A Teleconsultation Device, Consult Station, for Remote Primary Care: Multisite Prospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Telemedicine technology is a growing field, especially in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Consult Station (Health for Development) is the first telemedicine device enabling completely remote medical consultations, including the concurrent collection of clinical parameters and videos. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to collect data on the multisite urban and suburban implementation of the Consult Station for primary care and assess its contribution to health care pathways in areas with a low density of medical services. METHODS: In a proof-of-concept multisite prospective cohort study, 2134 consecutive patients had teleconsultations. Consultation characteristics were analyzed from both the patient and practitioner perspective. RESULTS: In this study, the main users of Consult Station were younger women consulting for low-severity seasonal infections. Interestingly, hypertension, diabetes, and preventive medical consultations were almost absent, while they accounted for almost 50% of consultations with a general practitioner (GP). We showed that for all regions where the Consult Station was implemented, the number of consultations increased as GP density decreased. The study of practitioner characteristics showed GPs from metropolitan areas are motivated to work with this device remotely, with a high level of technology acceptability. CONCLUSIONS: The multisite implementation of Consult Station booths is suitable for primary care and could also address the challenge of "medical deserts." In addition, further studies should be performed to evaluate the possible contribution of Consult Station booths to limiting work absenteeism.

Correction: A Teleconsultation Device, Consult Station, for Remote Primary Care: Multisite Prospective Cohort Study.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.2196/33507.].

Prognostic value of TP53 transcriptional activity on p21 and bax in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinomas treated by definitive chemoradiotherapy.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate biologic factors on survival and clinical response after definitive concomitant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). METHODS AND MATERIALS: TP53 protein hyperexpression (immunochemistry [IHC]) and functional assay (FA) of TP53, measuring the ability of TP53 to transactivate p21 and bax reporter systems, were performed in patients with ESCC treated by CRT. The impact of parameters studied on survival and clinical response to CRT was assessed. RESULTS: Thirty-eight patients with ESCC were included. TP53 alterations were detected in 84.2% of cases with FA. All TP53 mutations abolished the transactivation of p21 and bax reporter systems. After CRT, complete response rate was 55.3%. The median survival of the population was 17.5 months. Serum albumin (p = 0.002), weight loss <10% (p = 0.005), and response to treatment (p < 0.001) were significantly linked with survival. TP53 alteration in FA was not significantly predictive of response to CRT (p = 0.132) nor survival (p = 0.154). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that wild-type TP53 in ESCC could be associated with good response to definitive CRT. However, the small rate of ESCC with wild-type TP53 suggests that systematic determination of TP53 status is not appropriate for the management of the ESCC population.

[Assessment of the quality and psychological impact of information delivered using official consent forms in digestive endoscopy]. / Evaluation de la qualité et de l'impact de l'information transmise par les fiches d'endoscopie digestive élaborées par les sociétés savantes.

AIM: To test the impact of information brochures and informed consent forms in patients undergoing digestive endoscopy procedures. METHOD: All patients undergoing digestive endoscopy procedures during a two-month period were given information about the procedure to be performed by delivery of an information form produced by the French Endoscopy and Gastroenterology Societies. The patients were then asked to sign an inform consent form. A questionnaire about the informed consent form and the consent experience was given to all patients after the endoscopic procedure. RESULTS: The questionnaire was completed by 108 consecutive patients. The informed consent form was completely read by 96.3% and understood by 95%. Sixteen percent asked for complementary information, all about complications. Twenty percent were distressed by the explanations. Receiving written information was surprising for 22.2% of the patients, and distressing for 18.5% mainly when endoscopy was planned without general anesthesia (P=0.01 versus general anesthesia). Obtaining informed consent was qualified as a normal procedure for 47.2%, but distressing for 19.4%. It was considered by 41.1% as a way for doctors to be discharged from their obligations. CONCLUSION: The informed consent forms written by scientific societies are easy to understand. One third of the patients were distressed or surprised to be given oral or written information. To sign a written consent form before an endoscopy procedure is considered to be a means of discharging practitioners from their responsibilities for 30% of the patients.

Colorectal cancer with non-resectable synchronous metastases: should the primary tumor be resected?

OBJECTIVES: In asymptomatic patients presenting with non-resectable synchronous metastatic disease from colorectal adenocarcinoma, the beneficial effect of resecting the primary tumor remains to be documented. The aim of this study was to compare survival of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer who underwent elective resection of the primary tumor to those who did not. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of patients with metastatic colo-rectal cancer treated between June, 1996 and December, 1999 was performed. Overall survival was compared between patients who underwent first-line resection of the primary colorectal tumor (group 1) or those who did not undergo elective resection of the primary (group 2). The probability of surgical resection of the primary tumor for gastrointestinal complications in group 2 was evaluated. RESULTS: Thirty-one and 23 patients were included in groups 1 and 2 respectively. Five patients (21.7%, 95% confidence interval CI95% 4.9-38.5%) in group 2 required surgical treatment for intestinal obstruction due to the primary tumor. Two clinical characteristics were significantly different between groups 1 and 2: rectal localization (9.7% versus 34.7%; P=0.03) and presence of fewer than three metastases (29.0% versus 4.3%; P=0.03). Survival curves were not significantly different (logrank). Median duration of survival was 21 and 14 Months, respectively (P=0.718). CONCLUSION: In patients with non-resectable synchronous metastatic disease, non-surgical management of the primary tumor is a rational alternative if asymptomatic. A prospective randomized trial integrating the quality-of-life factor should be organized.

Usefulness of the serum carcinoembryonic antigen kinetic for chemotherapy monitoring in patients with unresectable metastasis of colorectal cancer.

PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to evaluate the relationship between serum carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) kinetic and response to chemotherapy in patients with unresectable metastasis of colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The kinetic was calculated using the slope of an exponential-regressive curve connecting the semi-logarithmic values of CEA. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were drawn to select the CEA slope thresholds to define patients with progressive or responsive disease with the highest sensitivity, specificity, and diagnosis accuracy odds ratio (DOR). The correlation between the CEA slopes and progression-free survival (PFS) was evaluated by the Cox model and Kaplan-Meier methods. RESULTS: A total of 122 patients were included. Progression defined by CEA slope greater than +0.05 resulted in sensitivity of 85.7%, specificity of 85.1%, and DOR of 34. The area under the ROC (AUROC) curve was 0.885 (95% CI, 0.815 to 0.936; P = .0001). Response defined by CEA slope less than -0.2 resulted in sensitivity of 74.7%, specificity of 82.5%, and DOR of 16. The AUROC curve was 0.847 (95% CI, 0.770 to 0.906; P = .0001). The difference between AUROC curves calculated with six or four CEA values was not significant. PFS was correlated with CEA slopes (hazard ratio, 4.6; 95% CI, 2.48 to 8.57). The median PFS was 10 months for patients with CEA slope values less than -0.2 months versus 6 months for patients with CEA slope values greater than -0.2 (P < .0001). CONCLUSION: These results suggest that the CEA kinetic is an accurate, simple, and noninvasive method to identify the disease progression in patients with unresectable metastasis of colorectal cancer.