Objective: To determine the proportion of adults treated for localized melanoma who prefer the standard scheduled visit frequency (as per Australian guideline recommendations) or fewer scheduled visits (adapted from the Melanoma Follow-up [MELFO] study of reduced follow-up).
Design, Setting, and Participants: This survey study used a telephone interview for surveillance following excision of localized melanoma at an Australian specialist center. We invited a random sample of 400 patients who had completed treatment for localized melanoma in 2014 to participate. They were asked about their preferences for scheduled follow-up, and experience of follow-up in the past 12 months. Those with a recurrent or new primary melanoma diagnosed by the time of interview (0.8-1.7 years since first diagnosis) were asked about how it was first detected and treated. SSE practices were also assessed.
Main Outcomes and Measures: Proportion preferring standard vs fewer scheduled clinic visits, median delay between detection and treatment of recurrent or new primary melanoma, and SSE practices.
Results: Of the 262 people who agreed to be interviewed, the mean (SD) age was 64.3 (14.3) years, and 93 (36%) were women. Among the 230 people who did not have a recurrent or new primary melanoma, 149 vs 81 preferred the standard vs fewer scheduled clinic visits option (70% vs 30% after adjusting for sampling frame). Factors independently associated with preferring fewer visits were a higher disease stage, melanoma on a limb, living with others, not having private health insurance, and seeing a specialist for another chronic condition. The median delay between first detection and treatment of recurrent or new primary melanoma was 7 and 3 weeks, respectively. Only 8% missed a scheduled visit, while 40% did not perform SSE or did so at greater than 3-month intervals.
Conclusions and Relevance: Some patients with melanoma may prefer fewer scheduled visits, if they are supported to do SSE and there is rapid clinical review of anything causing concern (patient-led surveillance).
METHODS: We randomly sampled 351 people with localised melanoma [American Joint Cancer Committee (AJCC) substages 0 - II] who had not had recurrent or new primary melanoma diagnosed from a total of 902 people diagnosed and treated for localised melanoma at a specialist centre in 2014. We interviewed participants by telephone about their experience of follow-up in the past year, and documented the proportion of patients who were undertaking shared care follow-up with a GP. We also recorded the frequency and type of investigations during follow-up. We calculated weighted estimates that are representative of the full inception cohort.
RESULTS: Of the 351 people who were invited to participate, 230 (66%) people consented to the telephone interview. The majority undertook shared care follow-up with a GP (61%). People who choose to have shared care follow-up with a GP are more likely to be male (p = 0.006), have lower AJCC stage (p for trend = 0.02), reside in more remote areas (p for trend
METHODS: This cross-sectional observational study included 465 adult outpatients prescribed analgesics for cancer pain for 1 month or longer at 22 sites in Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam. Data on analgesic prescription and cancer characteristics were extracted from medical records. Pain intensity, sleep disturbance, and quality of life measures were recorded via questionnaires.
RESULTS: Most patients (84.4%) had stage III or IV cancer. A total of 419 patients (90.7%) were prescribed opioids; of these, 42.2% received only weak opioids, whereas 57.8% received at least one strong opioid. The mean worst pain intensity during the past 24 hours was 4.76 (standard deviation [SD], 2.47) on a scale of 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain); the mean current pain intensity was 4.10 (SD, 2.61). More than half of patients (54.8%) reported sleep disturbance caused by pain in the past 7 days. The majority of patients reported problems with pain/discomfort (82.3%), usual activities (65.8%), mobility (58.2%), and anxiety/depression (56.3%). The median daily dose prescribed in oral morphine equivalents was 30 mg for both morphine and tramadol.
CONCLUSION: Despite unrelieved pain, sleep disturbance, and issues with quality of life, a notable proportion of patients were prescribed only weak opioids, and opioid doses prescribed were generally low. Efforts focused on encouragement of prescriptions with analgesic strength and/or doses proportional to the pain management needs of patients are vital to improve the status of cancer pain management in the region.
METHODS: Restriction fragment length polymorphism-polymerase chain reaction (RFLP-PCR) was used to genotype all the aforementioned gene polymorphisms. Kaplan-Meier survival function, log-rank test and Cox regression were used to investigate the effect of gene polymorphisms on the all-cause survival of NPC.
RESULTS: NPC cases carrying T/T genotype of ITGA2 C807T have poorer all-cause survival compared to those with C/C genotypes, with an adjusted HR of 2.06 (95% CI = 1.14-3.72) in individual model. The 5-year survival rate of C/C carriers was 55% compared to those with C/T and T/T where the survival rates were 50% and 43%, respectively.
CONCLUSION: The finding from the present study showed that ITGA2 C807T polymorphism could be potentially useful as a prognostic biomarker for NPC. However, the prognostic value of ITGA2 C807T polymorphism has to be validated by well-designed further studies with larger patient numbers.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified women diagnosed with ILC or IDLC. We selected the patients who had preoperative breast MRI. For each patient we identified the areas of multifocal, multicentric, or contralateral disease not visible to standard exams and detected by preoperative MRI. We analyzed the potential correlation between additional cancer areas and histological cancer markers.
RESULTS: Of the 155 women who met our inclusion criteria, 93 (60%) had additional cancer areas detected by MRI. In 61 women, 39,4% of the overall population, the additional cancer areas were confirmed by US/tomosynthesis second look and biopsy. Presurgical MRI staging changed surgical management in the 37,4% of the patients. Only six patients of the overall population needed a reoperation after the initial surgery. No statistically significant correlation was found between MRI overestimation and the presence of histological peritumoral vascular/linfatic invasion. No statistically significant correlation was found between additional cancer areas and histological cancer markers.
CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that MRI is an important tool in the preoperative management and staging of patients affected by lobular or ductolobular invasive carcinoma.
METHODS: ASCO convened a multidisciplinary, multinational Expert Panel that reviewed existing guidelines and conducted a modified ADAPTE process and a formal consensus process with additional experts for one round of formal ratings.
RESULTS: Existing sets of guidelines from 12 guideline developers were identified and reviewed; adapted recommendations from six guidelines form the evidence base and provide evidence to inform the formal consensus process, which resulted in agreement of 75% or more on all recommendations.
RECOMMENDATIONS: For nonmaximal settings, the recommended treatments for colon cancer stages nonobstructing, I-IIA: in basic and limited, open resection; in enhanced, adequately trained surgeons and laparoscopic or minimally invasive surgery, unless contraindicated. Treatments for IIB-IIC: in basic and limited, open en bloc resection following standard oncologic principles, if not possible, transfer to higher-level facility; in emergency, limit to life-saving procedures; in enhanced, laparoscopic en bloc resection, if not possible, then open. Treatments for obstructing, IIB-IIC: in basic, resection and/or diversion; in limited or enhanced, emergency surgical resection. Treatment for IIB-IIC with left-sided: in enhanced, may place colonic stent. Treatment for T4N0/T3N0 high-risk features or stage II high-risk obstructing: in enhanced, may offer adjuvant chemotherapy. Treatment for rectal cancer cT1N0 and cT2n0: in basic, limited, or enhanced, total mesorectal excision principles. Treatment for cT3n0: in basic and limited, total mesorectal excision, if not, diversion. Treatment for high-risk patients who did not receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy: in basic, limited, or enhanced, may offer adjuvant therapy. Treatment for resectable cT3N0 rectal cancer: in enhanced, base neoadjuvant chemotherapy on preoperative factors. For post-treatment surveillance, a combination of medical history, physical examination, carcinoembryonic antigen testing, imaging, and endoscopy is performed. Frequency depends on setting. Maximal setting recommendations are in the guideline. Additional information can be found at www.asco.org/resource-stratified-guidelines .
NOTICE: It is the view of the American Society of Clinical Oncology that health care providers and health care system decision makers should be guided by the recommendations for the highest stratum of resources available. The guidelines are intended to complement but not replace local guidelines.
METHODS: A professional group was formed by 36 experts of the Asian Novel Bio-Imaging and Intervention Group (ANBI2 G) members. Representatives from 12 Asia-Pacific countries participated in the meeting. The group organized three consensus meetings focusing on diagnostic endoscopy for gastrointestinal neoplasia. The Delphi method was used to develop the consensus statements.
RESULTS: Through the three consensus meetings with debating, reviewing the literature and regional data, a consensus was reached at third meeting in 2016. The consensus was reached on a total of 10 statements. Summary of statements is as follows: (i) Adequate bowel preparation for high-quality colonoscopy; (ii) Antispasmodic agents for lesion detection; (iii) Image-enhanced endoscopy (IEE) for polyp detection; (iv) Adenoma detection rate for quality indicators; (v) Good documentation of colonoscopy findings; (vi) Complication rates; (vii) Cecal intubation rate; (viii) Cap-assisted colonoscopy (CAC) for polyp detection; (ix) Macroscopic classification using indigocarmine spray for characterization of colorectal lesions; and (x) IEE and/or magnifying endoscopy for prediction of histology.
CONCLUSION: This consensus provides guidance for carrying out endoscopic diagnosis and characterization for early-stage colorectal neoplasia based on the evidence. This will enhance the quality of endoscopic diagnosis and improve detection of early-stage colorectal neoplasia.
RESULTS: In the present cross-sectional descriptive study, analysis of ZAP-70 expression showed that 36/110 (32.7%) patients positively expressed ZAP-70 and insignificant higher presentation in intermediate and at advanced stages as well as no correlation was seen with hematological parameters and clinical features compared with negatively ZAP-70, on the other hand, 41/110 (37.3%) were CD38+ and no significant correlation was shown with the stage at presentation, clinical characteristics (except Splenomegaly, P = 0.02) and hematological parameters. However, in combined expressions of both ZAP-70 and CD38 together, 20/110 (18.2%) were concordantly ZAP-70+/CD38+, 53/110 (48.2%) concordantly ZAP-70-/CD38- and 37/110 (33.6%) either ZAP-70+ or CD38+, and these three groups showed insignificant correlation with clinical (except Splenomegaly, P = 0.03) and hematological parameters, and the stage at presentation. Our data showed the combined analysis of these two markers, lead to classify our patients into three subgroups (either concordant positive, negative or discordant expressions) with statistically insignificant correlation with clinical presentation (except Splenomegaly), hematological parameters and stage at presentation of B-CLL patients.
METHODS: Venous blood samples from 46 pathologically confirmed PDAC patients were collected prospectively before surgery and immunoassayed using a specially designed TU-chip™. Captured CTCs were differentiated into epithelial (E), mesenchymal and hybrid (H) phenotypes. A further 45 non-neoplastic healthy donors provided blood for cell line validation study and CTC false positive quantification.
FINDINGS: A validated multivariable model consisting of disjunctively combined CTC phenotypes: "H-CTC≥15.0 CTCs/2ml OR E-CTC≥11.0 CTCs/2ml" generated an optimal prediction of metastasis with a sensitivity of 1.000 (95% CI 0.889-1.000) and specificity of 0.886 (95% CI 0.765-0.972). The adjusted Kaplan-Meier median OS constructed using Cox proportional-hazard models and stratified for E-CTC
METHODS: Data were retrieved for major SGC patients diagnosed between 1988 and 2011 from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program.
RESULTS: We have included 5446 patients with major SGC. Most patients had parotid gland cancer (84.61%). Patients having >18 ELNs, >4 PLNs, and >33.33% LNR were associated with a worse survival. Moreover, older age, male patients, grade IV, distant stage, unmarried patients, submandibular gland cancer, and received chemotherapy but not received surgery were significantly associated with a worse survival.
CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated that patients with >18 ELNs and >4 PLNs counts, and >33.33% LNR were high-risk group patients. We strongly suggest adding the ELNs and PLNs counts and/or LNR into the current staging system.
METHODOLOGY: This is a multi-centre, cross-sectional study involving the University of Malaya Medical Centre (UMMC), Queen Elizabeth II Hospital (QEH), and Tengku Ampuan Rahimah Hospital (TARH). Patients diagnosed with invasive breast cancer from January 2014 to December 2015 were included, excluding stromal cancers and lymphomas. Univariate and multivariate analyses identified factors influencing BCS.
RESULTS: A total of 1005 patients were diagnosed with breast cancer in the allocated time frame. Excluding incomplete records and those who did not have surgery, 730 patients were analysed. Overall BCS rate was 32.9%. The BCS rate was highest at QEH (54.1%), followed by UMMC (29.5%), and TARH (17.4%). 16.9% had BCS after neoadjuvant therapy. Factors influencing BCS uptake included age, ethnic group, breast-surgeon led services, AJCC Stage, tumour size, HER-2 expression, and tumour grade.
CONCLUSIONS: The rate of BCS in Malaysia is low. A wide variation of rate exists among the studied hospitals. Younger age, earlier AJCC stage, and the presence of a Breast sub-specialist surgeon, would make it more likely that the patient has her breast conserved.