Defining the Longitudinal Risk of CIN 3+ for <CIN 2 Colposcopy for Patients Referred With High-Grade Cytology

OBJECTIVE

To determine the baseline and cumulative risk of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN)3 and invasive cervical cancer in participants referred to colposcopy with high-grade cytology and

METHODS

The authors linked administrative databases including cytology, pathology, cancer registries, and physician billing history to identify participants referred to colposcopy between January 2012 and December 2013 with high-grade cytology (atypical squamous cells [ASC]-H, high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion [HSIL], invasive squamous cell carcinoma, adenocarcinoma, atypical glandular cells [AGC], adenocarcinoma in situ) and had

RESULTS

Among 4,168 women referred to colposcopy for ASC-H, HSIL, squamous cell carcinoma, or adenocarcinoma, the 3- and 5-year CIN3 incidence rates were 17.7%/20.0% no biopsy, 13.0%/15.1% negative biopsy, and 18.9%/20.0% low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL) biopsies. The 3- and 5-year incidences of invasive cancer were: 1.25%/1.68% no biopsy, 0.78%/1.04% negative biopsy, and 0%/0% LSIL biopsy. When the initial cytology was AGC/adenocarcinoma in situ (n = 944), the 3- and 5-year rates of CIN3 were 7.42%/8.39% no biopsy, 7.41%/9.26% negative biopsy, and 7.69%/7.69% LSIL biopsy. The invasive cancer rates were 1.12%/1.54% no biopsy, 0.46%/0.46% negative biopsy, and 0.0%/0.0% LSIL biopsy. By screening cytology, participants referred for HSIL had the highest 3- and 5-year rates of CIN3 (18.9% and 21%) compared with AGC (7.22%/8.28%) and ASC-H (15.5%/18%). The 3- and 5-year invasive cancer rates were 1.38%/1.75% HSIL, 0.85%/1.17% AGC, and 0.91%/1.36% ASC-H.

CONCLUSIONS

In participants referred for high-grade cytology where colposcopy shows Collapse

Key Words Collapse

MESH Headings

• Pregnancy
• Humans
• Female
• Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/diagnosis
• Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/epidemiology
• Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/pathology
• Colposcopy
• Adenocarcinoma in Situ
• Uterine Cervical Dysplasia/pathology
• Atypical Squamous Cells of the Cervix/pathology
• Carcinoma, Squamous Cell
• Squamous Intraepithelial Lesions
• Carcinoma in Situ
• Vaginal Smears
• Papillomavirus Infections/diagnosis
• Papillomaviridae

Collapse

Grants Collapse

Affiliation(s)

Sabrina Piedimonte Division of Gynecologic Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Kyle Tsang Cancer Prevention, Cancer Care Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Nathaniel Jembere Cancer Prevention, Cancer Care Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Joan Murphy Division of Gynecologic Oncology, University of Toronto, Trillium Health Partners, Mississauga, Ontario, Canada
Tina Karapetian Cancer Prevention, Cancer Care Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Julia Gao Cancer Prevention, Cancer Care Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Bronwen McCurdy Cancer Prevention, Cancer Care Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Jocelyn Sacco Cancer Prevention, Cancer Care Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Rachel Kupets Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Sunnybrook Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Collapse

A63 REFINING THE CANADIAN ASSOCIATION OF GASTROENTEROLOGY GUIDELINE ON SCREENING IN PERSONS WITH A FAMILY HISTORY OF NONHEREDITARY COLORECTAL CANCER OR ADENOMA: A MODIFIED DELPHI PROCESS

Background

In 2018, the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology (CAG) published an extensive systematic review and guideline on screening in persons with a family history (FHx) of nonhereditary colorectal cancer (CRC) and adenoma. While CAG’s recommendations were evidence-based, some recommendations lacked precision (e.g. ranges for some start ages & intervals) and screening cessation age was not addressed, leading to implementation challenges for practitioners and CRC screening programs.

Aims

To review and update the evidence since the 2018 guideline and to formulate implementable recommendations in the Ontario context that are aligned with the CAG guideline.

Methods

ColonCancerCheck (Ontario’s organized CRC screening program) conducted a modified version of the literature search used by CAG (Jan 2017 - Sept 2019). A 19-member expert panel with Canadian and international representatives from endoscopy, primary care, epidemiology, organized CRC screening programs, Ontario’s cancer system and the general public refined the recommendations of the CAG guideline for the purposes of implementation in an organized CRC screening program using a modified Delphi process. This iterative process involved a series of webinars and anonymous survey rounds where the panel reviewed evidence materials and provided online feedback to develop, refine & achieve consensus on screening recommendations in persons with a FHx of CRC/adenoma. Consensus was achieved if ≥75% of members agreed or strongly agreed with the statement.

Results

Six new systematic reviews and 2 new guidelines were identified. New evidence included data on the absolute risk (10 year & lifetime risk) of CRC by type of FHx, as well as the performance of fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) and barriers to CRC screening in persons with a FHx of CRC. The expert panel participated in 3 webinars and 4 online surveys to arrive at consensus. Panel recommendations and level of consensus will be reported for the 6 statements (Table).

Conclusions

Building from the CAG guideline, we derived evidence-based and implementable recommendations for screening persons with a FHx of CRC or adenoma.

Funding Agencies

Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario)

Prostate-specific Antigen Bounce After Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer: A Pooled Analysis of Four Prospective Trials

AIMS

We conducted a pooled analysis of four prospective stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) trials of low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer to evaluate the incidence of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) bounce and its correlation with the time-dose-fraction schedule. The correlation between bounce with PSA response at 4 years (nadir PSA < 0.4 ng/ml) and biochemical failure-free survival (BFFS) was also explored.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study included four treatment groups: 35 Gy/five fractions once per week (QW) (TG-1; n = 84); 40 Gy/five fractions QW (TG-2; n = 100); 40 Gy/five fractions every other day (TG-3; n = 73); and 26 Gy/two fractions QW (TG-4; n = 30). PSA bounce was defined as a rise in PSA by 0.2 ng/ml (nadir + 0.2) or 2 ng/ml (nadir + 2.0) above nadir followed by a decrease back to nadir. Patients with fewer than three follow-up PSA tests were excluded from the pooled analysis.

RESULTS

In total, 287 patients were included, with a median follow-up of 5.0 years. The pooled 5-year cumulative incidence of bounce by nadir + 2.0 was 8%. The 2-year cumulative incidences of PSA bounce by nadir + 0.2 were 28.9, 21, 19.6 and 16.7% (P = 0.12) and by nadir + 2.0 were 7.2, 8, 2.7 and 6.7% (P = 0.32) for TG-1 to TG-4, respectively. Multivariable analysis revealed that for nadir + 2.0, pre-treatment PSA (odds ratio 0.49; 95% confidence interval 0.26-0.97) correlated with PSA bounce. Although PSA bounce by nadir + 0.2 (odds ratio 0.10; 95% confidence interval 0.04-0.24) and nadir + 2.0 (odds ratio 0.29; 95% confidence interval 0.09-0.93) was associated with a lower probability of PSA response at 4 years, there was no association between bounce by nadir + 0.2 (hazard ratio 0.36; 95% confidence interval 0.08-1.74) or nadir + 2 (hazard ratio 1.77; 95% confidence interval 0.28-11.07) with BFFS.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of PSA bounce was independent of time-dose-fraction schedule for prostate SBRT. One in 13 patients experienced a bounce high enough to be misinterpreted as biochemical failure, and clinicians should avoid early salvage interventions in these patients. There was no association between PSA bounce and BFFS.

Moving toward patient-based funding through quality-based procedures (QBPs) for GI endoscopy and colposcopy

43

Background: As part of the Ministry’s Health System Funding Reform initiative, Cancer Care Ontario is tasked to develop and implement Quality-Based Procedures (QBPs) for programs such as GI Endoscopy and Colposcopy. QBPs are clusters of patients with clinically related diagnoses or treatments that have been identified by an evidence-based framework as providing opportunity for improving quality outcomes and reducing costs. As stated by the Ministry, the goal is to reimburse providers for the types and numbers of patients treated, using evidence-informed rates associated with the quality of care delivered. Methods: QBPs are multiyear and have four key deliverables: Clinical: developing clinical best practices. Funding: tying best practices to pricing. Capacity Planning: understanding procedure types/volumes for capacity management. Monitoring/Evaluation: measuring the QBP’s impact. Developing the QBPs has involved: Creating Clinical Expert Advisory Groups (CEAG) of clinicians who are recognized for their knowledge and expertise. Tasking the CEAG to define quality and develop best practices informed by literature reviews, jurisdictional scans, and guidelines. Documenting these standards and clinical pathways in a clinical handbook, providing information on the practices that should be implemented to ensure consistent care delivery. The development of best practices is imperative to the foundation of the QBP and spans multiple years. Once best practice development is complete, it will be tied to pricing, where the procedure will be micro-costed based on workload, equipment, supplies, and other administrative costs. Results: The QBPs continue to evolve and aim to: Reduce practice variation. Improve patient outcomes. Improve system accountability. Improve cost-effectiveness of services. Effectiveness will be measured through a performance management framework, including an integrated QBP scorecard measuring appropriateness, access, and efficiency. Conclusions: The underpinning for moving towards an evidence-based, patient-based funding model involves defining quality standards and clincal best practices, and applying these guidelines to determine the cost of quality care.

Automatic conformal prescription of very selective saturation bands for in vivo 1H-MRSI of the prostate

An important step in the implementation of three-dimensional in vivo proton magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging ((1)H-MRSI) of the prostate is the placement of spatial saturation pulses around the region of interest (ROI) for the removal of unwanted contaminating signals from peripheral tissue. The present study demonstrates the use of a technique called conformal voxel magnetic resonance spectroscopy (CV-MRS). This method automates the placement, orientation, timing and flip angle of very selective saturation (VSS) pulses around an irregularly-shaped, user-defined ROI. The method employs a user adjustable number of automatically positioned VSS pulses (20 used in the present study) which null the signal from periprostatic lipids while closely conforming the shape of the excitation voxel to the shape of the prostate. A standard endorectal coil in combination with a torso-phased array coil was used for all in vivo prostate studies. Three-dimensional in vivo prostate (1)H-MRSI data were obtained using the proposed semi-automated CV-MRS technique, and compared with a standard point resolved spectroscopy (PRESS) technique at TE = 130 ms using manual placement of saturation pulses. The in vivo prostate (1)H-MRSI data collected from 12 healthy subjects using the CV-MRS method showed significantly reduced lipid contamination throughout the prostate, and reduced baseline distortions. On average there was a 50 ± 17% (range 12% - 68%) reduction in lipids throughout the prostate. A voxel-by-voxel benchmark test of over 850 voxels showed that there were 63% more peaks fitted using the LCModel when using a Cramer-Rao Lower Bound (CRLB) cut-off of 40% when using the optimized conformal voxel technique in comparison to the manual placement approach. The evaluation of this CV-MRS technique has demonstrated the potential for easy automation of the graphical prescription of saturation bands for use in (1)H-MRSI.

Do expert assessments converge? An exploratory case study of evaluating and managing a blood supply risk

BACKGROUND

Examining professional assessments of a blood product recall/withdrawal and its implications for risk and public health, the paper introduces ideas about perceptions of minimal risk and its management. It also describes the context of publicly funded blood transfusion in Canada and the withdrawal event that is the basis of this study.

METHODS

Interviews with 45 experts from administration, medicine, blood supply, laboratory services and risk assessment took place using a multi-level sampling framework in the aftermath of the recall. These experts either directly dealt with the withdrawal or were involved in the management of the blood supply at the national level. Data from these interviews were coded in NVivo for analysis and interpretation. Analytically, data were interpreted to derive typifications to relate interview responses to risk management heuristics.

RESULTS

While all those interviewed agreed on the importance of patient safety, differences in the ways in which the risk was contextualized and explicated were discerned. Risk was seen in terms of patient safety, liability or precaution. These different risk logics are illustrated by selected quotations.

CONCLUSIONS

Expert assessments did not fully converge and it is possible that these different risk logics and discourses may affect the risk management process more generally, although not necessarily in a negative way. Patient safety is not to be compromised but management of blood risk in publicly funded systems may vary. We suggest ways of managing blood risk using formal and safety case approaches.