A comparative analysis: international variation in PET-CT service provision in oncology-an International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership study.

<bold>Objective: </bold>To explore differences in position emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) service provision internationally to further understand the impact variation may have upon cancer services. To identify areas of further exploration for researchers and policymakers to optimize PET-CT services and improve the quality of cancer services.<bold>Design: </bold>Comparative analysis using data based on pre-defined PET-CT service metrics from PET-CT stakeholders across seven countries. This was further informed via document analysis of clinical indication guidance and expert consensus through round-table discussions of relevant PET-CT stakeholders. Descriptive comparative analyses were produced on use, capacity and indication guidance for PET-CT services between jurisdictions.<bold>Setting: </bold>PET-CT services across 21 jurisdictions in seven countries (Australia, Denmark, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand, Norway and the UK).<bold>Participants: </bold>None.<bold>Intervention(s): </bold>None.<bold>Main Outcome Measure(s): </bold>None.<bold>Results: </bold>PET-CT service provision has grown over the period 2006-2017, but scale of increase in capacity and demand is variable. Clinical indication guidance varied across countries, particularly for small-cell lung cancer staging and the specific acknowledgement of gastric cancer within oesophagogastric cancers. There is limited and inconsistent data capture, coding, accessibility and availability of PET-CT activity across countries studied.<bold>Conclusions: </bold>Variation in PET-CT scanner quantity, acquisition over time and guidance upon use exists internationally. There is a lack of routinely captured and accessible PET-CT data across the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership countries due to inconsistent data definitions, data linkage issues, uncertain coverage of data and lack of specific coding. This is a barrier in improving the quality of PET-CT services globally. There needs to be greater, richer data capture of diagnostic and staging tools to facilitate learning of best practice and optimize cancer services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]