Assessment of multiple-opinion referrals and consults at the BC Children's Hospital Allergy Clinic.

BACKGROUND: Allergic disease is on the rise. Waitlists for specialists are long, and many referred patients have already received prior allergic assessment, either by a certified Allergist, Primary Care Provider, or other Specialist. It is important to understand the prevalence and motivating factors for multiple-opinion referrals, to deliver timely assessment for patients with allergic disease. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of demographic information, number of previous consultations, and motivation for new consults and multiple-opinion referrals, of pediatric patients aged 8 months-17 years to BC Children's Hospital Allergy Clinic from September 1, 2016-August 31, 2017, was performed. Referral data including reason for referral or multiple-opinion, primary allergic concerns, and others, from referral forms and consult notes were accessed through local Electronic Medical Records and subsequently analyzed for trends in categorical variables to assess the rationale for and impact of multiple-opinion referrals to our clinic. RESULTS: Of 1029 new referrals received, 210 (20.4%) were multiple-opinion referrals. Food allergy was the predominant allergic concern prompting further opinion (75.7%). The main rationale for seeking further opinions was wanting an assessment by a certified allergist in cases where prior consultation was performed by non-allergist specialist, primary care provider, or alternative health care provider. Of second-opinion referrals generated, 70 (33.3%) initial consultations were performed by an Allergist, whereas 140 (66.7%) were performed by a non-allergist. CONCLUSIONS: Many new consults at the BCCH Allergy Clinic are multiple-opinion assessments, contributing to long waitlists. Advocacy at the systems level through standardized referral guidelines, centralized triaging systems, and stronger support for Primary Care Providers is needed to provide better access in Canada for children needing a specialized Allergist. Trial registration UBC/BCCH Research Ethics Board.

Assessment of Agreement Between Human Ratings and Lexicon-Based Sentiment Ratings of Open-Ended Responses on a Behavioral Rating Scale.

To date, there is a paucity of research conducting natural language processing (NLP) on the open-ended responses of behavior rating scales. Using three NLP lexicons for sentiment analysis of the open-ended responses of the Behavior Assessment System for Children-Third Edition, the researchers discovered a moderately positive correlation between the human composite rating and the sentiment score using each of the lexicons for strengths comments and a slightly positive correlation for the concerns comments made by guardians and teachers. In addition, the researchers found that as the word count increased for open-ended responses regarding the child's strengths, there was a greater positive sentiment rating. Conversely, as word count increased for open-ended responses regarding child concerns, the human raters scored comments more negatively. The authors offer a proof-of-concept to use NLP-based sentiment analysis of open-ended comments to complement other data for clinical decision making.

Assessment of response to induction therapy and its influence on 5-year failure-free survival in group III rhabdomyosarcoma: the Intergroup Rhabdomyosarcoma Study-IV experience--a report from the Soft Tissue Sarcoma Committee of the Children's Oncology Group.

PURPOSE: Initial response to induction chemotherapy predicts failure-free survival (FFS) in osteosarcoma and Ewing's sarcoma. For Intergroup Rhabdomyosarcoma Study (IRS) IV patients with group III rhabdomyosarcoma, we assessed whether reported response assessed by anatomic imaging at week 8 predicted FFS. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We studied 444 group III patients who received induction therapy, had response assessed at week 8 by anatomic imaging, and continued with protocol therapy. Induction chemotherapy was generally followed by radiation therapy (RT) starting after week 9. Response to induction therapy was determined at weeks 0 and 8. Local institutions coded response. RESULTS: Response rate for the entire cohort at week 8 was 77% (95% CI, 73% to 81%; complete response [CR], 21%; partial response [PR], 56%) but response had no influence on FFS (P = .57). Two hundred seventy-two patients received standard-timing RT at week 9 and thus only chemotherapy during induction. Response rate was 81% (95% CI, 76% to 86%; CR, 22%; PR, 59%). In these patients, response did not influence FFS except for those with alveolar histology. One hundred thirty-two other patients received chemotherapy and RT during induction (up-front RT). Response rate was 65% (95% CI, 57% to 73%; CR, 12%; PR, 53%), but response had no influence on FFS (P = .69). Forty patients received no RT at all (protocol violation) and response to induction therapy had no effect on FFS. CONCLUSION: In IRS-IV, response rate to induction therapy was 77% in group III patients, was independent of histology, and had no influence on FFS overall.

Challenges in the recruitment of adolescents and young adults to cancer clinical trials.

The adolescent and young adult (AYA) oncology population has seen inferior progress in cancer survival compared with younger children and older adults over the past 25 years. Previously, AYAs had the best survival rates due to the prevalence of highly curable diseases including Hodgkin lymphoma and germ cell tumors, yet today AYAs have inferior survival rates to children and some adult cohorts. Survival rates are particularly poor for AYA-specific diseases such as sarcomas. Research involving children and adults diagnosed with common malignancies such as acute lymphoblastic leukemia has resulted in improved survival rates. However, AYAs have not directly benefited from such research due to low rates of access to and accrual on clinical trials. AYAs are less likely to have insurance or access to healthcare, are more likely to see providers who are not part of research institutions, and are less likely to be referred to or to join clinical trials, all of which may contribute to worse outcomes. Few clinical trials target AYA-specific diseases, leading to little information regarding how these diseases behave and what role the host plays. Tumor samples for this population are underrepresented in national tumor banks. Coupled with the need for more clinical trials that focus on AYA-specific cancers, better collaboration between adult and pediatric cooperative groups as well as increased education among community oncologists and primary care providers will be needed to enhance participation in clinical trials with the goal to increase survival and improve quality of that survival.