Search

Background: Quality performance indicators for the management of oesophagogastric cancer can be used to objectively measure and compare the performance of individual units and capture key elements of patient care to improve patient outcomes. Methods: Two systematic reviews were completed to identify evidence‐based quality performance indicators for the surgical management of oesophagogastric cancer. Based on the indicators identified, a two‐round modified Delphi process with invitations was sent to all members of the Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand Gastric and Oesophageal Surgery Association. The expert working group discussed each suggested indicator and either removed, added, or adjusted the list of indicators of oesophagogastric cancer. Results: The final list of both OG cancer indicators included Specialized Multi‐disciplinary team discussion, Endoscopy documentation, Staging Contrast CT Chest/Abdomen and Pelvis, Neoadjuvant or Adjuvant chemo/radiotherapy administered in accordance with the Local multi‐disciplinary team, Pathological margin clearance (R0 Resection), Lymphadenectomy retrieving 15 or more nodes, Formal review of pathological findings and documentation, Postoperative complications, 30‐day and 90‐day postoperative mortality, clinical surveillance and Specialized Dietetic guidance. Indicators specific to gastric cancer included Preoperative biopsy for pathological diagnosis and Staging Laparoscopy. Indicators specific to oesophageal cancer include positron emission tomography scan if CT negative for metastasis, Perioperative Oesophagectomy Care Pathway, length of stay of 21 days or more, and Unplanned readmission within 30 days. Conclusions: The results of this study present a core set of indicators for the surgical management of oesophagogastric cancer that can be used to measure quality and compare performance between different units. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We introduce a proof-of-concept extended reality (XR) environment for discussing cancer, presenting genomic information from multiple tumour sites in the context of 3D tumour models generated from CT scans. This tool enhances multidisciplinary discussions. Clinicians and cancer researchers explored its use in oncology, sharing perspectives on XR's potential for use in molecular tumour boards, clinician-patient communication, and education. XR serves as a universal language, fostering collaborative decision-making in oncology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The outcomes of palliative radiation therapy (RT) for neuroendocrine neoplasms (NEN) are seldom reported. We investigated outcomes following palliative radiotherapy in a cohort of patients with NENs. We hypothesised that well‐differentiated NEN will be less likely to have a clinical response than poorly differentiated NEN. Methods: Patients who received at least one course of palliative RT were identified using the New Zealand NETwork! Registry. Patients with Merkel cell carcinoma, pulmonary small cell carcinoma or asymptomatic patients were excluded. Clinical response to RT within 90 days and overall survival were analysed alongside clinical variables (fractionation, RT site, tumour differentiation and tumour primary site). Results: The cohort comprised 79 patients, with 147 courses of palliative RT delivered. Clinical response was measurable for 100 courses, with clinical response rate of 76%. A course delivered to a well‐differentiated NEN was associated with 2.02‐fold (95% CI 0.67, 6.12; P = 0.21) increase in odds of a clinical response compared to a poorly differentiated NEN. Median overall survival from the first fraction of RT was 94 days (95% CI 80, 138 days). Overall survival was higher in well‐differentiated NEN than in poorly differentiated NEN (HR 0.2, 95% CI 0.10–0.40, P‐value < 0.001); 30‐day mortality was 7%. There were significantly reduced odds of clinical response for non‐bone sites, and for courses >10 fractions compared to a single fraction. Conclusion: Palliative RT is an appropriate option for management of symptoms in patients with both well‐ and poorly differentiated metastatic NEN. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The objective of this systematic review was to identify pre-existing quality performance indicators (QPIs) for the surgical management of oesophageal cancer (OC). These QPIs can be used to objectively measure and compare the performance of individual units and capture key elements of patient care to improve patient outcomes. Methods: A systematic literature search of PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus and Embase was conducted. Articles reporting on the quality of healthcare in relation to oesophageal neoplasm or cancer and the surgical treatment of OC available until the 1st of March 2022 were included. Results: The final list of articles included retrospective reviews (n = 13), prospective reviews (n = 8), expert guidelines (n = 1) and consensus (n = 1). The final list of QPIs was categorized as process, outcome or structural measures. Process measures included multidisciplinary involvement, availability of multimodality diagnostic and treatment pathways and surgical metrics. Outcome measures included reoperation and readmission rates, the achievement of RO resection and length of hospital stay. Structural measures include multidisciplinary meetings. Conclusions: This systematic review summarizes QPIs for the surgical treatment of OC. The data will serve as an introduction to establishing a quality initiative project for OC resections. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A systematic review was undertaken to identify existing quality performance indicators (QPI) for the surgical treatment of gastric adenocarcinoma (GA) with the aim of defining a set of QPIs that can be used to assist in the accreditation of institutions for training, allow cross jurisdiction comparison of treatment and outcomes, as well as provide a basis to develop quality improvement programs. These QPI's capture key components of patient care that are fundamental to overall outcome. Methods: A systematic literature review was conducted searching MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, and SCOPUS with all literature available until the date of 1 August 2021 included. Search terms utilized were 'Quality of health care OR Quality improvement or Quality control OR Quality indicators', AND 'Gastrectomy' OR 'Stomach neoplasm' OR 'Adenocarcinoma' OR 'Gastric resection' OR 'Gastric cancer'. Results: Twelve articles were included in the final analysis. The selected studies included editorials (n = 2), retrospective review of institutional experience (n = 5), cohort studies (n = 2), survey methodology (n = 1), expert guidelines (n = 1) and consensus statement (n = 1). For GC QPIs, process measures included patient discussion at multi‐disciplinary meetings, access to perioperative multimodal diagnostic pathways, and specific surgical metrics (margin negative resections and adequate lymphadenectomy). Outcome measures included the RO resection rate, reoperation, readmission rate, and length of hospital stay. Conclusions: There is a relative paucity of internationally agreed QPI for the surgical management of gastric adenocarcinoma. The data from this review will form the basis of a project to develop internationally agreed and feasible QPI for gastric cancer resections. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Small intestinal Neuroendocrine Neoplasms (SI‐NENs) are the most common primary malignancy of the small bowel. The aim of this study is to define the survival of patients with an SI‐NEN in Auckland, Aotearoa New Zealand (AoNZ). Methods: A retrospective study of all patients diagnosed with a jejunal or ileal SI‐NEN in the Auckland region between 2000 and 2012 was performed. The New Zealand NETwork! Registry was searched to identify the study cohort. Retrospective data collection was performed to collect stage, survival and follow up data. Results: One hundred and seven patients were included in the study. The mean age of patients was 62.8 years (SD 11.9). The 5 and 10‐year disease‐specific survival for all patients was 66.1% (95% CI 56.5–75.7%) and 61.8% (95% CI 51.8–71.8%), respectively. Ten‐year disease‐specific survival was 100% for stage I and II, 74% (95%CI 61.7–84.4%) for stage III and 33.9% (95%CI 16.9–35.6%) for stage IV SI‐NEN. Eleven of 40 (27.5%) patients with stage III disease had recurrence and 3 of 7 (42.8%) patients with stage IV disease had recurrence. In patients with stage IV disease, neither primary resection (HR 2.25, 95% CI 0.92–5.5) nor distant resection (HR 1.72, 95% CI 0.63–4.7) were significantly associated with a disease‐specific or overall survival benefit. Conclusion: This study demonstrates that stage at SI‐NEN diagnosis is associated with survival, but resection of the primary or distant metastases in patients with stage IV disease is not. There was no recurrence in patients with stage I or II disease after complete resection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background A systematic review was undertaken to identify existing quality performance indicators (QPI) for the surgical treatment of oesophageal cancer (OC) with the aim of defining a set of QPIs that can be used in accreditation and allowing comparison of treatment and outcomes across jurisdictions, and provide a basis to develop quality improvement programs. These QPIs capture key components of patient care that are fundamental to the overall outcomes. Methods A systematic literature review was conducted by searching MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, and SCOPUS with all literature available until the date of 1st March 2022 included. Search terms utilised were Quality of health care OR Quality improvement OR Quality control OR Quality indicators OR Benchmark, AND Oesophagectomy OR Esophagectomy OR Oesophageal neoplasm OR Esophageal Neoplasm OR Adenocarcinoma OR Squamous Cell Cancer OR Oesophageal resection OR Esophageal Resection OR Oesophageal cancer OR Esophageal Cancer OR Ivor Lewis OR Oesophageal Surgery OR Esophageal Surgery. Results Twenty-five articles were included in the final analysis. The selected studies included editorials, retrospective review, prospective review, expert guidelines and consensus. For OC QPIs, process measures included multi-disciplinary meetings, access to perioperative multimodal diagnostic pathways, and surgical metrics (margin negative resections and adequate lymphadenectomy). Outcome measures included the RO resection rate, reoperation, readmission rate, and length of hospital stay. Conclusions This systematic review summarises QPIs for the surgical management of OC. The data from this review will form the basis of a project to develop internationally agreed QPIs for OC resections. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Quality performance indicators (QPIs) are used to monitor the delivery of cancer care. Neuroendocrine tumours (NETs) are a family of individually uncommon cancers that derive from neuroendocrine cells or their precursors, and can occur in most organs. There are currently no QPIs available for NETs and their heterogeneity makes QPI development difficult. CommNETs is a collaboration between NET clinicians, researchers and advocates in Canada, Australia and New Zealand. We created QPIs for NETs using a three-step consensus process. First, a multidisciplinary team used the nominal group technique to create candidates (n = 133) which were then curated into appropriateness statements (62 statements, 44 sub-statements). A two-stage modified RAND/UCLA Delphi consensus process was conducted: an online survey rated the statement appropriateness then the top-ranked statements (n = 20) were assessed in a face-to-face meeting. Finally, 10 QPIs met consensus criteria; documentation of primary site, proliferative index, differentiation, tumour board review, use of a structured pathology report, presence of distant metastasis, 5- and 10-year disease-free and overall survival. These NET QPIs will be trialed as a method to monitor and improve care for people with NETs and to facilitate international comparison. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]