Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 9 de 9
Filter
1.
J Surg Oncol ; 129(2): 392-402, 2024 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37750346

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: We sought to assess the uptake of minimally invasive hysterectomy among patients with endometrial and cervical cancer in Ontario, Canada, and assess the equity of access to minimally invasive surgery (MIS) by evaluating associations with patient, disease, institutional, and provider factors. METHODS: This is a retrospective population-based cohort study of hysterectomy for endometrial and cervical cancer in Ontario (2000-2017). Surgical approach, clinicopathologic, sociodemographic, institutional, and provider factors were identified through administrative databases. Fisher's exact, χ2 , Wilcoxon rank sum, logistic regression, and Cox proportional hazards modeling were used to explore factors associated with MIS. RESULTS: A total of 27 652 patients were included. In total, 6199/24 264 (26%) endometrial and 842/3388 (25%) cervical cancer patients received MIS. The proportion of MIS to open surgeries increased from <0.1% in 2000 to over 55% in 2017 (odds ratio [OR] = 1.31, confidence interval [CI] = 1.28-1.34). Low-income quintile, rurality, low hospital volume, nonacademic hospital, nongynecologic oncology surgeon, and earlier year of surgeon graduation were associated with reduced odds of MIS (OR < 1). CONCLUSIONS: The uptake of MIS hysterectomy increased steadily over the time period. Receipt of MIS is dependent upon multiple social determinants, provider variables, and systems factors. These disparities raise concern for health equity in Ontario and have significant implications for health systems planning and resource allocation.


Subject(s)
Uterine Cervical Neoplasms , Female , Humans , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/surgery , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/pathology , Retrospective Studies , Ontario/epidemiology , Cohort Studies , Hysterectomy , Health Services Accessibility , Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures , Neoplasm Staging
2.
Gynecol Oncol ; 165(2): 317-322, 2022 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35248391

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Routine preoperative axial imaging studies (CT/MRI) are not recommended for endometrioid endometrial cancer as they are unlikely to change management and may delay surgery. This study evaluated the association of receiving preoperative imaging on various outcomes. METHODS: A population-based cohort of Endometrioid Endometrial Cancer cases from 2006 to 2016 were identified from the Cancer Registry in Ontario, Canada. Wait time to surgery, type of surgery and overall survival were evaluated in patients with and without preoperative imaging. Predictive factors for wait time > 56 days and aggressive surgery (radical hysterectomy / lymphadenectomy) were determined using multivariable regression analysis. RESULTS: 13,050 cases were included. 22.6% of patients received preoperative imaging, mainly CT scans. Most patients (95.9%) received no neoadjuvant treatment. Patients with preoperative imaging were more likely to have neoadjuvant treatment (11.7% vs. 1.8%) and less likely to have surgery at 180 days post diagnosis (87.9% vs 94.6%). Patients with preoperative imaging had median wait time to surgery of 64 days (47-87), compared to 53 days (36-74) than those without imaging (p < 0.001). Multivariable modeling showed preoperative imaging was associated with decreased odds of having surgery within 56 days (OR = 0.68, 95% CI = 0.62-0.75), and increased odds (OR = 1.73, 95% CI = 1.53-1.95) of having aggressive surgery. The 5-year overall survival for patients with imaging was 84.8% versus 91.1% for patients without preoperative imaging. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative imaging was associated with longer wait times to surgery, more aggressive surgery, surgery with a gynecologic oncologist and increased use of neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatment. In early-stage disease there was no observed improvement in overall survival for patients with preoperative imaging. Further research on potential benefits of preoperative imaging in higher risk patients is required.


Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Endometrioid , Endometrial Neoplasms , Carcinoma, Endometrioid/diagnostic imaging , Carcinoma, Endometrioid/surgery , Endometrial Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Endometrial Neoplasms/surgery , Female , Humans , Hysterectomy , Neoadjuvant Therapy , Neoplasm Staging , Ontario/epidemiology , Operative Time , Retrospective Studies , Tomography, X-Ray Computed
3.
Gynecol Oncol ; 161(2): 361-366, 2021 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33750604

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Clinical practice guidelines recommend against routine preoperative axial imaging studies (CT/MRI) for endometrial cancer, except for cases of locally advanced disease or aggressive histologies. This study utilized population-based data to evaluate the use of preoperative imaging and factors associated with its use. METHODS: A population-based cohort of women diagnosed with endometrial cancer from 2006 to 2016 were identified from the Ontario Cancer Registry in Ontario, Canada. Patients were excluded if they had: hysterectomy prior to the date of diagnosis, non-epithelial histology or a prior cancer diagnosis within 5 years. Preoperative imaging (CT or MRI) rates were calculated over time. Predictive factors for preoperative imaging use were determined using multi-variable regression analysis. RESULTS: 17,718 cases were eligible for analysis. From 2006 to 2016, the proportion of patients receiving preoperative imaging increased from 22.2% to 39.3%. In a subgroup of patients with low-risk disease (stage 1, endometrioid adenocarcinoma), imaging increased from 16.3% to 29.5%. Multivariate analysis showed an association between preoperative imaging and advanced stage, advanced grade, non-endometrioid morphology, surgery with a gynecologic oncologist, surgery at a teaching hospital and a later year of diagnosis. From 2006 to 2016, the yearly incidence of endometrial cancer increased from 22.3/100,000 to 36.1/100,000, representing a mean annual increase of 3.6% per year. CONCLUSIONS: Endometrial cancer incidence and the use of preoperative imaging are increasing. Factors most associated with preoperative imaging are high-risk features. However, preoperative imaging is still being performed in low-risk patients, indicating non-adherence to guidelines, which has implications for constrained healthcare resources.


Subject(s)
Adenocarcinoma/diagnostic imaging , Carcinosarcoma/diagnostic imaging , Endometrial Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Guideline Adherence/trends , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/trends , Preoperative Care/trends , Adenocarcinoma/epidemiology , Adenocarcinoma/pathology , Adenocarcinoma/surgery , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Carcinosarcoma/epidemiology , Carcinosarcoma/pathology , Carcinosarcoma/surgery , Endometrial Neoplasms/epidemiology , Endometrial Neoplasms/pathology , Endometrial Neoplasms/surgery , Female , Humans , Hysterectomy , Incidence , Magnetic Resonance Imaging/standards , Magnetic Resonance Imaging/trends , Middle Aged , Multivariate Analysis , Neoplasm Staging , Ontario/epidemiology , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/standards , Preoperative Care/methods , Preoperative Care/standards , Registries , Retrospective Studies , Risk Assessment , Tomography, X-Ray Computed/standards , Tomography, X-Ray Computed/trends , Young Adult
4.
Gynecol Oncol ; 161(1): 236-243, 2021 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33526258

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: International guidelines recommend pneumococcal pneumonia and influenza vaccination for all patients with solid organ malignancies prior to initiating chemotherapy. Baseline vaccination rates (March 2019) for pneumococcal pneumonia and influenza at our tertiary cancer centre were 8% and 40%, respectively. The aim of this study was to increase the number of gynecologic chemotherapy patients receiving pneumococcal and influenza vaccinations to 80% by March 2020. METHODS: We performed an interrupted time series study using structured quality improvement methodology. Three interventions were introduced to address vaccination barriers: an in-house vaccination program, a staff education campaign, and a patient care bundle (pre-printed prescription, information brochure, vaccine record booklet). Process and outcome data were collected by patient survey and pharmacy audit and analyzed on statistical process control charts. RESULTS: We identified 195 eligible patients. Pneumococcal and influenza vaccination rates rose significantly from 5% to a monthly mean of 61% and from 36% to a monthly mean of 67%, respectively. The 80% target was reached for both vaccines during one or more months of study. The in-house vaccination and staff education programs were major contributors to the improvement, whereas the information brochure and record booklet were minor contributors. CONCLUSIONS: Three interventions to promote pneumococcal and influenza vaccination among chemotherapy patients resulted in significantly improved vaccination rates. Lessons learned about promoting vaccine uptake may be generalizable to different populations and vaccine types. In response to the global COVID-19 pandemic, initiatives to expand the program to all chemotherapy patients at our centre are underway.


Subject(s)
Genital Neoplasms, Female/complications , Immunization Programs/organization & administration , Influenza Vaccines , Influenza, Human/prevention & control , Pneumococcal Vaccines , Pneumonia, Pneumococcal/prevention & control , Quality Improvement/organization & administration , Cancer Care Facilities/organization & administration , Female , Genital Neoplasms, Female/drug therapy , Health Care Surveys , Health Services Accessibility/organization & administration , Humans , Influenza, Human/etiology , Ontario , Patient Acceptance of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Pneumonia, Pneumococcal/etiology , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/standards , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/statistics & numerical data , Professional-Patient Relations , Tertiary Care Centers/organization & administration
5.
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand ; 100(2): 353-361, 2021 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33000463

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of the study is to evaluate the impact of an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program implemented in a Gynecologic Oncology population undergoing a laparotomy at a Canadian tertiary care center. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Prospectively collected data, using the American College of Surgeons' National Surgical Quality Improvement Program dataset (ACS NSQIP), was used to compare 30-day postoperative outcomes of gynecologic oncology patients undergoing a laparotomy before and after the 2018 implementation of an ERAS program in a Canadian regional cancer center. Patient demographics, surgical variables and postoperative outcomes of 187 patients undergoing surgery in 2019 were compared with those of 441 patients undergoing surgery between January 2016 and December 2017. Student's t, Mann-Whitney U and Chi-square tests, as well as multivariate linear and logistic regressions were used to evaluate baseline characteristics and 30-day postoperative complications. RESULTS: Length of stay was significantly shortened in the study population after introducing the ERAS protocol, from a mean of 4.7 (SD = 3.8) days to a mean of 3.8 (SD = 3.2) days (P = .0001). The overall complication rate decreased from 24.3% to 16% (P = .02). Significant decreases in the rates of postoperative infections (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.56, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.31-0.99) and cardiovascular complications (adjusted OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.09-0.79) were noted, without a significant increase in readmission rate (adjusted OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.21-1.07). CONCLUSIONS: Introducing an ERAS program for gynecologic oncology patients undergoing laparotomy was effective in shortening length of stay and the overall complication rate without a significant increase in readmission. Advocacy for broader implementation of ERAS among gynecologic oncology services and ongoing discussion on challenges and opportunities in the implementation process are warranted to improve patient outcomes and experiences.


Subject(s)
Enhanced Recovery After Surgery , Genital Neoplasms, Female/surgery , Female , Gynecologic Surgical Procedures , Humans , Length of Stay/statistics & numerical data , Middle Aged , Ontario/epidemiology , Patient Readmission/statistics & numerical data , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , Prospective Studies , Tertiary Care Centers
6.
JAMA Netw Open ; 1(5): e182081, 2018 09 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30646153

ABSTRACT

Importance: In women with locally advanced cancer of the cervix (LACC), staging defines disease extent and guides therapy. Currently, undetected disease outside the radiation field can result in undertreatment or, if disease is disseminated, overtreatment. Objective: To determine whether adding fludeoxyglucose F 18 positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) to conventional staging with CT of the abdomen and pelvis affects therapy received in women with LACC. Design, Setting, and Participants: A randomized clinical trial was conducted. Women with newly diagnosed histologically confirmed International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage IB to IVA carcinoma of the cervix who were candidates for chemotherapy and radiation therapy (CRT) were allocated 2:1 to PET-CT plus CT of the abdomen and pelvis or CT alone. Enrollment occurred between April 2010 and June 2014 at 6 regional cancer centers in Ontario, Canada. The PET-CT scanners were at 6 associated academic institutions. The median follow-up at the time of the analysis was 3 years. The analysis was conducted on March 30, 2017. Interventions: Patients received either PET-CT plus CT of the abdomen and pelvis or CT of the abdomen and pelvis. Main Outcomes and Measures: Treatment delivered, defined as standard pelvic CRT vs more extensive CRT, ie, extended field radiotherapy or therapy with palliative intent. Results: One hundred seventy-one patients were allocated to PET-CT (n = 113) or CT (n = 58). The trial stopped early before the planned target of 288 was reached because of low recruitment. Mean (SD) age was 48.1 (11.2) years in the PET-CT group vs 48.9 (12.7) years in the CT group. In the 112 patients who received PET-CT, 68 (60.7%) received standard pelvic CRT, 38 (33.9%) more extensive CRT, and 6 (5.4%) palliative treatment. The corresponding data for the 56 patients who received CT alone were 42 (75.0%), 11 (19.6%), and 3 (5.4%). Overall, 44 patients (39.3%) in the PET-CT group received more extensive CRT or palliative treatment compared with 14 patients (25.0%) in the CT group (odds ratio, 2.05; 95% CI, 0.96-4.37; P = .06). Twenty-four patients in the PET-CT group (21.4%) received extended field radiotherapy to para-aortic nodes and 14 (12.5%) to common iliac nodes compared with 8 (14.3%) and 3 (5.4%), respectively, in the CT group (odds ratio, 1.64; 95% CI, 0.68-3.92; P = .27). Conclusions and Relevance: There was a trend for more extensive CRT with PET-CT, but the difference was not significant because the trial was underpowered. This trial provides information on the utility of PET-CT for staging in LACC. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00895349.


Subject(s)
Positron Emission Tomography Computed Tomography/statistics & numerical data , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/classification , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Chemoradiotherapy/methods , Female , Fluorodeoxyglucose F18/therapeutic use , Humans , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Staging/methods , Neoplasm Staging/statistics & numerical data , Ontario/epidemiology , Positron Emission Tomography Computed Tomography/methods , Radiopharmaceuticals/therapeutic use , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/diagnosis , Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/epidemiology
7.
Health Expect ; 18(5): 1066-80, 2015 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23663240

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Women with recurrent ovarian cancer depend on their physicians to provide them with information about their diagnosis and available treatment options if they wish to participate in the process of choosing the treatment. There is no information on how oncologists give information to women during the physician-patient encounter at the time the disease recurs. OBJECTIVES: To explore from the oncologists' perspective (i) the extent to which oncologists provide their own patients who are experiencing their first recurrence of ovarian cancer with the same information about management options, and (ii) any explicit or implicit criteria they use to decide whether and how to tailor the information to individual patients. METHODS: We adopted a qualitative, exploratory descriptive approach to begin to understand oncologists' perspectives on how they gave information to patients within the context of their clinical practice. Individual interviews were used to identify themes related to the study objectives. RESULTS: Fifteen gynaecologic and five medical oncologists participated. Theme 1 describes the extent to which oncologists give information to their patients in the same way or in different ways. This section describes how the same oncologist may modify the depth of information transfer based on several factors. Theme 2 focuses on the factors that influence what information is given. For example, the amount and type of information given is based on the oncologist's on-going assessment of how the patient is assimilating the information shared during the medical encounter, the oncologists' perception of their relationship with the patient and the oncologist's assessment of what role they should take in decision making. Theme 3 involves the factors that influenced how information is given. For example, the information shared may vary based on the oncologist's perception of the patient's vitality, the patient's comprehension of the information, the patient's emotional well-being. In addition, the oncologist may make the information relevant for the patient by using analogies. Different types of information may be shared based on the oncologist's perception of patient- or family-initiated question. The information relay may be curtailed based on competing demands for the oncologist. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Oncologists provide women with information on their disease status, their treatment options and the side effects of treatment. The oncologists use perceptions to determine what information and how to provide information. The question this paper raises is whether the oncologist's perceptions reflect the individual patient's information and decision-making needs.


Subject(s)
Communication , Medical Oncology , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/therapy , Ovarian Neoplasms/therapy , Patient Care Team , Physician-Patient Relations , Decision Making , Female , Gynecology , Humans , Interviews as Topic , Male , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/psychology , Ovarian Neoplasms/psychology , Qualitative Research
8.
J Clin Oncol ; 32(1): 27-33, 2014 Jan 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24276779

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To determine whether wait time from histologic diagnosis of uterine cancer to time of definitive surgery by hysterectomy had an impact on all-cause survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Women in Ontario with a confirmed histopathologic diagnosis of uterine cancer between April 1, 2000, and March 31, 2009, followed by surgery were identified in the Ontario Cancer Registry. Survival was calculated by using the Kaplan-Meier method. Factors were evaluated for their prognostic effect on survival by using Cox proportional hazards regression. Wait time was evaluated in a multivariable model after adjusting for other significant factors. RESULTS: The final study population included 9,417 women; 51.9% had surgery by a gynecologist, and 69.9% had endometrioid adenocarcinoma. Five-year survival for women with wait times of 0.1 to 2, 2.1 to 6, 6.1 to 12, or more than 12 weeks was 71.1%, 81.8%, 79.5%, and 71.9%, respectively. Wait times of ≤ 2 weeks were adversely prognostic for survival after adjusting for other significant factors in the multivariable model, and patients with wait times of more than 12 weeks had worse survival than those who had wait times between 2.1 and 12.0 weeks. CONCLUSION: To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report in a large population-based cohort demonstrating that longer wait times from diagnosis of uterine cancer to definitive surgery have a negative impact on overall survival.


Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Endometrioid/mortality , Hysterectomy , Insurance Coverage , Time-to-Treatment , Uterine Neoplasms/mortality , Waiting Lists , Adult , Aged , Carcinoma, Endometrioid/diagnosis , Carcinoma, Endometrioid/economics , Carcinoma, Endometrioid/surgery , Female , Humans , Hysterectomy/economics , Kaplan-Meier Estimate , Middle Aged , Multivariate Analysis , Ontario/epidemiology , Proportional Hazards Models , Registries , Retrospective Studies , Uterine Neoplasms/diagnosis , Uterine Neoplasms/economics , Uterine Neoplasms/surgery
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...