An innovative model of delivering cancer care in the community: the experience of a tertiary cancer centre in Singapore.

BACKGROUND: Cancer care has evolved rapidly, increasing the demand on healthcare resources. While many non-oral cancer treatments are administered in the hospital, not all necessitate complex medical care. Treatments that can be administered subcutaneously, intramuscularly, or as short intravenous infusions with a low risk of extravasation can be safely administered in the community. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Since 2017, the National University Cancer Institute, Singapore (NCIS) has operated a program called NCIS on-the-go (NOTG) comprising a network of community cancer treatment clinics located within 20 km of the hospital. NOTG provides 17 low-risk treatments and nursing services run by oncology-trained nurses without on-site physicians. Patients who receive their first dose of cancer treatment uneventfully in the cancer centre can opt-in to receive subsequent doses at any NOTG clinic. RESULTS: Treatment at NOTG has become more mainstream over the years, with its workload increasing by over sevenfold since 2017, and is now responsible for ∼10% of the total main cancer centre workload. The program is sustainable and financially viable to operate. A survey of 155 patients revealed a 96.8% user satisfaction rate, with the majority reporting tangible savings in travelling time, waiting time, and travelling costs. The diversion of low-risk treatments to NOTG has indirectly increased capacity and reduced waiting times at the main cancer centre for patients requiring complex cancer treatments, resulting in a win-win situation. CONCLUSIONS: NOTG represents an innovative model of care to deliver low-risk cancer treatments safely in the community and can be easily replicated in other countries.

Therapeutic applications of germline testing for cancer predisposition genes in Asia in the real world.

BACKGROUND: Germline genetic testing is traditionally carried out in patients suspected with hereditary cancer syndrome for enhanced cancer surveillance and/or preventive strategies, but is increasingly carried out for therapeutic indications. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of patients who underwent germline genetic testing at our centre to determine the prevalence of actionable pathogenic germline variants (PGV) and their clinical utility. RESULTS: From 2000 to 2022, 1154 cancer patients underwent germline testing, with the majority (945/1154) tested with multi-gene panels. Four hundred and eleven (35.6%) patients harboured a PGV and 334 (81%) were clinically actionable. BRCA1/2 accounted for 62.3% of actionable mutations, followed by mismatch repair (18%), and other homologous recombination repair (HRR) genes (19.7%). One hundred and fifty-two germline-positive patients have advanced cancers, and 79 received germline-directed therapies (poly ADP ribose polymerase inhibitors = 75; immunotherapy = 4). Median duration of immunotherapy and poly ADP ribose polymerase were 20.5 months (range 5-40 months) and 8 months (range 1-76 months), respectively. Among BRCA/HRR mutation carriers who received platinum-based chemotherapy, pathological complete response rate in the neoadjuvant setting was 53% (n = 17 breast cancers) and objective response rate was >80% in the advanced setting (n = 71). CONCLUSIONS: One-third of cancer patients tested carried a PGV and ∼80% were clinically actionable. Three-quarters of germline-positive advanced cancer patients received germline-directed therapies in the real world, underscoring the practical utility of germline testing to guide cancer therapeutics.