ABSTRACT
STUDY DESIGN: Survey. INTRODUCTION: AO Spine Research Objectives and Common Data Elements for Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy (AO Spine RECODE-DCM) is an international initiative that aims to accelerate knowledge discovery and improve outcomes by developing a consensus framework for research. This includes defining the top research priorities, an index term and a minimum data set (core outcome set and core data elements set - core outcome set (COS)/core data elements (CDE)). OBJECTIVE: To describe how perspectives were gathered and report the detailed sampling characteristics. METHODS: A two-stage, electronic survey was used to gather and seek initial consensus. Perspectives were sought from spinal surgeons, other healthcare professionals and people with degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM). Participants were allocated to one of two parallel streams: (1) priority setting or (2) minimum dataset. An email campaign was developed to advertise the survey to relevant global stakeholder individuals and organisations. People with DCM were recruited using the international DCM charity Myelopathy.org and its social media channels. A network of global partners was recruited to act as project ambassadors. Data from Google Analytics, MailChimp and Calibrum helped optimise survey dissemination. RESULTS: Survey engagement was high amongst the three stakeholder groups: 208 people with DCM, 389 spinal surgeons and 157 other healthcare professionals. Individuals from 76 different countries participated; the United States, United Kingdom and Canada were the most common countries of participants. CONCLUSION: AO Spine RECODE-DCM recruited a diverse and sufficient number of participants for an international PSP and COS/CDE process. Whilst PSP and COS/CDE have been undertaken in other fields, to our knowledge, this is the first time they have been combined in one process.
ABSTRACT
Management guidelines for male breast cancer have long been extrapolated from those for female breast cancer, which are based on large, randomised-controlled trials. While there are no randomised-controlled trials for male breast cancer management mainly due to the rarity of the disease, the only type of evidence available comes from retrospective studies, subject to selection biases and small sample sizes. Male breast cancer, while similar to female breast cancer in many respects, has some important differences that can affect management choices. Most cancers are oestrogen and progesterone receptor positive, and usually more advanced at presentation than female breast cancer. This is likely due to less breast parenchyma in male patients and delay to diagnosis. The classical management option for male patients with breast cancer is mastectomy, due to small tumour-to-breast ratio and often central position of the tumour. Breast conserving surgery is still useful in selected cases and has similar outcomes when compared to mastectomies in these patients. For patients with clinically negative lymph nodes, sentinel lymph node biopsy offers the same prognosis as axillary lymph node dissection, but with less associated morbidity. Endocrine therapy is of particular use, due to high levels of receptor positivity. Adjuvant endocrine therapy seems to significantly improve overall survival of male patients with breast cancer and while no prospective evidence exists for neoadjuvant hormonal therapy, there is hope that this is a useful management option as well. Radiotherapy is also useful in an adjuvant setting, particularly when combined with endocrine therapy. Better identification of patients, less delay from presentation to diagnosis and more collaborative efforts are key in improving the management, prognosis and outcomes of patients with male breast cancer.
