Critical Appraisal of Histologic Grading for Mucoepidermoid Carcinoma of Salivary Gland: Is an Objective Prognostic 2-tiered Grading System Possible?

Multiple 3-tiered grading systems exist for mucoepidermoid carcinoma (MEC), leading to controversial results on the frequency and prognostic values of each grade. We aimed to identify prognostic histologic factors and to evaluate grading schemes in this retrospective study of 262 resected primary head and neck MECs. The rate of nodal metastasis was 8.4%. Large tumor size, tumor fibrosis, infiltrative border, lymphovascular invasion, perineural invasion, atypical mitosis, mitotic index (MI) ≥4/2 mm 2 (4/10 HPFs), necrosis, and pT4 stage were associated with increased risk of nodal metastasis. The 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) was 95%. Significant prognostic factors for RFS included infiltrative border, tumor-associated lymphoid stroma, architectural patterns (macrocystic, microcystic, and noncystic), anaplasia, atypical mitosis, MI, necrosis, lymphovascular invasion, margin, pT stage, and tumor size. Nuclear anaplasia, high mitotic rate, and ≥25% microcystic component were significant independent prognostic factors on multivariate survival analysis. There was no significant difference between low-grade (LG) and intermediate-grade (IG) MECs in terms of risk of nodal metastasis and outcomes using all 4 known grading systems. Rather, high-grade MEC was consistently associated with an increased risk of nodal metastasis at presentation and decreased RFS and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) compared with the LG/IG MECs. We therefore recommend simplifying MEC grading to a 2-tiered grading scheme using MI and/or tumor necrosis. Using a 2-tiered grading, high-grade histology independently predict RFS, and is associated with a 25% risk of nodal metastasis, a 5-year RFS of 76%, and a 5-year DMFS of 76%, whereas LG MEC has a nodal metastasis rate of 7.0%, 5-year RFS of 97% and 5-year DMFS of 99%.

Development of a core outcome set for basal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: There is variation in the outcomes reported in clinical studies of basal cell carcinoma. This can prevent effective meta-analyses from answering important clinical questions. OBJECTIVE: To identify a recommended minimum set of core outcomes for basal cell carcinoma clinical trials. METHODS: Patient and professional Delphi process to cull a long list, culminating in a consensus meeting. To be provisionally accepted, outcomes needed to be deemed important (score, 7-9, with 9 being the maximum) by 70% of each stakeholder group. RESULTS: Two hundred thirty-five candidate outcomes identified via a systematic literature review and survey of key stakeholders were reduced to 74 that were rated by 100 health care professionals and patients in 2 Delphi rounds. Twenty-seven outcomes were provisionally accepted. The final core set of 5 agreed-upon outcomes after the consensus meeting included complete response; persistent or serious adverse events; recurrence-free survival; quality of life; and patient satisfaction, including cosmetic outcome. LIMITATIONS: English-speaking patients and professionals rated outcomes extracted from English language studies. CONCLUSION: A core outcome set for basal cell carcinoma has been developed. The use of relevant measures may improve the utility of clinical research and the quality of therapeutic guidance available to clinicians.

Effect of Stress Ball Use or Hand-holding on Anxiety During Skin Cancer Excision: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Patients undergoing skin surgery under local anesthesia can experience anxiety. Adjuvant intraoperative anxiety reduction methods may help. Objectives: To assess whether hand-holding or holding a stress ball reduces patient anxiety during excisional surgery of head or neck skin cancer with the patient under local anesthesia and to measure pain and patient satisfaction. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this nonblinded, single-center randomized clinical trial, performed from January 24 through April 26, 2017, at a dermatology outpatient service in an urban, academic medical center, a consecutive sample of 135 adults who required excisional removal of nonmelanoma skin cancer of the head or neck was randomized and studied. Interventions: Participants were randomized 1:1:1 to 3 groups: hand-holding, stress ball, or control (treatment as usual). Participants in the hand-holding group had a female researcher hold one of their hands during administration of anesthesia and extirpation, and those in the stress ball group held a round compressible ball and squeezed it as desired during the same period. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was anxiety, measured by a visual analog scale (VAS), 6-item State Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI), and physiologic measures (blood pressure and heart rate). Secondary outcomes were pain during the procedure and overall participant satisfaction. In addition, participants were asked how many hours they spent researching the procedure before surgery. Results: A total of 135 participants, 45 per study arm, were enrolled (mean [SD] age, 65.5 [13.9] years; 84 [62.2%] male; 134 [99.3%] white). There were no withdrawals or dropouts. Anxiety decreased over time in all groups, but no significant differences were found in the 3 anxiety measures across the 3 groups (VAS anxiety score before: control group, 3.11; hand-holding group, 3.04; stress ball group, 3.09 [P > .99]; VAS anxiety score during: control group, 1.89; hand-holding group, 2.31; stress ball group, 2.47 [P = .55]; STAI score: control group, 8.91; hand-holding group, 8.93; stress ball group, 8.76 [P = .96]). The 3 groups also did not significantly differ in postprocedure pain scores (control group, 0.78; hand-holding group, 0.64; stress ball group, 0.67; P = .85). Almost all participants (134 [99.2%]) were very satisfied. Participants who had done research had higher preoperative VAS anxiety scores (researched, 3.84; did not research, 2.62; P = .04). Conclusions and Relevance: Hand-holding and squeezing a stress ball do not appear to provide incremental anxiety reduction in patients during excisional skin cancer surgery. It is possible that some subgroups may respond better or that patients may respond better when able to select and tailor their preferred anxiety reduction method. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02816996.

Development of a core outcome set for clinical trials in basal cell carcinoma: study protocol for a systematic review of the literature and identification of a core outcome set using a Delphi survey.

BACKGROUND: Basal cell carcinoma is the most common skin cancer worldwide. Treatment options include both surgical and topical modalities. Although risk of metastasis is low, basal cell carcinoma can be invasive and infiltrate important underlying structures such as bone or cartilage. While many clinical trials examining therapies for basal cell carcinoma exist, the lack of consensus in outcome reporting across all trials poses a concern. Proper evaluation and comparison of treatment modalities is challenging. In order to address the inconsistencies present, this project aims to determine a core set of outcomes which should be evaluated in all clinical trials of basal cell carcinoma. METHODS/DESIGN: Outcomes will be extracted over four phases: (1) a systematic literature review, (2) patient interviews, (3) other published sources, and (4) stakeholder involvement. Potential outcomes will then be examined by the Steering Committee, who may add or remove outcomes. The Delphi process will then be performed to condense the list of outcomes generated. Two rounds of Delphi surveys will be performed with two groups of participants - physicians and patients. A consensus meeting with relevant stakeholders will be conducted after the Delphi exercise to further select outcomes, taking into account participant scores. By the end of the meeting, members will vote and decide on a final recommended set of core outcomes. For the duration of the study, we will be in collaboration with both the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) initiative and the Cochrane Skin Group - Core Outcome Set Initiative (CSG-COUSIN). DISCUSSION: This study aims to develop a core outcome set to guide assessment in clinical trials on basal cell carcinoma. The end-goal is to improve the consistency of outcome reporting and allow proper evaluation of treatment effectiveness.

Development of a core outcome set for clinical trials in facial aging: study protocol for a systematic review of the literature and identification of a core outcome set using a Delphi survey.

BACKGROUND: Facial aging is a concern for many patients. Wrinkles, loss of volume, and discoloration are common physical manifestations of aging skin. Genetic heritage, prior ultraviolet light exposure, and Fitzpatrick skin type may be associated with the rate and type of facial aging. Although many clinical trials assess the correlates of skin aging, there is heterogeneity in the outcomes assessed, which limits the quality of evaluation and comparison of treatment modalities. To address the inconsistency in outcomes, in this project we will develop a core set of outcomes that are to be evaluated in all clinical trials relevant to facial aging. METHODS/DESIGN: A long list of measureable outcomes will be created from four sources: (1) systematic medical literature review, (2) patient interviews, (3) other published sources, and (4) stakeholder involvement. Two rounds of Delphi processes with homogeneous groups of physicians and patients will be performed to prioritize and condense the list. At a consensus meeting attended by physicians, patients, and stakeholders, outcomes will be further condensed on the basis of participant scores. By the end of the meeting, members will vote and decide on a final recommended set of core outcomes. Subsequent to this, specific measures will be selected or created to assess these outcomes. DISCUSSION: The aim of this study is to develop a core outcome set and relevant measures for clinical trials relevant to facial aging. We hope to improve the reliability and consistency of outcome reporting of skin aging, thereby enabling improved evaluation of treatment efficacy and patient satisfaction. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) Initiative, accessible at http://www.comet-initiative.org/studies/details/737 . Core Outcomes Set Initiative, (CSG-COUSIN) accessible at https://www.uniklinikum-dresden.de/de/das-klinikum/universitaetscentren/zegv/cousin/meet-the-teams/project-groups/core-outcome-set-for-the-appearance-of-facial-aging . Protocol version date is 28 July 2016.

Development of a core outcome set for clinical trials in squamous cell carcinoma: study protocol for a systematic review of the literature and identification of a core outcome set using a Delphi survey.

BACKGROUND: Squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) is a common skin cancer that poses a risk of metastasis. Clinical investigations into SCC treatment are common, but the outcomes reported are highly variable, omitted, or clinically irrelevant. The outcome heterogeneity and reporting bias of these studies leave clinicians unable to accurately compare studies. Core outcome sets (COSs) are an agreed minimum set of outcomes recommended to be measured and reported in all clinical trials of a given condition or disease. Although COSs are under development for several dermatologic conditions, work has yet to be done to identify core outcomes specific for SCC. METHODS/DESIGN: Outcome extraction for COS generation will occur via four methods: (1) systematic literature review; (2) patient interviews; (3) other published sources; and (4) input from stakeholders in medicine, pharmacy, and other relevant industries. The list of outcomes will be revaluated by the Measuring PRiority Outcome Variables via Excellence in Dermatologic surgery (IMPROVED) Steering Committee. Delphi processes will be performed separately by expert clinicians and patients to condense the list of outcomes generated. A consensus meeting with relevant stakeholders will be conducted after the Delphi exercise to further select outcomes, taking into account participant scores. At the end of the meeting, members will vote and decide on a final recommended set of core outcomes. The Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) organization and the Cochrane Skin Group - Core Outcome Set Initiative (CSG-COUSIN) will serve as advisers throughout the COS generation process. DISCUSSION: Comparison of clinical trials via systematic reviews and meta-analyses is facilitated when investigators study outcomes that are relevant and similar. The aim of this project is to develop a COS to guide use for future clinical trials.