The International Gynecologic Cancer Society consensus statement on palliative care.

At the International Gynecologic Cancer Society (IGCS) Global Meeting in 2023 held in Seoul, South Korea, we held a Presidential Plenary Session focusing on palliative care (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TBDIoQ50xgI). We hereby reaffirm the significance of this session, express the Palliative Care Declaration made by the IGCS, and describe our action plan for the future.

Exploring global barriers to optimal ovarian cancer care: thematic analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the barriers to ovarian cancer care, as reported in the open ended responses of a global expert opinion survey, highlighting areas for improvement in global ovarian cancer care. Potential solutions to overcome these barriers are proposed. METHODS: Data from the expert opinion survey, designed to assess the organization of ovarian cancer care worldwide, were analyzed. The survey was distributed across a global network of physicians. We examined free text, open ended responses concerning the barriers to ovarian cancer care. A qualitative thematic analysis was conducted to identify, analyze, and report meaningful patterns within the data. RESULTS: A total of 1059 physicians from 115 countries completed the survey, with 438 physicians from 93 countries commenting on the barriers to ovarian cancer care. Thematic analysis gave five major themes, regardless of income category or location: societal factors, inadequate resources in hospital, economic barriers, organization of the specialty, and need for early detection. Suggested solutions include accessible resource stratified guidelines, multidisciplinary teamwork, public education, and development of gynecological oncology training pathways internationally. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis provides an international perspective on the main barriers to optimal ovarian cancer care. The themes derived from our analysis highlight key target areas to focus efforts to reduce inequalities in global care. Future regional analysis involving local representatives will enable country specific recommendations to improve the quality of care and ultimately to work towards closing the care gap.

Exploring international differences in ovarian cancer care: a survey report on global patterns of care, current practices, and barriers.

OBJECTIVE: Although global disparities in survival rates for patients with ovarian cancer have been described, variation in care has not been assessed globally. This study aimed to evaluate global ovarian cancer care and barriers to care. METHODS: A survey was developed by international ovarian cancer specialists and was distributed through networks and organizational partners of the International Gynecologic Cancer Society, the Society of Gynecologic Oncology, and the European Society of Gynecological Oncology. Respondents received questions about care organization. Outcomes were stratified by World Bank Income category and analyzed using descriptive statistics and logistic regressions. RESULTS: A total of 1059 responses were received from 115 countries. Respondents were gynecological cancer surgeons (83%, n=887), obstetricians/gynecologists (8%, n=80), and other specialists (9%, n=92). Income category breakdown was as follows: high-income countries (46%), upper-middle-income countries (29%), and lower-middle/low-income countries (25%). Variation in care organization was observed across income categories. Respondents from lower-middle/low-income countries reported significantly less frequently that extensive resections were routinely performed during cytoreductive surgery. Furthermore, these countries had significantly fewer regional networks, cancer registries, quality registries, and patient advocacy groups. However, there is also scope for improvement in these components in upper-middle/high-income countries. The main barriers to optimal care for the entire group were patient co-morbidities, advanced presentation, and social factors (travel distance, support systems). High-income respondents stated that the main barriers were lack of surgical time/staff and patient preferences. Middle/low-income respondents additionally experienced treatment costs and lack of access to radiology/pathology/genetic services as main barriers. Lack of access to systemic agents was reported by one-third of lower-middle/low-income respondents. CONCLUSIONS: The current survey report highlights global disparities in the organization of ovarian cancer care. The main barriers to optimal care are experienced across all income categories, while additional barriers are specific to income levels. Taking action is crucial to improve global care and strive towards diminishing survival disparities and closing the care gap.

Proceedings From the 1st International Conference 'Current Concepts and Controversies in Gynecologic and Urologic Oncology'.

The N.N. Alexandrov National Cancer Center of Belarus organized a collaborative international conference entitled 'Current Concepts and Controversies in Gynecologic and Urologic Oncology' with the International Gynecologic Cancer Society and the United States National Cancer Institute. International, regional, and national experts presented recent developments and local conditions in the treatment of gynecologic cancers. Findings were reviewed with the intent of optimizing the management of women with gynecologic cancers across the Commonwealth of Independent States region. At the end of the conference, a resolution was adopted to identify areas for improvement and future collaborations.

Sister Society Meeting on Global Education Development and Collaboration: Meeting Report.

OBJECTIVES: To identify common barriers to teaching and training and to identify strategies that would be useful in developing future training programs in gynecologic oncology in low- and middle- income countries. METHODS: There is a lack of overall strategy to meet the needs of education and training in gynecologic oncology in low- and middle- income countries, the leaderships of sister societies and global health volunteers met at the European Society of Gynecologic Oncology in October 23, 2015. The challenges of the training programs supported by gynecologic oncology societies, major universities and individual efforts were presented and discussed. Strategies to improve education and training were identified. RESULTS: Major challenges include language barriers, limited surgical equipment, inadequate internet access, lack of local support for sustainability in training programs, inadequate pathology and radiation oncology, finance and a global deficiency in identifying sites and personnel in partnering or developing training programs. The leaderships identified various key components including consultation with the local Ministry of Health, local educational institutions; inclusion of the program into existing local programs, a needs assessment, and the development of curriculum and regional centers of excellence. CONCLUSIONS: Proper preparation of training sites and trainers, the development of global curriculum, the establishment of centers of excellence, and the ability to measure outcomes are important to improve education and training in gynecologic oncology in low- and middle- income countries.

The every woman study™ low- and middle-income countries edition protocol: A multi-country observational study to assess opportunities and challenges to improving survival and quality of life for women with ovarian cancer.

BACKGROUND: Ovarian cancer is a challenging disease to diagnose and treat effectively with five-year survival rates below 50%. Previous patient experience research in high-income countries highlighted common challenges and opportunities to improve survival and quality of life for women affected by ovarian cancer. However, no comparable data exist for low-and middle-income countries, where 70% of women with the disease live. This study aims to address this evidence gap. METHODS: This is an observational multi-country study set in low- and middle-income countries. We aim to recruit over 2000 women diagnosed with ovarian cancer across multiple hospitals in 24 countries in Asia, Africa and South America. Country sample sizes have been calculated (n = 70-96 participants /country), taking account of varying national five-year disease prevalence rates. Women within five years of their diagnosis, who are in contact with participating hospitals, are invited to take part in the study. A questionnaire has been adapted from a tool previously used in high-income countries. It comprises 57 multiple choice and two open-ended questions designed to collect information on demographics, women's knowledge of ovarian cancer, route to diagnosis, access to treatments, surgery and genetic testing, support needs, the impact of the disease on women and their families, and their priorities for action. The questionnaire has been designed in English, translated into local languages and tested according to local ethics requirements. Questionnaires will be administered by a trained member of the clinical team. CONCLUSION: This study will inform further research, advocacy, and action in low- and middle-income countries based on tailored approaches to the national, regional and global challenges and opportunities. In addition, participating countries can choose to repeat the study to track progress and the protocol can be adapted for other countries and other diseases.

The Society of Thoracic Surgeons: 30-day operative mortality and morbidity risk models.

BACKGROUND: Although 30 day risk-adjusted operative mortality (ROM) has been used for quality assessment, it is not sufficient to describe the outcomes after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) surgery. Risk-adjusted major morbidity may differentially impact quality of care (as complications occur more frequently than death) and enhance a surgical team's ability to assess their quality. This study identified the preoperative risk factors associated with several complications and a composite outcome (the presence of any major morbidity or 30-day operative mortality or both). METHODS: For CABG procedures, the 1997 to 1999 Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) National Adult Cardiac Surgery Database was used to develop ROM and risk-adjusted morbidity (ROMB) models. Risk factors were selected using standard STS univariate screening and multivariate logistic regression approaches. Risk model performance was assessed. Across STS participating sites, the association of observed-to-expected (O/E) ratios for ROM and ROMB was evaluated. RESULTS: The 30-day operative death and major complication rates for STS CABG procedures were 3.05% and 13.40%, respectively (503,478 CABG procedures), including stroke (1.63%), renal failure (3.53%), reoperation (5.17%), prolonged ventilation (5.96%), and sternal infection (0.63%). Risk models were developed (c-indexes for stroke [0.72], renal failure [0.76], reoperation [0.64], prolonged ventilation [0.75], sternal infection [0.66], and the composite endpoint [0.71]). Only a slight correlation was found, however, between ROMB and ROM indicators. CONCLUSIONS: Used in combination, ROMB and ROM may provide the surgical team with additional information to evaluate the quality of their care as well as valuable insights to allow them to focus on areas for improvement.

Use of continuous quality improvement to increase use of process measures in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery: a randomized controlled trial.

CONTEXT: A rigorous evaluation of continuous quality improvement (CQI) in medical practice has not been carried out on a national scale. OBJECTIVE: To test whether low-intensity CQI interventions can be used to speed the national adoption of 2 coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery process-of-care measures: preoperative beta-blockade therapy and internal mammary artery (IMA) grafting in patients 75 years or older. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Three hundred fifty-nine academic and nonacademic hospitals (treating 267 917 patients using CABG surgery) participating in the Society of Thoracic Surgeons National Cardiac Database between January 2000 and July 2002 were randomized to a control arm or to 1 of 2 groups that used CQI interventions designed to increase use of the process-of-care measures. INTERVENTION: Each intervention group received measure-specific information, including a call to action to a physician leader; educational products; and periodic longitudinal, nationally benchmarked, site-specific feedback. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Differential incorporation of the targeted care processes into practice at the intervention sites vs the control sites, assessed by measuring preintervention (January-December 2000)/postintervention (January 2001-July 2002) site differences and by using a hierarchical patient-level analysis. RESULTS: From January 2000 to July 2002, use of both process measures increased nationally (beta-blockade, 60.0%-65.6%; IMA grafting, 76.2%-82.8%). Use of beta-blockade increased significantly more at beta-blockade intervention sites (7.3% [SD, 12.8%]) vs control sites (3.6% [SD, 11.5%]) in the preintervention/postintervention (P =.04) and hierarchical analyses (P<.001). Use of IMA grafting also tended to increase at IMA intervention sites (8.7% [SD, 17.5%]) vs control sites (5.4% [SD,15.8%]) (P =.20 and P =.11 for preintervention/postintervention and hierarchical analyses, respectively). Both interventions tended to have more impact at lower-volume CABG sites (for interaction: P =.04 for beta-blockade; P =.02 for IMA grafting). CONCLUSIONS: A multifaceted, physician-led, low-intensity CQI effort can improve the adoption of care processes into national practice within the context of a medical specialty society infrastructure.