for OS (HR = 0.20, 95% CI = [0.10-0.40]; p < 0.0001) and RFS (HR = 0.18, 95% CI = [0.09-0.37; p < 0.0001) as well as compliance of surgery for OS (HR = 0.43, 95% CI = [0.23-0.81]; p = 0.01). Multivariate Cox regression analysis revealed other independent predictors of OS like age at diagnosis, stage and histological subtype.

CONCLUSIONS

Management of AYA in joint units seems to improve the quality of care. Compliance of surgery and radiotherapy with CGP's seems to improve survival.

Radiotherapy Resources for the Care of Head and Neck Patients in Italy. A Survey by the Head and Neck Group of the Italian Association for Radiation Oncology (AIRO)

Aims and background

In 2006 a survey was performed to define the resources available in Italy for the provision of radiotherapy services to head and neck cancer patients. This was the first initiative of the newly founded Head and Neck Group of the Italian Association for Radiation Oncology.

Methods

A questionnaire was sent to all 138 radiotherapy centers active in the country. Items investigated included total numbers of head and neck cancer patients treated per year, waiting time before the start of treatment, general technical issues, and integration with surgery and chemotherapy.

Results

Sixty-nine questionnaires were returned (50% response rate). The total number of patients treated was 4,670, averaging 68 cases per center. The larynx was the primary site most frequently involved. Average waiting time was 30 days and 47 days for nonresected and postoperative cases, respectively. The combination of chemotherapy and radiotherapy was delivered to nonresected and resected patients in 96% and 54% of centers, respectively. Survey response rates, waiting time, and the use of organ preservation protocols were the issues showing more variations across the country.

Conclusions

This survey provides important data on radiotherapy resources available for head and neck cancer patients in Italy. The evidence of significant differences across the country concerning several relevant issues and the potential for cooperative clinical efforts in this relatively rare group of diseases urge the Group to plan further initiatives.

Quality assessment of a multidisciplinary tumour meeting for patients with head and neck cancer

Head and neck oncology MDT meetings are held in our region to establish a correct diagnosis and an appropriate treatment plan for each reviewed patient. The quality of these MDT meetings was assessed based on the following factors: How often can a diagnosis, a TNM-classification and a treatment plan be successfully established from the workup presented at the patient's first MDT meeting? And what are the reasons for failure? Further, how often are the TNM-classification altered at treatment start? All patients (n=329) presented at MDT meetings during one year were included prospectively and data were collected in a protocol. As telemedicine recently was introduced to reduce travel, any eventual impact on quality on decisions with regard to telemedicine were also studied. A diagnosis and a treatment plan could be established for 236 (73%) of 324 patients at the first MDT meeting. TNM classification was revised in four patients (1.4%) before treatment. In conclusion, the validity of decisions made at the MDT meeting is satisfactory, but improvements regarding the quality of workups are possible. The mode of presentation of patients at the MDT meeting was not decisive for the quality of decisions regarding diagnosis and treatment plans.

Effect of process standards on survival of patients with head and neck cancer in the south and west of England

The aim of the study was to compare standards for the process of care and 2-year survival between two cohorts of patients with head and neck cancer in the south and west of England. A total of 566 and 727 patients presented in 1996–97 and 1999–2000, respectively. The median number of cases treated per surgeon was 4 (1997, range 1–26) and 4 (2000, 1–23) and per radiotherapist was 10 (1–51) and 19 (1–70). For all ‘nontemporal’ standards, the overall standard increased, without reaching minimum high targets, while most ‘waiting times’ increased. Overall 2-year survival was 64.1% in 1997 and 65.1% in 2000. There was no difference in survival between networks (range 56–68, 1997, log-rank test 4.1, P=0.4; 62–69, 2000, log-rank test 1.26, P=0.69). Patients assessed by a multidisciplinary clinic exhibited improved survival (1997: P=0.1; 2000: hazard ratio 0.7, P=0.02), as did those with a pretreatment chest X-ray (hazard ratio 0.7, P=0.03). Despite an increased incidence, standards for the process of care for patients with head and neck cancer improved between 1996 and 2000, while waiting times increased and 2-year survival rates remained unaltered. Two out of five networks demonstrated centralisation of services between audits. Being seen in a multidisciplinary clinic correlated strongly with patient survival.