Search

The COVID‐19 pandemic had a severe impact on medical care. Our study aims to investigate the impact of COVID‐19 on advanced melanoma care in the Netherlands. We selected patients diagnosed with irresectable stage IIIc and IV melanoma during the first and second COVID‐19 wave and compared them with patients diagnosed within the same time frame in 2018 and 2019. Patients were divided into three geographical regions. We investigated baseline characteristics, time from diagnosis until start of systemic therapy and postponement of anti‐PD‐1 courses. During both waves, fewer patients were diagnosed compared to the control groups. During the first wave, time between diagnosis and start of treatment was significantly longer in the southern region compared to other regions (33 vs 9 and 15 days, P‐value, What's new? Little is known about the effects of COVID‐19 on advanced melanoma care. In this study, the authors examined several quality indicators of care. They observed a worsening in baseline characteristics, longer time between diagnosis and start of treatment and more postponed anti‐PD‐1 antibody courses with differences between the northern, middle and southern regions. Future studies are necessary to assess the long‐term consequences of our observed changes in advanced melanoma care.

Contains fulltext : 232046.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access) BACKGROUND: Anti-PD-1 antibodies and BRAF/MEK inhibitors are the two main groups of systemic therapy in the treatment of BRAF(V600)-mutant advanced melanoma. Until now, data are inconclusive on which therapy to use as first-line treatment. The aim of this study was to use propensity score matching to compare first-line anti-PD-1 monotherapy vs. BRAF/MEK inhibitors in advanced BRAF(V600)-mutant melanoma patients. METHODS: We selected patients diagnosed between 2014 and 2017 with advanced melanoma and a known BRAF(V600)-mutation treated with first-line BRAF/MEK inhibitors or anti-PD-1 antibodies, registered in the Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry. Patients were matched based on their propensity scores using the nearest neighbour and the optimal matching method. RESULTS: Between 2014 and 2017, a total of 330 and 254 advanced melanoma patients received BRAF/MEK inhibitors and anti-PD-1 monotherapy as first-line systemic therapy. In the matched cohort, patients receiving anti-PD-1 antibodies as a first-line treatment had a higher median and 2-year overall survival compared to patients treated with first-line BRAF/MEK inhibitors, 42.3 months (95% CI: 37.3-NE) vs. 19.8 months (95% CI: 16.7-24.3) and 65.4% (95% CI: 58.1-73.6) vs. 41.7% (95% CI: 34.2-51.0). CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that in the matched BRAF(V600)-mutant advanced melanoma patients, anti-PD-1 monotherapy is the preferred first-line treatment in patients with relatively favourable patient and tumour characteristics.

A Correction to this paper has been published: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41416-021-01312-1

Simple Summary: The survival of advanced melanoma patients has improved significantly over the last decade due to the introduction of new systemic therapies. It is unknown whether survival outcomes of advanced melanoma patients differ between melanoma centers in the Netherlands. This research aimed to assess center variation in treatments and 2-year survival probabilities of advanced melanoma patients diagnosed between 2013 and 2017 in the Netherlands. Significant center variation in 2-year survival probabilities of patients diagnosed in 2014-2015 was observed after correcting for case-mix and treatment with new systemic therapies. The different use of new systemic therapies partially explained the observed variation. From 2016 onwards, no significant difference in 2-year survival was observed between centers. This study shows the added value of quality monitoring with a national registry that enables the study of variation between centers.Background: To assure a high quality of care for patients treated in Dutch melanoma centers, hospital variation in treatment patterns and outcomes is evaluated in the Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry. The aim of this study was to assess center variation in treatments and 2-year survival probabilities of patients diagnosed between 2013 and 2017 in the Netherlands. Methods: We selected patients diagnosed between 2013 and 2017 with unresectable IIIC or stage IV melanoma, registered in the Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry. Centers' performance on 2-year survival was evaluated using Empirical Bayes estimates calculated in a random effects model. Treatment patterns of the centers with the lowest and highest estimates for 2-year survival were compared. Results: For patients diagnosed between 2014 and 2015, significant center variation in 2-year survival probabilities was observed even after correcting for case-mix and treatment with new systemic therapies. The different use of new systemic therapies partially explained the observed variation. From 2016 onwards, no significant difference in 2-year survival was observed between centers. Conclusion: Our data suggest that between 2014 and 2015, after correcting for patient case-mix, significant variation in 2-year survival probabilities between Dutch melanoma centers existed. The use of new systemic therapies could partially explain this variation. In 2013 and between 2016 and 2017, no significant variation between centers existed.

e21502 Background: The COVID-19 pandemic COVID had a severe impact on medical care in The Netherlands. So far, few studies have investigated the influence of COVID-19 on advanced melanoma care nationwide. This study aims to investigate the impact of COVID-19 on the systemic treatment of unresectable stage III and IV advanced melanoma patients in the Netherlands. Methods: Data were obtained from the Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry (DMTR), a population-based nationwide registry of all stage III and IV melanoma patients amenable for systemic treatment. We compared two patient groups dependent on the date of the first diagnosis of metastasis: during the first COVID-19 wave (March 15th 2020 until May 22nd 2020), and a control group during the same period one year earlier. Furthermore, we divided patients into three geographical regions within the Netherlands (north, middle and south). These regions were based on the maximum number of hospital admissions for COVID-19 patients during the first wave, using data from the National Intensive Care Evaluation (NICE). COVID-19 incidence was highest in the southern part of The Netherlands. We investigated baseline characteristics, type of systemic therapy, time from diagnosis of the irresectable stage III or IV melanoma until the start of systemic therapy, postponement of anti-PD-1 courses in patients actively being treated during the predefined time periods and progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) using Kaplan-Meier estimates. Results: During the first COVID-19 wave, 104 patients were diagnosed with advanced melanoma versus 166 patients during the control period in 2019. No significant differences were found in patient and tumor characteristics, type of systemic therapies or in the time from diagnosis until the start of systemic therapy, between the different periods. However, during the first wave, the time between diagnosis until the start of treatment was significantly longer in the southern regions as compared to the northern and middle regions (33 vs 9 and 15 days, p-value < 0.05). Anti-PD-1 antibody treatment courses were postponed in 79 patients (15.5%) during the first wave versus four patients (1.1%) in the control period. Significantly more patients had a postponed course in the south during the first wave compared to the middle and northern regions (30.2% vs 2.7% vs 16.7%, p-value < 0.001). With limited follow-up, thus far no significant differences in PFS and OS were found. Conclusions: Advanced melanoma care in the Netherlands was severely affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. In the south, where COVID-19 incidence was highest in the first wave, the start of systemic treatment for advanced melanoma was more often delayed, and treatment courses were more frequently postponed. Longer follow-up is needed to establish whether this has had an impact on patient outcome.

10042 Background: A large proportion of patients with advanced melanoma is not represented in phase III clinical trials, due to ineligibility. Real-world efficacy evidence of immune- and targeted therapies in these patients is lacking. We aimed to provide insight in survival outcomes of systemically treated patients who were not represented in the phase III trials in order to support clinical decision-making. Methods: Systemically treated ineligible patients with advanced melanoma diagnosed between 2014-2017 were analyzed. Prognostic importance of factors associated with overall survival (OS) was assessed by Kaplan Meier method, Cox regression models, predicted OS probabilities of prognostic subgroups and a conditional inference survival (decision) tree. Results: Of 2,536 systemically treated patients with advanced melanoma, 1,004 (40%) patients were ineligible for phase IIII trials. Ineligible patients had a poorer median OS (mOS) compared to eligible patients (8.8 vs 23 months). Eligibility criteria most strongly correlated with survival in ineligible systemically treated patients with ECOG Performance Score (PS) ≥2 vs PS 0-1 (HR 1.95 (95%CI: 1.52-2.5)), symptomatic brain metastases (BM) vs absent BM (HR 1.71 (95%CI: 1.34-2.18)) and LDH > 500 U/l vs normal (HR 1.89 (95%CI: 1.49-2.41)). All other factors for ineligibility were not associated with OS. By combining ECOG PS, BM and LDH, 18 subgroups were created. The 3-year survival probability of patients with ECOG PS ≤1, asymptomatic BM and normal LDH was 35.1%. Patients with ECOG PS of ≥2 with or without symptomatic BM had a mOS of 6.5 and 11.3 months and a 3-year survival probability of 9.3% and 23.6% respectively. In the decision tree, the covariate with the strongest predictive distinctive character for survival was LDH, followed by ECOG PS. Prognosis of LDH of > 500 U/L is infaust, although still long-term survival is possible (3-year survival probability of 15.3%). The decision tree showed the prognosis of patients with symptomatic BM can be good if ECOG PS is 0 and patients are aged ≤55 years (mOS of 22.3 months). Conclusions: Patients with advanced melanoma not represented in phase III trials treated with systemic therapy can achieve long term survival. LDH was the strongest predictive factor associated with survival, followed by ECOG PS and symptomatic BM. Other factors for ineligibility were not associated with OS. These results, together with the decision tree, can be used to provide insight in outcomes to facilitate the shared decision-making process when comparative studies are not available.

BACKGROUND. The current study evaluated the efficacy of incorporating standardized health-related quality of life (HRQL) assessments as a routine part of the outpatient chemotherapy treatment of cancer patients in a community hospital in terms of: 1) facilitating nurse-patient communication, 2) increasing nurses' awareness of patients' HRQL, 3) patient management, 4) patients' satisfaction, and 5) patients' HRQL. METHODS. The study employed a sequential cohort design with repeated measures. Ten nurses and 219 patients participated in this community hospital-based study. The intervention involved patients completing standardized HRQL questionnaires via a touch-screen computer, the results of which were provided to nurses and patients in a graphic summary. Questionnaire and medical record data were used to assess outcomes. RESULTS. HRQL-related topics were discussed significantly more frequently in the intervention group than in the control group (mean = 4.8 topics vs 3.8 topics, respectively; P = .02). Nurses' awareness of patients' levels of daily activity, pain, and overall quality of life was significantly better in the intervention than the control group. The mean number of HRQL-related notations in the medical records was significantly higher in the intervention group (24 vs 20; P< .05). Only modest effects were observed in patient management (counseling behavior), and no significant effects were found in patient satisfaction or changes in HRQL over time. CONCLUSIONS. Incorporating standardized HRQL assessments in daily clinical oncology nursing practice primarily facilitates the discussion of HRQL issues and increases nurses' awareness. Additional efforts are needed to enhance the effect of routine HRQL assessments on patient management and HRQL. Cancer 2008. © 2008 American Cancer Society.

Item does not contain fulltext BACKGROUND: Initial antibiotic treatment for acute appendicitis has been shown to be safe in adults; so far, not much is known about the safety and efficacy of this treatment in children. The aims of this study were to investigate the feasibility of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) evaluating initial antibiotic treatment for acute appendectomy in children with acute simple appendicitis and to evaluate the safety of this approach. METHODS: In a multicenter, prospective cohort study patients aged 7-17 years with a radiologically confirmed simple appendicitis were eligible. Intravenous antibiotics (amoxicillin/clavulanic acid 250/25 mg/kg 4 times daily; maximum 6,000/600 mg/d and gentamicin 7 mg/kg once daily) were administered for 48-72 hours. Clinical reevaluation every 6 hours, daily blood samples, and ultrasound follow-up after 48 hours was performed. In case of improvement after 48 hours, oral antibiotics were given for a total of 7 days. At any time, in case of clinical deterioration or non-improvement after 72 hours, an appendectomy could be performed. Follow-up continued until 8 weeks after discharge. Adverse events were defined as major complications of antibiotic treatment, such as allergic reactions, perforated appendicitis, and recurrent appendicitis. RESULTS: Of 44 eligible patients, 25 participated (inclusion rate, 57%; 95% CI, 42%-70%). Delayed appendectomy was performed in 2, and the other 23 were without symptoms at the 8 weeks follow-up. Minor complications occurred in three patients. None of the patients suffered from an adverse event or a recurrent appendicitis. CONCLUSION: Our study shows that an RCT comparing initial antibiotic treatment strategy with urgent appendectomy is feasible in children; the intervention seems to be safe.

BackgroundChemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) are major adverse effects of cancer chemotherapy. This study investigated: (1) the impact of CINV on patients' health-related quality of life (HRQL) in daily clinical practice; (2) the association between patient characteristics and type of antiemetics and CINV; and (3) the role of CINV in physicians' decisions to modify antiemetic treatment.Patients and methodsThis prospective, multicenter study was conducted in nine general hospitals in the Netherlands. During three consecutive chemotherapy cycles, patients used a diary to record episodes of nausea, vomiting and antiemetic use. For each cycle, these ratings were made 1 day prior to and 7 days after having received chemotherapy. The influence of CINV on patients' HRQL was evaluated with the Functional Living Index-Emesis (FLIE) questionnaire at day 6 of each treatment cycle. (Changes in) antiemetic use were recorded by the treating nurse. Patient inclusion took place between May 2005 and May 2007.ResultsTwo hundred seventy-seven patients were enrolled in the study. Acute and delayed nausea during the first treatment cycle was reported by 39% and 68% of the patients, respectively. The comparable figures for acute and delayed vomiting were 12% and 23%. During the first and subsequent treatment cycle, approximately one-third of the patients indicated that CINV had a substantial impact on their daily lives. Female patients and younger patients reported significantly more CINV than male and older patients. At all treatment cycles, patients receiving treatment with moderately emetogenic chemotherapy, containing anthracycline, reported more acute nausea than patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy. Acute vomiting was associated significantly with change in (i.e., additional) antiemetic treatment. Delayed CINV did not influence antiemetic treatment.ConclusionCINV continues to be a problem that adversely affects the daily lives of patients. CINV is worse in women and in younger patients. In daily clinical practice, acute CINV, but not delayed CINV, results in changes in antiemetic treatment. In view of the effects of not only acute, but also delayed CINV on daily life, more attention should be paid to adjustment of antiemetic treatment to cover CINV complaints, later during the chemotherapy cycle.

Objective: To determine the level of agreement between patients and observers regarding the frequency with which health-related quality of life topics are discussed during outpatient clinical oncology visits. Methods: The sample (n = 50) consisted of a consecutive series of cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy. Both the patients and observers used a checklist to report which HRQL topics had been discussed during the consultation. Percentage of agreement, kappa and adjust-kappa statistics were calculated. Results: The percentage agreement between patients' and observers' ratings was generally high, ranging from 74% for fatigue to 96% for sleep problems and cognitive functioning. The average percentage of agreement over the 13 HRQL topics rated was 86%. Cohen's kappa varied between 0.41 (for pain) and 0.78 (for sleep problems). Prevalence-adjusted kappa's were generally higher, ranging from 0.48 (for fatigue) to 0.92 (for sleep problems and social functioning). The average Cohen's kappa and prevalence-adjusted kappa over the 13 HRQL topics were 0.56 and 0.71, respectively. Level of agreement was not found to vary significantly as a function of patients' background characteristics. Conclusion: Oncology patients' self-reports of the HRQL-related topics discussed during outpatient chemotherapy visits are in reasonably close agreement with those provided by observers. Practice implications: Our results indicate that the patient is a legitimate source of information about the HRQL-related content of medical encounters, and thus can be used in communication studies where the collection of observational data (e.g., via audio- or videotaping) is either too costly or logistically impractical. © 2006 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved. Chemicals / CAS: Antineoplastic Agents

Purpose This study investigated adherence to treatment guidelines on cancer-related anaemia and fatigue (CRA/CRF) and factors influencing the choice of intervention.Methods In this prospective, observational study, 136 cancer patients being treated with chemotherapy in a large community hospital completed a questionnaire at consecutiveoutpatient visits assessing fatigue (the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy—Fatigue) and fatigue-related counselling and advice received. Data on administration of chemotherapy and use of epoetin or blood transfusions were abstracted from the medical records.Results Fifty-three percent of patients with severe anaemia (HbConclusions In daily clinical practice, guidelines concerning the use of epoetin or blood transfusion in severe CRA are adhered to in about half of the cases. In patients with less severe anaemia, the level of fatigue did not play a significant role in the use of epoetin. According to current guidelines, counselling on CRF should be directed primarily at activity enhancement. However, only a minority of patients receive such counselling.