The public's intended uptake of hypothetical esophageal adenocarcinoma screening scenarios: a nationwide survey.

INTRODUCTION: Screening for early esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) may potentially reduce EAC-related mortality and morbidity. This study aimed to examine the Dutch population's intended uptake of three hypothetical EAC screening test scenarios and preferences for potential future organization. METHODS: A total of 8350 Dutch individuals aged 45-75 years were invited, of whom 2258 completed a web-based survey. Participants were randomly assigned to one of three hypothetical screening test scenarios (i.e., transnasal endoscopy, ingestible cell-collection device, or breath analysis). The primary outcome was intended uptake. Secondary outcomes included acceptance of screening eligibility criteria and preferences regarding invitation, counseling, and diagnostic follow-up. We performed exploratory univariable and multivariable regression analyses to assess which determinants were associated with EAC screening intent. RESULTS: Intended uptake of screening was highest in the breath analysis scenario (95%), followed by conventional upper endoscopy (78%), an ingestible cell-collection device (75%), and transnasal endoscopy (68%) (p<0.001). Anticipating discomfort was most strongly associated with decreased intention to undergo transnasal endoscopy (OR 0.18, 95% CI 0.11-0.29) or swallow a cell-collection device (OR 0.20, 95% CI 0.13-0.32). Cancer worry and high acceptance of test sensitivity/specificity were consistently associated with a positive intention to participate in screening. Inviting persons for screening based on gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD) symptoms, age, or the output of a risk prediction model was acceptable to 74%, 69%, and 66%, respectively. Inviting only men was acceptable for only 41% of women. The majority (58%) preferred to be invited by a public health organization and 32% of the participants preferred to discuss their decision to participate with a health care professional. CONCLUSION: Participants in this study self-selected through a web-based survey, potentially introducing selection bias. Participants generally intended to participate in EAC screening, although the level of intent depends on the discomfort and performance associated with the offered screening test. Determining eligibility based on GERD symptoms, age, or a risk calculator, but not sex, would be acceptable to most individuals.

Training in optical diagnosis in community hospitals is associated with improved recognition and treatment of T1 CRC: a prospective multicenter intervention study (OPTICAL II).

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Recognition of T1 colorectal cancer (CRC) is difficult, with sensitivities of 35-60% in Western countries. We evaluated the real-life effects of the implementation of the OPTICAL model, a recently developed structured and validated prediction model, in Dutch community hospitals. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this prospective multicenter study, 383 endoscopists from 40 hospitals were invited to follow an e-learning on the OPTICAL-model, to increase sensitivity for detecting T1CRC in non-pedunculated polyps. Next, real-life recognition of T1CRC was evaluated in 25 hospitals. Endoscopic and pathologic reports of T1CRCs detected during the next year were collected retrospectively while endoscopists were unaware of this evaluation. Sensitivity for recognition of T1CRC, R0 resection rate, and treatment modality were compared for trained vs. untrained endoscopists and for recognised vs. unrecognised T1CRCs. RESULTS: Within 1 year after the e-learning 251 endoscopists detected 528 non-pedunculated T1CRCs, 118 (47%) of the endoscopist were trained. T1CRCs had a median size of 20mm and were mainly located in the distal colorectum (66%). Trained endoscopists recognised T1CRCs more frequently than untrained endoscopists (sensitivity 74% vs. 62%; mixed model analysis OR 2.90; 95%CI 1.54-5.45. A higher rate of R0 resection was seen for T1CRCs detected by trained endoscopists (69% vs. 56%, OR 1.73; 95%CI 1.03-2.91). CONCLUSION: Training in optical recognition of T1CRCs in community hospitals was associated with an increase in sensitivity for T1CRCs. Recognition led to a higher rate of en bloc local excision, resulting in higher R0-resection rates. This may be an important step towards more organ-preserving strategies.

Impact of 18FFDG-PET/CT and Laparoscopy in Staging of Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer: A Cost Analysis in the Prospective Multicenter PLASTIC-Study.

BACKGROUND: Unnecessary D2-gastrectomy and associated costs can be prevented after detecting non-curable gastric cancer, but impact of staging on treatment costs is unclear. This study determined the cost impact of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (18FFDG-PET/CT) and staging laparoscopy (SL) in gastric cancer staging. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this cost analysis, four staging strategies were modeled in a decision tree: (1) 18FFDG-PET/CT first, then SL, (2) SL only, (3) 18FFDG-PET/CT only, and (4) neither SL nor 18FFDG-PET/CT. Costs were assessed on the basis of the prospective PLASTIC-study, which evaluated adding 18FFDG-PET/CT and SL to staging advanced gastric cancer (cT3-4 and/or cN+) in 18 Dutch hospitals. The Dutch Healthcare Authority provided 18FFDG-PET/CT unit costs. SL unit costs were calculated bottom-up. Gastrectomy-associated costs were collected with hospital claim data until 30 days postoperatively. Uncertainty was assessed in a probabilistic sensitivity analysis (1000 iterations). RESULTS: 18FFDG-PET/CT costs were €1104 including biopsy/cytology. Bottom-up calculations totaled €1537 per SL. D2-gastrectomy costs were €19,308. Total costs per patient were €18,137 for strategy 1, €17,079 for strategy 2, and €19,805 for strategy 3. If all patients undergo gastrectomy, total costs were €18,959 per patient (strategy 4). Performing SL only reduced costs by €1880 per patient. Adding 18FFDG-PET/CT to SL increased costs by €1058 per patient; IQR €870-1253 in the sensitivity analysis. CONCLUSIONS: For advanced gastric cancer, performing SL resulted in substantial cost savings by reducing unnecessary gastrectomies. In contrast, routine 18FFDG-PET/CT increased costs without substantially reducing unnecessary gastrectomies, and is not recommended due to limited impact with major costs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03208621. This trial was registered prospectively on 30-06-2017.

Oesophageal cancer awareness and anticipated time to help-seeking: results from a population-based survey.

BACKGROUND: Modifying public awareness of oesophageal cancer symptoms might help to decrease late-stage diagnosis and, in turn, improve cancer outcomes. This study aimed to explore oesophageal cancer symptom awareness and determinants of lower awareness and anticipated time to help-seeking. METHODS: We invited 18,156 individuals aged 18 to 75 years using random sampling of the nationwide Dutch population registry. A cross-sectional web-based survey containing items adapted from the Awareness and Beliefs about Cancer measure (i.e., cancer symptom awareness, anticipated time to presentation with dysphagia, health beliefs, and sociodemographic variables) was filled out by 3106 participants (response rate: 17%). Descriptive statistics were calculated and logistic regression analyses were performed to explore determinants of awareness and anticipated presentation (dichotomised as <1 month or ≥1 month). RESULTS: The number of participants that recognised dysphagia as a potential symptom of cancer was low (47%) compared with symptoms of other cancer types (change in bowel habits: 77%; change of a mole: 93%; breast lump: 93%). In multivariable analyses, non-recognition of dysphagia was associated with male gender (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.43-0.58), lower education (OR 0.44, 0.35-0.54), and non-western migration background (OR 0.43, 0.28-0.67). Anticipated delayed help-seeking for dysphagia was associated with not recognising it as possible cancer symptom (OR 1.58, 1.27-1.97), perceived high risk of oesophageal cancer (OR 2.20, 1.39-3.47), and negative beliefs about oesophageal cancer (OR 1.86, 1.20-2.87). CONCLUSION: Our findings demonstrate a disconcertingly low public awareness of oesophageal cancer symptoms. Educational interventions targeting groups with decreased awareness and addressing negative cancer beliefs may lead to faster help-seeking behaviour, although additional studies are needed to determine the effect on clinical cancer outcomes.

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs before endoscopic ultrasound guided tissue acquisition to reduce the incidence of post procedural pancreatitis.

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) with fine needle aspiration or fine needle biopsy is the gold standard for sampling tissue to diagnose pancreatic cancer and autoimmune pancreatitis or to analyze cyst fluid. The most common reported adverse event of fine needle aspiration and/or fine needle biopsy is acute pancreatitis, which is likely induced by the same pathophysiological mechanisms as after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). According to the current European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are administered prior to ERCP as a scientifically proven treatment to reduce post-ERCP pancreatitis incidence rate. A single suppository of diclofenac or indomethacin prior to EUS guided tissue acquisition (TA) is harmless in healthy adults. Since it is associated with low costs and, most important, may prevent a dreadsome complication, we strongly recommend the administration of 100 mg diclofenac rectally prior to EUS-TA. We will explain this recommendation in more detail in this review as well as the risk and pathophysiology of post-EUS TA pancreatitis.

Endoscopic resection for residual oesophageal neoplasia after definitive chemoradiotherapy.

Definitive chemoradiation is the recommended treatment for locally advanced, irresectable oesophageal cancer and a valid alternative to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) with surgery in oesophageal squamous cell cancer (OSCC) patients. In case of locoregional recurrence, salvage treatment can be considered in fit and resectable patients. Salvage surgery is a valid option but associated with significant morbidity. Therefore, for tumors confined to the mucosa or submucosal layers endoscopic resection is a good and less-invasive alternative. Over the last decade several case-series have demonstrated a high technical success rate of endoscopic treatment after definitive CRT. In this review we summarize the clinical outcomes and challenges of endoscopic treatment of early recurrence after definitive CRT in oesophageal cancer.

Treatment failure of Helicobacter Pylori in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Due to increasing antibiotic resistance, the worldwide efficacy of Helicobacter pylori (Hp) eradication treatment has decreased. AIM: To determine antimicrobial resistance of Hp in primary care. DESIGN & SETTING: Retrospective cohort study using real-world routine health care data from 80 general practices in the Netherlands. METHOD: Patients with ICPC-codes for gastric symptoms or ATC-code for acid inhibition in the period 2010-2020 were selected. Main outcomes were antimicrobial resistance of Hp, defined as the prescription of a second eradication treatment within 12 months, and clinical remission of gastric symptoms, defined as no usage of acid inhibition one year following eradication therapy. RESULTS: We identified 138,455 patients with gastric symptoms and/or acid inhibition use (mean age 57 years [SD 18.2], 43% male). A total of 5,224 (4%) patients received a Hp eradication treatment. A second treatment was prescribed to 416 (8%) of those patients. From these, 380 patients received amoxicillin-clarithromycin, 16 amoxicillin-metronidazole and 11 clarithromycin-metronidazole as first regimen and were considered antimicrobial resistant. We observed a 0.8% increment per year of patients requiring a second eradication treatment (P=0.003, 95% CI 0.33-1.22). After successful eradication, 2,329/4,808 (48%) patients used acid inhibition compared to 355/416 (85%) patients following treatment failure (P<0.001). CONCLUSION: Antimicrobial treatment is not successful in almost one-tenth of Hp infections in primary care after a first treatment containing clarithromycin and/or metronidazole. Although the treatment failure rate is not as high as reported in secondary care, the increasing trend is concerning and may require revision of the current guidelines.

The EORTC QLU-C10D is a valid cancer-specific preference-based measure for cost-utility and health technology assessment in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: Cost-utility analysis typically relies on preference-based measures (PBMs). While generic PBMs are widely used, disease-specific PBMs can capture aspects relevant for certain patient populations. Here the EORTC QLU-C10D, a cancer-specific PBM based on the QLQ-C30, is validated using Dutch trial data with the EQ-5D-3L as a generic comparator measure. METHODS: We retrospectively analysed data from four Dutch randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comprising the EORTC QLQ-C30 and the EQ-5D-3L. Respective Dutch value sets were applied. Correlations between the instruments were calculated for domains and index scores. Bland-Altman plots and intra-class correlations (ICC) displayed agreement between the measures. Independent and paired t-tests, effect sizes and relative validity indices were used to determine the instruments' performance in detecting clinically known-group differences and health changes over time. RESULTS: We analysed data from 602 cancer patients from four different trials. In overall, the EORTC QLU-C10D showed good relative validity with the EQ-5D-3L as a comparator (correlations of index scores r = 0.53-0.75, ICCs 0.686-0.808, conceptually similar domains showed higher correlations than dissimilar domains). Most importantly, it detected 63% of expected clinical group differences and 50% of changes over time in patients undergoing treatment. Both instruments showed poor performance in survivors. Detection rate and measurement efficiency were clearly higher for the QLU-C10D than for the EQ-5D-3L. CONCLUSIONS: The Dutch EORTC QLU-C10D showed good comparative validity in patients undergoing treatment. Our results underline the benefit that can be achieved by using a cancer-specific PBM for generating health utilities for cancer patients from a measurement perspective.

A computer-aided polyp detection system in screening and surveillance colonoscopy: an international, multicentre, randomised, tandem trial.

BACKGROUND: Studies on the effect of computer-aided detection (CAD) in a daily clinical screening and surveillance colonoscopy population practice are scarce. The aim of this study was to evaluate a novel CAD system in a screening and surveillance colonoscopy population. METHODS: This multicentre, randomised, controlled trial was done in ten hospitals in Europe, the USA, and Israel by 31 endoscopists. Patients referred for non-immunochemical faecal occult blood test (iFOBT) screening or surveillance colonoscopy were included. Patients were randomomly assigned to CAD-assisted colonoscopy or conventional colonoscopy; a subset was further randomly assigned to undergo tandem colonoscopy: CAD followed by conventional colonoscopy or conventional colonoscopy followed by CAD. Primary objectives included adenoma per colonoscopy (APC) and adenoma per extraction (APE). Secondary objectives included adenoma miss rate (AMR) in the tandem colonoscopies. The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04640792. FINDINGS: A total of 916 patients were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis: 449 in the CAD group and 467 in the conventional colonoscopy group. APC was higher with CAD compared with conventional colonoscopy (0·70 vs 0·51, p=0·015; 314 adenomas per 449 colonoscopies vs 238 adenomas per 467 colonoscopies; poisson effect ratio 1·372 [95% CI 1·068-1·769]), while showing non-inferiority of APE compared with conventional colonoscopy (0·59 vs 0·66; p<0·001 for non-inferiority; 314 of 536 extractions vs 238 of 360 extractions). AMR in the 127 (61 with CAD first, 66 with conventional colonoscopy first) patients completing tandem colonoscopy was 19% (11 of 59 detected during the second pass) in the CAD first group and 36% (16 of 45 detected during the second pass) in the conventional colonoscopy first group (p=0·024). INTERPRETATION: CAD increased adenoma detection in non-iFOBT screening and surveillance colonoscopies and reduced adenoma miss rates compared with conventional colonoscopy, without an increase in the resection of non-adenomatous lesions. FUNDING: Magentiq Eye.

Recurrences of advanced sessile and lateral spreading colorectal adenoma after endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) thermal ablation versus no adjuvant therapy (RESPECT): a protocol of an international randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Nowadays, large benign lateral spreading lesions (LSLs) and sessile polyps in the colorectum are mostly resected by endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). A major drawback of EMR is the polyp recurrence rate of up to 20%. Snare tip soft coagulation (STSC) is considered an effective technique to reduce recurrence rates. However, clinical trials on STSC have mainly been conducted in expert referral centers. In these studies, polyp recurrence was assessed optically, and additional adjunctive techniques were excluded. In the current trial, we will evaluate the efficacy and safety of STSC in daily practice, by allowing adjunctive techniques during EMR and the use of both optical and histological polyp recurrence to assess recurrences during follow-up. METHODS: The RESPECT study is a multicenter, parallel-group, international single blinded randomized controlled superiority trial performed in the Netherlands and Germany. A total of 306 patients undergoing piecemeal EMR for LSLs or sessile colorectal polyps sized 20-60 mm will be randomized during the procedure after endoscopic complete polyp resection to the intervention or control group. Post-EMR defects allocated to the intervention group will be treated with thermal ablation with STSC of the entire resection margin. Primary outcome will be polyp recurrence by optical and histological confirmation at the first surveillance colonoscopy after 6 months. Secondary outcomes include technical success and complication rates. DISCUSSION: The RESPECT study will evaluate if STSC is effective in reducing recurrence rates after piecemeal EMR of large colorectal lesions in daily clinical practice performed by expert and non-expert endoscopists. Moreover, endoscopists will be allowed to use adjunctive techniques to remove remaining adenomatous tissue during the procedure. Finally, adenomatous polyp recurrence during follow-up will be defined by histologic identification. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05121805. Registered on 16 November 2021. Start recruitment: 17 March 2022. Planned completion of recruitment: 31 April 2025.

Multisegmented esophageal fully covered self-expandable metal stent for palliation of malignant dysphagia: a prospective multicenter feasibility and safety study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: A novel multisegmented esophageal fully covered self-expandable metal stent (FCSEMS) was designed to reduce stent migration that is seen in up to 30% of patients. We aimed to evaluate safety and efficacy of this multisegmented FCSEMS. METHODS: This multicenter prospective study aimed to include 30 patients undergoing palliative stent placement. Efficacy defined as technically successful stent placement and dysphagia scores and safety defined as (serious) adverse events ((S)AEs) were measured. RESULTS: The study was prematurely terminated due to safety concerns after including 23 patients (mean age 72 yrs (± 10); 78% male). Stent placement was technically successful in 21 patients (91%) and dysphagia scores had improved in all patients with successful stent placement. SAEs occurred in 16 (70%) patients. Stent-related mortality occurred in three patients (13%). CONCLUSION: The multisegmented FCSEMS successfully treated malignant dysphagia. The study was however prematurely terminated because stent placement was associated with a relatively high SAE rate. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT04415463).

An intraprocedural bowel cleansing system for difficult-to-prepare patients-A multicenter prospective feasibility study.

BACKGROUND: Adequate bowel preparation is a prerequisite for colonoscopy. However, up to 20% of colonoscopies remain inadequately prepared. Risk factors for inadequate bowel preparation often overlap with those of failed cecal intubation. This study aimed to assess the feasibility of an intraprocedural bowel cleansing system (BCS) in patients with a history of inadequate bowel preparation. METHODS: Patients (n = 44) with a history of inadequate bowel preparation in the past 2 years were included. After a limited preparation with 300 mL split-dose sodium picosulfate magnesium citrate, additional cleansing during colonoscopy was performed with the BCS. The primary outcome was adequate bowel preparation using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS). Secondary outcomes included cecal intubation rate, procedure times, usability, and safety. RESULTS: Median BBPS increased from 1-2-2 (IQR 1-2) to 3-3-3 (IQR) (p < 0.0001), with 31.8% and 88.6% of patients adequately prepared before and after using the BCS, respectively (p < 0.0001). Cecal intubation rate was 88.6%. Reasons for incomplete colonoscopy were looping (n = 2), technical failure (n = 1), relative stricture (n = 1), and residual feces (n = 1). In patients with complete colonoscopy, the adequate cleansing rate was 97.5%. Median total procedure time was 26 min, of which 5.3 min were spent on cleaning. General ease of use was scored with a median of 4 out of 5, representing "as good as conventional colonoscopy". No serious adverse events occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Adequate bowel cleaning can be achieved with an intraprocedural BCS in patients with a history of inadequate bowel preparation, which may reduce repeat colonoscopies and clinical admissions for bowel preparation. However, since these patients more frequently have complicated anatomy (surgical scarring, diverticulosis, etc.), adequate patient selection is advised to avoid incomplete procedures.

Standardised training for endoscopic mucosal resection of large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps to reduce recurrence (*STAR-LNPCP study): a multicentre cluster randomised trial.

OBJECTIVE: Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is the preferred treatment for non-invasive large (≥20 mm) non-pedunculated colorectal polyps (LNPCPs) but is associated with an early recurrence rate of up to 30%. We evaluated whether standardised EMR training could reduce recurrence rates in Dutch community hospitals. DESIGN: In this multicentre cluster randomised trial, 59 endoscopists from 30 hospitals were randomly assigned to the intervention group (e-learning and 2-day training including hands-on session) or control group. From April 2019 to August 2021, all consecutive EMR-treated LNPCPs were included. Primary endpoint was recurrence rate after 6 months. RESULTS: A total of 1412 LNPCPs were included; 699 in the intervention group and 713 in the control group (median size 30 mm vs 30 mm, 45% vs 52% size, morphology, site and access (SMSA) score IV, 64% vs 64% proximal location). Recurrence rates were lower in the intervention group compared with controls (13% vs 25%, OR 0.43; 95% CI 0.23 to 0.78; p=0.005) with similar complication rates (8% vs 9%, OR 0.93; 95% CI 0.64 to 1.36; p=0.720). Recurrences were more often unifocal in the intervention group (92% vs 76%; p=0.006). In sensitivity analysis, the benefit of the intervention on recurrence rate was only observed in the 20-40 mm LNPCPs (5% vs 20% in 20-29 mm, p=0.001; 10% vs 21% in 30-39 mm, p=0.013) but less evident in ≥40 mm LNPCPs (24% vs 31%; p=0.151). In a post hoc analysis, the training effect was maintained in the study group, while in the control group the recurrence rate remained high. CONCLUSION: A compact standardised EMR training for LNPCPs significantly reduced recurrences in community hospitals. This strongly argues for a national dedicated training programme for endoscopists performing EMR of ≥20 mm LNPCPs. Interestingly, in sensitivity analysis, this benefit was limited for LNPCPs ≥40 mm. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NTR7477.

Multimodal Therapy Versus Primary Surgery for Gastric and Gastroesophageal Junction Diffuse Type Carcinoma, with a Focus on Signet Ring Cell Carcinoma: A Nationwide Study.

BACKGROUND: Diffuse type adenocarcinoma and, more specifically, signet ring cell carcinoma (SRCC) of the stomach and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) have a poor prognosis and the value of neoadjuvant chemo(radio)therapy (nCRT) is unclear. METHODS: All patients who underwent surgery for diffuse type gastric and GEJ carcinoma between 2004 and 2015 were retrospectively included from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. The primary outcome was overall survival after surgery. Kaplan-Meier curves were plotted. Furthermore, multivariable Poisson and Cox regressions were performed, correcting for confounders. To comply with the Cox regression proportional hazard assumption, gastric cancer survival was split into two groups, i.e. <90 days and >90 days, postoperatively by adding an interaction variable. RESULTS: Analyses included 2046 patients with diffuse type cancer: 1728 gastric cancers (50% SRCC) and 318 GEJ cancers (39% SRCC). In the gastric cancer group, 49% received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) and 51% received primary surgery (PS). All-cause mortality within 90 days postoperatively was lower after nCT (hazard ratio [HR] 0.29, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.20-0.44; p < 0.001). Also after 90 days, mortality was lower in the nCT group (HR for the interaction variable 2.84, 95% CI 1.87-4.30, p < 0.001; total HR 0.29*2.84 = 0.84). In the GEJ group, 38% received nCT, 22% received nCRT, and 39% received PS. All-cause mortality was lower after nCT (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.43-0.93; p = 0.020) compared with PS. The nCRT group was removed from the Cox regression analysis since the Kaplan-Meier curves of nCRT and PS intersected. The results for gastric and GEJ carcinomas were similar between the SRCC and non-SRCC subgroups. CONCLUSION: For gastric and GEJ diffuse type cancer, including SRCC, nCT was associated with increased survival.

Dutch, UK and US professionals' perceptions of screening for Barrett's esophagus and esophageal adenocarcinoma: a concept mapping study.

BACKGROUND: Novel, less-invasive technologies to screen for Barrett's esophagus (BE) may enable a paradigm shift in early detection strategies for esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Understanding professionals' perspectives on screening is important to determine how to proceed. We aimed to explore and compare professionals' perceptions of screening for BE and EAC screening in three countries. METHODS: In this study, 29 Dutch, 20 British and 18 American health care professionals (clinicians, researchers and policy makers) participated in concept mapping: a mixed-methods consensus building methodology. Statements on perceived barriers, facilitators, advantages, disadvantages, implications or worries associated with screening for BE and EAC were collected in asynchronous digital brainstorm sessions. Subsequently, participants sorted the statements into groups according to thematic similarity and assessed the relevance of each statement in evaluating the acceptability of BE and EAC screening. Multidimensional scaling and cluster analysis were used to map the associations between generated statements. RESULTS: Professionals across three countries identified eight consistent themes that relate to their perceptions of screening for BE and EAC: (1) Benefits, (2) Harms, (3) Clinical effectiveness concerns, (4) Screening population, (5) Screening modality, (6) Resources, (7) Ownership, and (8) Public communication. Dutch and American professionals prioritized the potential health benefits of screening but also questioned clinical impact. In contrast, British participants prioritized identification of the screening population and suitable test. CONCLUSIONS: Most professionals see potential in less-invasive screening tests for BE and EAC but underline the need to define the target screening population and determine benefits and harms before widely employing them. Successful implementation will require thoughtful consideration of the involvement of general practitioners, readiness of endoscopy and pathology services, balanced public communication, and country-specific regulations.

Pelvic insufficiency fractures and pelvic bone metastases after neoadjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy for rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Pelvic insufficiency fractures (PIFs) are a late complication of radiotherapy for pelvic malignancies. We evaluated the incidence, radiologic findings, clinical course, and outcome of PIFs in patients treated with neoadjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy ((C)RT) for rectal cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Data of patients diagnosed with rectal cancer from a large teaching hospital treated from 2002 to 2012 were extracted from the Dutch Cancer Registry. All hospital records were reviewed for the diagnosis of PIFs or pelvic bone metastases. An expert radiologist reassessed all imaging procedures of the lower back, abdomen, and pelvis. RESULTS: A total of 513 rectal cancer patients were identified of whom 300 patients (58.5%) were treated with neoadjuvant (C)RT (long- vs. short-course radiotherapy: 91 patients [17.7%] vs. 209 [40.7%], respectively). Twelve PIFs were diagnosed initially according to hospital records and imaging reports of all 513 patients. These 12 patients were treated with neoadjuvant (C)RT. After reassessment of all pelvic imaging procedures done in this patient group (432 patients (84.2%)), 20 additional PIFs were detected in patients treated with neoadjuvant (C)RT, resulting in a 10.7% PIF rate in irradiated patients. One PIF was detected in the group of patients not treated with neoadjuvant (C)RT for rectal cancer. This patient had palliative radiotherapy for prostate cancer and is left out of the analysis. Median follow-up time of 32 PIF patients was 49 months. Median time between start of neoadjuvant (C)RT and diagnosis of PIF was 17 months (IQR 9-28). Overall median survival for patients with PIF was 63.5 months (IQR 44-120). CONCLUSION: PIFs are a relatively common late complication of neoadjuvant (C)RT for rectal cancer but are often missed or misdiagnosed as pelvic bone metastases. The differentiation of PIFs from pelvic bone metastases is important because of a different treatment and disease outcome.

Incidence, Stage, Treatment, and Survival of Noncardia Gastric Cancer.

Importance: Gastric cancer is the fifth most common cancer worldwide, and investigating its incidence, characteristics, treatment, and outcomes over the past decades can help in selecting clinical strategies and future research directions. Objective: To analyze the trends in incidence, staging, and treatment of gastric cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: This nationwide, population-based cohort study included patients diagnosed with noncardia gastric cancer (NCGC) between 1989 and 2021 in the Netherlands. Main Outcomes and Measures: Differences in tumor characteristics, treatment, and survival were analyzed per fixed time periods (1989-1993, 1994-1998, 1999-2003, 2004-2008, 2009-2013, 2014-2018, and 2019-2021). Results: In total, 47 014 patients (median [IQR] age, 73 [64-80] years; 28 032 [60%] male patients) were identified with mostly adenocarcinomas of the antrum region (when location was known). Age-standardized incidence decreased from 20.3 to 6.1 per 100 000 person-years between 1989 and 2021. During the study period, unknown T and N stages were recorded less frequently, and metastatic disease was diagnosed more frequently (1989-1993: 2633 of 9493 patients [28%]; 2019-2021: 1503 of 3200 patients [47%] in 2019-2021). Over time, fewer patients with metastatic disease underwent surgery with or without other treatment modalities (68% in 1989-1993 vs 64% in 2019-2021), and palliative chemotherapy in metastatic NCGC increased from 9% to 40%. For patients with nonmetastatic disease, 5-year relative survival improved from 28% (95% CI, 26.5%-29.2%) to 36% (95% CI, 33.5%-37.6%) between 1989 and 2021. For patients with nonmetastatic disease undergoing a resection, 5-year survival increased from 40% (95% CI, 38.3%-41.8%) to 51% (95% CI, 47.9%-53.3%). For patients with metastatic disease, 1-year relative survival increased from 10% (95% CI, 8.7%-11.1%) to 19% (95% CI, 17.2%-21.6%), but 3-year relative survival remained poor at 5% (95% CI, 3.6%-7.5%). Conclusions and Relevance: In this nationwide cohort study involving 47 014 patients diagnosed with NCGC (1989-2021), the results showed a decrease in incidence, more accurate staging, a shift in treatment modalities, and improved patient survival.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the diagnosis, stage, and treatment of esophagogastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has affected the entire global healthcare system, including oncological care. This study investigated the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the diagnosis, stage, and treatment of esophagogastric cancer in the Netherlands. METHODS: Patients diagnosed in 2020 were divided into 5 periods, based on the severity of the COVID-19 pandemic in the Netherlands, and compared to patients diagnosed in the same period in the years 2017-2019. Patient characteristics and treatments were evaluated for esophageal cancer (EC) and gastric cancer (GC) separately. RESULTS: The number of esophagogastric cancer diagnoses decreased prominently during the first 2 months of the COVID-19 pandemic. During this period, a significantly higher percentage of GC patients was diagnosed with incurable disease (52.5% in 2017-2019 and 67.7% in 2020, p = 0.011). We observed a significant reduction in the percentage of patients with potentially curable EC treated with resection and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (from 35.0% in 2017-2019 to 27.3% in 2020, p < 0.001). Also, patients diagnosed with incurable GC were treated less frequently with a resection (from 4.6% in 2017-2019 to 1.5% in 2020, p = 0.009) in the second half of 2020. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to previous years, the number of esophagogastric cancer diagnoses decreased in the first 2 months of the COVID-19 pandemic, while an increased percentage of patients was diagnosed with incurable disease. Both in the curative and palliative setting, patients were less likely to be treated with a surgical resection.