Upfront Versus Delayed Systemic Therapy in Patients With Oligometastatic Cancer Treated With SABR in the Phase 2 SABR-5 Trial.

PURPOSE: The optimal sequencing of local and systemic therapy for oligometastatic cancer has not been established. This study retrospectively compared progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and SABR-related toxicity between upfront versus delay of systemic treatment until progression in patients in the SABR-5 trial. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The single-arm phase 2 SABR-5 trial accrued patients with up to 5 oligometastases across SABR-5 between November 2016 and July 2020. Patients received SABR to all lesions. Two cohorts were retrospectively identified: those receiving upfront systemic treatment along with SABR and those for whom systemic treatment was delayed until disease progression. Patients treated for oligoprogression were excluded. Propensity score analysis with overlap weighting balanced baseline characteristics of cohorts. Bootstrap sampling and Cox regression models estimated the association of delayed systemic treatment with PFS, OS, and grade ≥2 toxicity. RESULTS: A total of 319 patients with oligometastases underwent treatment on SABR-5, including 121 (38%) and 198 (62%) who received upfront and delayed systemic treatment, respectively. In the weighted sample, prostate cancer was the most common primary tumor histology (48%) followed by colorectal (18%), breast (13%), and lung (4%). Most patients (93%) were treated for 1 to 2 metastases. The median follow-up time was 34 months (IQR, 24-45). Delayed systemic treatment was associated with shorter PFS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.56; 95% CI, 1.15-2.13; P = .005) but similar OS (HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.51-1.59; P = .65) compared with upfront systemic treatment. Risk of grade 2 or higher SABR-related toxicity was reduced with delayed systemic treatment (odds ratio, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.15-0.70; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Delayed systemic treatment is associated with shorter PFS without reduction in OS and with reduced SABR-related toxicity and may be a favorable option for select patients seeking to avoid initial systemic treatment. Efforts should continue to accrue patients to histology-specific trials examining a delayed systemic treatment approach.

Improving patient outcomes and radiotherapy systems: A pan-Canadian approach to patient-reported outcome use.

Standardized collection and use of clinical patient-reported outcomes (PRO) have potential to benefit the care of individual patients and improve radiotherapy system performance. Its centralized health-care system makes Canada a prime candidate to take a leader and collaborator role in international endeavors to promote expansion of patient-reported outcome collection and use in radiotherapy. The current review discusses the development of a pan-Canadian approach to PRO use, through a quality improvement initiative led by the Canadian Partnership for Quality Radiotherapy (CPQR), a unique partnership of Canadian radiotherapy professional organizations (Canadian Association of Radiation Oncology-CARO, Canadian Organization of Medical Physicists-COMP, and the Canadian Association of Medical Radiation Technologists-CAMRT).

Healthcare system barriers to long-term follow-up for adult survivors of childhood cancer in British Columbia, Canada: a qualitative study.

PURPOSE: Risk-stratified life-long follow-up care is recommended for adult childhood cancer survivors (CCS) to ensure appropriate prevention, screening, and management of late effects. The identification of barriers to long-term follow-up (LTFU), particularly in varying healthcare service contexts, is essential to develop and refine services that are responsive to survivor needs. We aimed to explore CCS and healthcare professionals (HCP) perspectives of healthcare system factors that function as barriers to LTFU in British Columbia, Canada. METHODS: We analyzed data from 43 in-depth interviews, 30 with CCS and 13 with HCP, using qualitative thematic analysis and constant comparative methods. RESULTS: Barriers to accessible, comprehensive, quality LTFU were associated with the following: (1) the difficult and abrupt transition from pediatric to adult health services, (2) inconvenient and under-resourced health services, (3) shifting patient-HCP relationships, (4) family doctor inadequate experience with late effects management, and (5) overdue and insufficient late effects communication with CCS. CONCLUSIONS: Structural, informational, and interpersonal/relational healthcare system factors often prevent CCS from initially accessing LTFU after discharge from pediatric oncology programs as well as adversely affecting engagement in ongoing screening, surveillance, and management of late effects. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Understanding the issues faced by adult CCS will provide insight necessary to developing patient-centered healthcare solutions that are key to accessible, acceptable, appropriate, and effective healthcare.

Impact of hospital volume on quality indicators for rectal cancer surgery in British Columbia, Canada.

BACKGROUND: The relationship between hospital volume and patient outcomes remains controversial for rectal cancer. METHODS: This is a population-based database study. Patients treated with surgery for a stage I to III rectal adenocarcinoma from 2003 to 2009 were identified. High-volume hospitals (HVH) were those centers performing 20 surgeries or more per year. Primary outcomes were operative and perioperative factors that have proven influence on patient outcomes. RESULTS: In all, 2,081 patients had surgery for rectal cancer. Of these, 1,690 patients had surgery in an HVH and 391 had surgery in a low-volume hospital. On multivariate analysis, patients who had surgery in an HVH were more likely to have sphincter-preserving surgery, 12 or more lymph nodes removed with the tumor, neoadjuvant radiation therapy, and receive pre-operative or postoperative chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: For rectal cancer patients in British Columbia, Canada, being treated at an HVH is associated with several quality indicators linked to better patient outcomes.

Definitions of Obstetric and Gynecologic Hospitalists.

The obstetric hospitalist and the obstetric and gynecologic hospitalist evolved in response to diverse forces in medicine, including the need for leadership on labor and delivery units, an increasing emphasis on quality and safety in obstetrics and gynecology, the changing demographics of the obstetric and gynecologic workforce, and rising liability costs. Current (although limited) research suggests that obstetric and obstetric and gynecologic hospitalists may improve the quality and safety of obstetric care, including lower cesarean delivery rates and higher vaginal birth after cesarean delivery rates as well as lower liability costs and fewer liability events. This research is currently hampered by the use of varied terminology. The leadership of the Society of Obstetric and Gynecologic Hospitalists proposes standardized definitions of an obstetric hospitalist, an obstetric and gynecologic hospitalist, and obstetric and gynecologic hospital medicine practices to standardize communication and facilitate program implementation and research. Clinical investigations regarding obstetric and gynecologic practices (including hospitalist practices) should define inpatient coverage arrangements using these standardized definitions to allow for fair conclusions and comparisons between practices.

Business and Organizational Models of Obstetric and Gynecologic Hospitalist Groups.

The growth of obstetric and gynecologic (OB/GYN) hospitalists throughout the United States has led to different organizational approaches, depending on the perception of what an OB/GYN hospitalist is. There are advantages of OB/GYN hospitalist practices; however, practitioners who do this as just 1 piece of their practice are not fulfilling the promise of what this new specialty can deliver. Because those with office practices have their own business models, this article is devoted to the organizational and business models of OB/GYN hospitalists for physicians whose practice is devoted to inpatient obstetrics with or without emergency room and/or inpatient gynecology coverage.

Access to medical and supportive care for rural and remote cancer survivors in northern British Columbia.

BACKGROUND: Rural cancer survivors (RCS) potentially have unique medical and supportive care experiences when they return to their communities posttreatment because of the availability and accessibility of health services. However, there is a limited understanding of cancer survivorship in rural communities. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to describe RCS experiences accessing medical and supportive care postcancer treatment. METHODS: Interviews and focus groups were conducted with 52 RCS residing in northern British Columbia, Canada. The data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis methods. RESULTS: General Population RCS and First Nations RCS experienced challenges accessing timely medical care close to home, resulting in unmet medical needs. Emotional support services were rarely available, and, if they did exist, were difficult to access or not tailored to cancer survivors. Travel and distance were barriers to medical and psychological support and services, not only in terms of the cost of travel, but also the toll this took on family members. Many of the RCS lacked access to trusted and useful information. Financial assistance, for follow-up care and rehabilitation services, was rarely available, as was appropriate employment assistance. CONCLUSION: Medical and supportive care can be inaccessible, unavailable, and unaffordable for cancer survivors living in rural northern communities.

Trajectories of social isolation in adult survivors of childhood cancer.

PURPOSE: Long-term childhood cancer survivors may be at increased risk for poor social outcomes as a result of their cancer treatment, as well as physical and psychological health problems. Yet, important challenges, namely social isolation, are not well understood. Moreover, survivors' perspectives of social isolation as well as the ways in which this might evolve through young adulthood have yet to be investigated. The purpose of this research was to describe the trajectories of social isolation experienced by adult survivors of a childhood cancer. METHODS: Data from 30 in-depth interviews with survivors (9 to 38 years after diagnosis, currently 22 to 43 years of age, 60 % women) were analyzed using qualitative, constant comparative methods. RESULTS: Experiences of social isolation evolved over time as survivors grew through childhood, adolescence and young adulthood. Eleven survivors never experienced social isolation after their cancer treatment, nor to the present day. Social isolation among 19 survivors followed one of three trajectories; (1) diminishing social isolation: it got somewhat better, (2) persistent social isolation: it never got better or (3) delayed social isolation: it hit me later on. CONCLUSIONS: Knowledge of when social isolation begins and how it evolves over time for different survivors is an important consideration for the development of interventions that prevent or mitigate this challenge. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Assessing and addressing social outcomes, including isolation, might promote comprehensive long-term follow-up care for childhood cancer survivors.

Obstetrician/gynecologist hospitalists: can we improve safety and outcomes for patients and hospitals and improve lifestyle for physicians?

Over the last 5 years, a new obstetric-gynecologic hospitalist model has emerged rapidly, the primary focus of which is the care and safety of the laboring patient. The need for this type of practitioner has been driven by a number of factors: various types of patient safety programs that require a champion and organizer; the realization that bad outcomes and malpractice lawsuits often result from the lack of immediate availability of a physician in the labor and delivery suite; the desire for many younger practicing physicians to seek a balance between their personal and professional lives; the appeal of shift work as opposed to running a busy private practice; the waning amount of training that new residency graduates receive in critical skills that are needed on labor and delivery; the void in critical care of the laboring patient that is created by the outpatient focus of many physicians in maternal-fetal medicine; the need for hospitals to have a group of physicians to implement protocols and policies on the unit, and the need for teaching in all hospitals, not just academic centers. By having a dedicated group of physicians whose practice is limited mostly to the care of the labor and delivery aspects of patient care, there is great potential to address many of these needs. There are currently 164 known obstetrician/gynecologist hospitalist programs across the United States, with 2 more coming on each month; the newly formed Society of Obstetrician/Gynecologist Hospitalists currently has >80 individual members. This article addresses the advantages, challenges, and variety of Hospitalist models and will suggest that what may be considered an emerging trend is actually a sustainable model for improved patient care and safety.