Treatment and referral patterns for colorectal cancer

Adjuvant Chemotherapy Does Not Compensate for an Inadequate Right Colon Cancer Surgery: High Peritoneal Recurrence Rates Indicate Need for Altered Treatment Paradigms

There is a lack of evidence for optimal management of patients with right colon cancers upon referral to the oncology care centre, following an inadequate index surgery elsewhere. A prospectively maintained database of patients with right colon cancers managed between 2013 and 2019 was screened to identify those patients who underwent index surgery in a non-oncological setup. They were managed with adjuvant chemotherapy followed by observation, with surgery being reserved for recurrent disease. Of the 155 patients identified after the screening, 97 were included in the study. They were stratified depending upon the number of lymph nodes harvested at primary surgery-Group A (less than 12 nodes) (n = 49), Group B (12 to 27 nodes) (n = 39) and Group C (28 and more nodes) (n = 9). Patients with lymph node metastases had inferior survival at 2 years than node-negative patients and this survival difference increased progressively from Group A towards Group C. Patients who had radiological locoregional residual disease upon restaging (at presentation) had significantly inferior survival. At the end of 2 years, overall survival and disease-free survival of the cohort were 71.5% and 45.8%, respectively. Fifty-eight patients had disease relapse, with peritoneal recurrence seen in 37 patients (63.8%). Of these, only 15.5% recurrences were surgically salvageable. Treatment of patients who have undergone inadequate index colectomy with chemotherapy alone has shown inferior survival outcomes with high rates of peritoneal relapse in comparison to historical cohorts. The treatment strategy for such patients needs to be revisited in a prospective study design.

Quality indicators for systemic anticancer therapy services: a systematic review of metrics used to compare quality across healthcare facilities

PURPOSE

The number of systemic anticancer therapy (SACT) regimens has expanded rapidly over the last decade. There is a need to ensure quality of SACT delivery across cancer services and systems in different resource settings to reduce morbidity, mortality, and detrimental economic impact at individual and systems level. Existing literature on SACT focuses on treatment efficacy with few studies on quality or how SACT is delivered within routine care in comparison to radiation and surgical oncology.

METHODS

Systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. EMBASE and MEDLINE were searched and handsearching was undertaken to identify literature on existing quality indicators (QIs) that detect meaningful variations in the quality of SACT delivery across different healthcare facilities, regions, or countries. Data extraction was undertaken by two independent reviewers.

RESULTS

This review identified 63 distinct QIs from 15 papers. The majority were process QIs (n = 55, 87.3%) relating to appropriateness of treatment and guideline adherence (n = 28, 44.4%). There were few outcome QIs (n = 7, 11.1%) and only one structural QI (n = 1, 1.6%). Included studies solely focused on breast, colorectal, lung, and skin cancer. All but one studies were conducted in high-income countries.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this review highlight a significant lack of research on SACT QIs particularly those appropriate for resource-constrained settings in low- and middle-income countries. This review should form the basis for future work in transforming performance measurement of SACT provision, through context-specific QI SACT development, validation, and implementation.

Patient's attitudes and perceptions around attending oncology consultations following surgery for colorectal cancer: A qualitative study

Background: The oncology consultation following surgery for colorectal cancer (CRC) is usually the first step in the receipt of chemotherapy. Non-compliance with this consultation results in non-receipt of recommended chemotherapy, when appropriate, and worse clinical outcomes. This study sought to explore South African patients' attitudes and perceptions around attending scheduled oncology consultations following their CRC surgery. Methods: Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with patients who had surgery for CRC at a quaternary South African hospital and who had to decide whether they would return for an oncology consultation. The "Model of health services use" informed the design of the interview guide, which included questions on factors that impact health seeking behavior. Demographics of participants, CRC disease stage, and compliance with scheduled oncology consultations were also collected. Descriptive statistics were used to analyse the quantitative data, while deductive thematic analysis was used to analyse the qualitative data. Results: Seven participants were interviewed. The median age was 60.0 years and four participants (57.1%) were female. Black African, White, and Asian participants accounted for 85.7% of the study sample. Most participants had stage III CRC (71.4%). The oncology consultation no-show rate was 14.3%. Participant's knowledge and beliefs around CRC proved to be an important predisposing factor that influenced follow-up decisions. Family support and religion were cited as important enabling factors. Travel costs to the hospital and frustrations related to the clinic appointment booking/scheduling process were cited as important disabling factors. Lastly, the participant's self-perceived need for additional oncology care also appeared to influence their decision to return for ongoing oncology consultation after the initial surgery. Conclusion: Several contextual factors can potentially influence a patient's compliance with a scheduled oncology consultation following CRC surgery. A multipronged approach which addresses these factors is required to improve compliance with oncology consultations.

Predictors of treatment refusal in patients with colorectal cancer: A systematic review

This systematic review was conducted to investigate predictors of treatment refusal in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients. An understanding of these predictors would inform statistical models for the identification of high-risk patients who might benefit from interventions that seek to improve treatment compliance. We performed a search of PubMed and Scopus to identify potentially relevant studies on predictors of treatment refusal in CRC patients that were published between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2021. We screened manuscripts using predefined eligibility criteria. Information on study design, study location, patient characteristics, treatments, rates and predictors of treatment refusal, and the impact of treatment refusal on mortality or survival were collected from eligible studies. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa score. The overall findings of the review process were summarized using descriptive statistics and a narrative synthesis. A total of 13 studies were included in this review. Ten studies reported on refusal of CRC surgery, refusal rate: 0.25%-3.26%; three studies reported on chemotherapy refusal (one of which reported on both surgery and chemotherapy refusal), refusal rate: 7.8%-41.5%; and one study reported on refusal of any cancer treatment, refusal rate: 8.7%. The bulk of the published literature confirmed the harmful association between treatment refusal and poor survival outcomes in CRC patients. Frequently cited predictors of treatment refusal included patient demographic characteristics (age, race, gender), clinical characteristics (disease stage, comorbidity), and factors that impact access to cancer care services (healthcare insurance, facility level). Potentially high rates of treatment refusal pose a challenge to CRC control. This review has identified several factors which must be considered when attempting to reduce treatment refusal in CRC patients. Furthermore, these factors should be tested as components of predictive risk models for this important outcome.

Treatment patterns and primary reasons for adjusted treatment in older and younger patients with stage II or III colorectal cancer

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to assess age-related treatment patterns and primary reasons for adjusted treatment in patients with colorectal cancer.

METHODS

Patients with colorectal cancer stage II or III diagnosed between 2015 and 2018 in the Netherlands were eligible for this study. Data were provided by the Netherlands Cancer Registry and included socio-demographics, clinical characteristics, treatment patterns and primary reasons for adjusted treatment. Treatment patterns and reasons for adjusted treatment were analysed according to age groups.

RESULTS

Of all 29,620 patients, 30% were aged <65 years (n = 8994), 34% between 65 and 75 years (n = 10,173), 27% between 75 and 85 years (n = 8102) and 8% were ≥85 years (n = 2349). Irrespective of cancer location or stage, older patients received less frequently a combination of surgery and (neo)adjuvant therapy compared to younger patients (decreasing from 55% to 1% in colon cancer patients, and from 71% to 23% in rectal cancer patients aged <65 years and ≥85 years respectively). Omission of surgical treatment increased with age in both patients with colon cancer (ranging from 1% in patients aged <65 years to 16% in those ≥85 years) and rectal cancer (ranging from 12% in patients aged <65 years to 56% in those ≥85 years). The most common reasons for adjusted treatment were patient preference (27%) and functional status (20%), both reasons increased with advancing age.

CONCLUSIONS

Guideline non-adherence increased with advancing age and omission of standard treatment was mainly based on patient preference and functional status. These findings provides insight in the treatment decision-making process in patients with colorectal cancer. Future research is necessary to further assess patient's role in the treatment decision-making process.

Impact of negative lymph nodes on colon cancer survival and exploring relevant transcriptomics differences through real-world data analyses

Background

The prognostic role and underlying heterogeneity of negative lymph nodes (NLNs) on colon cancer is not well understood. The purpose of this study was to construct NLN-based prognostic models and reveal relevant mechanisms affecting NLNs by analyzing omic data.

Methods

This inception cohort study included 314,398 colon cancer patients from the US Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to determine the cut-off of NLNs. Nomograms were constructed and validated using SEER data and the Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) data, respectively. The differentially expressed genes (DEGs) were analyzed using edgeR. Enrichment analyses were performed by Metascape.

Results

Multivariate analysis confirmed the high NLN had improved cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS) compared to low NLN [hazard ratio (HR) =0.610, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.601-0.620] for CSS and (HR =0. 682, 95% CI, 0.674-0.690) for OS. Nomograms were established for CSS and OS with the c-statistic 0.790 (95% CI, 0.788-0.792) for CSS and 0.734 (95% CI, 0.732-0.736) for OS. High NLN was associated with less B cell (P=0.002) and macrophage infiltration (P<0.0001), high microsatellite instability (MSI) (OR =4.325, P=0.001), and hypermutation (OR =4.285, P=0.001; high vs. low). Transcriptomics analysis demonstrated histone modifiers were the most significant different biological processes between the high and low NLN group.

Conclusions

The NLN-based models can aid in personalized risk stratification for colon cancer. This study postulates that high NLN may represent a biological subtype with less macrophage infiltration, high MSI status, hypermutation, and histone modifier gene enriched expression, and thus warrants further investigation.

Patterns of colorectal cancer care in the United States and Canada: a systematic review

Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer in the United States and Canada. Given the high incidence and increased survival of colorectal cancer patients, prevalence is increasing over time in both countries. Using MEDLINE, we conducted a systematic review of the literature published between 2000 and 2010 to describe patterns of colorectal cancer care. Specifically we examined data sources used to obtain treatment information and compared patterns of cancer-directed initial care, post-diagnostic surveillance care, and end-of-life care among colorectal cancer patients diagnosed in the United States and Canada. Receipt of initial treatment for colorectal cancer was associated with the anatomical position of the tumor and extent of disease at diagnosis, in accordance with consensus-based guidelines. Overall, care trends were similar between the United States and Canada; however, we observed differences with respect to data sources used to measure treatment receipt. Differences were also present between study populations within country, further limiting direct comparisons. Findings from this review will allow researchers, clinicians, and policy makers to evaluate treatment receipt by patient, clinical, or system characteristics and identify emerging trends over time. Furthermore, comparisons between health-care systems in the United States and Canada can identify disparities in care, allow the evaluation of different models of care, and highlight issues regarding the utility of existing data sources to estimate national patterns of care.

Defining the potential of neoadjuvant chemotherapy use as a quality indicator for bladder cancer care

PURPOSE

Despite known survival benefits, overall use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy before cystectomy is low, raising concerns about quality of care. However, not all patients undergoing cystectomy are eligible for this therapy. We establish the maximum proportion of patients expected to receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy if all those eligible had a consultation with medical oncology.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From institutional data (January 2010 through December 2012) we identified 215 patients treated with radical cystectomy for bladder cancer. After excluding patients not eligible for neoadjuvant chemotherapy, we fit models assessing patient disease and health factors affecting referral to medical oncology and receipt of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Expected use of chemotherapy was then determined for increasingly broad groups of patients treated with cystectomy after controlling for factors precluding the use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

RESULTS

Of the 215 patients identified 127 (59%) were eligible for neoadjuvant chemotherapy. After additional consideration of patient factors (patient refusal, health status and poor renal function), maximum receipt of neoadjuvant chemotherapy increased from 42% to 71% as more restrictive definitions for the eligible patient cohort were used.

CONCLUSIONS

Substantial variability exists in the proportion of patients eligible for neoadjuvant chemotherapy based on the population identified. While there is substantial underuse of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, the development of quality metrics for this essential therapy depends on correct identification of the cystectomy population being assessed. Even with referral of all appropriate patients for medical oncology evaluation, use of chemotherapy would likely not exceed 50% of patients in nationally representative cystectomy data.

Differences between referred and nonreferred patients in cancer research

BACKGROUND

In Canada, provincial cancer registries have been established to provide rigorous population-based data for patients with colorectal cancer. Databases maintained by regional cancer agencies contain a broader scope of information and have been used as a surrogate source of information for colorectal cancer research. It is unclear whether these data can be reliably extrapolated to all patients affected by colorectal cancer. We sought to determine whether patients included in a referral-based database are systematically different from patients who are not included.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study to compare patients referred to the British Columbia Cancer Agency with those who were not referred. Comparison was based on age, sex and geographic location. We used univariate and logistic regression analysis to identify significant differences between the cohorts.

RESULTS

Univariate analysis demonstrated that the referral and nonreferral cohorts differed in sex, age and geographic location. For patients with rectal cancer, the referral and nonreferral cohorts varied in age and geographic location. Multivariate analysis demonstrated significant differences in age and geographic location but not sex for patients with colon and rectal cancer.

CONCLUSION

Patients included in the referral database differed in age and geographic location from those included only in the provincial database. Studies using large data sets from referral centres must be interpreted with caution and may not be representative of the entire patient population.

Unrelated donor allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation is underused as a curative therapy in eligible patients from the United States

Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (alloHCT) is a curative therapy for hematologic disorders including acute lymphoblastic and myeloid leukemia, chronic lymphocytic and myeloid leukemia, Hodgkin's and non-Hodgkin lymphoma, multiple myeloma, and myelodysplastic syndrome. To determine the utilization of alloHCT from unrelated donors (URDs) in the United States, we calculated the number of patients diagnosed with hematologic disorders age 20 to 74 years based on 2004 to 2008 Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results and 2007 US Census data, estimated the percentage of patients who would be eligible for URD alloHCT after discounting the mortality rate during induction therapy and the rate of severe comorbidities, and compared these with the actual 2007 alloHCTs facilitated by the National Marrow Donor Program. We found that the number of URD alloHCT as a percentage of the estimated potential transplantations ranged from 11% for multiple myeloma to 54% for chronic myeloid leukemia, with an average percentage of 26% for all the disorders considered. In an analysis stratified by age groups (20 to 44, 45 to 64, and 65 to 74 years), the utilization of URD alloHCT was higher in younger patients than in older patients for all disorders. Of acute lymphoblastic and myeloid leukemia patients, approximately 66% underwent URD alloHCT later in the course of their disease (in second or greater complete remission). URD alloHCT is likely underused for potentially curable hematologic disorders, particularly in older patients. Understanding the reasons for low use of alloHCT may lead to strategies to expand the use of this curative therapy for more patients with hematologic disorders.

Application of the analytic hierarchy process in the performance measurement of colorectal cancer care for the design of a pay-for-performance program in Taiwan

OBJECTIVE

To prioritize performance measures for colorectal cancer care to facilitate the implementation of a pay-for-performance (PFP) system.

DESIGN

Questionnaires survey.

SETTING

Medical hospitals in Taiwan.

PARTICIPANTS

Sixty-six medical doctors from 5 November 2009 to 10 December 2009.

INTERVENTION

Analytic hierarchy process (AHP) technique. Main outcome measure(s) Performance measures (two pre-treatment, six treatment related and three monitoring related) were used.

RESULTS

Forty-eight doctors responded and returned questionnaires (response rate 72.7%) with surgeons and physicians contributing equally. The most important measure was the proportion of colorectal patients who had pre-operative examinations that included chest X-ray and abdominal ultrasound, computed tomography or MRI (global priority: 0.144), followed by the proportion of stages I-III colorectal cancer patients who had undergone a wide surgical resection documented as 'negative margin' (global priority: 0.133) and the proportion of colorectal cancer patients who had undergone surgery with a pathology report that included information on tumor size and node differentiation (global priority: 0.116). Most participants considered that the best interval for the renewal indicators was 3-5 years (43.75%) followed by 5-10 years (27.08%).

CONCLUSIONS

To design a PFP program, the AHP method is a useful technique to prioritize performance measures, especially in a highly specialized domain such as colorectal cancer care.

Time to Consultation and Disease-modifying Antirheumatic Drug Treatment of Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis — Northern Alberta Perspective

Objective.

To determine the timeliness of consultation and initiation of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) referred to rheumatologists.

Methods.

The first part of the study was a review of the charts of 151 patients with RA followed by 3 rheumatologists. The outcome measure was the interval between symptom onset and consultation with a rheumatologist. The second part of the study involved a chart review of 4 family physician practices in a small urban center in order to determine the accuracy of diagnostic coding (International Classification of Diseases; ICD-9) of RA, as well as the proportion of patients with RA seen by a rheumatologist. Finally, a survey was sent to primary care physicians at a group of walk-in clinics to determine what percentage of their patients with RA were referred to a rheumatologist and, concerning referral patterns, how likely it is they would refer a confirmed or suspected RA patient to a rheumatologist.

Results.

Patients with RA referred to rheumatologists in this sample were seen by a rheumatologist at a mean of 9.8 months (median 5 mo, range 0–129 mo) after symptom onset, and mean 1.2 months (median 4.0 mo, range 0–8 mo) after being referred by their primary care physician. All referred patients with confirmed RA were started on DMARD within 1 week of initial consultation. Primary care physicians would refer suspected RA patients 99.5% of the time (median 100, range 90–100%), and 87.6% (median 90, range 50–100%) of patients with confirmed RA would have seen a rheumatologist at least once. A chart review showed that, in a select group of family physicians, 70.9% (22/31) of patients coded as RA per the ICD-9 did indeed have RA and all had seen a rheumatologist for their condition.

Conclusion.

In Northern Alberta, patients with RA are seen and started on DMARD therapy in a timely fashion. Most of the delay is at the primary care level, suggesting a need for improved education of patients and primary care physicians rather than a formal triage system.

Referral rate to oncologists and its variation by hospital for colorectal cancer patients

BACKGROUND

Recent population-based studies in Alberta, Canada, found that approximately 50% of patients with stage III colon or stages II/III rectal adenocarcinoma did not receive guideline-recommended treatment (surgery plus chemotherapy or chemoradiation); a primary reason was not having an oncologist consult. We assessed the relationship between the hospital where the surgery was performed and the probability of a patient not having an oncologist consult.

METHODS

All patients diagnosed with stage III colon or stage II/III rectal adenocarcinoma between 2002 and 2005 in Alberta who had surgery were identified from the Alberta Cancer Registry and included in the study. Multivariable logistic regression modeling with hospitals as random effects was used to estimate cancer-type-specific odds ratios of not having an oncologist consult for each hospital, adjusted for age, sex, and comorbidities, relative to the overall nonconsultation rate.

RESULTS

Overall, 21% of stage III colon, 25% of stage II rectal, and 13% of stage III rectal adenocarcinoma patients did not have an oncologist consult. Rates varied appreciably across hospitals and between cancer types within hospitals, even after the case-mix adjustment (adjusted odds ratios of nonconsultation ranged from 0.4 to 8.1). Small hospitals that performed 12 or fewer surgeries had nearly 100% consultation rates.

CONCLUSIONS

The variation in oncologist-consult rates, particularly for stage II rectal cancer patients, is concerning. We are presenting the findings to the surgical community and discussing interventions to improve oncologist-consult rates.

Dropping the baton: specialty referrals in the United States

CONTEXT

In the United States, more than a third of patients are referred to a specialist each year, and specialist visits constitute more than half of outpatient visits. Despite the frequency of referrals and the importance of the specialty-referral process, the process itself has been a long-standing source of frustration among both primary care physicians (PCPs) and specialists. These frustrations, along with a desire to lower costs, have led to numerous strategies to improve the specialty-referral process, such as using gatekeepers and referral guidelines.

METHODS

This article reviews the literature on the specialty-referral process in order to better understand what is known about current problems with the referral process and what solutions have been proposed. The article first provides a conceptual framework and then reviews prior literature on the referral decision, care coordination including information transfer, and access to specialty care.

FINDINGS

PCPs vary in their threshold for referring a patient, which results in both the underuse and the overuse of specialists. Many referrals do not include a transfer of information, either to or from the specialist; and when they do, it often contains insufficient data for medical decision making. Care across the primary-specialty interface is poorly integrated; PCPs often do not know whether a patient actually went to the specialist, or what the specialist recommended. PCPs and specialists also frequently disagree on the specialist's role during the referral episode (e.g., single consultation or continuing co-management).

CONCLUSIONS

There are breakdowns and inefficiencies in all components of the specialty-referral process. Despite many promising mechanisms to improve the referral process, rigorous evaluations of these improvements are needed.

Factors influencing medical oncology referral in Dukes' C colonic cancer

AIM

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common malignancies worldwide and adjuvant chemotherapy is proven to improve survival in patients with Dukes' C CRC. The purpose of this study was to analyze factors influencing referral to medical oncology in patients with Dukes' C colonic cancer in our institutions.

METHODS

Patients who underwent resection for Dukes' C colonic cancer were assessed for factors that influence the pattern of postoperative referral to the medical oncology department, including demographic and perioperative data.

RESULTS

Overall, 466 patients were identified to have Dukes' C colonic cancer, with 53.9% of these being female. Referral to medical oncology occurred for 58.4% patients. Multivariable logistic regression modeling identified age, elective admission and resection in private hospitals as factors. The likelihood of medical oncology referral in patients who had elective resection was 63% versus 41% in those who had emergency resection and resection in private hospitals was 69% versus 50% in public hospitals.

CONCLUSION

Referral to a postoperative medical oncology clinic for adjuvant chemotherapy in Dukes' C colonic cancer was more likely in younger patients, those who underwent elective resection and those treated in private hospitals.

Comparison of treatment received versus long-standing guidelines for stage III colon and stage II/III rectal cancer patients diagnosed in Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba in 2004

PURPOSE

Guideline-recommended treatment for stage II/III colorectal cancer includes postsurgical chemotherapy and/or radiation as standard of care. This study measures adherence to guidelines across 3 Canadian provinces and evaluates the relationship of patient characteristics with receiving standard care.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All surgically treated patients diagnosed in 2004 with stage III colon or stage II/III rectal cancer and residing in Alberta, Saskatchewan, or Manitoba were identified from provincial cancer registries. Sex, age at diagnosis, and area of residence were also obtained from the cancer registry. The primary outcome of interest was receipt of standard care: surgery followed by chemotherapy or radiation therapy (adjuvant therapy). chi2 tests and binary regression with log link assessed the relationship of patient demographic characteristics (age, sex, residence, cancer disease stage) with receipt of standard care.

RESULTS

About half of the patients received adjuvant therapy. Patients with stage III rectal cancer were more likely to receive adjuvant treatment than stage II patients in Alberta and Saskatchewan. There was a large decrease in the percentage of patients who received adjuvant treatment with increasing age in all the provinces (P < .001), ranging from about 80% of those aged < 65 years to about 20% of those aged >or= 75 years for colon cancer patients and from about 70% to 30%, respectively, for rectal cancer patients. The decrease of adjuvant treatment with increasing age was most marked in Alberta.

CONCLUSION

The percentage of patients receiving guideline-recommended treatment is low. Reasons for lack of adherence to guidelines need to be addressed.

Timely access and quality of care in colorectal cancer: are they related?

OBJECTIVE

Colorectal cancer patients want both timely access and high-quality care. The objective of this study was to explore relationships between quality indicators and access time intervals specific to colorectal cancer patients.

DESIGN

Prospective consecutive cohort study.

SETTING

Single health district.

PARTICIPANTS

Between February 2002 and February 2004, all patients undergoing non-emergent surgery for primary colorectal cancer were enrolled.

INTERVENTION

A standardized method was used to collect clinicodemographic, diagnostic and treatment event data.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Associations between accepted colorectal cancer-specific quality indicators and benchmarked access time intervals for diagnosis, surgery and adjuvant therapy were examined using multivariate logistic regression, controlling for clinicodemographic factors.

RESULTS

Among the 392 patients in the study cohort, 9.9% were diagnosed on screening examination, 53.1% underwent preoperative staging imaging and 74.5% underwent full preoperative colonic examination. On multivariate logistic regression, patients presenting via screening were more likely to move from presentation to diagnosis within the 4-week benchmark for this access time interval, compared with symptomatic patients (RR 8.1, P < 0.001). The absence of preoperative staging imaging was associated with achievement of the 4-week benchmark for the access time interval from diagnosis to surgery (RR 2.5, P < 0.001). Similarly, an absence of complete preoperative colonic examination was associated with achievement of the 8-week benchmark for the access time interval from surgery to adjuvant therapy (RR 6.6, P = 0.008).

CONCLUSIONS

Although several associations between quality indicators and benchmarked access time intervals for colorectal cancer patients were identified, the relationship between quality and access is complex and far from universal. It is therefore clear that quality care and timely access are not synonymous, and that both must be studied to improve colorectal cancer care.

Is quality of colorectal cancer care good enough? Core measures development and its application for comparing hospitals in Taiwan

BACKGROUND

Although performance measurement for assessing care quality is an emerging area, a system for measuring the quality of cancer care at the hospital level has not been well developed. The purpose of this study was to develop organization-based core measures for colorectal cancer patient care and apply these measures to compare hospital performance.

METHODS

The development of core measures for colorectal cancer has undergone three stages including a modified Delphi method. The study sample originated from 2004 data in the Taiwan Cancer Database, a national cancer data registry. Eighteen hospitals and 5585 newly diagnosed colorectal cancer patients were enrolled in this study. We used indicator-based and case-based approaches to examine adherences simultaneously.

RESULTS

The final core measure set included seventeen indicators (1 pre-treatment, 11 treatment-related and 5 monitoring-related). There were data available for ten indicators. Indicator-based adherence possesses more meaningful application than case-based adherence for hospital comparisons. Mean adherence was 85.8% (79.8% to 91%) for indicator-based and 82.8% (77.6% to 88.9%) for case-based approaches. Hospitals performed well (>90%) for five out of eleven indicators. Still, the performance across hospitals varied for many indicators. The best and poorest system performance was reflected in indicators T5-negative surgical margin (99.3%, 97.2%-100.0%) and T7-lymph nodes harvest more than twelve(62.7%, 27.6%-92.2%), both of which related to surgical specimens.

CONCLUSIONS

In this nationwide study, quality of colorectal cancer care still shows room for improvement. These preliminary results indicate that core measures for cancer can be developed systematically and applied for internal quality improvement.

The cost burden of trastuzumab and bevacizumab therapy for solid tumours in Canada

OBJECTIVE

Monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) such as trastuzumab and bevacizumab have become important yet expensive components of systemic cancer therapy across a variety of disease sites. We assessed the potential cost implications of adopting trastuzumab and bevacizumab therapy in the context of their potential utilization in breast, lung, and colorectal cancers.

DESIGN

We first estimated MAb costs per patient and treatment indication and then included the MAb acquisition cost and the costs of medical resource utilizations required for therapy delivery. Drug costs were based on 2005 average Canadian wholesale prices, assuming full drug delivery and uncomplicated cycles. A direct-payer perspective was undertaken, and results are reported in Canadian dollars. Potential lifetime costs were then derived according to constructed schema, which account for absolute numbers of target patients and systemic therapy utilization. We subsequently estimated costs of MAb therapy relative to total costs of conventional management without MAb therapy.

RESULTS

Trastuzumab costs $49,915 and $28,350 per patient treated in the adjuvant and metastatic breast cancer settings, respectively; bevacizumab costs $48,490 and $39,614 per patient treated in the metastatic lung and colorectal cancer settings, respectively. Potential lifetime absolute costs to Canada's health care system were approximately $127 million and $299 million for trastuzumab and bevacizumab respectively, corresponding to an average increase in health care expenditure of approximately 19% for breast cancer and 21% for lung and colorectal cancer over conventional management without MAbs.

CONCLUSIONS

Novel Mab-based therapies such as trastuzumab and bevacizumab will likely add a significant cost burden to Canada's publicly funded health care system.

Organization-based performance measures of cancer care quality: core measure development for breast cancer in Taiwan

The purpose of the study was to develop organization-based core performance measures (CPMs) for breast cancer patients treated in hospitals that participated in cancer quality improvement programmes in Taiwan. CPMs were developed in three stages that included a preparation, a consensus building stage, and two stages of stakeholder feedback. Three criteria and seven subcriteria were applied in the development process. Indicators listed in a Delphi questionnaire were based on a literature search, indicators developed by relevant institutions and discussion by authors. Each indicator needed to meet inclusion criteria as a final indicator. Evidence-based guidelines, expert opinions from panel group, 27 hospitals and empirical data were all applied to develop and revise the core measures. Fifteen out of 28 indicators were selected and modified after the three stages. There were two pre-treatment indicators for screening and diagnosis, nine treatment-related indicators, and four monitoring-related indicators. Six indicators were supported by evidence level I, and four indicators by level II evidence. The CPMs for breast cancer can be developed systematically and be applied for internal quality improvement and external surveillance. Our experience can be extended to other cancer sites and adapted to link with pay for performance or certification program in cancer care.

Residual treatment disparities after oncology referral for rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Black patients with rectal cancer are considerably less likely than white patients to receive adjuvant therapy. We examined the hypothesis that the lower treatment rate for blacks is due to underreferral to medical and radiation oncologists.

METHODS

We used 1992-1999 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare data to identify elderly (> or = 66 years of age) patients who had been hospitalized for resection of stage II or III rectal cancer (n = 2716). We used chi(2) tests to examine associations between race and 1) consultation with an oncologist and 2) receipt of adjuvant therapy. We then used logistic regression to analyze the influence of sociodemographic and clinical characteristics (age at diagnosis, sex, marital status, median income and education in area of residence, comorbidity, and cancer stage) on black-white differences in the receipt of adjuvant therapy. All statistical tests were two-sided.

RESULTS

There was no statistically significant difference between the 134 black patients and the 2582 white patients in the frequency of consultation with a medical oncologist (73.1% for blacks vs 74.9% for whites, difference = 1.8%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = > 5.9% to 9.5%, P = .64) or radiation oncologist (56.7% vs 64.8%, difference = 8.1%, 95% CI = > 0.5% to 16.7%, P = .06), but blacks were less likely than whites to consult with both a medical oncologist and a radiation oncologist (49.2% vs 58.8%, difference = 9.6%, 95% CI = 0.9% to 18.2%, P = .03). Among patients who saw an oncologist, black patients were less likely than white patients to receive chemotherapy (54.1% vs 70.2%, difference = 16.1%, 95% CI = 6.0% to 26.2%, P = .006), radiation therapy (73.7% vs 83.4%, difference = 9.7%, 95% CI = 0.4% to 19.8%, P = .06), or both (60.6% vs 76.9%, difference = 16.3%, 95% CI = 4.3% to 28.3%, P = .008). Patient and provider characteristics had minimal influence on the racial disparity in the use of adjuvant therapy.

CONCLUSION

Racial differences in oncologist consultation rates do not explain disparities in the use of adjuvant treatment for rectal cancer. A better understanding of patient preferences, patient-provider interactions, and potential influences on provider decision making is necessary to develop strategies to increase the use of adjuvant treatment for rectal cancer among black patients.

The role of the surgeon in whether patients with lymph node-positive colon cancer see a medical oncologist

BACKGROUND

Chemotherapy improves survival for patients with stage III colon cancer, but some older patients with lymph node-positive colon cancer do not see a medical oncologist and, thus, do not receive adjuvant chemotherapy.

METHODS

To evaluate the role of the surgeon in determining referrals to medical oncology among patients with stage III colon cancer, the authors conducted a retrospective cohort study of 6158 patients aged >or=66 years who were diagnosed with stage III colon cancer from 1992 through 1999 by using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare linked database. Multilevel analysis was used to simultaneously model variations in patients' seeing a medical oncologist at the patient and surgeon levels.

RESULTS

Twenty-one percent of the total variance in seeing a medical oncologist was attributable to the surgeon after adjusting for available patient, tumor, and surgeon characteristics. The individual surgeon characteristics that significantly predicted whether the patient saw a medical oncologist were year since graduation (<or=10 years vs >20 years; hazard ratio [HR], 1.60; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.19-2.16), practicing in a teaching hospital (yes vs. no: HR; 1.30; 95% CI, 1.07-1.58), and volume of patients with colon cancer (<30 patients vs >or=121 patients; HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.46-0.94). Surgeon sex, race, board certification, and type of practice were not independent predictors of medical oncology referral.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgeons accounted for approximately 20% of the variation in patients seeing a medical oncologist. Interventions at the level of the surgeon may be appropriate to improve the care of patients with colon cancer.

Concordance with national guidelines for colorectal cancer care in New South Wales: a population‐based patterns of care study

OBJECTIVE

To investigate predictors of evidence-based surgical care in a population-based sample of patients with newly diagnosed colorectal cancer.

DESIGN, PATIENTS AND SETTING

Prospective audit of all new patients with colorectal cancer reported to the New South Wales Central Cancer Registry between 1 February 2000 and 31 January 2001.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Concordance with seven guidelines from the 1999 Australian evidence-based guidelines for colorectal cancer; predictors of guideline concordance; the mean proportion of relevant guidelines followed for individual patients.

RESULTS

Questionnaires were received for 3095 patients (91.6%). Between 0 and 100% of relevant guidelines were followed for individual patients (median, 67%). Concordance with individual guidelines varied considerably. Patient age independently predicted non-concordance with guidelines for adjuvant therapy and preoperative radiotherapy. Adjuvant chemotherapy was more likely if a patient with node-positive colon cancer was treated in a metropolitan hospital or by a general surgeon. Surgeons with a high caseload or specialty in colorectal cancer were more likely to perform colonic pouch reconstruction, prescribe thromboembolism or antibiotic prophylaxis, and were less likely to refer patients with high-risk rectal cancer for adjuvant radiotherapy. Bowel preparation was less likely among older patients and in high-caseload hospitals.

CONCLUSION

Effective strategies to fully implement national colorectal cancer guidelines are needed. In particular, increasing the use of appropriate adjuvant therapy should be a priority, especially among older people.

Expanded Treatment Options in the Adjuvant Therapy of Colon Cancer: Implications for Oncology Nurses

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES

To review the role of adjuvant therapy in the treatment of patients with colon cancer.

DATA SOURCES

Published articles, Internet sources, and books.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Colon cancer is a very common cancer in men and women. Chemotherapy, consisting primarily of 5-fluorouracil, has been used to treat colon cancer since the 1950s, but additional effective agents against metastatic disease now are available. The options for adjuvant chemotherapy have increased dramatically. Ongoing studies are evaluating the role of biologics in adjuvant therapy of colon cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of oxaliplatin in the adjuvant setting has further defined exciting new therapy options for patients with colon cancer.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING

Oncology nurses caring for patients with colon cancer should be aware of new changes in therapy options. Although the addition of new therapies increases the tools in the drug arsenal for the common disease, management of toxicities of therapy is crucial as well. This article reviews changes in therapy options and toxicity management, including discussion of key issues for oncology nurses in the care of patients with colon cancer.

Referral to medical oncology: a crucial step in the treatment of older patients with stage III colon cancer

PURPOSE

Adjuvant chemotherapy for stage III colon cancer produces a substantial survival benefit, but many older patients do not receive chemotherapy. This study examines factors associated with medical oncology consultation and evaluates the impact of such consultation on chemotherapy use.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We used the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare linked database and identified 7,569 patients, aged 66-99, with stage III colon cancer diagnosed from 1992-1999. Modified Poisson regression was used to assess the relative risk for seeing a medical oncologist and for receiving chemotherapy as a function of individual characteristics.

RESULTS

78.08% of patients saw a medical oncologist within 6 months of diagnosis. Patients who were female, white, married, had low comorbidity scores, were diagnosed in more recent years, or had four or more positive lymph nodes were more likely to see a medical oncologist. Patients seeing a medical oncologist were 10 times more likely to receive chemotherapy (odds ratio, 9.98; 95% confidence interval, 8.21-12.14), after controlling for demographic and tumor characteristics. Chemotherapy use increased over time, but was substantially lower among older, black, and unmarried patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Referral to medical oncology is one of the most important factors associated with receipt of chemotherapy among older patients with stage III colon cancer. Comorbidity decreases the likelihood of receiving chemotherapy, but its effect is the same for those who see a medical oncologist and all patients combined. Ensuring that high-risk patients are referred to medical oncology is a crucial step in quality care for patients with colon cancer.

Increasing negative lymph node count is independently associated with improved long-term survival in stage IIIB and IIIC colon cancer

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of the number of negative lymph nodes on survival in patients with stage III colon cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients who underwent surgery for stage III colon cancer between January 1988 and December 1997 were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results cancer registry. The number of negative and positive nodes was determined for 20,702 eligible patients. Disease-specific survival was examined by substage according to the number of negative nodes identified. A proportional hazards model was constructed to determine the effect of the number of negative nodes on survival.

RESULTS

For stage IIIB and IIIC patients, there was a significant decrease in disease-specific mortality as the number of negative nodes increased; cumulative 5-year cancer mortality was 27% in stage IIIB patients with 13 or more negative nodes identified versus 45% in those with three or fewer negative lymph nodes evaluated (P < .0001). In patients with stage IIIC cancer, those with 13 or more negative nodes had a 5-year mortality of 42% versus 65% in those with three or fewer negative lymph nodes evaluated (P < .0001). There was no association between the number of negative nodes identified and disease-specific survival for patients with stage IIIA disease. After controlling for the number of positive nodes, a higher number of negative nodes was found to be independently associated with improved disease-specific survival.

CONCLUSION

The number of negative nodes is an important independent prognostic factor for patients with stage IIIB and IIIC colon cancer.

Receipt of recommended therapy by patients with advanced colorectal cancer

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate utilization of surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation therapy among patients with stage II or III colon cancer and stage II/III rectal or rectosigmoid cancer, as recommended by current national guidelines.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study at the Michael E. DeBakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center (Houston, TX) used 1999-2003 administrative data to identify patients with a diagnostic code for colorectal cancer. Medical charts were then abstracted to identify an incident cohort with stage II or III cancer. Outcome of interest was receipt of recommended therapy defined as surgery only (stage II colon) or surgery with adjuvant chemo- or radiotherapy (stage III colon or stage II/III rectal/rectosigmoid cancer). Potential determinants of receipt of recommended therapy were analyzed using logistic regression.

RESULTS

Among 197 incident cases diagnosed or treated, mean age of patients was 66 yr (SD, 11 yr), 64% were Caucasian, and 98.5% were men. A gastroenterologist diagnosed 72.5% tumors including 62 stage II colon, 62 stage III colon, and 73 stage II/III rectal cancers. Referral to oncology occurred in 76% of stage II colon, 92% of stage III colon, and 99% of rectal cancers. 87% of stage II and 71% of stage III colon cancer patients received recommended therapy, compared to only 42.5% of rectal cancer patients. Predictors of receipt of recommended therapy among rectal cancers included being married (OR, 5.3; 95% CI: 1.6-17.1), presentation at tumor board (OR, 3.6; 95% CI: 1.2-11.2), or age<65 yr (OR, 3.5; 95% CI: 1.3-9.3). When patient's comorbidity and physician's decision-making process were considered in the assessment of the outcome, only presentation at tumor board remained predictive of receipt of recommended therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Most colon cancer patients at a major VA medical center receive recommended therapy. Among rectal cancer patients, those presented at tumor board are most likely to receive recommended therapy.

A patient's race/ethnicity does not explain the underuse of appropriate adjuvant therapy in colorectal cancer

INTRODUCTION

To improve colorectal cancer outcomes, appropriate adjuvant therapy (chemotherapy, radiation therapy) should be given. Numerous studies have demonstrated underuse of adjuvant therapy in colorectal cancer. The current study examines variables associated with underuse of adjuvant therapy.

METHODS

Three population-based databases were linked: California Cancer Registry, California Patient Discharge Database, 2000 Census. All colorectal cancer patients diagnosed from 1994 to 2001 were studied. Patient characteristics (age, gender, race/ethnicity, comorbidities, payer, diagnosis year, socioeconomic status) were used in five multivariate regression analyses to predict receipt of chemotherapy for Stage III colon cancer, and receipt of chemotherapy and radiation therapy for Stages II, III rectal cancer.

RESULTS

The overall cohort was 18,649 Stage III colon cancer and Stages II, III rectal cancer patients. Mean age was 68.9 years, 50 percent male, 74 percent non-Hispanic white, 6 percent black, 11 percent Hispanic, 9 percent Asian, and 65 percent had no significant comorbid disease. Receipt of chemotherapy was 48 percent for Stage III colon cancer, 48 percent for Stage II rectal cancer, and 66 percent for Stage III rectal cancer. Receipt of radiation therapy was 52 percent for Stage II rectal cancer and 66 percent for Stage III rectal cancer. In all five models, low socioeconomic status predicted underuse of chemotherapy or radiation therapy (P < 0.016). Race/ethnicity was not statistically associated with underuse in any of the models.

CONCLUSIONS

Most literature identifies race/ethnicity as the reason for disparate receipt of adjuvant therapy in colorectal cancer. Using a more robust database of three population-based sources, our analysis demonstrates that socioeconomic status is a more important predictor of (in)appropriate care than race/ethnicity. Explicit measures to improve care to the poor with colorectal cancer are needed.

Quality measures for the use of adjuvant chemotherapy and radiation therapy in patients with colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Chemotherapy (CT) and radiation therapy (RT) are essential components of adjuvant (preoperative or postoperative) therapy for many patients with colorectal cancer (CRC); however, quality measures (QMs) of these critical aspects of CRC treatment have not been characterized well. Therefore, the authors conducted a systematic review of the literature to determine the available QMs for adjuvant CT and RT in patients with CRC and rated their usefulness for assessing the delivery of quality care.

METHODS

The MEDLINE and Cochrane data bases were searched for all publications that contained potential/actual QMs pertaining to adjuvant therapy for CRC. Identified QMs were rated by using criteria developed by the National Quality Forum.

RESULTS

Thirty-two articles met the established inclusion/exclusion criteria. Those 32 articles contained 12 potential or actual QMs, 6 of which had major flaws that limited their applicability. The most useful QMs identified were 1) the percentage of patients with AJCC Stage III colon cancer who received postoperative CT and 2) the percentage of patients with Stage II or III rectal cancer who received chemoradiotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

To the authors' knowledge, very few QMs pertaining to adjuvant CT or RT for CRC have been published to date, and only half of those measures were rated as useful, acceptable, and valid in the current literature review. Future research should focus on refining existing QMs and on developing new QMs that target important leverage points with respect to the provision of adjuvant therapy for patients with CRC.