Percutaneous guided biopsy for diagnosing suspected primary malignant bone tumors in pediatric patients: a safe, accurate, and cost-saving procedure.

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous biopsy is the reference diagnostic procedure for adult musculoskeletal tumors. Its place in pediatrics is controversial and open biopsy remains recommended. OBJECTIVE: To assess diagnostic performance and feasibility of percutaneous biopsy performed on children and young adults for suspected malignant bone tumors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a 5-year retrospective study including patients ≤21 years who underwent a bone biopsy for a suspected malignant bone tumor. We assessed diagnostic yield (percentage of analyzable biopsies), accuracy (percentage of accurate diagnoses among all analyzable biopsies) and efficacy (percentage of accurate diagnoses among all biopsies), costs, anesthetic requirements and sample availability for biomedical research. Patients diagnosed with an open biopsy were used to compare diagnostic performances, anesthetic requirements and costs. RESULTS: We included 90 percutaneous and 27 open biopsies in 117 patients. For percutaneous biopsy, diagnostic yield was 95.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] 88.8-98.7%), accuracy was 96.2% (95% CI 86.8-99.5%) and efficacy was 89.3% (95% CI 78.1-96.0%). There was no statistical difference with open biopsy (Fisher exact test, P > 0.05). Mean costs were reduced with percutaneous biopsy: €1,937 (standard deviation [SD] €2,408) versus €6,362 (SD €5,033; Mann-Whitney, P < 0.0001). Thirty-two of the 48 (67%) patients included in clinical trials and diagnosed with percutaneous biopsy had suitable samples for ancillary analyses. CONCLUSION: Percutaneous biopsy is a valid alternative to open biopsy for diagnosing pediatric and young adult primary malignant bone tumors.

Territorial inequalities in management and conformity to clinical guidelines for sarcoma patients: an exhaustive population-based cohort analysis in the Rhône-Alpes region.

BACKGROUND: Sarcomas are rare cancers with great variability in clinical and histopathological presentation. The main objective of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) is to standardize diagnosis and treatment. METHODS: From March 2005 to February 2007, all patients diagnosed with localized sarcoma in the Rhône-Alpes region were included in a cohort-based study, to evaluate the compliance of sarcoma management with French guidelines in routine practice and to identify predictive factors for compliance with CGPs. RESULTS: 634 (71 %) patients with localized sarcoma satisfying the inclusion criteria were included out of 891 newly diagnosed sarcomas. Taking into account initial diagnosis until follow-up, overall conformity to CPGs was only 40 % [95 % confidence interval (CI) = 36-44], ranging from 54 % for gastrointestinal stromal tumor to 36 % for soft tissue sarcoma and 42 % for bone sarcoma. In multivariate analysis, primary tumor type [relative risk (RR) = 4.42, 95 % CI = 2.79-6.99, p < 0.001], dedicated multidisciplinary staff before surgery (RR = 4.19, 95 % CI = 2.39-7.35, p < 0.001) and management in specialized hospitals (RR = 3.71, 95 % CI = 2.43-5.66, p < 0.001) were identified as unique independent risk factors for conformity to CPGs for overall treatment sequence. CONCLUSIONS: With only 40 % of total conformity to CPGs, the conclusions support the improvement of initial sarcoma management and its performance in specialized centres or within specialized dedicated networks.

Clinicians' adherence versus non adherence to practice guidelines in the management of patients with sarcoma: a cost-effectiveness assessment in two European regions.

BACKGROUND: Although the management of sarcoma is improving, non adherence to clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) remains high, mainly because of the low incidence of the disease and the variety of histological subtypes. Since little is known about the health economics of sarcoma, we undertook a cost-effectiveness analysis (within the CONnective TIssue CAncer NETwork, CONTICANET) comparing costs and outcomes when clinicians adhered to CPGs and when they did not. METHODS: Patients studied had a histological diagnosis of sarcoma, were older than 15 years, and had been treated in the Rhône-Alpes region of France (in 2005/2006) or in the Veneto region of Italy (in 2007). Data collected retrospectively for the three years after diagnosis were used to determine relapse free survival and health costs (adopting the hospital's perspective and a microcosting approach). All costs were expressed in euros (€) at their 2009 value. A 4% annual discount rate was applied to both costs and effects. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was expressed as cost per relapse-free year gained when management was compliant with CPGs compared with when it was not. To capture uncertainty surrounding ICER, a probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed based on a non-parametric bootstrap method. RESULTS: A total of 219 patients were included in the study. Compliance with CPGs was observed for 118 patients (54%). Average total costs reached 23,571 euros when treatment was in accordance with CPGs and 27,313 euros when it was not. In relation to relapse-free survival, compliance with CPGs strictly dominates non compliance, i.e. it is both less costly and more effective. Taking uncertainty into account, the probability that compliance with CPGs still strictly dominates was 75%. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings should encourage physicians to increase their compliance with CPGs and healthcare administrators to invest in the implementation of CPGs in the management of sarcoma.

Multidisciplinarity and medical decision, impact for patients with cancer: sociological assessment of two tumour committees' organization.

PURPOSE: Medical practices in oncology are expected to be multidisciplinary, yet few articles studied how this may be concretely applied. In the present study, we evaluated the organization of two multidisciplinary committees, one for breast cancer and one for sarcoma, in a French Comprehensive Cancer Centre. METHODS: Both tumours were specifically chosen so as to emphasise substantial differences in relation with incidence, histological subtypes, management strategy, and scientific evidence. Between 2003 and 2004, 404 decision processes were observed, 210 for sarcoma (26 meetings) and 194 for breast cancer (10 meetings). The number of physicians who took part in the discussions and their medical specialties were systematically noted as well as the number of contradictory discussions, medical specialties represented in these contradictory discussions and the topics of contradiction. The last measured data was whether the final committee's decision was in conformity with the referent preferences or not. All these measures were related to the referent's medical speciality and working place, to the stage of the disease and to the disease management stage. RESULTS: Committees' specificities concerned their organization, referent's medical specialties, the number of participants in discussions and their medical specialties. Discussions in the sarcoma committee tended to be more multidisciplinary, involving more specialties. Initial strategy proposal for one patient was modified during the discussions for 86 patients out of 210 (41%) and for 62 out of 194 (32%) respectively for sarcoma and breast cancer. However, there was no significant difference in the rate of contradictory discussions between breast cancer and sarcoma committees (32% versus 41% respectively; P = 0.08). The rates of contradictory discussions were similar for localized cancers, local relapse and metastasis disease (37%, 41% and 34% respectively; P = 0.86). CONCLUSIONS: The present study reports more than 30% of changes concerning strategy for patient with cancer due to multidisciplinary discussions. This indicates that, providing tumour committees are adapted to the pathologies' characteristics, they can promote a collective and multidisciplinary approach to oncology.