Evolution of surgical approach to rectal cancer resection: A multinational registry assessment.

PURPOSE: Surgical approach to rectal cancer has evolved in recent decades, with introduction of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) techniques and local excision. Since implementation might differ internationally, this study is aimed at evaluating trends in surgical approach to rectal cancer across different countries over the last 10 years and to gain insight into patient, tumour and treatment characteristics. METHODS: Pseudo-anonymised data of patients undergoing resection for rectal cancer between 2010 and 2019 were extracted from clinical audits in the Netherlands (NL), Sweden (SE), England-Wales (EW) and Australia-New Zealand (AZ). RESULTS: Ninety-nine thousand five hundred ninety-seven patients were included (38,413 open, 55,155 MIS and 5416 local excision). An overall increase in MIS was observed from 29.9% in 2010 to 72.1% in 2019, with decreasing conversion rates (17.5-9.0%). The MIS proportion was highly variable between countries in the period 2010-2014 (54.4% NL, 45.3% EW, 39.8% AZ, 14.1% SE, P < 0.001), but variation reduced over time (2015-2019 78.8% NL, 66.3% EW, 64.3% AZ, 53.2% SE, P < 0.001). The proportion of local excision for the two periods was highly variable between countries: 4.7% and 11.8% in NL, 3.9% and 7.4% in EW, 4.7% and 4.6% in AZ, 6.0% and 2.9% in SE. CONCLUSIONS: Application and speed of implementation of MIS were highly variable between countries, but each registry demonstrated a significant increase over time. Local excision revealed inconsistent trends over time.

Inequalities in the recovery of colorectal cancer services during the COVID-19 pandemic: a national population-based study.

AIM: Evidence is lacking on whether there were inequalities in the recovery of colorectal cancer (CRC) services within the English National Health Service (NHS) following the COVID-19 pandemic. The aim of this study was to evaluate recovery according to patient age and socioeconomic status. METHOD: Using routinely collected data, CRC patients diagnosed and treated in the English NHS were identified for two timeframes: the 'initial pandemic period' (April-June 2020) and the 'pandemic period' (April 2020-March 2022). Poisson models evaluated changes in numbers of diagnoses, major resections, adjuvant chemotherapy and neoadjuvant radiotherapy use for each timeframe, relative to the equivalent pre-pandemic timeframe (April-June 2019 and April 2018-March 2020, respectively), stratified by age and socioeconomic status. Tumour stage at presentation was evaluated over time. RESULTS: Substantial deficits in diagnoses, major resections and adjuvant chemotherapy were identified in the initial pandemic period, whilst the use of neoadjuvant radiotherapy increased. Overall, these deficits recovered. Patients outside screening age, and in the most deprived group, had greater deficits in diagnoses and major resections. There was no evidence of stage migration by June 2021. CONCLUSIONS: CRC services showed recovery to baseline during the pandemic. However, evident inequalities must be addressed in ongoing recovery efforts. Long-term outcomes will fully establish the impact of the pandemic on CRC patients.

Impact of patient choice and hospital competition on patient outcomes after rectal cancer surgery: A national population-based study.

BACKGROUND: The objective of the current national cohort study was to analyze the correlation between choice and competition on outcomes after cancer surgery in rectal cancer. METHODS: The analysis included all men who underwent rectal cancer surgery in the English National Health Service between March 2015 and April 2019 (n = 13,996). Multilevel logistic regression was used to assess the effect of a rectal cancer surgery center being located in a competitive environment (based on the number of centers within a threshold distance) and being a successful competitor (based on the ability to attract patients from other hospitals) on eight patient-level outcomes: 30- and 90-day emergency readmissions, 30-day re-operation rates, 90-day postoperative mortality, length of stay >14 days, circumferential resection margin status, rates of primary procedure with a permanent stoma, and rates of persistent stoma 18 months after anterior resection. RESULTS: With adjustment for patient characteristics, patients who underwent surgery in centers located in a stronger competitive environment were less likely to have an abdominoperineal excision or a Hartman's procedure (odds ratio [OR], 0.73; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.55-0.97, p = .04). Additionally, individuals who received treatment at hospitals that were successful competitors had a lower risk of a 90-day readmission following rectal cancer surgery (OR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.76-0.97, p = .03) and were less likely to have a persistent stoma at 18 months after anterior resection (OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.61-0.93, p = .02). CONCLUSIONS: Hospitals located in areas of high competition are associated with better patient outcomes and improved processes of care for rectal cancer surgery.

What is the impact of hospital and surgeon volumes on outcomes in rectal cancer surgery?

AIM: Evidence for a positive volume-outcome relationship for rectal cancer surgery is unclear. This study aims to evaluate the volume-outcome relationship for rectal cancer surgery at hospital and surgeon level in the English National Health Service (NHS). METHOD: All patients undergoing a rectal cancer resection in the English NHS between 2015 and 2019 were included. Multilevel multivariable logistic regression was used to model relationships between outcomes and mean annual hospital and surgeon volumes (using a linear plus a quadratic term for volume) with adjustment for patient characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 13 858 patients treated in 166 hospitals were included. Six hospitals (3.6%) performed fewer than 10 rectal cancer resections per year, and 381 surgeons (45.0%) performed fewer than five such resections per year. Patients treated by high-volume surgeons had a reduced length of stay (p = 0.016). No statistically significant volume-outcome relationships were demonstrated for 90-day mortality, 30-day unplanned readmission, unplanned return to theatre, stoma at 18 months following anterior resection, positive circumferential resection margin and 2-year all-cause mortality at either hospital or surgeon level (p values > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Almost half of colorectal surgeons in England do not meet national guidelines for rectal cancer surgeons to perform a minimum of five major resections annually. However, our results suggest that centralizing rectal cancer surgery with the main focus of increasing operative volume may have limited impact on NHS surgical outcomes. Therefore, quality improvement initiatives should address a wider range of evidence-based process measures, across the multidisciplinary care pathway, to enhance outcomes for patients with rectal cancer.

Survival outcomes associated with completion of adjuvant oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy for stage III colon cancer: A national population-based study.

The impact of cycle completion rates of oxaliplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy for stage III colon cancer in real-world practice is unknown. We assessed its impact, and that of treatment modification, on 3-year cancer-specific mortality. Four thousand one hundred and forty-seven patients with pathological stage III colon cancer undergoing major resection from 2014 to 2017 in the English National Health Service were included. Chemotherapy data came from linked national administrative datasets. Competing risk regression analysis for 3-year cancer-specific mortality was performed according to completion of <6, 6-11, or 12 5-fluoropyrimidine and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) cycles, or <4, 4-7, or 8 capecitabine and oxaliplatin (CAPOX) cycles, adjusted for patient, tumour and hospital-level characteristics. Median age was 64 years. Thirty-two per cent of patients had at least one comorbidity. Forty-two per cent of patients had T4 disease, and 40% had N2 disease. Compared to completion of 12 FOLFOX cycles, cancer-specific mortality was higher in patients completing <6 cycles [subdistribution hazard ratios (sHR) 2.17; 95% CI 1.56-3.03] or 6-11 cycles (sHR 1.40; 95% CI 1.09-1.78) (P < .001). Compared to completion of 8 CAPOX cycles, cancer-specific mortality was higher in patients completing <4 cycles (sHR 2.02; 95% CI 1.53-2.67) or 4-7 cycles (sHR 1.63; 95% CI 1.27-2.10) (P < .001). Dose reduction and early oxaliplatin discontinuation did not impact mortality in patients completing all cycles. Completion of all cycles of chemotherapy was associated with improved cancer-specific survival in real-world practice. Poor prognostic factors may have affected findings, however, patients completing <50% of cycles had poor outcomes. Clinicians may wish to facilitate completion with treatment modification in those able to tolerate it.

Outcomes of colorectal cancer resection in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: a national population-based analysis in England and Wales.

AIM: The aim was to compare early postoperative outcomes and 2-year cancer-specific mortality following colorectal cancer (CRC) resection in patients with and without inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) in England and Wales. METHOD: Records for patients in the National Bowel Cancer Audit who had major CRC resection between April 2014 and December 2017 were linked to routinely collected hospital level administrative datasets and chemotherapy and radiotherapy datasets. Multivariable regression models were used to compare outcomes with adjustment for patient and tumour characteristics. RESULTS: In all, 63 365 patients were included. 1285 (2.0%) had an IBD diagnosis: 839 (65.3%) ulcerative colitis, 435 (33.9%) Crohn's disease and 11 (0.9%) were indeterminate. IBD patients were younger, had more advanced cancer staging and a higher proportion of right-sided tumours. They also had a higher proportion of emergency resection, total/subtotal colectomy, open surgery and stoma formation at resection, with longer hospital admissions and higher rates of unplanned readmission and reoperation. Fewer rectal cancer patients with IBD received neoadjuvant radiotherapy (24.8% vs. 36.0%, P = 0.005) whilst similar proportions of Stage III colon cancer patients received adjuvant chemotherapy. Ninety-day postoperative mortality was similar, but unadjusted 2-year cancer-specific mortality was significantly higher in patients with IBD (subdistribution hazard ratio 1.35, 95% CI 1.18-1.55). Risk adjustment for patient and tumour factors reduced this association (adjusted subdistribution hazard ratio 1.22, 95% CI 1.05-1.43). CONCLUSION: Patients with IBD and CRC are a distinct patient group who develop CRC at a younger age and undergo more radical surgery. They have worse cancer survival, with the difference in prognosis appearing after the early postoperative period.

The impact of the first peak of the COVID-19 pandemic on colorectal cancer services in England and Wales: A national survey.

AIM: The object of this work was to study how National Health Service hospitals in England and Wales aimed to maintain effective and safe colorectal cancer (CRC) services during the first peak of the COVID-19 pandemic (April 2020). METHOD: A national survey was performed among all 148 hospitals providing CRC services. Information was collected about changes in referrals, diagnostic, staging and therapeutic procedures, as well as whether there was access to a 'cold site' (a hospital facility free of COVID-19). Clinicians in each hospital were also asked to give the 'single most important lesson learned' about keeping services safe and effective. RESULTS: Full responses were received from 123 (83%) hospitals, and information about 'cold sites' was available for 146 (99%). Eighty hospitals (54%) had access to a 'cold site' and this was increased in regions with higher COVID-19 infection rates (p <0.001). Of the 123 responding hospitals, 105 (85%) indicated that referrals of patients with suspected CRC had dropped by at least 30%, and 69 (56%) indicated that treatment plans were altered in at least 50% of CRC patients. However, 'cold site' availability protected the capacity for diagnostic colonoscopy (p = 0.013) and CRC resection (p = 0.010). Many 'lessons learned' highlighted the importance of adequate structural service organization, often mentioning 'cold sites' and regional coordination as examples, good communication and triage of patients based on clinical urgency. CONCLUSION: Access to 'cold sites', as well as regional coordination, clear communication and strong leadership, were found to be pivotal in maintaining capacity for diagnosis and treatment of CRC during the COVID-19 surge.

One-year mortality of colorectal cancer patients: development and validation of a prediction model using linked national electronic data.

BACKGROUND: The existing literature does not provide a prediction model for mortality of all colorectal cancer patients using contemporary national hospital data. We developed and validated such a model to predict colorectal cancer death within 90, 180 and 365 days after diagnosis. METHODS: Cohort study using linked national cancer and death records. The development population included 27,480 patients diagnosed in England in 2015. The test populations were diagnosed in England in 2016 (n = 26,411) and Wales in 2015-2016 (n = 3814). Predictors were age, gender, socioeconomic status, referral source, performance status, tumour site, TNM stage and treatment intent. Cox regression models were assessed using Brier scores, c-indices and calibration plots. RESULTS: In the development population, 7.4, 11.7 and 17.9% of patients died from colorectal cancer within 90, 180 and 365 days after diagnosis. T4 versus T1 tumour stage had the largest adjusted association with the outcome (HR 4.67; 95% CI: 3.59-6.09). C-indices were 0.873-0.890 (England) and 0.856-0.873 (Wales) in the test populations, indicating excellent separation of predicted risks by outcome status. Models were generally well calibrated. CONCLUSIONS: The model was valid for predicting short-term colorectal cancer mortality. It can provide personalised information to support clinical practice and research.

Role of Emergency Laparoscopic Colectomy for Colorectal Cancer: A Population-based Study in England.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate factors associated with the use of laparoscopic surgery and the associated postoperative outcomes for urgent or emergency resection of colorectal cancer in the English National Health Service. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Laparoscopy is increasingly used for elective colorectal cancer surgery, but uptake has been limited in the emergency setting. METHODS: Patients recorded in the National Bowel Cancer Audit who underwent urgent or emergency colorectal cancer resection between April 2010 and March 2016 were included. A multivariable multilevel logistic regression model was used to estimate odds ratios (ORs) of undergoing laparoscopic resection and postoperative outcome according to approach. RESULTS: There were 15,516 patients included. Laparoscopy use doubled from 15.1% in 2010 to 30.2% in 2016. Laparoscopy was less common in patients with poorer physical status [American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) 4/5 vs 1, OR 0.29 (95% confidence interval, 95% CI 0.23-0.37), P < 0.001] and more advanced T-stage [T4 vs T0-T2, OR 0.28 (0.23-0.34), P < 0.001] and M-stage [M1 vs M0, OR 0.85 (0.75-0.96), P < 0.001]. Age, socioeconomic deprivation, nodal stage, hospital volume, and a dedicated colorectal emergency service were not associated with laparoscopy. Laparoscopic patients had a shorter length of stay [median 8 days (interquartile range (IQR) 5 to 15) vs 12 (IQR 8 to 21), adjusted mean difference -3.67 (-4.60 to 2.74), P < 0.001], and lower 90-day mortality [8.1% vs 13.0%; adjusted OR 0.78 (0.66-0.91), P = 0.004] than patients undergoing open resection. There was no significant difference in rates of readmission or reoperation by approach. CONCLUSION: The use of laparoscopic approach in the emergency resection of colorectal cancer is linked to a shorter length of hospital stay and reduced postoperative mortality.

The impact of advancing age on incidence of hepatectomy and post-operative outcomes in patients with colorectal cancer liver metastases: a population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Clinical outcomes for elderly patients undergoing liver resection for colorectal cancer (CRC) liver metastases are poorly characterised. This study aimed to investigate the impact of advancing age on the incidence of liver resection and post-operative outcomes. METHODS: Patients in the National Bowel Cancer Audit undergoing major CRC resection from 2010 to 2016 in England were included. Liver resection was identified from linked Hospital Episode Statistics data. A Cox-proportional hazards model was used to compare 3-year mortality. RESULTS: Of 117,005 patients, 6081 underwent liver resection. For patients <65 years there was 1 liver resection per 12 cases, 65-74, 1 per 17, and ≥75, 1 per 40. 90-day mortality after liver resection increased with advancing age (<65 0.9% (26/2829), 65-74 2.8% (57/2070), ≥75 4.0% (47/1182); P < 0.001). Age was an independent risk factor for 3-year mortality. Patients 65-74 did not have adjusted mortality higher than those <65, yet age ≥75 was associated with increased overall mortality (Hazard ratio (HR) 1.47 (95% CI 1.30-1.68)) and cancer-specific mortality (HR 1.30 (95% CI 1.13-1.49)). CONCLUSION: Although advancing age was associated with higher rates of 90-day mortality following liver resection, 3-year mortality for patients 65-74 years was comparable to younger patients. These results will aid clinicians and patients in pre-operative decision-making.

Identifying a common data dictionary across colorectal cancer outcome registries: A mapping exercise to identify opportunities for data dictionary harmonisation.

IMPORTANCE: The development of colorectal cancer outcome registries internationally has been organic, with differing datasets, data definitions and infrastructure across registries which has limited data pooling and international comparison. Currently there is no comprehensive data dictionary identified as a standard. This study is part of an international collaboration that aims to identify areas of data capture and usage which may be optimised to improve understanding of colorectal cancer outcomes. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare and identify commonalities and areas of difference across major colorectal cancer registries. We sought to establish datasets comprising of mutually collected common fields, and a combined comprehensive dataset of all collected fields across major registries to aid in establishing a future colorectal cancer registry database standard. DESIGN AND METHODS: This mixed qualitative and quantitative study compared data dictionaries from three major colorectal cancer outcome registries: Bowel Cancer Outcomes Registry (BCOR) (Australia and New Zealand), National Bowel Cancer Audit (NBOCA) (United Kingdom) and Dutch ColoRectal Audit (DCRA) (Netherlands). Registries were compared and analysed thematically, and a common dataset and combined comprehensive dataset were developed. These generated datasets were compared to data dictionaries from Sweden (SCRCR), Denmark (DCCG), Argentina (BNCCR-A) and the USA (NAACCR and ACS NSQIP). Fields were assessed against prominent quality indicator metrics from the literature and current case-use. RESULTS: We developed a combined comprehensive dataset of 225 fields under seven domains: demographic, pre-operative, operative, post-operative, pathology, neoadjuvant therapy, adjuvant therapy, and follow up/recurrence. A common dataset was developed comprising 38 overlapping fields, showing a low degree of mutually collected data, especially in preoperative, post operative and adjuvant therapy domains. The BNCCR-A, SCRCR and DCCG databases all contained a high percentage of common dataset fields. Fields were poorly comparable when viewed form current quality indicator metrics. CONCLUSION: This study mapped data dictionaries of prominent colorectal cancer registries and highlighted areas of commonality and difference The developed common field dataset provides a foundation for registries to benchmark themselves and work towards harmonisation of data dictionaries. This has the potential to enable meaningful large-scale international outcomes research.

Improving risk models for patients having emergency bowel cancer surgery using linked electronic health records: a national cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Life-saving emergency major resection of colorectal cancer (CRC) is a high-risk procedure. Accurate prediction of postoperative mortality for patients undergoing this procedure is essential for both healthcare performance monitoring and preoperative risk assessment. Risk-adjustment models for CRC patients often include patient and tumour characteristics, widely available in cancer registries and audits. The authors investigated to what extent inclusion of additional physiological and surgical measures, available through linkage or additional data collection, improves accuracy of risk models. METHODS: Linked, routinely-collected data on patients undergoing emergency CRC surgery in England between December 2016 and November 2019 were used to develop a risk model for 90-day mortality. Backwards selection identified a 'selected model' of physiological and surgical measures in addition to patient and tumour characteristics. Model performance was assessed compared to a 'basic model' including only patient and tumour characteristics. Missing data was multiply imputed. RESULTS: Eight hundred forty-six of 10 578 (8.0%) patients died within 90 days of surgery. The selected model included seven preoperative physiological and surgical measures (pulse rate, systolic blood pressure, breathlessness, sodium, urea, albumin, and predicted peritoneal soiling), in addition to the 10 patient and tumour characteristics in the basic model (calendar year of surgery, age, sex, ASA grade, TNM T stage, TNM N stage, TNM M stage, cancer site, number of comorbidities, and emergency admission). The selected model had considerably better discrimination compared to the basic model (C-statistic: 0.824 versus 0.783, respectively). CONCLUSION: Linkage of disease-specific and treatment-specific datasets allowed the inclusion of physiological and surgical measures in a risk model alongside patient and tumour characteristics, which improves the accuracy of the prediction of the mortality risk for CRC patients having emergency surgery. This improvement will allow more accurate performance monitoring of healthcare providers and enhance clinical care planning.

Measuring variation in the quality of systemic anti-cancer therapy delivery across hospitals: A national population-based evaluation.

AIM: To date, there has been little systematic assessment of the quality of care associated with systemic anti-cancer therapy (SACT) delivery across national healthcare systems. We evaluated hospital-level toxicity rates during SACT treatment as a means of identifying variation in care quality. METHODS: All colorectal cancer (CRC) patients receiving SACT within 106 English National Health Service (NHS) hospitals between 2016 and 2019 were included. Severe acute toxicity rates were derived from hospital administrative data using a validated coding framework. Variation in hospital-level toxicity rates was assessed separately in the adjuvant and metastatic settings. Toxicity rates were adjusted for age, sex, comorbidity, performance status, tumour site, and TNM staging. RESULTS: Eight thousand one hundred and seventy three patients received SACT in the adjuvant setting, and 7,683 patients in the metastatic setting. Adjusted severe acute toxicity rates varied between hospitals from 11% to 49% for the adjuvant cohort, and from 25% to 67% for the metastatic cohort. Compared to the national mean toxicity rate in the adjuvant cohort, six hospitals were more than two standard deviations (2SD) above, and four hospitals were more than 2SD below. In the metastatic cohort, six hospitals were more than 2SD above, and seven hospitals were more than 2SD below the national mean toxicity rate. Overall, 12 hospitals (12%) had toxicity rates more than 2SD above the national mean, and 11 (10%) had rates more than 2SD below. CONCLUSION: There is substantial variation in hospital-level severe acute toxicity rates in both the adjuvant and metastatic settings, despite risk-adjustment. Ongoing reporting of this performance indicator can be used to focus further investigation of toxicity rates and stimulate quality improvement initiatives to improve care.

Development and validation of a coding framework to identify severe acute toxicity from systemic anti-cancer therapy using hospital administrative data.

BACKGROUND: The capture of toxicities from systemic anti-cancer therapy (SACT) in real-world data will complement results from clinical trials. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a comprehensive coding framework to identify severe acute toxicity in hospital administrative data. METHODS: A coding framework was developed to identify diagnostic codes representing severe acute toxicity in hospital administrative data. The coding framework was validated on a sample of 23,265 colon cancer patients treated in the English National Health Service between 1 June 2014 and 31 December 2017. This involved comparing individual toxicities according to the receipt of SACT and according to different SACT regimens, as well as assessing the associations of predictive factors and outcomes with toxicity. RESULTS: The severe acute toxicities captured by the developed coding framework were shown to vary across clinical groups with an overall rate of 26.4% in the adjuvant cohort, 53.4% in the metastatic cohort, and 12.5% in the comparison group receiving no chemotherapy. Results were in line with regimen-specific findings from clinical trials. For example, patients receiving additional bevacizumab had higher rates of bleeding (12.5% vs. 2.7%), gastrointestinal perforation (5.6% vs. 2.9%) and fistulation (1.4% vs. 0.5%), and allergic drug reactions (1.4% vs. 0.5%). Severe acute toxicity was associated with pre-existing renal (p = 0.001) and cardiac disease (p = 0.038), and urgency of surgery (p = 0.004). Severe toxicity also predicted lower rates of completion of chemotherapy (p = <0.001) and an increased likelihood of altered administration route (p = <0.001). CONCLUSION: These results demonstrate that the developed coding framework captures severe acute toxicities from hospital administrative data of colon cancer patients. A similar approach can be used for patients with other cancer types, receiving different regimens. Toxicity captured in administrative data can be used to compare treatment outcomes, inform clinical decision making, and provide opportunities for benchmarking and provider performance monitoring.

Surgical Treatment and Outcomes of Colorectal Cancer Patients During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A National Population-based Study in England.

To compare the management and outcomes of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients during the first 2 months of the COVID-19 pandemic with the preceding 6 months. BACKGROUND: The pandemic has affected the diagnosis and treatment of CRC patients worldwide. Little is known about the safety of major resection and whether creating "cold" sites (COVID-free hospitals) is effective. METHODS: A national study in England used administrative hospital data for 14,930 CRC patients undergoing surgery between October 1, 2019, and May 31, 2020. Mortality of CRC resection was compared before and after March 23, 2020 ("lockdown" start). RESULTS: The number of elective CRC procedures dropped sharply during the pandemic (from average 386 to 214 per week), whereas emergency procedures were hardly affected (from 88 to 84 per week). There was little change in characteristics of surgical patients during the pandemic. Laparoscopic surgery decreased from 62.5% to 35.9% for elective and from 17.7% to 9.7% for emergency resections. Surgical mortality increased slightly (from 0.9% to 1.2%, P = 0.06) after elective and markedly (from 5.6% to 8.9%, P = 0.003) after emergency resections. The observed increase in mortality during the first phase of the pandemic was similar in "cold" and "hot" sites (P > 0.5 elective and emergency procedures). CONCLUSIONS: The pandemic resulted in a 50% reduction in elective CRC procedures during the initial surge and a substantial increase in mortality after emergency resection. There was no evidence that surgery in COVID-free "cold" sites led to better outcomes in the first 2 months.

Validity of chemotherapy information derived from routinely collected healthcare data: A national cohort study of colon cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: We used a structured approach to validate chemotherapy information derived from a national routinely collected chemotherapy dataset and from national administrative hospital data. METHODS: 10,280 patients who had surgical resection with stage III colon cancer were included. First, we compared information derived from the national chemotherapy dataset (SACT) and from the administrative hospital dataset (HES) in the English NHS with respect to receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT). Second, we compared regimen and number of cycles in linked patient-level records. Third, we carried out a sensitivity analysis to establish to what extent the impact of ACT receipt differed according to data source. RESULTS: 6,012 patients (58 %) received ACT according to either dataset. Of these patients, 3,460 (58 %) had ACT records in both datasets, 1,649 (27 %) in SACT alone, and 903 (15 %) in HES alone. Of the 3,460 patients with records in both datasets, 3,320 (96 %) had matching regimens. There was good agreement on cycle number with similar proportions of patients recorded with a single cycle (6 % in SACT vs. 7 % in HES) and slightly fewer patients recorded with more than 8 cycles in SACT (32 % in SACT vs. 35 % in HES). 3-year cancer-specific mortality was similar for patients receiving ACT, regardless of whether a patient received ACT according to SACT alone (16.6 %), according to HES alone (16.8 %), or according to either SACT or HES (17.1 %). CONCLUSION: Routinely collected national chemotherapy data and administrative hospital data are highly accurate in recording regimen and number of chemotherapy cycles. However, chemotherapy information should ideally be captured from both datasets to avoid under-capture, particularly of oral chemotherapy from administrative hospital data, and to minimise bias.

Effect of public reporting of surgeons' outcomes on patient selection, "gaming," and mortality in colorectal cancer surgery in England: population based cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of surgeon specific outcome reporting in colorectal cancer surgery on risk averse clinical practice, "gaming" of clinical data, and 90 day postoperative mortality. DESIGN: National cohort study. SETTING: English National Health Service hospital trusts. POPULATION: 111 431 patients diagnosed as having colorectal cancer from 1 April 2011 to 31 March 2015 included in the National Bowel Cancer Audit. INTERVENTION: Public reporting of surgeon specific 90 day mortality in elective colorectal cancer surgery in England introduced in June 2013. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Proportion of patients with colorectal cancer who had an elective major resection, predicted 90 day mortality based on characteristics of patients and tumours, and observed 90 day mortality adjusted for differences in characteristics of patients and tumours, comparing patients who had surgery between April 2011 and June 2013 and between July 2013 and March 2015. RESULTS: The proportion of patients with colorectal cancer undergoing major resection did not change after the introduction of surgeon specific public outcome reporting (39 792/62 854 (63.3%) before versus 30 706/48 577 (63.2%) after; P=0.8). The proportion of these major resections categorised as elective or scheduled also did not change (33 638/39 792 (84.5%) before versus 25 905/30 706 (84.4%) after; P=0.5). The predicted 90 day mortality remained the same (2.7% v 2.7%; P=0.3), but the observed 90 day mortality fell (952/33 638 (2.8%) v 552/25 905 (2.1%)). Change point analysis showed that this reduction was over and above the existing downward trend in mortality before the introduction of public outcome reporting (P=0.03). CONCLUSIONS: This study did not find evidence that the introduction of public reporting of surgeon specific 90 day postoperative mortality in elective colorectal cancer surgery has led to risk averse clinical practice behaviour or "gaming" of data. However, its introduction coincided with a significant reduction in 90 day mortality.