A regional clinical audit of the provision of adjuvant systemic anti-cancer treatment following lung cancer resection in eligible patients across Greater Manchester to support national benchmarking

Introduction: Adjuvant anti-cancer systemic therapy (SACT) following lung resection improves overall survival in stage II/II non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The Getting It Right First Time (GIRFT) National Specialty Report for Lung Cancer recommends centres publish adjuvant SACT rates for National benchmarking and proposes a target of >40% of eligible patients undergo SACT. We report a regional audit into the uptake of adjuvant SACT in Greater Manchester (GM). Method(s): A retrospective case review of all patients undergoing curative-intent NSCLC surgery with a pathological stage of II/III from 01/01/21 to 30/04/21. Data collected included patient demographics, uptake of adjuvant SACT, reasons for no adjuvant SACT and tolerance and complications of SACT. Result(s): 58 patients underwent surgical resection within the audit period and were eligible for adjuvant SACT. Median age was 70 years (range 45 - 81) and 60% were female. 47% (27/58) commenced adjuvant SACT;41% (24/58) were treated with chemotherapy and 7% (4/58) were treated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors. 58% (14/24) of patients that commenced adjuvant chemotherapy completed 4 cycles. Carboplatin/Vinorelbine was the commonest regimen (82%, 18/22). There were no grade III-V complications and no chemotherapy-related deaths. Dose reduction due to toxicity was required in 14% (3/22). The reasons adjuvant systemic therapy was not given were patient choice in 32% (10/31), poor physical health such that risks outweighed benefits in 42% (13/31), and other reasons (e.g. need to treat synchronous primary tumours) in 26% (8/31). COVID-19 was not recorded as a cause for adjuvant omission/ dose reduction. Conclusion(s): This data provides national benchmarking information for adjuvant SACT in NSCLC and suggests the target of >40% is achievable and appropriate. Interventions that improve patient fitness pre- and post-operatively might increase adjuvant SACT uptake. This regional audit will be extended to review all eligible patients in 2021 and further data will be presented. Disclosure: No significant relationships.Copyright © 2023 Elsevier B.V.

The European Rare Disease Network for HHT Frameworks for management of hereditary haemorrhagic telangiectasia in general and speciality care.

Hereditary haemorrhagic telangiectasia (HHT) is a complex, multisystemic vascular dysplasia affecting approximately 85,000 European Citizens. In 2016, eight founding centres operating within 6 countries, set up a working group dedicated to HHT within what became the European Reference Network on Rare Multisystemic Vascular Diseases. By launch, combined experience exceeded 10,000 HHT patients, and Chairs representing 7 separate specialties provided a median of 24 years' experience in HHT. Integrated were expert patients who focused discussions on the patient experience. Following a 2016-2017 survey to capture priorities, and underpinned by more than 40 monthly meetings, and new data acquisitions, VASCERN HHT generated position statements that distinguish expert HHT care from non-expert HHT practice. Leadership was by specialists in the relevant sub-discipline(s), and 100% consensus was required amongst all clinicians before statements were published or disseminated. One major set of outputs targeted all healthcare professionals and their HHT patients, and include the new Orphanet definition; Do's and Don'ts for common situations; Outcome Measures suitable for all consultations; COVID-19; and anticoagulation. The second output set span aspects of vascular pathophysiology where greater understanding will assist organ-specific specialist clinicians to provide more informed care to HHT patients. These cover cerebral vascular malformations and screening; mucocutaneous telangiectasia and differential diagnosis; anti-angiogenic therapies; circulatory interplays between anaemia and arteriovenous malformations; and microbiological strategies to counteract loss of normal pulmonary capillary function. Overall, the integrated outputs, and documented current practices, provide frameworks for approaches that augment the health and safety of HHT patients in diverse health-care settings.

Virtual Outpatient Heart Failure Care - Lessons From the Covid-19 Era

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted the way care is delivered to patients with chronic conditions such as heart failure (HF). Many outpatient encounters are now conducted virtually via telehealth. Whether virtual visit for HF results in similar type of interventions as when the patient is seen in person is not known. Methods: Starting on March 15, 2020, all non-time sensitive outpatient in-person appointments at our institution were cancelled and transitioned to virtual appointments where possible. We included all patients seen in a tertiary care HF clinic from February 18 to March 13 (pre-Covid) and from March 16 to May 15 (post-COVID). We examined the volume of in-person and virtual visits and compared medication titration rates pre- and post-COVID. Results: The study cohort included 745 patients, mean age 60.7+/-15.3 years, 65.2% male, 80.9% Caucasian, 7.7% Hispanic/Latino. Of these, 227 patients were seen pre-COVID and 518 post-COVID. All appointments were in-person pre-COVID. After the change, only 18% of appointments were in-person while 82% were virtual. Outpatient volume decreased after March 15, but gradually increased, eventually to volumes that exceeded pre-COVID (Figure). Detailed results on medication titration are shown in Table. Diuretic titration took place in 33/227 (14.5%) of patients pre-COVID and 83/518 (16.0%) post-COVID (p=NS). Among 567 patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), titration of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) took place in 86/172 (50.0%) of patients pre-COVID and 159/395 (40.2%) post-COVID (p=0.03). Among the 395 HFrEF patients seen post-COVID, GDMT was titrated in 33/68 (48.5%) patients seen in person and 126/327 (38.5%) seen virtually - p=0.13. Barriers to medication titration in virtual visits were lack of blood pressure readings and lack of recent laboratory results. Conclusion: Telehealth has become an essential method of outpatient care delivery for chronic HF. Once implemented, it offered efficiencies including improved access to the HF clinic thanks to higher throughput capacity compared to physical clinic space. However, we identified that GDMT titration took place less frequently than during in-person visits. Since it is anticipated that telehealth use will continue into the future, approaches to maximize GDMT in the absence of traditional direct physical contact with HF patients are needed.