Quality of surgery and treatment and its association with hospital volume: A population-based study in more than 5000 Belgian ovarian cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Different sets of quality indicators are used to identify areas for improvement in ovarian cancer care. This study reports transparently on how (surgical) indicators were measured and on the association between hospital volume and indicator results in Belgium, a country setting without any centralisation of ovarian cancer care. METHODS: From the population-based Belgian Cancer Registry, patients with a borderline malignant or invasive epithelial ovarian tumour diagnosed between 2014 and 2018 were selected and linked to health insurance and vital status data (n = 5119). Thirteen quality indicators on diagnosis and treatment were assessed and the association with hospital volume was analysed using logistic regression adjusted for case-mix. RESULTS: The national results for most quality indicators on diagnosis and systemic therapy were around the predefined target value. Other indicators showed results below the benchmark: genetic testing, completeness of staging surgery, lymphadenectomy with at least 20 pelvic/para-aortic lymph nodes removed, and timely start of chemotherapy after surgery (within 42 days). Ovarian cancer care in Belgium is dispersed over 100 hospitals. Lower volume hospitals showed poorer indicator results compared to higher volume hospitals for lymphadenectomy, staging, timely start of chemotherapy and genetic testing. In addition, surgery for advanced stage tumours was performed less often in lower volume hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: The indicators that showed poorer results on a national level were also those with poorer results in lower-volume hospitals compared to higher-volume hospitals, consequently supporting centralisation. International benchmarking is hampered by different (surgical) definitions between countries and studies.

Survival of patients with unfavorable prognosis cutaneous melanoma with increased use of immunotherapy agents: a population-based study in Belgium.

BACKGROUND: Although metastatic cutaneous melanoma is associated with an unfavorable prognosis, innovative therapies including immunomodulating agents and targeted therapies have shown survival benefits in clinical trials. We assessed the impact of the introduction of innovative drugs into clinical practice on the survival of patients with metastatic cutaneous melanoma during the period 2004-2017, in Belgium. The evolution of associated expenses was also analyzed. METHODS: This is a retrospective population-based study using data from the national Belgian Cancer Registry, compulsory health insurance, and administrative survival data. The immunomodulating drugs were ipilimumab, nivolumab and pembrolizumab, while targeted therapies included vemurafenib, dabrafenib and trametinib. RESULTS: We did not identify a trend for improvement over time. Median survival (years) was 1.5 (95% CI: 1.1-1.8) in 2004-2008, 1.1 (95% CI: 0.8-1.5) in 2009-2013, and 1.6 (95% CI: 1.3-2.4) in 2014-2017, respectively. In contrast, survival improved in those with unknown primary tumor localization. In this group, median survival time was 2.0 (95% CI: 1.4-2.9) in the most recent period, while it was 1.1 (95% CI: 0.7-1.3) in 2009-2013, and 0.9 (95% CI: 0.6-1.2) in 2004-2008. The uptake of innovative drugs remained modest, with no drug being used by more than 30% of patients. Yearly expenditure was almost non-existent, and gradually increased, reaching several million euros in 2014-2017. CONCLUSION: Patients with metastatic cutaneous melanoma who were diagnosed between 2004 and 2017 showed no apparent improvement in survival. In contrast, increased survival was observed in the subgroup of patients with unknown primary tumor localization.

Association between hospital volume and outcomes in invasive ovarian cancer in Belgium: A population-based study.

OBJECTIVES: To study the association between hospital volume and outcomes in patients with invasive epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). METHODS: This study included 3988 patients diagnosed with invasive EOC between 2014 and 2018, selected from the population-based database of the Belgian Cancer Registry (BCR), and coupled with health insurance and vital status data. The associations between hospital volume and observed survival since diagnosis were assessed with Cox proportional hazard models, while volume associations with 30-day post-operative mortality and complicated recovery were evaluated using logistic regression models. RESULTS: Treatment for EOC was very dispersed with half of the 100 centres treating fewer than six patients per year. The median survival of patients treated in centres with the highest-volume quartile was 2.5 years longer than in those with the lowest-volume quartile (4.2 years versus 1.7 years). When taking the case-mix of hospitals into account, patients treated in the lowest volume centres had a 47% higher hazard to die than patients treated in the highest volume centres (HR: 1.47, 95% CI: 1.11-1.93, p = 0.006) over the first five years after incidence. A similar association was found when focussing on the surgical volume of the hospitals and considering only operated patients with invasive EOC. Lastly, the 30-day post-operative mortality decreased significantly with increasing surgical volume. CONCLUSIONS: The large dispersion of care and expertise within Belgium and the volume-outcome associations observed in this study support the implementation of the concentration of care for patients with invasive EOC in reference centres.

Belgian observational survival data (incidence years 2004-2017) and expenditure for innovative oncology drugs in twelve cancer indications.

BACKGROUND: The Food and Drug Administration and European Medicines Agency typically approve market access for cancer drugs based on surrogate end-points, which do not always translate into substantiated improvements in outcomes that matter the most to patients, i.e. survival and quality of life. These drugs often, also, have a high price tag. We assessed whether there was an increase in cancer drug expenditure for a broad selection of indications, and whether this correlates with increased overall survival. METHODS: This cohort study used Belgian Cancer Registry data from 125,692 patients (12 cancer indications, incidence period 2004-2017), which was linked to reimbursement and survival data. This reliably represents the Belgian situation. One-to-five year observed survival probability, median survival time, oncology drug expenditure and mean oncology drug cost per patient were reviewed. FINDINGS: In almost all indications, total expenditure and average treatment cost for oncology drugs increased over the years (2004-2017). In contrast, mixed findings are observed for the evolution in overall survival probability and median survival time. While an absolute improvement in the 3-year survival probability of about 10% is noticed in non-small-cell lung cancer and chronic myeloid leukaemia, improvements in about half of the other indications are limited or even absent. INTERPRETATION: The Belgian observational data indicate that assuming 'innovative' oncology drugs always add value in terms of improved survival is often unjustified. The literature also highlights the problem of using surrogate end-points, and the lack of comparative evidence showing an added value of oncology drugs for both survival and quality of life at market approval or during the post-marketing phase. Comparative studies should be conducted in the pre-marketing phase that are suitable for registration purposes, aid reimbursement decisions and support physicians and patients when making treatment decisions.

Survival in stage IV ovarian cancer with increased use of debulking surgery and bevacizumab.

OBJECTIVES: Advanced ovarian cancer has a poor prognosis, with a 5 year survival probability of <30%. Attempts to improve survival have focused on debulking surgery and systemic therapy. We assessed the evolution of treatment patterns and survival of patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer with specific attention to changes in survival after introducing bevacizumab. METHODS: Population based data from the Belgian Cancer Registry were coupled with administrative reimbursement data from the compulsory health insurance organizations and the national database where date of death is registered, based on the patient's unique national number. Patients with epithelial ovarian cancer stage IV diagnosed in 2004-17 were included. The proportion of patients who underwent debulking surgery and received bevacizumab was calculated per incidence year. Survival was compared for the three incidence periods (2004-08, 2009-13, 2014-17) and before and after the introduction of bevacizumab. RESULTS: 2034 patients with stage IV epitheial ovarian cancer were included. From 2012 onwards, uptake of bevacizumab increased, with 50% of patients with stage IV ovarian cancer diagnosed in 2017 receiving bevacizumab. The proportion of stage IV patients who underwent debulking surgery also increased over time, from 21.1% in 2004-08 to 50.4% and 45.4% in 2009-13 and 2014-17, respectively. The 3 year observed survival probability fluctuated between 27% and 42% without a trend over time. The increase in debulking surgery was associated with improved survival (hazard ratio (HR) 0.88, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.79 to 0.98) but the introduction of bevacizumab was not (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.03). For patients diagnosed in 2004, the mean cost per patient treated with oncological drugs was about €12 500, which doubled to about €25 000 for patients diagnosed in 2014 or later. CONCLUSIONS: Despite a rise in the use of debulking surgery and the introduction of bevacizumab into clinical practice, no improvement in 3 year survival probability was observed for patients with advanced ovarian cancer in Belgium.

Should systemic antibiotics be prescribed in periodontal abscesses and pericoronitis? A systematic review of the literature.

This study assessed whether systemic antibiotics are beneficial or harmful in patients who present with an acute periodontal abscess or pericoronitis, with or without systemic involvement, and, if antibiotics are beneficial, which type, dosage, and duration are the most effective. Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were screened from 1948 up to 1 April 2022 for systematic reviews, randomised clinical trials (RCTs), and other studies. Dedicated websites were consulted for systematic reviews, clinical practice guidelines, and health technology assessments on the topic. Outcomes of interest comprised tooth survival, swelling, pain, tooth mobility, periodontal probing depth, suppuration, adverse effects, quality of life measurements, and medication required for pain relief. Overall, five guidelines, seven systematic reviews, 15 RCTs, and 34 other studies were identified and selected for full-text assessment, but none of them fulfilled the inclusion criteria. At present there is no single randomised or non-randomised controlled trial assessing the harms and clinical effectiveness of systemic antibiotics in adults with a periodontal abscess or pericoronitis.

Are systemic antibiotics indicated in children presenting with an odontogenic abscess in the primary dentition? A systematic review of the literature.

OBJECTIVES: This systematic review aimed to assess (1) whether systemic antibiotics are beneficial or harmful in healthy children who present with an odontogenic abscess in the primary dentition with or without systemic involvement and (2) if antibiotics are beneficial, which type, dosage and duration are the most effective. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Electronic databases (Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library) were screened from 1948 up to August 2020. No filters with respect to study design were applied. Outcomes of interest included pain, swelling, pain relief, adverse effects, signs of infection, quality-of-life measurements and medication required for pain relief. RESULTS: Altogether, 352 titles and abstracts were screened for eligibility; of these, 19 were selected for full text assessment. All were excluded because none of them fulfilled the inclusion criteria and addressed the (adjunctive) use of antibiotics in children who present with an odontogenic abscess in the primary dentition. CONCLUSIONS: At present, there is no single randomised or non-randomised clinical study evaluating the effectiveness and harms of systemic antibiotics administered in children who present with an odontogenic abscess in the primary dentition. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: There is no clinical evidence to support nor to refute the use of antibiotics in children who present with an odontogenic abscess in the primary dentition without signs of local spread or systemic involvement. Given this lack of scientific evidence, the use of antibiotics cannot be recommended in these children. Well-designed clinical trials are indicated to fully understand the impact and necessity of antibiotics in these situations.

Patterns and quality of care for head and neck cancer in Belgium: A population-based study.

OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the quality of care for patients with squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the oral cavity, oropharynx, hypopharynx or larynx in Belgium. METHODS: Data of the Belgian Cancer Registry were coupled with health insurance data and hospital discharge data. Quality of care and the association with hospital volume were evaluated based on six quality indicators. RESULTS: Half of the patients were treated with primary radiotherapy, with or without systemic therapy (49.7%) and 38.1% with surgery, with or without (neo)adjuvant therapy. Single-modality treatment was provided to 78.1% of early-disease patients. Of the patients with cN0 disease, 56.4% underwent neck dissection. Postoperative radiotherapy was completed timely in 48.5% of patients. Concomitant chemotherapy was administered to 58.2% of patients <70 years with locally advanced disease. Imaging of the neck after radiotherapy was performed appropriately in 32.7% of patients. Variability between centres was considerable. No clear relationship between hospital volume and results of the individual QIs was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Results show that for the measured QIs, targets are not met and variability between centres is considerable. Through individual feedback, centres are motivated to improve the quality of care for head and neck cancer patients in Belgium.

Improved survival in patients with head and neck cancer treated in higher volume centres: A population-based study in Belgium.

OBJECTIVES: The study investigated the association between hospital volume and observed survival of patients with a head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). METHODS: Overall, 9245 patients diagnosed with HNSCC between 2009 and 2014, were identified in the population-based Belgian Cancer Registry. This database was coupled with other databases providing information on diagnostic and therapeutic procedures, vital status, and comorbidities. The overall and relative survival probabilities were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier and the Ederer II methods, respectively. The relation between hospital volume and observed survival since diagnosis was then assessed using Cox proportional hazard models adjusted for potential confounders. RESULTS: The care for patients with HNSCC in Belgium was dispersed over more than 99 centres with half of the centres treating four or less patients with HNSCC per year. Survival probabilities were significantly better for patients treated in higher volume centres (>20 patients/year): the median survival of patients treated in these centres was 1.1 year longer (5.1 versus 4.0 years) than in lower volume centres. This association was confirmed in analyses taking the case-mix between hospitals into account: the hazard to die of any cause decreased on average with 0.4% per increase of one additionally treated patient. Beyond 20 assigned patients per year, there was no further decrease in the hazard to die. CONCLUSIONS: Statistically significant and clinically relevant improved survival probabilities were obtained in patients treated in higher volume centres (>20 patients/year) compared with their peers treated in lower volume centres. This supports the recommendation to concentrate the care for patients with HNSCC in reference centres.

Comorbidity in head and neck cancer: Is it associated with therapeutic delay, post-treatment mortality and survival in a population-based study?

OBJECTIVES: This study aims to investigate the relationship between comorbidities and therapeutic delay, post-treatment mortality, overall and relative survival in patients diagnosed with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (HNSCC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: 9245 patients with a single HNSCC diagnosed between 2009 and 2014 were identified in the Belgian Cancer Registry. The Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) was calculated for 8812 patients (95.3%), distinguishing patients having none (0), mild (1-2), moderate (3-4) or severe comorbidity (>4). The relationship between CCI and therapeutic delay was evaluated using the Spearman correlation. Post-treatment mortality was modelled with logistic regression, using death within 30 days as the event. The association between comorbidity and survival was assessed using Cox proportional hazard models. RESULTS: Among 8812 patients with a known CCI, 39.2% had at least one comorbidity. Therapeutic delay increased from 31 to 36 days when the CCI worsened from 0 to 4 (rho = 0.087). After case-mix adjustment, higher baseline comorbidity was associated with increased post-surgery mortality (mild, OR 3.52 [95% CI 1.91-6.49]; severe, OR 18.71 [95% CI 6.85-51.12]) and post-radiotherapy mortality (mild, OR 2.23 [95% CI 1.56-3.19]; severe, OR 9.33 [95% CI 4.83-18.01]) and with reduced overall survival (mild, HR 1.39, [95% CI 1.31-1.48]; severe, HR 2.41 [95% CI 2.00-2.90]). That was also the case for relative survival in unadjusted analyses (mild, EHR 1.77 [95% CI 1.64-1.92]; severe, EHR = 4.15 [95% CI 3.43-5.02]). CONCLUSION: Comorbidity is significantly related to therapeutic delay, post-treatment mortality, 5-year overall and relative survival in HNSCC patients. Therapeutic decision support tools should optimally integrate comorbidity.

Budgeting of non-commercial clinical trials: development of a budget tool by a public funding agency.

BACKGROUND: Investigator-led multicentre randomised trials are essential to generate evidence on the optimal use of medical interventions. These non-commercial trials are often hampered by underfunding, which may lead to difficulties in gathering a team with the necessary expertise, a delayed trial start, slow recruitment and even early trial discontinuation. As a new public funder of pragmatic clinical trials, the KCE Trials programme was committed to correctly pay all trial activities in order to assure timely delivery of high-quality trial results. As no appropriate trial budget tool was readily publicly available that took into account the costs for the sponsor as well as the costs for participating sites, we developed a tool to make the budgeting of a clinical trial efficient, transparent and fair across applicants. METHODS: All trial-related activities of the sponsor and sites were categorised, and cost drivers were identified. All elements were included in a spreadsheet tool allowing the sponsor team to calculate in detail the various activities of a clinical trial and to appreciate the budget impact of specific cost drivers, e.g. a delay in recruitment. Hourly fees by role were adapted from published data. Fixed amounts per activity were developed when appropriate. RESULTS: This publicly available tool has already been used for 17 trials funded since the start of the KCE Trials programme in 2016, and it continues to be used and improved. This budget tool is used together with additional risk-reducing measures such as a multistep selection process with advance payments, a recruitment feasibility check by sponsor and funder, a close monitoring of study progress and a milestone-based payment schedule with the last payment made when the manuscript is submitted. CONCLUSIONS: The budget tool helps the KCE Trials programme to answer relevant research questions in a timely way, within budget and with high quality, a necessary condition to achieve impact of this programme for patients, clinical practice and healthcare payers.

Head and Neck Cancer in Belgium: Quality of Diagnostic Management and Variability Across Belgian Hospitals Between 2009 and 2014.

Aims: The study assessed the quality of diagnosis and staging offered to patients with a head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) and the variability across Belgian hospitals. Methods: In total, 9,245 patients diagnosed with HNSCC between 2009 and 2014, were identified in the population-based Belgian Cancer Registry (BCR). The BCR data were coupled with other databases providing information on diagnostic and therapeutic procedures reimbursed by the compulsory health insurance, vital status data, and comorbidities. The use of diagnosis and staging procedures was assessed by four quality indicators (QI) (i.e., use of dedicated head and neck imaging studies, use of PET-CT, TNM reporting and interval between diagnosis and start of treatment), for which a target was defined before the analysis. The association between the binary QIs and observed survival was assessed using Cox proportional hazard models adjusted for potential confounders. Results: Overall, 82.5% of patients received staging by MRI and/or CT of the head and neck region before the start of treatment. In 47.6% of stage III-IV patients eligible for treatment with curative intent, a whole-body FDG-PET(/CT) was performed. The proportion of patients whose cTNM and pTNM stage was reported to the BCR was 80.5 and 78.4%, respectively. The median interval from diagnosis to first treatment with curative intent was 32 days (IQR: 19-46). For none of these QIs the pre-set targets were reached and a substantial variability between centers was observed for all quality indicators. No binary QI was significantly associated with observed survival. Conclusions: The four quality indicators related to diagnosis and staging in HNSCC all showed substantial room for improvement. For none of them the pre-set targets were met at the national level and the variability between centers was substantial. Each Belgian hospital received an individual feedback report in order to stimulate reflection and quality improvement processes.

Association between surgical volume and post-operative mortality and survival after surgical resection in lung cancer in Belgium: A population-based study.

OBJECTIVES: The existence of a relationship between hospital surgical volume and outcome after lung cancer surgery remains an ongoing debate. We aimed to evaluate the association between volume and 60-day mortality, 1- and 3-year observed survival (OS) in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients in Belgium. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with NSCLC in 2010-2011 were identified in the database of the Belgian Cancer Registry, excluding patients with multiple tumours. Regression models were applied to assess the relationship between hospital surgical volume, 60-day mortality and 1- and 3-year OS, adjusting for different patient and tumour characteristics. Surgical volume was taken into account as a continuous variable in the models. RESULTS: In 2010-2011 a total of 9,817 patients with NSCLC were diagnosed in Belgium and 2,084 of them underwent surgery. After adjusting for patient and tumour characteristics, a relationship between hospital surgical volume and patients' outcome was found. Postoperative mortality and survival improved with increasing annual surgical volume up to 10 interventions. However, no further gain in outcome has been observed above 10. While the 60-day postoperative mortality is 3.5% for hospitals with an annual volume larger than 10, the predicted mortality rate for a hospital with an annual volume of only 5 interventions is 6.5%. Similar results were observed for 1- and 3-year OS. CONCLUSION: In Belgium, a higher hospital surgical volume is associated with improved outcome in NSCLC patients after surgical resection. Minimally 10 surgical interventions per year seem to be required to achieve an optimal performance.

Use of health insurance data to identify and quantify the prevalence of main comorbidities in lung cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Identifying comorbidities in lung cancer patients is a complex process in population-based studies and no gold standard exists. The current study aims to identify and measure the main comorbidities using administrative health insurance data, which were available on a population-based level. METHOD: A literature search was conducted to identify comorbidities in lung cancer patients and to select Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical codes to measure them. For each patient, the volume of delivered relevant drugs for each comorbidity in the year preceding the diagnosis of lung cancer was computed, based on the Defined Daily Doses reimbursed. Case definition rules were set by comparing the identification of comorbidities via health insurance data with the reporting of them in the medical files in a sample of hospitals. RESULTS: Four comorbidities were identified: chronic respiratory diseases, chronic cardiovascular diseases, diabetes mellitus and renal diseases. A very good to moderate agreement between the prevalence based on medical files versus health insurance data was obtained for diabetes mellitus (kappa = 0.83), chronic cardiovascular diseases (kappa = 0.64), chronic respiratory diseases (kappa = 0.48) but not for renal diseases (kappa = 0.22). Because only 27% of patients having renal diseases recorded in the medical files were identified using health insurance data, this comorbidity was not withheld. Among 12,839 lung cancer patients diagnosed in 2010-2011 in Belgium, 29.7% had chronic respiratory diseases, 57.5% had chronic cardiovascular diseases and 14.1% had diabetes mellitus. DISCUSSION: This study showed that it was possible to capture three major comorbidities in lung cancer patients using administrative health data, namely, diabetes mellitus, chronic cardiovascular diseases, and chronic respiratory diseases. However, the agreement was only moderate for the last one. A prerequisite for using this methodology is that administrative health data are available for all patients.

Positron emission tomography (PET) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for assessing tumour resectability in advanced epithelial ovarian/fallopian tube/primary peritoneal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Ovarian cancer is the leading cause of death from gynaecological cancer in developed countries. Surgery and chemotherapy are considered its mainstay of treatment and the completeness of surgery is a major prognostic factor for survival in these women. Currently, computed tomography (CT) is used to preoperatively assess tumour resectability. If considered feasible, women will be scheduled for primary debulking surgery (i.e. surgical efforts to remove the bulk of tumour with the aim of leaving no visible (macroscopic) tumour). If primary debulking is not considered feasible (i.e. the tumour load is too extensive), women will receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy to reduce tumour load and subsequently undergo (interval) surgery. However, CT is imperfect in assessing tumour resectability, so additional imaging modalities can be considered to optimise treatment selection. OBJECTIVES: To assess the diagnostic accuracy of fluorodeoxyglucose-18 (FDG) PET/CT, conventional and diffusion-weighted (DW) MRI as replacement or add-on to abdominal CT, for assessing tumour resectability at primary debulking surgery in women with stage III to IV epithelial ovarian/fallopian tube/primary peritoneal cancer. SEARCH METHODS: We searched MEDLINE and Embase (OVID) for potential eligible studies (1946 to 23 February 2017). Additionally, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO-ICTRP and the reference list of all relevant studies were searched. SELECTION CRITERIA: Diagnostic accuracy studies addressing the accuracy of preoperative FDG-PET/CT, conventional or DW-MRI on assessing tumour resectability in women with advanced stage (III to IV) epithelial ovarian/fallopian tube/primary peritoneal cancer who are scheduled to undergo primary debulking surgery. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently screened titles and abstracts for relevance and inclusion, extracted data and performed methodological quality assessment using QUADAS-2. The limited number of studies did not permit meta-analyses. MAIN RESULTS: Five studies (544 participants) were included in the analysis. All studies performed the index test as replacement of abdominal CT. Two studies (366 participants) addressed the accuracy of FDG-PET/CT for assessing incomplete debulking with residual disease of any size (> 0 cm) with sensitivities of 1.0 (95% CI 0.54 to 1.0) and 0.66 (95% CI 0.60 to 0.73) and specificities of 1.0 (95% CI 0.80 to 1.0) and 0.88 (95% CI 0.80 to 0.93), respectively (low- and moderate-certainty evidence). Three studies (178 participants) investigated MRI for different target conditions, of which two investigated DW-MRI and one conventional MRI. The first study showed that DW-MRI determines incomplete debulking with residual disease of any size with a sensitivity of 0.94 (95% CI 0.83 to 0.99) and a specificity of 0.98 (95% CI 0.88 to 1.00) (low- and moderate-certainty evidence). For abdominal CT, the sensitivity for assessing incomplete debulking was 0.66 (95% CI 0.52 to 0.78) and the specificity 0.77 (95% CI 0.63 to 0.87) (low- and low-certainty evidence). The second study reported a sensitivity of DW-MRI of 0.75 (95% CI 0.35 to 0.97) and a specificity of 0.96 (95% CI 0.80 to 1.00) (very low-certainty evidence) for assessing incomplete debulking with residual disease > 1 cm. In the last study, the sensitivity for assessing incomplete debulking with residual disease of > 2 cm on conventional MRI was 0.91 (95% CI 0.59 to 1.00) and the specificity 0.97 (95% CI 0.87 to 1.00) (very low-certainty evidence). Overall, the certainty of evidence was very low to moderate (according to GRADE), mainly due to small sample sizes and imprecision. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Studies suggested a high specificity and moderate sensitivity for FDG-PET/CT and MRI to assess macroscopic incomplete debulking. However, the certainty of the evidence was insufficient to advise routine addition of FDG-PET/CT or MRI to clinical practice..In a research setting, adding an alternative imaging method could be considered for women identified as suitable for primary debulking by abdominal CT, in an attempt to filter out false-negatives (i.e. debulking, feasible based on abdominal CT, unfeasible at actual surgery).

Probiotics for the prevention or treatment of chemotherapy- or radiotherapy-related diarrhoea in people with cancer.

BACKGROUND: Treament-related diarrhoea is one of the most common and troublesome adverse effects related to chemotherapy or radiotherapy in people with cancer. Its reported incidence has been as high as 50% to 80%. Severe treatment-related diarrhoea can lead to fluid and electrolyte losses and nutritional deficiencies and could adversely affect quality of life (QoL). It is also associated with increased risk of infection in people with neutropenia due to anticancer therapy and often leads to treatment delays, dose reductions, or treatment discontinuation. Probiotics may be effective in preventing or treating chemotherapy- or radiotherapy-induced diarrhoea. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the clinical effectiveness and side effects of probiotics used alone or combined with other agents for prevention or treatment of chemotherapy- or radiotherapy-related diarrhoea in people with cancer. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2017, Issue 7), MEDLINE (1946 to July week 2, 2017), and Embase (1980 to 2017, week 30). We also searched prospective clinical trial registers and the reference lists of included studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the effects of probiotics for prevention or treatment of chemotherapy- or radiotherapy-related diarrhoea in people with cancer. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. We used random-effects models for all meta-analyses. If meta-analysis was not possible, we summarised the results narratively. MAIN RESULTS: We included 12 studies involving 1554 participants. Eleven studies were prevention studies, of which seven compared probiotics with placebo (887 participants), one compared two doses of probiotics with each other and with placebo (246 participants), and three compared probiotics with another active agent (216 participants).The remaining study assessed the effectiveness of probiotics compared with placebo for treatment of radiotherapy-related diarrhoea (205 participants).For prevention of radiotherapy (with or without chemotherapy)-induced diarrhoea, review authors identified five heterogeneous placebo-controlled studies (with 926 participants analysed). Owing to heterogeneity, we could not carry out a meta-analysis, except for two outcomes. For occurrence of any diarrhoea, risk ratios (RRs) ranged from 0.35 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.26 to 0.47) to 1.0 (95% CI 0.94 to 1.06) (three studies; low-certainty evidence). A beneficial effect of probiotics on quality of life could neither be demonstrated nor refuted (two studies; low-certainty evidence). For occurrence of grade 2 or higher diarrhoea, the pooled RR was 0.75 (95% CI 0.55 to 1.03; four studies; 420 participants; low-certainty evidence), and for grade 3 or higher diarrhoea, RRs ranged from 0.11 (95% CI 0.06 to 0.23) to 1.24 (95% CI 0.74 to 2.08) (three studies; low-certainty evidence). For probiotic users, time to rescue medication was 36 hours longer in one study (95% CI 34.7 to 37.3), but another study reported no difference (moderate-certainty evidence). For the need for rescue medication, the pooled RR was 0.50 (95% CI 0.15 to 1.66; three studies; 194 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No study reported major differences between groups with respect to adverse effects. Although not mentioned explicitly, no studies reported deaths, except one in which one participant in the probiotics group died of myocardial infarction after three sessions of radiotherapy.Three placebo-controlled studies, with 128 analysed participants, addressed prevention of chemotherapy-induced diarrhoea. For occurrence of any diarrhoea, the pooled RR was 0.59 (95% CI 0.36 to 0.96; two studies; 106 participants; low-certainty evidence). For all other outcomes, a beneficial effect of probiotics could be neither demonstrated nor refuted (one to two studies; 46 to 106 participants; all low-certainty evidence). Studies did not address quality of life nor time to rescue medication.Three studies compared probiotics with another intervention in 213 participants treated with radiotherapy (with or without chemotherapy). One very small study (21 participants) reported less diarrhoea six weeks after treatment when dietary counselling was provided (RR 0.30, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.81; very low-certainty evidence). In another study (148 participants), grade 3 or 4 diarrhoea occurred less often in the probiotics group than in the control group (guar gum containing nutritional supplement) (odds ratio (OR) 0.38, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.89; low-certainty evidence), and two studies (63 participants) found less need for rescue medication of probiotics versus another active treatment (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.86; very low-certainty evidence). Studies did not address quality of life nor time to rescue medication.One placebo-controlled study with 205 participants addressed treatment for radiotherapy-induced diarrhoea and could not demonstrate or refute a beneficial effect of probiotics on average diarrhoea grade, time to rescue medication for diarrhoea (13 hours longer in the probiotics group; 95% CI -0.9 to 26.9 hours), or need for rescue medication (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.03; moderate-certainty evidence). This study did not address quality of life.No studies reported serious adverse events or diarrhoea-related deaths. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review presents limited low- or very low-certainty evidence supporting the effects of probiotics for prevention and treatment of diarrhoea related to radiotherapy (with or without chemotherapy) or chemotherapy alone, need for rescue medication, or occurrence of adverse events. All studies were underpowered and heterogeneous. Severe side effects were absent from all studies.Robust evidence on this topic must be provided by future methodologically well-designed trials.

Quality of care and variability in lung cancer management across Belgian hospitals: a population-based study using routinely available data.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the quality of care for all patients diagnosed with lung cancer in Belgium based on a set of evidence-based quality indicators and to study the variability of care between hospitals. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS: A retrospective study based on linked data from the cancer registry, insurance claims and vital status for all patients diagnosed with lung cancer between 2010 and 2011. Evidence-based quality indicators were identified from a systematic literature search. A specific algorithm to attribute patients to a centre was developed, and funnel plots were used to assess variability of care between centres. INTERVENTION: None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The proportion of patients who received appropriate care as defined by the indicator. Secondary outcome included the variability of care between centres. RESULTS: Twenty indicators were measured for a total of 12 839 patients. Good results were achieved for 60-day post-surgical mortality (3.9%), histopathological confirmation of diagnosis (93%) and for the use of PET-CT before treatment with curative intent (94%). Areas to be improved include the reporting of staging information to the Belgian Cancer Registry (80%), the use of brain imaging for clinical stage III patients eligible for curative treatment (79%), and the time between diagnosis and start of first active treatment (median 20 days). High variability between centres was observed for several indicators. Twenty-three indicators were found relevant but could not be measured. CONCLUSION: This study highlights the feasibility to develop a multidisciplinary set of quality indicators using population-based data. The main advantage of this approach is that not additional registration is required, but the non-measurability of many relevant indicators is a hamper. It allows however to easily point to areas of large variability in care.

Locally advanced vulva cancer: A single centre review of anovulvectomy and a systematic review of surgical, chemotherapy and radiotherapy alternatives. Is an international collaborative RCT destined for the "too difficult to do" box?

INTRODUCTION: Treatment of locally advanced vulva cancer (LAVC) remains challenging. Due to the lack of randomised trials many questions regarding the indications for different treatment options and their efficacy remain unanswered. METHODS: In this retrospective study we provide the largest published series of LAVC patients treated with anovulvectomy, reporting oncological outcomes and morbidity. Additionally, a systematic literature review was performed for all treatment options 1946-2015. RESULTS: In our case series, 57/70 (81%) patients were treated in the primary setting with anovulvectomy and 13 patients underwent anovulvectomy for recurrent disease. The median overall survival (OS) was 69months (1-336) with disease specific survival of 159months (1-336). Following anovulvectomy for primary disease, time to progression and OS were significantly higher in node negative disease (10 vs. 96months; 19 vs. 121months, p<0.0001). Post-surgical complications were observed in 36 (51.4%), the majority of which were Grade I/II infections. There was one peri-operative death. Review of the literature showed that chemotherapy, radiotherapy or combination treatments are alternatives to surgery. Evidence relating to all of these consisted mostly of small retrospective series, which varied considerably in terms of patient characteristics and treatment schedules. Significant patient and treatment heterogeneity prevented meta-analysis with significant biases in these studies. It was unclear if survival or morbidity was better in any one group with a lack of data reporting complications, quality of life, and long term follow-up. However, results for chemoradiation are encouraging enough to warrant further investigation. CONCLUSIONS: There remains inadequate evidence to identify an optimal treatment for LAVC. However, there is sufficient evidence to support a trial of anovulvectomy versus chemoradiation. Discussions and consensus would be needed to determine trial criteria including the primary outcome measure. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy or radiotherapy alone may be best reserved for the palliative setting or metastatic disease.

Non-surgical interventions for late rectal problems (proctopathy) of radiotherapy in people who have received radiotherapy to the pelvis.

BACKGROUND: This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2002, and previously updated in 2007. Late radiation rectal problems (proctopathy) include bleeding, pain, faecal urgency, and incontinence and may develop after pelvic radiotherapy treatment for cancer. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and safety of non-surgical interventions for managing late radiation proctopathy. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Issue 11, 2015); MEDLINE (Ovid); EMBASE (Ovid); CANCERCD; Science Citation Index; and CINAHL from inception to November 2015. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing non-surgical interventions for the management of late radiation proctopathy in people with cancer who have undergone pelvic radiotherapy for cancer. Primary outcomes considered were: episodes of bowel activity, bleeding, pain, tenesmus, urgency, and sphincter dysfunction. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Study selection, 'Risk of bias' assessment, and data extraction were performed in duplicate, and any disagreements were resolved by involving a third review author. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 1221 unique references and 16 studies including 993 participants that met our inclusion criteria. One study found through the last update was moved to the 'Studies awaiting classification' section. We did not pool outcomes for a meta-analysis due to variation in study characteristics and endpoints across included studies.Since radiation proctopathy is a condition with various symptoms or combinations of symptoms, the studies were heterogeneous in their intended effect. Some studies investigated treatments targeted at bleeding only (group 1), some investigated treatments targeted at a combination of anorectal symptoms, but not a single treatment (group 2). The third group focused on the treatment of the collection of symptoms referred to as pelvic radiation disease. In order to enable some comparison of this heterogeneous collection of studies, we describe the effects in these three groups separately.Nine studies assessed treatments for rectal bleeding and were unclear or at high risk of bias. The only treatments that made a significant difference on primary outcomes were argon plasma coagulation (APC) followed by oral sucralfate versus APC with placebo (endoscopic score 6 to 9 in favour of APC with placebo, risk ratio (RR) 2.26, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.12 to 4.55; 1 study, 122 participants, low- to moderate-quality evidence); formalin dab treatment (4%) versus sucralfate steroid retention enema (symptom score after treatment graded by the Radiation Proctopathy System Assessments Scale (RPSAS) and sigmoidoscopic score in favour of formalin (P = 0.001, effect not quantified, 1 study, 102 participants, very low- to low-quality evidence), and colonic irrigation plus ciprofloxacin and metronidazole versus formalin application (4%) (bleeding (P = 0.007, effect not quantified), urgency (P = 0.0004, effect not quantified), and diarrhoea (P = 0.007, effect not quantified) in favour of colonic irrigation (1 study, 50 participants, low-quality evidence).Three studies, of unclear and high risk of bias, assessed treatments targeted at something very localised but not a single pathology. We identified no significant differences on our primary outcomes. We graded all studies as very low-quality evidence due to unclear risk of bias and very serious imprecision.Four studies, of unclear and high risk of bias, assessed treatments targeted at more than one symptom yet confined to the anorectal region. Studies that demonstrated an effect on symptoms included: gastroenterologist-led algorithm-based treatment versus usual care (detailed self help booklet) (significant difference in favour of gastroenterologist-led algorithm-based treatment on change in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire-Bowel (IBDQ-B) score at six months, mean difference (MD) 5.47, 95% CI 1.14 to 9.81) and nurse-led algorithm-based treatment versus usual care (significant difference in favour of the nurse-led algorithm-based treatment on change in IBDQ-B score at six months, MD 4.12, 95% CI 0.04 to 8.19) (1 study, 218 participants, low-quality evidence); hyperbaric oxygen therapy (at 2.0 atmospheres absolute) versus placebo (improvement of Subjective, Objective, Management, Analytic - Late Effects of Normal Tissue (SOMA-LENT) score in favour of hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT), P = 0.0019) (1 study, 150 participants, moderate-quality evidence, retinol palmitate versus placebo (improvement in RPSAS in favour of retinol palmitate, P = 0.01) (1 study, 19 participants, low-quality evidence) and integrated Chinese traditional plus Western medicine versus Western medicine (grade 0 to 1 radio-proctopathy after treatment in favour of integrated Chinese traditional medicine, RR 2.55, 95% CI 1.30 to 5.02) (1 study, 58 participants, low-quality evidence).The level of evidence for the majority of outcomes was downgraded using GRADE to low or very low, mainly due to imprecision and study limitations.  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Although some interventions for late radiation proctopathy look promising (including rectal sucralfate, metronidazole added to an anti-inflammatory regimen, and hyperbaric oxygen therapy), single small studies provide limited evidence. Furthermore, outcomes important to people with cancer, including quality of life (QoL) and long-term effects, were not well recorded. The episodic and variable nature of late radiation proctopathy requires large multi-centre placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) to establish whether treatments are effective. Future studies should address the possibility of associated injury to other gastro-intestinal, urinary, or sexual organs, known as pelvic radiation disease. The interventions, as well as the outcome parameters, should be broader and include those important to people with cancer, such as QoL evaluations.

Quality of pathology reports for advanced ovarian cancer: are we missing essential information? An audit of 479 pathology reports from the EORTC-GCG 55971/NCIC-CTG OV13 neoadjuvant trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the quality of surgical pathology reports of advanced stage ovarian, fallopian tube and primary peritoneal cancer. This quality assurance project was performed within the EORTC-GCG 55971/NCIC-CTG OV13 study comparing primary debulking surgery followed by chemotherapy with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and interval debulking surgery. METHODS: Four hundred and seventy nine pathology reports from 40 institutions in 11 different countries were checked for the following quality indicators: macroscopic description of all specimens, measuring and weighing of major specimens, description of tumour origin and differentiation. RESULTS: All specimens were macroscopically described in 92.3% of the reports. All major samples were measured and weighed in 59.9% of the reports. A description of the origin of the tumour was missing in 20.5% of reports of the primary debulking group and in 23.4% of the interval debulking group. Assessment of tumour differentiation was missing in 10% of the reports after primary debulking and in 20.8% of the reports after interval debulking. Completeness of reports is positively correlated with accrual volume and adversely with hospital volume or type of hospital (academic versus non-academic). Quality of reports differs significantly by country. CONCLUSION: This audit of ovarian cancer pathology reports reveals that in a substantial number of reports basic pathologic data are missing, with possible adverse consequences for the quality of cancer care. Specialisation by pathologists and the use of standardised synoptic reports can lead to improved quality of reporting. Further research is needed to better define pre- and post-operative diagnostic criteria for ovarian cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy.