Prioritization and resource allocation in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Recommendations for colorectal and pancreatic cancer in Germany.

In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, there has been a scarcity of resources with various effects on the care of cancer patients. This paper provides an English summary of a German guideline on prioritization and resource allocation for colorectal and pancreatic cancer in the context of the pandemic. Based on a selective literature review as well as empirical and ethical analyses, the research team of the CancerCOVID Consortium drafted recommendations for prioritizing diagnostic and treatment measures for both entities. The final version of the guideline received consent from the executive boards of nine societies of the Association of Scientific Medical Societies in Germany (AWMF), 20 further professional organizations and 22 other experts from various disciplines as well as patient representatives. The guiding principle for the prioritization of decisions is the minimization of harm. Prioritization decisions to fulfill this overall goal should be guided by 1. the urgency relevant to avoid or reduce harm; 2. the likelihood of success of the diagnostic or therapeutic measure advised; and 3. the availability of alternative treatment options. In the event of a relevant risk of harm as a result of prioritization, these decisions should be made by means of a team approach. Gender, age, disability, ethnicity, origin and other social characteristics, such as social or insurance status, as well as the vehemence of a patient's treatment request and SARS-CoV-2 vaccination status should not be used as prioritization criteria. The guideline provides concrete recommendations for 1. diagnostic procedures, 2. surgical procedures for cancer, and 3. systemic treatment and radiotherapy in patients with colorectal or pancreatic cancer within the context of the German healthcare system.

Complete mesocolic excision for right colonic cancer: prospective multicentre study.

BACKGROUND: Complete mesocolic excision (CME) for right colonic cancer is a more complex operation than standard right hemicolectomy but evidence to support its routine use is still limited. This prospective multicentre study evaluated the effect of CME on long-term survival in colorectal cancer centres in Germany (RESECTAT trial). The primary hypothesis was that 5-year disease-free survival would be higher after CME than non-CME surgery. A secondary hypothesis was that there would be improved survival of patients with a mesenteric area greater than 15 000 mm2. METHODS: Centres were asked to continue their current surgical practices. The surgery was classified as CME if the superior mesenteric vein was dissected; otherwise it was assumed that no CME had been performed. All specimens were shipped to one institution for pathological analysis and documentation. Clinical data were recorded in an established registry for quality assurance. The primary endpoint was 5-year overall survival for stages I-III. Multivariable adjustment for group allocation was planned. Using a primary hypothesis of an increase in disease-free survival from 60 to 70 per cent, a sample size of 662 patients was calculated with a 50 per cent anticipated drop-out rate. RESULTS: A total of 1004 patients from 53 centres were recruited for the final analysis (496 CME, 508 no CME). Most operations (88.4 per cent) were done by an open approach. Anastomotic leak occurred in 3.4 per cent in the CME and 1.8 per cent in the non-CME group. There were slightly more lymph nodes found in CME than non-CME specimens (mean 55.6 and 50.4 respectively). Positive central mesenteric nodes were detected more in non-CME than CME specimens (5.9 versus 4.0 per cent). One-fifth of patients had died at the time of study with recorded recurrences (63, 6.3 per cent), too few to calculate disease-free survival (the original primary outcome), so overall survival (not disease-specific) results are presented. Short-term and overall survival were similar in the CME and non-CME groups. Adjusted Cox regression indicated a possible benefit for overall survival with CME in stage III disease (HR 0.52, 95 per cent c.i. 0.31 to 0.85; P = 0.010) but less so for disease-free survival (HR 0.66; P = 0.068). The secondary outcome (15 000 mm2 mesenteric size) did not influence survival at any stage (removal of more mesentery did not alter survival). CONCLUSION: No general benefit of CME could be established. The observation of better overall survival in stage III on unplanned exploratory analysis is of uncertain significance.

Oncological colorectal surgery during the COVID-19pandemic-a national survey.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to clarify the surgical supply situation of oncological colorectal patients in Germany during limitations of the OR caseload due to the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Between 11th and 19th April 2020, all members of a consortium of German colorectal cancer centers were invited to participate in a web-based survey on the current status of surgical care situation of colorectal cancer patients in Germany. RESULTS: A total of 112 colorectal surgeons of 101 German hospitals participated in the survey. Eighty-seven percent of the participating hospitals had to reduce their total surgical caseload and 34% their surgical volume for oncological colorectal patients during COVID-19 pandemic. Restrictions of the surgical caseload were independent of the size of the hospital and the number of cases of COVID-19 in the federal state of the hospital. Sixteen percent of colorectal surgeons consider surgical limitations to be not justified and 78% to be justified only if the care of oncological patients is ensured. Ninety-five percent of the colorectal surgeons interviewed stated that all oncological colorectal patients with an indication for surgery should be operated in time, despite the current reservations for COVID-19 patients. For the majority of the respondents (63% and 51%, respectively), an extended waiting time for surgery of up to 2 weeks was acceptable for non-metastatic and metastatic patients, respectively. CONCLUSION: In Germany, there is a temporarily relevant reduction of surgical volume in oncological colorectal patients. Most colorectal surgeons stated that oncological colorectal surgery should not be compromised despite the measures taken during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Barriers and Facilitating Factors for Research Involvement in Cancer Centers: A Survey of Colorectal Cancer Center Coordinators in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland.

Improvements in health care depend on research involving health-care providers (HCPs) and health-care organizations (HCOs). Existing research suggests that involvement in research studies is still much lower than it could be. This study investigates factors that may impede or facilitate research involvement. A standardized online questionnaire was used to carry out a survey, in 3 countries, of key informants in colorectal cancer centers that hold certification in accordance with the requirements of the German Cancer Society. A total of 184 individuals responded (response rate 65%). The respondents found it difficult to identify studies suitable for their patients (40% agreement), criticized the small overall number of studies available (48%), and found that many studies are not worthwhile financially (56%). Among respondents who were not involved in studies as the principal investigators (PIs), 66% agreed they lacked the research infrastructure needed and 81% that they did not have enough staff. Among respondents who were involved as PIs, only 22% indicated that their hospital management encouraged them to initiate and conduct clinical trials. Eighty-five percent of the respondents agreed that the general population lacks information about the importance of studies. Five recommendations for health policy makers are derived from these findings for ways of increasing the involvement of HCPs and HCOs in research, and in cancer research in particular.

Retromesenteric course of the middle colic artery-challenges and pitfalls in D3 right colectomy for cancer.

BACKGROUND: The middle colic artery (MCA) is of crucial importance in abdominal surgery, for laparoscopic or open right and transverse colectomies. Against this background, a high number of reports concerning anatomical variations of the MCA have been published intended to contribute to the improvement of operative techniques for the treatment of colon cancer. Despite this extensive literature, briefly reviewed in the present paper, a course of the MCA posterior to the superior mesenteric vein, called a retromesenteric trajectory, has been related to only once, to the best of our knowledge. METHODS: A total series of 507 patients included in two prospective trials concerning laparoscopic or open right colectomy for cancer between 2011 and 2017 are reported. The investigation included preoperative or postoperative multidetector-computed tomography angiography. RESULTS: We found four (0.79%) cases of retromesenteric MCA. They all underwent meticulous image analysis with mesenteric vessels' road mapping, detailed morphometry, and surgical validation which revealed that, apart from their course, those cases did not differ significantly from the rest of the series. CONCLUSION: This paper therefore documents the worth-knowing behavior causing considerable confusion for the operating surgeon unaware of the abnormality and shows its concrete impact on patient-tailored surgical practice, in particular for laparoscopic D3 colectomy (including the "uncinated process first" approach).

[Autoimmune pancreatitis--a rare and difficult differential diagnosis to pancreatic cancer]. / Autoimmunpankreatitis--eine seltene und schwierige Differentialdiagnose zum Pankreaskarzinom.

BACKGROUND: Autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP) is a rare disorder. Typical clinical symptoms include extrahepatic cholestasis, abdominal pain, and weight loss. CASE REPORT: The case of a patient with cholestatic icterus and double duct sign is reported, who underwent surgery (Whipple operation) because of suspected pancreatic cancer. Histology of the resected pancreas head revealed AIP. Due to this diagnosis, measurement of IgG4 showed a significantly elevated serum level. Postoperatively, cholestasis parameters remained elevated, which was interpreted as associated sclerosing cholangitis. Therapy with corticosteroids led to normalization of the cholestasis within 4 weeks. CONCLUSION: AIP should be taken into account as differential diagnosis to pancreatic cancer, especially in cases without clear demarcation of a pancreatic tumor. Measurement of IgG4 may be an important parameter to avoid unnecessary surgery.