Cancer services in Western Australia: A comparison of regional outcomes with metropolitan Perth.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether any survival differences existed between advanced cancer patients treated in metropolitan Perth and those treated in regional Western Australia (WA). DESIGN: Retrospective study. SETTING: Advanced cancer patients treated through medical oncology clinics at Royal Perth Hospital and regional cancer centres (Kalgoorlie, Albany, Geraldton and Northam). PARTICIPANTS: Patients diagnosed with advanced melanoma, breast, colorectal, gastro-oesophageal, prostate, lung and pancreatic cancers between 1 January 2007 and 31 December 2011. INTERVENTIONS: Nil. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Median survival. RESULTS: Data were available for 1581 patients with 75% living in a metropolitan setting and 25% in rural WA. Median overall survival was 8.3 months for metropolitan patients and 7.6 months for regional patients (P = 0.06, HR 0.89; 95% CI, 0.78-1.01). There was no statistically significant difference in median survival for different tumour types except pancreatic cancer: breast 22.1 months versus 21.3 months, colorectal 13.1 months versus 16.4 months, lung 5.1 months versus 3.1 months, upper GI 5.6 months versus 7.2 months, pancreatic 4.5 months versus 3 months (P = 0.02, HR 0.57; 95% CI, 0.32-0.99), melanoma 10.4 months versus 10.5 months, prostate 28.6 months versus 15.3 months. Rural cancer patients with breast and pancreatic cancers received fewer lines of anti-cancer therapy compared to metropolitan patients. The three-year survival rates for metropolitan compared to rural breast cancer patients were 34 and 23%, respectively (not statistically significant). CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest a trend towards inferior survival for regional cancer patients in WA compared with metropolitan-based patients.

Nausea still the poor relation in antiemetic therapy? The impact on cancer patients' quality of life and psychological adjustment of nausea, vomiting and appetite loss, individually and concurrently as part of a symptom cluster.

PURPOSE: Despite significant antiemetic advances, almost 50% of treated cancer patients still experience nausea and vomiting (N&V). The goal of antiemetic therapy--complete prevention of treatment-induced nausea and/or vomiting (TIN+/-V)--remains elusive for several reasons. Potentially, N&V may be part of a symptom cluster where co-occurring symptoms negatively affect antiemetic management. Consequently, we examined TIN+/-V incidence and the impact of nausea, vomiting and symptom cluster(s) containing them, respectively, on patients' quality of life (QoL) and psychological adjustment across treatment. METHODS: A longitudinal secondary analysis was performed on data from a prospective, observational QoL study involving 200 newly diagnosed cancer patients who underwent combined modality treatment. QoL, psychological adjustment and patient/clinical characteristics were examined at pretreatment, on-treatment (8 weeks) and post-treatment. RESULTS: Overall, 62% of patients experienced TIN+/-V, with TIN (60%) doubling TIV incidence (27 %). Exploratory factor analyses of QoL scores at each treatment time point identified a recurrent gastrointestinal symptom cluster comprising nausea, vomiting and appetite loss. Approximately two thirds of patients reported co-occurrence of all three symptoms, which exerted synergistic effects of multiplicative proportions on overall QoL. Patients who reported co-occurrence of these symptoms during treatment experienced significantly greater QoL impairment (physical, role and social functioning, fatigue, N&V, appetite loss, overall physical health, overall QOL) and psychological distress (cancer distress, premorbid neuroticism) than those unaffected (0.001 > p ≤ 0.05). Moreover, nausea was more pervasive than vomiting or appetite loss across treatment and had a greater impact on overall QoL. While antiemetic therapy was effective for vomiting and helped prevent/relieve associated appetite loss, the benefits for appetite loss were seemingly constrained by its failure to exert adequate control over nausea in many patients. CONCLUSIONS: TIN+/-V still represents a very major concern for patients. Uncontrolled TIN+/-V often results in significant appetite and weight loss, leading to increased risk for malnutrition. Malnutrition and weight loss, in turn, are associated with poorer prognosis, treatment tolerance and response, performance status, QoL and survival. Consequently, a multiple symptom intervention approach focusing on N&V as core symptoms is recommended. Clinicians should genuinely consider combining essential antiemetic therapies with other evidence-based pharmacological (e.g. nausea: psychotropics, such as olanzapine) and non-pharmacological approaches (e.g. N&V: relaxation) in attempts to not only improve prevention and control of N&V for their patients, but also reduce the synergistic impact of cluster symptoms (e.g. N&V, appetite loss) as a whole and resultant QoL impairment likewise. Where associated symptoms are not adequately controlled by these antiemetic-based interventions, targeted evidence-based strategies should be supplemented.

Risk factors at pretreatment predicting treatment-induced nausea and vomiting in Australian cancer patients: a prospective, longitudinal, observational study.

PURPOSE: Despite significant advances in antiemetic management, almost 50% of cancer patients still experience nausea and vomiting during treatment. The goal of antiemetic therapy is complete prevention of treatment-induced nausea and/or vomiting (TINV); however, realisation of this goal remains elusive, thus supplementary strategies identifying patients at high risk must be employed in the interim. Consequently, we examined TINV incidence and its risk factors, including patient, clinical and pretreatment quality of life (QOL)/psychological factors. METHODS: Two hundred newly diagnosed cancer patients beginning combined treatment participated in this prospective, longitudinal, observational study. QOL (including TINV), psychological adjustment, and patient/clinical characteristics were examined at pretreatment, on-treatment (8 weeks ± 1 week) and post-treatment. RESULTS: Overall, 62% of patients experienced TINV, with TIN incidence (60%) doubling that of TIV (27%). Eight independent risk factors predicted 73% of TIN incidence: high premorbid/anticipatory NV, moderately/highly emetogenic chemotherapy (M/HEC), longer treatment (>3 months), female gender, surgery prior to adjuvant chemotherapy ± radiotherapy, private health insurance and low emotional functioning (pretreatment). Six independent risk factors predicted 77% of TIV incidence: premorbid/anticipatory vomiting, M/HEC, female gender, cancer resection and low role functioning (pretreatment). CONCLUSIONS: TINV still represents a very major concern for patients. Several pretreatment risk factors for the development of TIN and TIV, respectively, were identified. Patients about to undergo cancer treatment, particularly combined treatment involving emetogenic chemotherapy and surgery, should be screened for these factors with a view to modifying standard pretreatment/maintenance antiemetic therapy. Furthermore, and consistent with recent research, it is recommended that more comprehensive interventions combining antiemetics with other effective pharmacological (e.g. anxiolytics) and non-pharmacological approaches (e.g. acupuncture, relaxation techniques) be considered by clinicians in attempts to improve control of TIN and TIV (and overall QOL) for their patients. In this way, optimal holistic care will be ensured for cancer patients by clinicians providing conventional oncology treatment.

Survival rates for stage II colon cancer patients treated with or without chemotherapy in a population-based setting.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: There is considerable uncertainty as to whether adjuvant 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy provides survival benefit for colon cancer patients with stage II disease. Consequently, the current rates of chemotherapy use for this disease are low despite 5-year survival rates of only 70-80%. The aim of the present study is to compare the survival rate of stage II colon cancer patients treated by surgery alone with that of patients also treated by chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A population-based observational study was conducted on the survival of stage II colon cancer patients (n = 812) diagnosed in Western Australia from 1993 to 2003. The study was restricted to patients aged < or =75 years, of whom 18% (n = 142) were treated with chemotherapy. Only 0.9% of patients older than 75 years received chemotherapy. RESULTS: Patients who received chemotherapy were significantly younger (mean age 6 years) than those treated by surgery alone (65 years, P < 0.001), and their tumors were more often positive for vascular invasion (P = 0.007). Multivariate analysis that included all prognostic factors revealed adjuvant chemotherapy was associated with improved survival (HR = 0.62, 95% CI [0.39-0.98], P = 0.043), with women gaining more benefit (HR = 0.48, 95% CI [0.20-1.22], P = 0.09) than men (HR = 0.94, 95% CI [0.54-1.64], P = 0.8). CONCLUSIONS: In view of the apparent survival benefit from chemotherapy for stage II colon cancer, the present study raises concerns about the current low rates of adjuvant treatment for this disease in the community, particularly for female patients.

Surgical management of lung cancer in Western Australia in 1996 and its outcomes.

BACKGROUND: All cases of lung cancer diagnosed in Western Australia in 1996 in which surgery was the primary treatment, were reviewed. Reported herein are the characteristics of the patients, the treatment outcomes and a comparison of the management undertaken with that recommended by international guidelines. METHODS: All patients with a new diagnosis of lung cancer in Western Australia in the calendar year of 1996 were identified using two different population-based registration systems: the Western Australian (WA) Cancer Registry and the WA Hospital Morbidity Data System. A structured questionnaire on the diagnosis and management was completed for each case. Date of death was determined through the WA Cancer Registry. RESULTS: Six hundred and sixty-eight patients with lung cancer were identified; 132 (20%) were treated with surgery. Lobectomy was the most frequently performed procedure (71%), followed by pneumonectomy (19%). Major complications affected 23% of patients. Postoperative mortality was 6% (3% lobectomy, 12% pneumonectomy). At 5 years the absolute survival was as follows for stage I, II, IIIA, IIIB, respectively: 51%, 45%, 12%, 5%. CONCLUSIONS: Investigations and choice of surgery in WA in 1996 reflect current international guidelines. The survival of patients with resectable lung cancer remains unsatisfactory.