Optimising Patient Outcomes in Tongue Cancer: A Multidisciplinary Approach.

A multidisciplinary approach to the management of tongue cancer is vital for achieving optimal patient outcomes. Nursing and allied health professionals play essential roles within the team. We developed symposia comprising a series of online lectures offering a detailed perspective on the role each discipline and consumer perspective has in the management of patients with tongue cancer. The topics, including epidemiology and prevention, diagnosis, treatment planning, surgery, adjuvant care, and the management of recurrent or metastatic disease, were thoroughly examined. The symposia highlighted the significance of fostering collaboration and continuous learning through a multidisciplinary approach. This initiative should be relevant to healthcare professionals, researchers, and policymakers striving to enhance patient outcomes in tongue cancer care through innovative collaboration.

Registry-derived stage (RD-Stage) for capturing stage at diagnosis for pancreatic carcinoma in Australia.

INTRODUCTION: Stage of pancreatic carcinoma at diagnosis is a strong prognostic indicator of morbidity and mortality, yet is poorly notified to population-based cancer registries ("cancer registries"). Registry-derived stage (RD-Stage) provides a method for cancer registries to use available data sources to compile and record stage in a consistent way. This project describes the development and validation of rules to capture RD-Stage (pancreatic carcinoma) and applies the rules to data currently captured in each Australian cancer registry. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Rules for deriving RD-stage (pancreatic carcinoma) were developed using the American Joint Commission on Cancer (AJCC) Staging Manual 8th edition and endorsed by an Expert Working Group comprising specialists responsible for delivering care to patients diagnosed with pancreatic carcinoma, cancer registry epidemiologists and medical coders. Completeness of data fields required to calculate RD-Stage (pancreatic carcinoma) and an overall proportion of cases for whom RD stage could be assigned was assessed using data collected by each Australian cancer registry, for period 2018-2019. A validation study compared RD-Stage (pancreatic carcinoma) calculated by the Victorian Cancer Registry with clinical stage captured by the Upper Gastro-intestinal Cancer Registry (UGICR). RESULTS: RD-Stage (pancreatic carcinoma) could not be calculated in 4/8 (50%) of cancer registries; one did not collect the required data elements while three used a staging system not compatible with RD-Stage requirements. Of the four cancer registries able to calculate RD-Stage, baseline completeness ranged from 9% to 76%. Validation of RD-Stage (pancreatic carcinoma) with UGICR data indicated that there was insufficient data available in VCR to stage 174/457 (38%) cases and that stage was unknown in 189/457 (41%) cases in the UGICR. Yet, where it could be derived, there was very good concordance at stage level (I, II, III, IV) between the two datasets. (95.2% concordance], Kendall's coefficient = 0.92). CONCLUSION: There is a lack of standardisation of data elements and data sources available to cancer registries at a national level, resulting in poor capacity to currently capture RD-Stage (pancreatic carcinoma). RD-Stage provides an excellent tool to cancer registries to capture stage when data elements required to calculate it are available to cancer registries.

Characteristics of patients diagnosed with pancreatic cancer who access palliative care: An observational study.

PURPOSE: Despite the benefits of palliative care (PC) in pancreatic cancer, little is known about patients who access PC. This observational study examines the characteristics of patients with pancreatic cancer at their first episode of PC. METHODS: First-time, specialist PC episodes captured through the Palliative Care Outcomes Collaboration (PCOC), in Victoria, Australia between 2014 and 2020, for pancreatic cancer, were identified. Multivariable logistic regression analyses examined the impact of patient- and service-level characteristics on symptom burden (measured through patient-reported outcome measures and clinician-rated scores) at first PC episode. RESULTS: Of 2890 eligible episodes, 45% began when the patient was deteriorating and 32% ended in death. High fatigue and appetite-related distress were most common. Generally, increasing age, higher performance status and more recent year of diagnosis predicted lower symptom burden. No significant differences were noted between symptom burden of regional/remote versus major city dwellers; however, only 11% of episodes recorded the patient as a regional/remote resident. A greater proportion of first episodes for non-English-speaking patients began when the patient was unstable, deteriorating or terminal, ended in death and were more likely to be associated with high family/carer problems. Community PC setting predicted high symptom burden, with the exception of pain. CONCLUSION: A large proportion of first-time specialist PC episodes in pancreatic cancer begin at a deteriorating phase and end in death, suggesting late access to PC. Timely referrals to community-based specialist PC, access in regional/remote areas, as well as development of culturally diverse support systems require further investigation.

Prognostic models to predict survival in patients with pancreatic cancer: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has poor survival. Current treatments offer little likelihood of cure or long-term survival. This systematic review evaluates prognostic models predicting overall survival in patients diagnosed with PDAC. METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive search of eight electronic databases from their date of inception through to December 2019. Studies that published models predicting survival in patients with PDAC were identified. RESULTS: 3297 studies were identified; 187 full-text articles were retrieved and 54 studies of 49 unique prognostic models were included. Of these, 28 (57.1%) were conducted in patients with advanced disease, 17 (34.7%) with resectable disease, and four (8.2%) in all patients. 34 (69.4%) models were validated, and 35 (71.4%) reported model discrimination, with only five models reporting values >0.70 in both derivation and validation cohorts. Many (n = 27) had a moderate to high risk of bias and most (n = 33) were developed using retrospective data. No variables were unanimously found to be predictive of survival when included in more than one study. CONCLUSION: Most prognostic models were developed using retrospective data and performed poorly. Future research should validate instruments performing well locally in international cohorts and investigate other potential predictors of survival.

Mapping disadvantage: identifying inequities in functional outcomes for prostate cancer survivors based on geography.

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer is the most common internal malignancy in Australian men, and although most patients have good survival outcomes, treatment toxicities can impair function, leading to diminished quality of life for prostate cancer survivors. Socioeconomic disadvantage and geographical remoteness have been shown to be related to worse oncologic outcomes, and it is expected that they would similarly influence functional outcomes in prostate cancer. METHODS: Using data from the Victorian Prostate Cancer Outcomes Registry (n = 10,924), we investigated functional outcomes as measured by the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite-26 (EPIC-26) following prostate cancer treatment, focusing on associations with socioeconomic status and geographical remoteness and controlling for clinicopathologic characteristics. A single composite score was developed from the five separate EPIC-26 domains for use in geo-mapping. RESULTS: A total of 7690 patients had complete EPIC-26 data, allowing mapping hotspots of poor function using our composite score. These hotspots were observed to relate to areas of socioeconomic disadvantage. Significant heterogeneity in outcomes was seen in urban areas, with hotspots of good and poor function. Both socioeconomic disadvantage and geographical remoteness were found to predict for worse functional outcomes, although only the former is significant on multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Geo-mapping of functional outcomes in prostate cancer has the potential to guide health care service provision and planning. A nuanced policy approach is required so as not to miss disadvantaged patients who live in urban areas. We have demonstrated the potential of geo-mapping to visualise population-level outcomes, potentially allowing targeted interventions to address inequities in quality of care.

Establishing metastatic prostate cancer quality indicators using a modified Delphi approach.

BACKGROUND: There is variation in the care provided to men with metastatic prostate cancer (mPCa). There has been no previous set of quality indicators (QIs) regarding the management of men with mPCa. The objective of this study is to develop a set of international mPCa-specific QIs, which will enable global benchmarking of quality of care. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Potential QIs were identified through a literature review. Fourteen multidisciplinary mPCa experts (representing medical and radiation oncology, nursing, psychology, palliative care and urology) from eight countries participated in a modified Delphi process, which consisted of two online surveys, one face-to-face meeting and two teleconferences. Panelists were asked to rate each indicator's importance and feasibility on a Likert scale from 1 to 9. Indicators that received median importance and median feasibility scores ≥ 7.5, and a disagreement index <1 for both measures, on the final round of voting were included in the final set. RESULTS: There was consensus on 23 QIs out of total of 662. Four regarding "general management", 12 "therapies", three "complications" and four "patient-reported quality of life". One of the inherent limitations of the Delphi process is that there is a small expert panel involved. CONCLUSION: The quality indicator set defined by our process for management of men with mPCa will enable greater understanding of the standard and variation of care globally and will promote consistency of good practice. Future directions will include retrospective evaluation for compliance with these indicators, as well as prospective monitoring.

Comparison of urinary and sexual patient-reported outcomes between open radical prostatectomy and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a propensity score matched, population-based study in Victoria.

BACKGROUND: Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) rates have been increasing worldwide despite a lack of evidence of superior patient-reported outcomes (PROs) compared to open radical prostatectomy (ORP). METHODS: This retrospective study included men who contributed data to the Prostate Cancer Outcomes Registry-Victoria (PCOR-Vic), underwent ORP or RARP between January 2014 and May 2018, and completed the EPIC-26 questionnaire 12 months post-surgery. Urinary and sexual bother items, the urinary incontinence domain score, the urinary irritative/obstructive domain score, the sexual domain score and the pad usage item from the EPIC-26 questionnaire were compared between the two cohorts. Unmatched and propensity score matched cohorts were used to determine if there were differences in urinary and sexual PROs between ORP and RARP after accounting for the patient case-mix and surgeon characteristics. RESULTS: Of 3826 patients undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP), 1047 received ORP and 2779 received RARP. Propensity score matching reduced the magnitude of the observed differences in four out of six outcomes (urinary bother, urinary incontinence domain, pad usage and sexual domain). Using a propensity score matched cohort, there were no statistically significant differences for RARP patients, compared to ORP patients, in terms of urinary bother (Rd = 0.47%, P = 0.707), urinary incontinence domain scores (Coeff = - 0.84, P = 0.506), urinary irritative/obstructive domain scores (Coeff = 1.03, P = 0.105), pad usage (Rd = - 0.75%, P = 0.771) and sexual bother (Rd = - 0.89%, P = 0.731). RARP patients had slightly higher sexual domain scores (Coeff = 3.65, P = 0.005). CONCLUSION: There were no differences in urinary PROs between ORP and RARP when assessed 12 months post-surgery. The sexual domain slightly favoured RARP, however this was not deemed clinically significant.

Self-reported lack of energy or feeling depressed 12 months after treatment in men diagnosed with prostate cancer within a population-based registry.

OBJECTIVE: Feeling depressed and lethargic are common side effects of prostate cancer (PCa) and its treatments. We examined the incidence and severity of feeling depressed and lack of energy in patients in a population based PCa registry. METHODS: We included men diagnosed with PCa between 2015 and 2019 in Victoria, Australia, and enrolled in the Prostate Cancer Outcomes Registry. The primary outcome measures were responses to two questions on the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC-26) patient reported instrument: problems with feeling depressed and problems with lack of energy 12 months following treatment. We evaluated associations between these and age, cancer risk category, treatment type, and urinary, bowel, and sexual function. RESULTS: Both outcome questions were answered by 9712 out of 12,628 (77%) men. 981 patients (10%) reported at least moderate problems with feeling depressed; 1563 (16%) had at least moderate problems with lack of energy and 586 (6.0%) with both. Younger men reported feeling depressed more frequently than older men. Lack of energy was more common for treatments that included androgen deprivation therapy than not (moderate/big problems: 31% vs. 13%), irrespective of disease risk category. Both outcomes were associated with poorer urinary, bowel, and sexual functional domain scores. CONCLUSIONS: Self-reported depressive feelings and lack of energy were frequent in this population-based registry. Problems with feeling depressed were more common in younger men and lack of energy more common in men having hormonal treatment. Clinicians should be aware of the incidence of these symptoms in these at-risk groups and be able to screen for them.

Neuroendocrine cells in prostate cancer correlate with poor outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature to understand the variation in the reporting of neuroendocrine staining and determine the influence of reporting neuroendocrine staining at diagnosis on patient outcomes. METHODS: Medical databases were searched to identify studies in which adenocarcinoma specimens were stained with any of the following four neuroendocrine markers: chromogranin A (CgA), neuron-specific enolase (NSE), synaptophysin and CD56. The prevalence of neuroendocrine staining and correlation of the prevalence of neuroendocrine staining to patient outcomes were analysed using a random-effects model. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: Sixty-two studies spanning 7616 patients were analysed. The pooled prevalence for the most common marker, CgA (41%), was similar to that of NSE (39%) and higher than that of synaptophysin (31%). The prevalence of CgA staining was significantly influenced by reporting criteria, where objective thresholds reduced the variation in prevalence to 26%. No correlation was found between CgA prevalence and tumour grade. Patients positive for CgA staining using objective criteria had more rapid biochemical progression (hazard ratio [HR] 1.98, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.49 to 2.65) and poorer prostate cancer-specific survival (HR 7.03, 95% CI 2.55 to 19.39) compared to negative patients, even among those with low-risk cancers. CONCLUSION: Discrepancies in the reported prevalence of neuroendocrine cells in adenocarcinoma are driven by the inconsistent scoring criteria. This study unequivocally demonstrates that when neuroendocrine cell staining is assessed with objective criteria it identifies patients with poor clinical outcomes. Future studies are needed to determine the exact quantifiable thresholds for use in reporting neuroendocrine cell staining to identify patients at higher risk of progression.

The association between quality care and outcomes for a real-world population of Australian patients diagnosed with pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: This study: (i) assessed compliance with a consensus set of quality indicators (QIs) in pancreatic cancer (PC); and (ii) evaluated the association between compliance with these QIs and survival. METHODS: Four years of data were collected for patients diagnosed with PC. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). A multivariable analysis tested the relationship between significant patient and hospital characteristics, patient cluster effects within hospitals and survival. RESULTS: 1061 patients were eligible for this study. Significant association with improved survival were: (i) in the potentially resectable group having adjuvant chemotherapy administered following surgery or a reason documented (HR, 0.29; 95 CI, 0.19-0.46); (ii) in the locally advanced group included having chemotherapy ± chemoradiation, or a reason documented for not undergoing treatment (HR, 0.38; 95 CI, 0.25-0.58); and (iii) in the metastatic disease group included having documented performance status at presentation (HR, 0.65; 95 CI, 0.47-0.89), being seen by an oncologist in the absence of treatment (HR, 0.48; 95 CI, 0.31-0.77), and disease management discussed at a multidisciplinary team meeting (HR, 0.79; 95 CI, 0.64-0.96). CONCLUSION: Capture of a concise data set has enabled quality of care to be assessed.

Characteristics and Quality of National Cardiac Registries: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: National cardiac registries are increasingly used for informing health policy, improving the quality and cost-effectiveness of patient care, clinical research, and monitoring the safety of novel treatments. However, the quality of registries is variable. We aimed to assess the characteristics and quality of national cardiac registries across all subspecialties of cardiac care. METHODS: Publications relating to national cardiac registries across six cardiac subspecialty domains were identified by searching MEDLINE and the Google advanced search function with 26 438 citations and 4812 full-text articles reviewed. RESULTS: A total of 155 registries, representing 49 countries, were included in the study. Of these, 45 related to coronary disease or percutaneous coronary intervention, 28 related to devices, arrhythmia, and electrophysiology, 24 related to heart failure, transplant, and mechanical support, 21 related to structural heart disease, 21 related to congenital heart disease, and 16 related to cardiac surgery. Enrollment was procedure-based in 60% and disease-based in 40%. A total of 73.10 million patients were estimated to have been enrolled in cardiac registries. Quality scoring was performed using a validated registry grading system, with registries performing best in the use of explicit variable definitions and worst in assessment of data reliability. Higher quality scores were associated with government funding, mandated enrollment, linkage to other registries, and outcome risk adjustment. Quality scores and number of registries within a country were positively correlated with each other and with measures of national economic output, health expenditure, and urbanization. CONCLUSIONS: There has been remarkable growth in the uptake of national cardiac registries across the last few decades. However, the quality of processes used to ensure data completeness and accuracy remain variable and few countries have integrated registries covering multiple subspecialty domains. Clinicians, funders, and health policymakers should be encouraged to focus on the range, quality, and integration of these registries. Registration: URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero; Unique identifier: CRD42020204224.

Establishing a global quality of care benchmark report.

BACKGROUND: The Movember funded TrueNTH Global Registry (TNGR) aims to improve care by collecting and analysing a consistent dataset to identify variation in disease management, benchmark care delivery in accordance with best practice guidelines and provide this information to those in a position to enact change. We discuss considerations of designing and implementing a quality of care report for TNGR. METHODS: Eleven working group sessions were held prior to and as reports were being built with representation from clinicians, data managers and investigators contributing to TNGR. The aim of the meetings was to understand current data display approaches, share literature review findings and ideas for innovative approaches. Preferred displays were evaluated with two surveys (survey 1: 5 clinicians and 5 non-clinicians, 83% response rate; survey 2: 17 clinicians and 18 non-clinicians, 93% response rate). RESULTS: Consensus on dashboard design and three data-display preferences were achieved. The dashboard comprised two performance summary charts; one summarising site's relative quality indicator (QI) performance and another to summarise data quality. Binary outcome QIs were presented as funnel plots. Patient-reported outcome measures of function score and the extent to which men were bothered by their symptoms were presented in bubble plots. Time series graphs were seen as providing important information to supplement funnel and bubble plots. R Markdown was selected as the software program principally because of its excellent analytic and graph display capacity, open source licensing model and the large global community sharing program code enhancements. CONCLUSIONS: International collaboration in creating and maintaining clinical quality registries has allowed benchmarking of process and outcome measures on a large scale. A registry report system was developed with stakeholder engagement to produce dynamic reports that provide user-specific feedback to 132 participating sites across 13 countries.

Trends in Conservative Management for Low-risk Prostate Cancer in a Population-based Cohort of Australian Men Diagnosed Between 2009 and 2016.

Conservative management, specifically with active surveillance (AS), has emerged as the preferred approach for low-risk prostate cancer (LRPC). We evaluated the trend for conservative management (ie, no active treatment within 12mo of diagnosis) for LRPC in an Australian population-based cohort of men captured in the Prostate Cancer Outcomes Registry Victoria (PCOR-Vic). Of the 3201 men diagnosed with LRPC between January 2009 and December 2016, 60% (1928/3201) had conservative management, and 52% (1664/3201) were documented to be on AS. There was an increase in conservative management from 52% in 2009 to 73% in 2016 (p<0.001), largely attributable to an increase in AS from 33% in 2009 to 67% in 2016 (p<0.001). When stratified by age group, the increase in conservative management was more pronounced among younger patients: from 37% to 66% for men aged <60yr versus from 72% to 86% for men aged ≥70yr. In multivariable analyses, increasing age, lower prostate-specific antigen and clinical category, lower socioeconomic status, and being diagnosed in public metropolitan institutions were all independently associated with a greater likelihood of conservative management. Identification of sociodemographic and institutional variations in practice allows for targeted strategies to improve management for men with LRPC. PATIENT SUMMARY: We looked at the uptake of conservative management (no active treatment within 12 mo of diagnosis) over time in an Australian population-based cohort of men with low-risk prostate cancer. The proportion of men with low-risk prostate cancer managed conservatively increased from 52% in 2009 to 73% in 2016. The increase in the uptake of conservative management for low-risk prostate cancer in Australia is concordant with international guidelines and other international population-based studies.

Barriers and enablers to the implementation of multidisciplinary team meetings: a qualitative study using the theoretical domains framework.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines recommend discussion by a multidisciplinary team (MDT) to review and plan the management of patients for a variety of cancers. However, not all patients diagnosed with cancer are presented at an MDT. OBJECTIVES: (1) To identify the factors (barriers and enablers) influencing presentation of all patients to, and the perceived value of, MDT meetings in the management of patients with pancreatic cancer and; (2) to identify potential interventions that could overcome modifiable barriers and enhance enablers using the theoretical domains framework (TDF). METHODS: Semistructured interviews were conducted with radiologists, surgeons, medical and radiation oncologists, gastroenterologists, palliative care specialists and nurse specialists based in New South Wales and Victoria, Australia. Interviews were conducted either in person or via videoconferencing. All interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim, deidentified and data were thematically coded according to the 12 domains explored within the TDF. Common belief statements were generated to compare the variation between participant responses. RESULTS: In total, 29 specialists were interviewed over a 4-month period. Twenty-two themes and 40 belief statements relevant to all the TDF domains were generated. Key enablers influencing MDT practices included a strong organisational focus (social/professional role and identity), beliefs about the benefits of an MDT discussion (beliefs about consequences), the use of technology, for example, videoconferencing (environmental context and resources), the motivation to provide good quality care (motivation and goals) and collegiality (social influences). Barriers included: absence of palliative care representation (skills), the number of MDT meetings (environmental context and resources), the cumulative cost of staff time (beliefs about consequences), the lack of capacity to discuss all patients within the allotted time (beliefs about capabilities) and reduced confidence to participate in discussions (social influences). CONCLUSIONS: The internal and external organisational structures surrounding MDT meetings ideally need to be strengthened with the development of agreed evidence-based protocols and referral pathways, a focus on resource allocation and capabilities, and a culture that fosters widespread collaboration for all stages of pancreatic cancer.

Barriers and enablers to the implementation of protocol-based imaging in pancreatic cancer: A qualitative study using the theoretical domains framework.

BACKGROUND: Accurate pre-operative imaging plays a vital role in patient selection for surgery and in allocating stage-appropriate therapies to patients diagnosed with pancreatic cancer (PC). This study aims to: (1) understand the current diagnosis and staging practices for PC; and (2) explore the factors (barriers and enablers) that influence the use of a pancreatic protocol computed tomography (PPCT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to confirm diagnosis and/or accurately stage PC. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with radiologists, surgeons, gastroenterologists, medical and radiation oncologists from the states of New South Wales (NSW) and Victoria, Australia. Interviews were conducted either in person or via video conferencing. All interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim, de-identified and data were thematically coded according to the 12 domains explored within the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Common belief statements were generated to compare the variation between participant responses. FINDINGS: In total, 21 clinicians (5 radiologists, 10 surgeons, 2 gastroenterologists, 4 medical and radiation oncologists) were interviewed over a four-month-period. Belief statements relevant to the TDF domains were generated. Across the 11 relevant domains, 20 themes and 30 specific beliefs were identified. All TDF domains, with the exception of social influences were identified by participants as relevant to protocol-based imaging using either a PPCT or MRI, with the domains of knowledge, skills and environmental context and resources being offered by most participants as being relevant in influencing their decisions. CONCLUSIONS: To maximise outcomes and personalise therapy it is imperative that diagnosis and staging investigations using the most appropriate imaging modalities are conducted in a timely, efficient and effective manner. The results provide an understanding of specialists' opinion and behaviour in relation to a PPCT or MRI and should be used to inform the design of future interventions to improve compliance with this practice.

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in pancreatic cancer: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this systematic review is to examine patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), their attributes and application in patients with pancreatic cancer (PC). METHOD: A systematic literature search was undertaken of articles published to June 2018 to identify PROMs applied in primary studies in PC. Characteristics of the included studies and PROMs were described with identified scales grouped into five domains. The psychometric properties of the identified PROMs were further assessed for reliability and validity among patients with PC. RESULTS: From 1688 studies screened, 170 were included. Almost half (48%) were conducted in patients with unresectable PC; the majority of these (68%) were evaluated in randomized controlled trials. Median questionnaire completion rates fell below 10% of the original cohort within 12 months in patients with unresectable PC compared to 75% in patients with resectable PC. Seventy PROMs were identified, 32 measuring unidimensional parameters (e.g. pain) and 35 measuring multidimensional (e.g. quality of life) constructs. Only five (7%) PROMs were disease-specific and 13 (19%) were validated in patients with PC. Fifty scales were grouped into 19 physical, 9 psychological, 6 psychiatric, 9 social and 7 other domains. CONCLUSION: Three multidimensional PROMs, the: (i) FACT-HEP in unresectable PC; (ii) QLQ-PAN26 (in conjunction with its core QLQ-C30 PROM) in resectable PC; and (iii) MDASI-GI are recommended as instruments to capture quality of life in patients with PC. Summarised scales and psychometric evaluation provide a framework to choose PROMs for scales not captured by the recommended PROMs.

The Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Registry (UGICR): a clinical quality registry to monitor and improve care in upper gastrointestinal cancers.

PURPOSE: The Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Registry (UGICR) was developed to monitor and improve the quality of care provided to patients with upper gastrointestinal cancers in Australia. PARTICIPANTS: It supports four cancer modules: pancreatic, oesophagogastric, biliary and primary liver cancer. The pancreatic cancer (PC) module was the first module to be implemented, with others being established in a staged approach. Individuals are recruited to the registry if they are aged 18 years or older, have received care for their cancer at a participating public/private hospital or private clinic in Australia and do not opt out of participation. FINDINGS TO DATE: The UGICR is governed by a multidisciplinary steering committee that provides clinical governance and oversees clinical working parties. The role of the working parties is to develop quality indicators based on best practice for each registry module, develop the minimum datasets and provide guidance in analysing and reporting of results. Data are captured from existing data sources (population-based cancer incidence registries, pathology databases and hospital-coded data) and manually from clinical records. Data collectors directly enter information into a secure web-based Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) data collection platform. The PC module began with a pilot phase, and subsequently, we used a formal modified Delphi consensus process to establish a core set of quality indicators for PC. The second module developed was the oesophagogastric cancer (OGC) module. Results of the 1 year pilot phases for PC and OGC modules are included in this cohort profile. FUTURE PLANS: The UGICR will provide regular reports of risk-adjusted, benchmarked performance on a range of quality indicators that will highlight variations in care and clinical outcomes at a health service level. The registry has also been developed with the view to collect patient-reported outcomes (PROs), which will further add to our understanding of the care of patients with these cancers.