Textbook outcomes for oesophagectomy: A valid composite measure assessment tool for surgical performance in a specialist unit.

INTRODUCTION: In 2017 the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit Group proposed a ten-item composite measure for a 'textbook outcome' (TBO) following oesophago-gastric resection. Studies have shown associations between TBO and improved conditional and overall survival. The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of TBO to assess the outcomes from a single specialist unit in a country, with low incidence of disease, allowing comparisons with international specialist centres. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected oesophageal cancer surgery data at a single centre, in Australia, between 2013 and 2018. Multivariable logistical regression assessed association between baseline factors and TBO. Post-operative complications were analysed in two separate groups as Clavien-Dindo ≥2 (CD ≥ 2) and Clavien-Dindo ≥3 (CD ≥ 3). Cox-proportional hazards regression analysis determined the association between TBO and survival. RESULTS: 246 patients were analysed, with 50.8% (n = 125) achieving a TBO when complications were defined as CD ≥ 2 and 58.9% (n = 145) when using CD ≥ 3. Patients aged ≥75, and those with a pre-operative respiratory co-morbidity were less likely to achieve a TBO. Overall survival was not influenced by TBO when complications were defined as CD ≥ 2, however it was higher when a TBO was achieved, and complications were defined as CD ≥ 3 (HR 0.54, 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.84, P = 0.007). CONCLUSION: TBO is a multi-parameter metric that allowed benchmarking of the quality of oesophageal cancer surgery in our unit, providing favourable outcomes compared with other published data. There was an association between TBO and improved overall survival when the definition of severe complications was CD ≥ 3.

Responsiveness and convergent validity of QLU-C10D and EQ-5D-3L in assessing short-term quality of life following esophagectomy.

AIM: This study assessed the responsiveness and convergent validity of two preference-based measures; the newly developed cancer-specific EORTC Quality of Life Utility Measure-Core 10 dimensions (QLU-C10D) relative to the generic three-level version of the EuroQol 5 dimensions (EQ-5D-3L) in evaluating short-term health related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes after esophagectomy. METHODS: Participants were enrolled in a multicentre randomised controlled trial to determine the impact of preoperative and postoperative immunonutrition versus standard nutrition in patients with esophageal cancer. HRQoL was assessed seven days before and 42 days after esophagectomy. Standardized Response Mean and Effect Size were calculated to assess responsiveness. Ceiling effects for each dimension were calculated as the proportion of the best level responses for that dimension at follow-up/post-operatively. Convergent validity was assessed using Spearman's correlation and the level of agreement was explored using Bland-Altman plots. RESULTS: Data from 164 respondents (mean age: 63 years, 81% male) were analysed. HRQoL significantly reduced on both measures with large effect sizes (> 0.80), and a greater mean difference (0.29 compared to 0.16) on QLU-C10D. Both measures had ceiling effects (> 15%) on all dimensions at baseline. Following esophagectomy, ceiling effects were observed with self-care (86%), mobility (67%), anxiety/depression (55%) and pain/discomfort (19%) dimensions on EQ-5D-3L. For QLU-C10D ceiling effects were observed with emotional function (53%), physical function (16%), nausea (35%), sleep (31%), bowel problems (21%) and pain (20%). A strong correlation (r = 0.71) was observed between EQ-5D-3L anxiety and QLU-C10D emotional function dimensions. Good agreement (3.7% observations outside the limits of agreement) was observed between the utility scores. CONCLUSION: The QLU-C10D is comparable to the more widely applied generic EQ-5D-3L, however, QLU-C10D was more sensitive to short-term utility changes following esophagectomy. Cognisant of requirements by policy makers to apply generic utility measures in cost effectiveness studies, the disease-specific QLU-C10D should be used alongside the generic measures like EQ-5D-3L. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry (ACTRN12611000178943) on the 15th of February 2011.

Preoperative Ultrasound Assessment of Regional Lymph Nodes in Melanoma Patients Does not Provide Reliable Nodal Staging: Results From a Large Multicenter Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether preoperative ultrasound (US) assessment of regional lymph nodes in patients who present with primary cutaneous melanoma provides accurate staging. BACKGROUND: It has been suggested that preoperative US could avoid the need for sentinel node (SN) biopsy, but in most single-institution reports, the sensitivity of preoperative US has been low. METHODS: Preoperative US data and SNB results were analyzed for patients enrolled at 20 centers participating in the screening phase of the second Multicenter Selective Lymphadenectomy Trial. Excised SNs were histopathologically assessed and considered positive if any melanoma was seen. RESULTS: SNs were identified and removed from 2859 patients who had preoperative US evaluation. Among those patients, 548 had SN metastases. US was positive (abnormal) in 87 patients (3.0%). Among SN-positive patients, 39 (7.1%) had an abnormal US. When analyzed by lymph node basin, 3302 basins were evaluated, and 38 were true positive (1.2%). By basin, the sensitivity of US was 6.6% (95% confidence interval: 4.6-8.7) and the specificity 98.0% (95% CI: 97.5-98.5). Median cross-sectional area of all SN metastases was 0.13 mm2; in US true-positive nodes, it was 6.8 mm2. US sensitivity increased with increasing Breslow thickness of the primary melanoma (0% for ≤1 mm thickness, 11.9% for >4 mm thickness). US sensitivity was not significantly greater with higher trial center volume or with pre-US lymphoscintigraphy. CONCLUSION: In the MSLT-II screening phase population, SN tumor volume was usually too small to be reliably detected by US. For accurate nodal staging to guide the management of melanoma patients, US is not an effective substitute for SN biopsy.

Evaluation of the efficacy of 3D total-body photography with sequential digital dermoscopy in a high-risk melanoma cohort: protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Melanoma is Australia's fourth most common cancer. Early detection is fundamental in maximising health outcomes and minimising treatment costs. To date, population-based screening programmes have not been justified in health economic studies. However, a skin surveillance approach targeting high-risk individuals could improve the cost-benefit ratio. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This paper describes a 2-year longitudinal randomised controlled trial (RCT) to compare routine clinical care (control) with an intensive skin surveillance programme (intervention) consisting of novel three-dimensional (3D) total-body photography (TBP), sequential digital dermoscopy and melanoma-risk stratification, in a high-risk melanoma cohort. Primary outcomes will evaluate clinical, economic and consumer impact of the intervention. Clinical outcomes will evaluate differences in the rate of lesion excisions/biopsies per person, benign to malignant ratio for excisions and thickness of melanomas diagnosed. A health economic analysis using government data repositories will capture healthcare utilisation and costs relating to skin surveillance. Consumer questionnaires will examine intervention acceptability, the psychological impact, and attitudes towards melanoma risk and sun protective behaviour. Secondary outcomes include the development of a holistic risk algorithm incorporating clinical, phenotypic and genetic factors to facilitate the identification of those most likely to benefit from this surveillance approach. Furthermore, the feasibility of integrating the intervention with teledermatology to enhance specialist care in remote locations will be evaluated. This will be the first RCT to compare a targeted surveillance programme utilising new 3D TBP technology against current routine clinical care for individuals at high risk of melanoma. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has received Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC) approval from both Metro South Health HREC (HREC/17/QPAH/816) and The University of Queensland HREC (2018000074). TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ANZCTR12618000267257; Pre-results.

Assessment of morbidity following regional nodal dissection in the axilla and groin for metastatic melanoma.

BACKGROUND: This study assessed and compared the morbidity of nodal dissection in the axilla and groin including sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB), completion lymph node dissection for a positive SLNB (CLND) and therapeutic lymph node dissection (TLND) with and without adjuvant radiotherapy (RT). METHODS: Patients who had nodal dissection in the axilla or groin for cutaneous melanoma over an 18-year period (1995-2013) were prospectively documented on a database. The median follow-up was nearly 3 years. Early complications and clinically relevant lymphoedema were retrospectively analysed to assess the incidence and differences between the region and type of nodal surgery. RESULTS: Included were 1521 patients following nodal dissection in the axilla (916 patients) and groin (605 patients). Less early complications occurred following SLNB in the axilla compared with the groin (5% versus 14%, P = 0.0001). Early complications were similar for CLND and TLND in the groin (49% versus 43%, P = 0.879) and axilla (28% versus 33%, P = 0.607). Moderate to severe lymphoedema rates were similar following axillary SLNB and CLND (6% versus 8%, P = 0.407). The lymphoedema rate for groin SLNB was lower than CLND (10% versus 20%, P = 0.063). No significant difference in lymphoedema rates followed CLND and TLND in each region. Following TLND, RT increased lymphoedema rates. CONCLUSIONS: Morbidity may occur following SLNB with the groin having a higher rate of early complications and lymphoedema compared with the axilla. The morbidity following CLND and TLND were similar. Lymphoedema rates were increased following RT.

TOPGEAR: a randomised phase III trial of perioperative ECF chemotherapy versus preoperative chemoradiation plus perioperative ECF chemotherapy for resectable gastric cancer (an international, intergroup trial of the AGITG/TROG/EORTC/NCIC CTG).

BACKGROUND: The optimal management of patients with resectable gastric cancer continues to evolve in Western countries. Following publication of the US Intergroup 0116 and UK Medical Research Council MAGIC trials, there are now two standards of care for adjuvant therapy in resectable gastric cancer, at least in the Western world: postoperative chemoradiotherapy and perioperative epirubicin/cisplatin/fluorouracil (ECF) chemotherapy. We hypothesize that adding chemoradiation to standard perioperative ECF chemotherapy will achieve further survival gains. We also believe there are advantages to administering chemoradiation in the preoperative rather than postoperative setting. In this article, we describe the TOPGEAR trial, which is a randomised phase III trial comparing control arm therapy of perioperative ECF chemotherapy with experimental arm therapy of preoperative chemoradiation plus perioperative ECF chemotherapy. METHODS/DESIGN: Eligible patients with resectable adenocarcinoma of the stomach or gastroesophageal junction will be randomized to receive either perioperative chemotherapy alone (3 preoperative and 3 postoperative cycles of ECF) or perioperative chemotherapy plus preoperative chemoradiation. In the chemoradiation arm, patients receive 2 cycles of ECF plus chemoradiation prior to surgery, and then following surgery 3 further cycles of ECF are given. The trial is being conducted in two Parts; Part 1 (phase II component) has recruited 120 patients with the aim of assessing feasibility, safety and preliminary efficacy of preoperative chemoradiation. Part 2 (phase III component) will recruit a further 632 patients to provide a total sample size of 752 patients. The primary endpoint of the phase III trial is overall survival. The trial includes quality of life and biological substudies, as well as a health economic evaluation. In addition, the trial incorporates a rigorous quality assurance program that includes real time central review of radiotherapy plans and central review of surgical technique. DISCUSSION: TOPGEAR is an international, intergroup collaboration led by the Australasian Gastro-Intestinal Trials Group (AGITG), in collaboration with the Trans-Tasman Radiation Oncology Group (TROG), European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) and the NCIC Clinical Trials Group. It addresses a globally significant question that will help inform future international standards for clinical practice in resectable gastric cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12609000035224 . Registered 30 May 2009.