Using Primary Care Data to Report Real-World Pancreatic Cancer Survival and Symptomatology.

Pancreatic cancer is the 10th most common cancer diagnosed; despite recent advances in many areas of oncology, survival remains poor, in part owing to late diagnosis. Whilst primary care data are used widely for epidemiology and pharmacovigilance, they are less used for observing survival. In this study we extracted a pancreatic cancer cohort from a nationally representative English primary care database of electronic health records (EHRs) and reported on their symptom and mortality data. A total of 11, 649 cases were identified within the Oxford Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) Clinical Informatics Digital Hub network. All-cause mortality data was recorded for 4623 (39.69%). Mean age at recording of cancer diagnosis was 71.4 years (SD 12.0 years). 1-year and 5-year survival was 22.06% and 3.27% respectively. Within a multivariate model, age had a significant impact on survival; those diagnosed under the age of 60 had the longest survival, as compared to those age 60 - 79 (HR: 1.36, 95% CI: 1.20 - 1.54, p < 0.001) and 80+ (HR: 2.13, 95% CI: 1.86 - 2.44, p < 0.01). Symptomatology was examined; at any time point abdominal pain was the most commonly reported symptom present in 5271 cases (45.2%), but within the 12 months preceding diagnosis jaundice was the most common feature, present in 2587 patients (22.2%). Future studies clarifying other contributing factors on survival outcomes and patterns of symptomatology are needed; primary care EHRs provide an opportunity to evaluate real-world cancer patient cohort data.

Barrett's oesophagus: Current controversies.

Oesophageal adenocarcinoma is rapidly increasing in Western countries. This tumour frequently presents late in its course with metastatic disease and has a very poor prognosis. Barrett's oesophagus is an acquired condition whereby the native squamous mucosa of the lower oesophagus is replaced by columnar epithelium following prolonged gastro-oesophageal reflux and is the recognised precursor lesion for oesophageal adenocarcinoma. There are multiple national and society guidelines regarding screening, surveillance and management of Barrett's oesophagus, however all are limited regarding a clear evidence base for a well-demonstrated benefit and cost-effectiveness of surveillance, and robust risk stratification for patients to best use resources. Currently the accepted risk factors upon which surveillance intervals and interventions are based are Barrett's segment length and histological interpretation of the systematic biopsies. Further patient risk factors including other demographic features, smoking, gender, obesity, ethnicity, patient age, biomarkers and endoscopic adjuncts remain under consideration and are discussed in full. Recent evidence has been published to support earlier endoscopic intervention by means of ablation of the metaplastic Barrett's segment when the earliest signs of dysplasia are detected. Further work should concentrate on establishing better risk stratification and primary and secondary preventative strategies to reduce the risk of adenocarcinoma of the oesophagus.

Toward More Efficient Surveillance of Barrett's Esophagus: Identification and Exclusion of Patients at Low Risk of Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic surveillance of Barrett's esophagus (BE) is probably not cost-effective. A sub-population with BE at increased risk of high-grade dysplasia (HGD) or esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) who could be targeted for cost-effective surveillance was sought. METHODS: The outcome for BE surveillance from 2003 to 2012 in a structured program was reviewed. Incidence rates and incidence rate ratios for developing HGD or EAC were calculated. Risk stratification identified individuals who could be considered for exclusion from surveillance. A health-state transition Markov cohort model evaluated the cost-effectiveness of focusing on higher-risk individuals. RESULTS: During 2067 person-years of follow-up of 640 patients, 17 individuals progressed to HGD or EAC (annual IR 0.8%). Individuals with columnar-lined esophagus (CLE) ≥2 cm had an annual IR of 1.2% and >8-fold increased relative risk of HGD or EAC, compared to CLE <2 cm [IR-0.14% (IRR 8.6, 95% CIs 4.5-12.8)]. Limiting the surveillance cohort after the first endoscopy to individuals with CLE ≥2 cm, or dysplasia, followed by a further restriction after the second endoscopy-exclusion of patients without intestinal metaplasia-removed 296 (46%) patients, and 767 (37%) person-years from surveillance. Limiting surveillance to the remaining individuals reduced the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio from US$60,858 to US$33,807 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Further restrictions were tested but failed to improve cost-effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: Based on stratification of risk, the number of patients requiring surveillance can be reduced by at least a third. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of US$50,000 per QALY, surveillance of higher-risk individuals becomes cost-effective.

Modelling the carbon footprint of reflux control.

BACKGROUND: The NHS is responsible for approximately 30% of all public sector carbon emissions. The Climate Change Act 2008 introduced legally binding targets to cut emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs) by at least 80% of the 1990 baseline by 2050. This paper seeks to examine two different strategies for the treatment of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease and their modelled costs and carbon emissions. METHODS: This study uses data from the costs of care of patients in the REFLUX study and NHS England Carbon Emissions Carbon Footprinting Report to model the carbon emissions associated with medical and surgical treatment of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. The main outcome measures are modelled financial costs and carbon emissions for medical and surgical treatment pathways. RESULTS: There is a high initial cost (financially and carbon emissions) for surgery, however subsequent year-on-year financial spend and carbon emissions are lower in patients who have had surgical treatment such that the total modelled financial cost of surgery is lower in the 14th year and carbon emissions are lower in the 9th year. The model is sensitive to changes in the efficiency of pharmaceutical procurement and surgical failure rate. CONCLUSIONS: The model has demonstrated that in cases of equivalent clinical benefit one pathway may be preferred on the basis of other factors including carbon emissions.