Patients' perspectives and the perceptions of healthcare providers in the treatment of early rectal cancer; a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Shared decision-making has become of increased importance in choosing the most suitable treatment strategy for early rectal cancer, however, clinical decision-making is still primarily based on physicians' perspectives. Balancing quality of life and oncological outcomes is difficult, and guidance on patients' involvement in this subject in early rectal cancer is limited. Therefore, this study aimed to explore preferences and priorities of patients as well as physicians' perspectives in treatment for early rectal cancer. METHODS: In this qualitative study, semi-structured interviews were performed with early rectal cancer patients (n = 10) and healthcare providers (n = 10). Participants were asked which factors influenced their preferences and how important these factors were. Thematic analyses were performed. In addition, participants were asked to rank the discussed factors according to importance to gain additional insights. RESULTS: Patients addressed the following relevant factors: the risk of an ostomy, risk of poor bowel function and treatment related complications. Healthcare providers emphasized oncological outcomes as tumour recurrence, risk of an ostomy and poor bowel function. Patients perceived absolute risks of adverse outcome to be lower than healthcare providers and were quite willing undergo organ preservation to achieve a better prospect of quality of life. CONCLUSION: Patients' preferences in treatment of early rectal cancer vary between patients and frequently differ from assumptions of preferences by healthcare providers. To optimize future shared decision-making, healthcare providers should be aware of these differences and should invite patients to explore and address their priorities more explicitly during consultation. Factors deemed important by both physicians and patients should be expressed during consultation to decide on a tailored treatment strategy.

Clinical consequences of diagnostic variability in the histopathological evaluation of early rectal cancer.

INTRODUCTION: In early rectal cancer, organ sparing treatment strategies such as local excision have gained popularity. The necessity of radical surgery is based on the histopathological evaluation of the local excision specimen. This study aimed to describe diagnostic variability between pathologists, and its impact on treatment allocation in patients with locally excised early rectal cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with locally excised pT1-2 rectal cancer were included in this prospective cohort study. Both quantitative measures and histopathological risk factors (i.e. poor differentiation, deep submucosal invasion, and lymphatic- or venous invasion) were evaluated. Interobserver variability was reported by both percentages and Fleiss' Kappa- (ĸ) or intra-class correlation coefficients. RESULTS: A total of 126 patients were included. Ninety-four percent of the original histopathological reports contained all required parameters. In 73 of the 126 (57.9%) patients, at least one discordant parameter was observed, which regarded histopathological risk factors for lymph node metastases in 36 patients (28.6%). Interobserver agreement among different variables varied between 74% and 95% or ĸ 0.530-0.962. The assessment of lymphovascular invasion showed discordances in 26% (ĸ = 0.530, 95% CI 0.375-0.684) of the cases. In fourteen (11%) patients, discordances led to a change in treatment strategy. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that there is substantial interobserver variability between pathologists, especially in the assessment of lymphovascular invasion. Pathologists play a key role in treatment allocation after local excision of early rectal cancer, therefore interobserver variability needs to be reduced to decrease the number of patients that are over- or undertreated.

Reoperation After Operative Treatment of Open Finger Fractures.

BACKGROUND: Our primary aim was to develop a prediction model for return to the operating room (OR) after open finger fractures by studying the reoperation rate of open finger fractures based on patient demographics, injury mechanism, injury severity, and type of initial surgical fixation. The secondary aim was to study the predictors for secondary surgery due to nonunion, postoperative infection, and secondary amputation. METHODS: In the retrospective chart review, 1321 open finger fractures of 907 patients were included. Demographic-, injury-, and treatment-related factors were gathered from medical records. RESULTS: We found that open fractures involving the thumb had lower odds of undergoing secondary surgery. Crush injury, proximal phalangeal fracture, arterial injury, other injured fingers, and other injuries to the ipsilateral hand were associated with higher odds of undergoing secondary surgery. However, the associated factors we identified were not powerful enough to create a predictive model. Other injury to the ipsilateral hand, vein repair, and external fixator as initial treatment were associated with postoperative nonunion. Crush injury and proximal phalangeal fracture were associated with postoperative infection. No factors were associated with secondary amputation. CONCLUSIONS: A quarter of open finger fractures will likely need more than one surgical procedure, especially in more severely injured fingers, due to crush or with vascular impairment. Furthermore, fractures involving the thumb have less reoperation, while fractures involving the proximal phalanx have poorest outcomes.

Serum-based measurements of stromal activation through ADAM12 associate with poor prognosis in colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Recently it has been recognized that stromal markers could be used as a clinically relevant biomarker for therapy response and prognosis. Here, we report on a serum marker for stromal activation, A Disintegrin and Metalloprotease 12 (ADAM12) in colorectal cancer (CRC). METHODS: Using gene expression databases we investigated ADAM12 expression in CRC and delineated the source of ADAM12 expression. The clinical value of ADAM12 was retrospectively assessed in the CAIRO2 trial in metastatic CRC with 235 patients (31% of total cohort), and an independent rectal cancer cohort (n = 20). RESULTS: ADAM12 is expressed by activated CRC associated fibroblasts. In the CAIRO2 trial cohort, ADAM12 serum levels were prognostic (ADAM12 low versus ADAM12 high; median OS 25.3 vs. 17.1 months, HR 1.48 [95% CI 1.11-1.96], P = 0.007). The prognostic potential was specifically high for metastatic rectal cancer (HR 1.78 [95% CI 1.06-3.00], P = 0.030) and mesenchymal subtype tumors (HR 2.12 [95% CI 1.25-3.60], P = 0.004). ADAM12 also showed potential for predicting recurrence in an exploratory analysis of non-metastatic rectal cancers. CONCLUSIONS: Here we describe a non-invasive marker for activated stroma in CRC which associates with poor outcome, especially for primary cancers located in the rectum.

Diagnostic variability in the histopathological assessment of advanced colorectal adenomas and early colorectal cancer in a screening population.

AIM: The aim of this study was to evaluate interobserver variability between individual pathologists and a panel of pathologists in the histopathological assessment of advanced colorectal neoplasms in the Dutch bowel cancer screening population. METHODS AND RESULTS: Histological slides of adenomas with high-grade dysplasia and early colorectal carcinomas (CRC) from 20 different laboratories were reviewed by the pathology panel of the Dutch bowel screening programme. Interobserver variability was reported by descriptive statistics. In addition, potential clinical consequences of discrepancies were evaluated. A total of 104 cases of adenomas with high-grade dysplasia and 83 early CRCs were reviewed. Discrepancies were observed in 41 of 104 (39.4%) adenoma cases, which potentially had clinical consequences in 16 (15.4%) cases. For CRC, discrepancies were shown in 44 of 83 cases (53.0%) and would have potentially led to alternative treatment strategies in 25 (30.1%) cases. Most frequently, discrepancies were observed in the assessment of lymphovascular invasion (23 of 73 cases, 31.5%). CONCLUSION: This study showed that considerable interobserver variability is present in the histopathological assessment of advanced colorectal neoplasia, which may impact upon treatment choices. Additional stains and education, as well as intercollegial consultation, might decrease this variability.

Multidisciplinary management of early rectal cancer - The role of surgical local excision in current and future clinical practice.

The implementation of bowel cancer screening programs has led to a rise in the incidence of early rectal cancer. The combination of increased incidence and the growing interest in organ-sparing treatment options has led to an amplified importance of local excision techniques in treatment strategies for early rectal cancer. In addition, developments in new technologies of single-port surgery have popularized surgical techniques. Although local treatment of early rectal cancer seems promising, a multidisciplinary approach is necessary and awareness of the oncological robustness is warranted to enable shared decision-making. This review illustrates the position of surgical local excision in the treatment of early rectal cancer and reflects on its role in current and future clinical practice.

Do Patient Preferences Influence Surgeon Recommendations for Treatment?

BACKGROUND: When the best treatment option is uncertain, a patient's preference based on personal values should be the source of most variation in diagnostic and therapeutic interventions. Unexplained surgeon-to-surgeon variation in treatment for hand and upper extremity conditions suggests that surgeon preferences have more influence than patient preferences. METHODS: A total of 184 surgeons reviewed 18 fictional scenarios of upper extremity conditions for which operative treatment is discretionary and preference sensitive, and recommended either operative or non-operative treatment. To test the influence of six specific patient preferences the preference was randomly assigned to each scenario in an affirmative or negative manner. Surgeon characteristics were collected for each participant. RESULTS: Of the six preferences studied, four influenced surgeon recommendations. Surgeons were more likely to recommend non-operative treatment when patients; preferred the least expensive treatment (adjusted OR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.71 - 0.94; P=0.005), preferred non-operative treatment (adjusted OR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.72 - 0.95; P=0.006), were not concerned about aesthetics (adjusted OR, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.0 - 1.3; P=0.046), and when patients only preferred operative treatment if there is consensus among surgeons that operative treatment is a useful option (adjusted OR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.68 - 0.89; P<0.001). CONCLUSION: Patient preferences were found to have a measurable influence on surgeon treatment recommendations though not as much as we expected-and surgeons on average interpreted surgery as more aesthetic. This emphasizes the importance of strategies to help patients reflect on their values and ensure their preferences are consistent with those values (e.g. use of decision-aids).