Routine follow-up care for head and neck cancer after curative treatment: A 3-year experience of measuring patients' self-reported needs, preferences, quality of life and attitudes towards follow-up.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and describe attitudes, quality of life (Qol), needs and preferences of patients with head and neck cancer after 3 years of follow-up care. METHODS: This is an exploratory prospective study of recurrence-free patients. Survey results were compared between 1-, 2- and 3-year post-treatment and by disease characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 116 patients were included with 46% oropharyngeal cancer, 66% early stage disease and 41% having had surgery. After 3 years, most patients reported good to excellent health (88%), however expressed uncertainty regarding recurrence (66%), multiple needs (information on prognosis 91%, long-term sequalae 72%) and wanted to continue with follow-up (96%). Few changes were observed over time, with exceptions. Patients with more advanced disease, oral cancer or who had surgery experienced declining Qol (p < 0.050). Women experienced improvements in Qol domains (pain p = 0.028, speech p = 0.009) over time. Attitudes towards communication with oncologists demonstrated improved patient comfort (p = 0.044) over the 3 years; however, patients' beliefs about their prognosis did not (71% vs. 73% vs. 77% did not believe they were cured, p = 0.581). CONCLUSION: Although patients' needs, preferences and attitudes towards follow-up did not change drastically, important needs persist. This work supports identifying individual patient needs and the challenges in addressing prognostic expectations.

Routine follow-up care after curative treatment of head and neck cancer: A survey of patients' needs and preferences for healthcare services.

OBJECTIVE: The experience of a cancer diagnosis and receiving treatment can have profound impacts on health and subsequently patients may require significant support. Often, these needs are not identified or addressed. Given that less is known about the follow-up requirements for head and neck cancer patients, this study aimed to describe their follow-up needs and preferences. METHODS: In Ontario, Canada from 2012-2014, 175 patients completed a questionnaire at an appointment one year after treatment. To identify associations between characteristics and follow-up needs, bivariate analyses and ordinal logistic regression models were employed. RESULTS: A diversity of follow-up requirements was found. The most commonly reported follow-up needs were having imaging tests performed (66%), receiving information on treatment side effects (84%) and prognosis details (95%). Many patients experienced an improvement in their health (79%) but notably, not all. Characteristics such as psychosocial and well-being measures (functional status, anxiety, fear of recurrence, quality of life), attitudes towards follow-up (reassurance, communication), demographics (age, sex, marital status), and stage of disease predicted needs and preferences for follow-up care (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: While awaiting top-level evidence, this work demonstrates the variation in needs and supports the identification of patients with higher follow-up requirements by screening for well-being and enquiring about expectations in follow-up care.

Did the addition of concurrent chemotherapy to conventional radiotherapy improve survival for patients with HPV+ve and HPV-ve Oropharynx cancer? A population-based study.

BACKGROUND: In the absence of clear evidence on the efficacy of concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CRT) over conventional radiotherapy (RT) for HPV+ve and for HPV-ve oropharyngeal cancer (OPC), this study compares the treatments and outcomes from pre-CRT years to post-CRT years. METHODS: A population-based retrospective treatment-effectiveness study based on all patients with OPC treated in Ontario Canada in 1998, 1999, 2003 and 2004. Charts were reviewed, tissue samples were requested and tissue was tested for p16 or in situ hybridisation. Overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) were compared by treatment era and by treatment type for all 1028 patients, for 865 treated for cure and for 610 with HPV status. RESULTS: There was no improvement in OS comparing pre-CRT to post-CRT eras for the HPV+ve patients (P=0.147) or for the HPV-ve patients (P=0.362). There was no difference in OS comparing CRT to RT for the HPV+ve cohort (HR=0.948 (0.642-1.400)) or for the HPV-ve patients (HR=1.083 (0.68-1.727)). CONCLUSIONS: In these 'real-world' patients what appeared to be improvements in OS with CRT in clinical trials were confounded by HPV status in Ontario. CRT did not improve outcomes for HPV+ve or for HPV-ve patients.

Economies of scale: body mass index and costs of cardiac surgery in Ontario, Canada.

An obesity paradox has been described, whereby obese patients have better health outcomes than normal weight patients in certain clinical situations, including cardiac surgery. However, the relationship between body mass index (BMI) and resource utilization and costs in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery is largely unknown. We examined resource utilization and cost data for 53,224 patients undergoing CABG in Ontario, Canada over a 10-year period between 2002 and 2011. Data for costs during hospital admission and for a 1-year follow-up period were derived from the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, and analyzed according to pre-defined BMI categories using analysis of variance and multivariate models. BMI independently influenced healthcare costs. Underweight patients had the highest per patient costs ($50,124 ± $36,495), with the next highest costs incurred by morbidly obese ($43,770 ± $31,747) and normal weight patients ($42,564 ± $30,630). Obese and overweight patients had the lowest per patient costs ($40,760 ± $30,664 and $39,960 ± $25,422, respectively). Conversely, at the population level, overweight and obese patients were responsible for the highest total yearly population costs to the healthcare system ($92 million and $50 million, respectively, compared to $4.2 million for underweight patients). This is most likely due to the high proportion of CABG patients falling into the overweight and obese BMI groups. In the future, preoperative risk stratification and preparation based on BMI may assist in reducing surgical costs, and may inform health policy measures aimed at the management of weight extremes in the population.

Sex/Gender-Based Pharmacology and Statin Utilization Amongst Elderly Patients with Diabetes.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to explore the ten-year trends in utilization of bioequivalent doses of statin amongst elderly patients with diabetes according to sex/gender in Ontario, Canada. METHODS: A cohort of patients with diabetes (>65 years) was constructed using the Ontario Diabetes Database Statin utilization data (2003-2012) was obtained from the Ontario Drug Benefit Program for both women and men. Bioequivalent doses for statins were calculated according to the dosing conversion factor in therapeutic interchange programs in clinical practice. Utilization pattern of high potency (Atorvastatin and Rosuvastatin) vs. low potency statins (Simvastatin, Lovastatin, Fluvastatin, Pravastatin) were also analyzed. RESULTS: The average bioequivalent Simvastatin utilization in 2003 was 29.22 mg/day for women and 30.35 mg/day for men. By 2008, this gap in dosing was higher for both women and men and by 2013 it had increased to 47.75 mg/day for women and 52.98 mg/day for men. For average number of day supply per year, there was no significant trend of changes over the 10-year period, although the use of high potency statins increased significantly (P<0.001) for both women and men. No differences were seen for sex/gender; either for the 10-year period or for each year. CONCLUSIONS: There has been significant increase in bioequivalent statin utilization amongst elderly patients with diabetes in Ontario; for both men and women. In a publicly-funded healthcare system such as Ontario, there were no sex/gender differences in the utilization of high potency statin (Atorvastatin and Rosuvastatin) amongst elderly patient with diabetes.

Body Mass Index, Outcomes, and Mortality Following Cardiac Surgery in Ontario, Canada.

BACKGROUND: The "obesity paradox" reflects an observed relationship between obesity and decreased morbidity and mortality, suggesting improved health outcomes for obese individuals. Studies examining the relationship between high body mass index (BMI) and adverse outcomes after cardiac surgery have reported conflicting results. METHODS AND RESULTS: The study population (N=78 762) was comprised of adult patients who had undergone first-time coronary artery bypass (CABG) or combined CABG/aortic valve replacement (AVR) surgery from April 1, 1998 to October 31, 2011 in Ontario (data from the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences). Perioperative outcomes and 5-year mortality among pre-defined BMI (kg/m(2)) categories (underweight <20, normal weight 20 to 24.9, overweight 25 to 29.9, obese 30 to 34.9, morbidly obese >34.9) were compared using Bivariate analyses and Cox multivariate regression analysis to investigate multiple confounders on the relationship between BMI and adverse outcomes. A reverse J-shaped curve was found between BMI and mortality with their respective hazard ratios. Independent of confounding variables, 30-day, 1-year, and 5-year survival rates were highest for the obese group of patients (99.1% [95% Confidence Interval {CI}, 98.9 to 99.2], 97.6% [95% CI, 97.3 to 97.8], and 90.0% [95% CI, 89.5 to 90.5], respectively), and perioperative complications lowest. Underweight and morbidly obese patients had higher mortality and incidence of adverse outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Overweight and obese patients had lower mortality and adverse perioperative outcomes after cardiac surgery compared with normal weight, underweight, and morbidly obese patients. The "obesity paradox" was confirmed for overweight and moderately obese patients. This may impact health resource planning, shifting the focus to morbidly obese and underweight patients prior to, during, and after cardiac surgery.

Prostate cancer-specific survival differences in patients treated by radical prostatectomy versus curative radiotherapy.

OBJECTIVE: We compared the cause-specific survival of patients who received radiotherapy to those who received surgery for cure of their prostate cancer using a number of design and analytic steps to mitigate confounding by indication. METHODS: This was a case-cohort study of 2213 patients in the Ontario Cancer Registry diagnosed between 1990 and 1998 who were either treatment candidates or received curative radiotherapy or surgery. Cases included patients who died of prostate cancer within 10 years. The study population was restricted to those who were candidates for either treatment (radiotherapy or surgery) based on disease severity (low and intermediate risk using the Genitourinary Radiation Oncologists of Canada risk groups). The median follow-up was 51 months. Cause-specific survival was analyzed using Cox-proportional hazards regression with case-cohort variance adjustment. Results from intent-to-treat analyses were compared to results by treatment received. RESULTS: Adjusted hazard ratios for risk of prostate cancer death for radiotherapy compared to surgery for the entire study population were 1.62 (95%CI 1.00-2.61) and 2.02 (1.19-3.43) analyzing by intent-to-treat and treatment received, respectively. Intent-to-treat hazard ratios for the low- and intermediate-risk groups were 0.87 (0.28-2.76) and 1.57 (0.95-2.61), respectively. CONCLUSION: Overall results were driven by the finding in the intermediate-risk group, which indicated that radiotherapy was not as effective as surgery in this group. Confirmation was needed with special attention paid to risk stratification and the impact of more contemporary delivery of these treatment options.

Assessing the impact of comorbid illnesses on death within 10 years in prostate cancer treatment candidates.

BACKGROUND: Treatment choice in prostate cancer is influenced by pre-existing comorbid illnesses, but information about their individual prognostic impact is sparse, and only 1 comorbidity index has been developed for this setting. The authors assessed the impact of individual comorbid illnesses on the risk of early, other-cause death in prostate cancer treatment candidates and propose a modification of an existing comorbidity scale. METHODS: A population-based case-cohort study included patients diagnosed from 1990 through 1998 in Ontario, Canada who had planned curative radiotherapy or prostatectomy. The subcohort numbered 1643, and the case sample (those dying of other causes within 10 years) numbered 630. Ontario Cancer Registry data were linked to data from medical charts, including: age, comorbidity using the Cumulative Illness Rating Scale for Geriatrics (CIRS-G), stage, prostate-specific antigen, Gleason score, and treatment. Cox proportional hazards regression assessed the age-adjusted association between CIRS-G and other-cause death. RESULTS: Respiratory and cardiac diseases were the most common comorbidities and most strongly associated with an increased risk of death. Other important comorbidities included vascular disease, renal disease, and diabetes. The modified CIRS-G(pros) score yielded a relative risk (RR) of 1.64 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.52-1.76) for those scoring 1 compared with 0 and RR 1.18 (95% CI, 1.15-1.21) for each increment above 1. Except for those aged >80 years, results were consistent across treatment type and age group. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides estimates of the role of individual comorbid illnesses in prostate cancer. The modified CIRS-G(pros) could be useful in the clinic and in future research on this patient population.

A population-based study of factors associated with early versus late stage oral cavity cancer diagnoses.

Oral cavity cancers can be detected early yet many are diagnosed with advanced disease. We assessed risk factors for advanced stage disease in a population-based study. Study population was all Ontario patients with anterior tongue or floor of mouth cancers diagnosed between 1991 and 2000 (n=2033). Data are from a retrospective chart review. Risk factors included: demographic characteristics, co-morbidity, precancerous lesions, dental status, smoking, alcohol use, and social marginalization. Multivariate regression analyses assessed independent associations while controlling for disease grade and site. Forty percent had advanced disease. Eighty-nine percent presented with symptoms and 66% were referred by a family physician. Risk factors in the tongue group were being: age ≥80 (RR 1.47), widowed (RR 1.34), social marginalized (RR 1.69), a current smoker (RR 1.26), or a smoker-heavy drinker (RR 1.73). Risk factors in the floor of mouth group were being: age ≥70 (70-79: RR 1.24 and ≥80: RR 1.43), and socially marginalized (RR 1.22). Having a pre-cancerous lesion (RR 0.44) or a regular dentist (RR 0.84) was protective in the floor of mouth group. Risk factors for those with co-morbid illnesses were being: age ≥70 (70-79: RR 1.28 and ≥80: RR 1.55), separated/divorced (RR 1.26), socially marginalized (RR 1.37), or a smoker-heavy drinker (RR 1.44); while having a regular dentist was protective (RR 0.83). Targeted education to alert those at risk about oral cancer warning signs and better training coupled with opportunistic oral cavity exams by family physicians could reduce the burden of this disease.

Effects of non-selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs on the aggressiveness of prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Inflammatory mediators have a role in the initiation and progression of prostate cancer. Observed anti-cancer effects of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) have consisted largely of those that inhibit inflammatory mechanisms thought to promote an aggressive disease phenotype. Epidemiologic studies have supported a chemopreventive effect but there is little research on a possible protective role against prostate cancer aggressiveness and progression to advanced disease. METHODS: We conducted a population-based exploratory study, using cross-sectional and case-cohort approaches to assess, the effect of NSAIDs on indicators of prostate cancer aggressiveness. The study population consisted of 1,619 randomly selected patients with a further over-sampling of 453 prostate cancer mortality cases. All had been curatively treated by radical prostatectomy or external-beam radiotherapy and were sampled using the Ontario Cancer Registry. Aggressiveness of disease at diagnosis, represented by Gleason score, and risk of prostate cancer death were compared across NSAID exposure groups. RESULTS: The adjusted odds ratio (OR) of a total Gleason score of 8-10 versus 2-6 indicated a non-significant protective effect of NSAIDs (OR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.47-1.17). We did not observe an association with risk of prostate cancer death overall (HR: 1.03, 95% CI: 0.79-1.34), but a secondary analysis indicated that NSAID users surviving five years may be protected from early prostate cancer death (HR: 0.54, 95% CI: 0.26-1.13). CONCLUSION: Although estimates were not statistically significant, this exploratory study indicates a possible negative association between NSAID use and disease aggressiveness. Larger investigations with more precise exposure measurements are recommended.

Predictive validity of five comorbidity indices in prostate carcinoma patients treated with curative intent.

BACKGROUND: Comorbidity is important to consider in clinical research on curative prostate carcinoma because of the role of competing risks. Five chart-based comorbidity indices were assessed for their ability to predict survival. METHODS: This was a case-cohort study of prostate carcinoma patient cohort treated with curative intent in Toronto and Southeast Cancer Care Ontario regions between 1990 and 1996; the subcohort was drawn from these men, whereas cases were cohort members who died from causes other than prostate carcinoma. Comorbidity data were obtained from medical charts (269 subjects). Vital status, age, area of residence, and socioeconomic status information were available. Predictive validity was quantified by the percent variance explained (PVE) over and above age using proportional hazards modeling. RESULTS: The Chronic Disease Score (CDS) (PVE = 11.3%; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 3.5-22.8%), Index of Coexistent Disease (ICED) (PVE = 9.0%; 95% CI, 2.9-17.9%), Cumulative Illness Rating Scale (CIRS) (PVE = 7.2%; 95% CI, 1.4-17.1%), Kaplan-Feinstein Index (PVE = 4.9%; 95% CI, 0.6-12.8%), and Charlson Index (PVE = 3.8%; 95% CI, 0.3-10.9%) each explained some outcome variability beyond age. PVE differences among indices were not statistically significant. A comorbidity identified at the time of cancer diagnosis was the cause of death in 59.2% of cases (75% for cardiac or vascular causes). CONCLUSIONS: The better-performing, more comprehensive indices (CDS, ICED, and CIRS) would be useful in measuring and controlling for comorbidity in this setting. The CDS was easiest to apply and explained the most outcome variability.

Measuring comorbidity in patients with head and neck cancer.

BACKGROUND: Comorbidities are diseases or conditions that coexist with a disease of interest. The importance of comorbidities is that they can alter treatment decisions, change resource utilization, and confound the results of survival analysis. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine the best comorbidity index to use in survival analysis of patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. METHOD: Four validated indexes, with very different methodologies (i.e., the Charlson Index, the Cumulative Illness Rating Scale, the Kaplan-Feinstein Classification, the Index of Co-existent Disease), were tested using data from 379 unselected consecutive patients with complete 3-year follow-up from the Kingston Regional Cancer Center. Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox Proportional Hazards Regression were used to stratify patients into three levels of increasing severity of comorbidity for each index. The Proportion of Variance Explained and Receiver Operating Characteristics curves were used to compare the performance of the indexes. CONCLUSION: The Kaplan-Feinstein Classification was the most successful in stratifying patients in this population.