The COVID-19 pandemic and its effects on follow-up of patients with early breast cancer: A patient survey.

PURPOSE: Despite limited evidence supporting its effectiveness, most guidelines recommend long-term, routinely scheduled in-person surveillance of patients with early breast cancer (EBC). The COVID-19 pandemic led to increased use of virtual care. This survey evaluated patient perspectives on follow-up care. METHODS: Patients with EBC undergoing surveillance were surveyed about follow-up protocols, perceptions, and interest in clinical trials assessing different follow-up strategies. RESULTS: Of 402 approached patients 270 completed the survey (response rate 67%). Median age 62.5 years (range 25-86) and median time since breast cancer diagnosis was 3.8 years (range < 1-33 years). Most (n = 148/244, 60%) were followed by more than one provider. Routine follow-ups with breast examination were mostly conducted by medical/radiation oncologists every 6 months (n = 110/236, 46%) or annually (n = 106/236, 44%). Participants felt routine follow-up was useful to monitor for recurrence, manage side effects of cancer treatment and to provide support/reassurance. Most participants felt regular follow-up care would detect recurrent cancer earlier (n = 214/255, 96%) and increase survival (n = 218/249, 88%). The COVID-19 pandemic reduced the number of in-person visits for 54% of patients (n = 63/117). Patients were concerned this reduction of in-person visits would lead to later detection of both local (n = 29/63, 46%) and distant recurrences (n = 25/63, 40%). While many felt their medical and radiation oncologists were the most suited to provide follow-up care, 55% felt comfortable having their primary care provider (PCP) conduct surveillance. When presented with a scenario where follow-up has no effect on earlier detection or survival, 70% of patients still wanted routine in-person follow-up for reassurance (63%) with the goal of earlier recurrence detection (56%). CONCLUSIONS: Despite limited evidence of effectiveness of routine in-person assessment, patients continue to place importance on regularly scheduled in-person follow-up.

How a Canadian federal organization integrated synoptic reporting and quality improvement tools to drive a national learning health system in cancer surgery.

Accurate and complete surgical and pathology reports are the cornerstone of treatment decisions and cancer care excellence. Synoptic reporting is a process for reporting specific data elements in a specific format in surgical and pathology reports. Since 2007, The Canadian Partnership Against Cancer has led the implementation of synoptic reporting mechanisms across multiple cancer disease sites and jurisdictions across Canada. While the implementation of synoptic reporting has been successful, its use to drive improvements in the quality of cancer care delivery has been lacking. Here we describe the Partnership's 4-year, national multi-jurisdictional quality improvement initiative to catalyse the use synoptic data to drive cancer system improvements. Resources provided to the jurisdictions included operational funding, training in quality improvement methodology, national forums, expert coaches, and ad hoc monitoring and support. The program emphasized foundational concepts including data literacy, audit and feedback reports, communities of practice, and positive deviance methodology.

Shaping the future of healthcare in British Columbia: Establishing provincial clinical governance for responsible deployment of AI tools.

As healthcare embraces the transformative potential of Artificial Intelligence (AI), it is imperative to safeguard patient and provider safety, equity, and trust in the healthcare system. This article outlines the approach taken by the British Columbia (BC) Provincial Health Services Authority (PHSA) to establish clinical governance for the responsible deployment of AI tools in healthcare. Leveraging its province-wide mandate and expertise, PHSA establishes the infrastructure and processes to proactively and systematically intake, assess, prioritize, and evaluate AI tools. PHSA proposes a coordinated approach in AI tool deployment in collaboration with regional health authorities to prevent duplication of efforts and ensure equitable access to existing and emerging AI tools across the province of BC, incorporating principles of anti-Indigenous racism, cultural safety, and humility. The proposed governance structure underscores the identification of clinical needs, proactive ethics review, rigorous risk assessment, data validation, transparent communication, provider training, and ongoing evaluation to ensure success.

Implementation and evaluation of a national quality improvement initiative in cancer surgery.

BACKGROUND: In 2017, the Canadian Partnership Against Cancer, a Canadian federally sponsored organisation, initiated a national multijurisdictional quality improvement (QI) initiative to maximise the use of synoptic data to drive cancer system improvements, known as the Evidence for Surgical Synoptic Quality Improvement Programme. The goal of our study was to evaluate the outcomes, determinants and learning of this nationally led initiative across six jurisdictions in Canada, integrating a mix of cancer surgery disease sites and clinicians. METHODS: A mixed-methods evaluation (surveys, semistructured interviews and focus groups) of this initiative was focused on the ability of each jurisdiction to use synoptic reporting data to successfully implement and sustain QI projects to beyond the completion of the initiative and the lessons learnt in the process. Resources provided to the jurisdictions included operational funding, training in QI methodology, national forums, expert coaches, and ad hoc monitoring and support. The programme emphasised foundational concepts of the QI process including data literacy, audit and feedback reports, communities of practice (CoP) and positive deviance methodology. RESULTS: 101 CoP meetings were held and 337 clinicians received feedback reports. There were 23 projects, and 22 of 23 (95%) showed improvements with 15 of 23 (65%) achieving the proposed targets. Enablers of effective data utilisation/feedback reports for QI included the need for clinicians to trust the data, have comparative data for feedback, and the engagement of both data scientists and clinicians in designing feedback reports. Enablers of sustainability of QI within each jurisdiction included QI training for clinicians, the ability to continue CoP meetings, executive and broad stakeholder engagement, and the ability to use pre-existing organisational infrastructures and processes. Barriers to continue QI work included lack of funding for core team members, lack of automated data collection processes and lack of clinician incentives (financial and other). CONCLUSION: Success and sustainability in data-driven QI in cancer surgery require skills in QI methodology, data literacy and feedback, dedicated supportive personnel and an environment that promotes the process of collective learning and shared accountability. Building these capabilities in jurisdictional teams, tailoring interventions to facility contexts and strong leadership engagement will create the capacity for continued success in QI for cancer surgery.

Outcomes after Surgery for Early Stage Breast Cancer in Women Staged With Preoperative Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging According to Breast Tissue Density.

PURPOSE: To determine surgical outcomes and breast cancer disease-free survival outcomes of women with early stage breast cancer with and without use of preoperative breast MRI according to breast tissue density. METHODS: Women with early stage breast cancer diagnosed from 2004 to 2009 were classified into 2 groups: 1) those with dense and heterogeneously dense breasts (DB); 2) those with nondense breasts (NDB) (scattered fibroglandular and fatty replaced tissue). The 2 groups were reviewed to determine who underwent preoperative MRI. Breast tissue density was determined with mammography according to ACR BI-RADS. Patients were compared according to tumor size, grade, stage, and treatment. Survival analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier estimates. RESULTS: In total, 261 patients with mean follow-up of 85 months (25-133) were included: 156 DB and 105 NDB. Disease-free survival outcomes were better in the DB group in patients with MRI than in those without MRI: patients with MRI had significantly fewer local recurrences (P < 0.016) and metachronous contralateral breast cancers (P < 0.001), but this was not the case in the NDB group. Mastectomies were higher in the DB group with preoperative MRI than in those without MRI (P < 0.01), as it was in the NDB group (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative breast MRI was associated with reduced local recurrence and metachronous contralateral cancers in the DB group, but not in the NDB group; however, the DB patients with MRI had higher mastectomy rates.