Performance of standardized cancer patient pathways in Sweden visualized using observational data and a state-transition model.

Standardized Cancer Patient Pathways (CPPs) were introduced in Swedish healthcare starting in 2015 to improve diagnostics for patients with symptoms of cancer, patient satisfaction and equity of care between healthcare providers. An inclusion target and a time target were set. Our primary aim was to visualize the patient population going through CPPs, in terms of investigation time and indications of the various outcomes including cancer diagnoses. Our secondary aims were to examine if targets were met, and to examine frequencies of undetected cancer. We collected data from 19,204 patients starting in a CPP, and 7895 patients diagnosed with cancer in 2018 in a region of Sweden. A state transition model was developed and used as analytical framework, and patients were mapped over time in the states of the model. Visualization of the patient-flow through the model illustrates speed of investigation, time to treatment, frequencies of detected and undetected cancer. Twelve CPPs out of 28 met the inclusion target, five met the time target. After suspicion of cancer rejected, 0.8% of patients were diagnosed with the primarily suspected cancer, 1.0% with another cancer. In patients not meeting the criteria for well-founded suspicion less than 3% were later diagnosed with cancer. The visualization of the patient flow into and through standardized cancer patient pathways illustrates investigation time, events occurring and outcomes. The use of standardized cancer patient pathways detects cancer efficiently.

Implementation of the measure of case discussion complexity to guide selection of prostate cancer patients for multidisciplinary team meetings.

BACKGROUND: Multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTMs) provide an integrated team approach to ensure individualized and evidence-based treatment recommendations and best expert advice in cancer care. A growing number of patients and more complex treatment options challenge MDTM resources and evoke needs for case prioritization. In this process, decision aids could provide streamlining and standardize evaluation of case complexity. We applied the recently developed Measure of Case Discussion Complexity, MeDiC, instrument with the aim to validate its performance in another healthcare setting and diagnostic area as a means to provide cases for full MDTM discussions. METHODS: The 26-item MeDiC instrument evaluates case complexity and was applied to 364 men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer in Sweden. MeDiC scores were generated from individual-level health data and were correlated with clinicopathological parameters, healthcare setting, and the observed clinical case selection for MDTMs. RESULTS: Application of the MeDiC instrument was feasible with rapid scoring based on available clinical data. Patients with high-risk prostate cancers had significantly higher MeDiC scores than patients with low or intermediate-risk cancers. In the total study, population affected lymph nodes and metastatic disease significantly influenced MDTM referral, whereas comorbidities and age did not predict MDTM referral. When individual patient MeDiC scores were compared to the clinical MDTM case selection, advanced stage, T3/T4 tumors, involved lymph nodes, presence of metastases and significant physical comorbidity were identified as key MDTM predictive factors. CONCLUSIONS: Application of the MeDiC instrument in prostate cancer may be used to streamline case selection for MDTMs in cancer care and may complement clinical case selection.

Predicting life with a permanent end colostomy: A prospective study on function, bother and acceptance.

AIM: The factors that influence a patient's experience of a colostomy are not known. The aim of this study was to characterise stoma function, stoma-related bother and acceptance among patients operated for rectal cancer and to investigate if there were any preoperative personal factors with predictive impact on long-term stoma-related bother. METHODS: The QoLiRECT (Quality of Life in RECTal cancer) study is a prospective multicentre study of patients with rectal cancer. This was a subgroup analysis of patients with a permanent colostomy with a 2-year follow-up. Penalised regression models with shrinkage estimation were used to predict the 1-and 2-year bother using baseline data. The predictive value and the importance of the included variables were evaluated using bootstrap resampling techniques. RESULTS: A total of 379 patients were included. Overall stoma acceptance was high and a majority of patients were not bothered by their stoma; 77% and 83% at 1 and 2 years, respectively. The subgroup of patients with stoma-related bother had a high prevalence of difficulties, especially fear of leakage, and a low stoma acceptance in daily life. Both clinical and personal factors were associated with stoma-related bother. The most important factors were quality of life and physical health, but the prediction accuracy was low. CONCLUSIONS: Stoma-related bother was associated with overall stoma dysfunction. As stoma-related bother is a multifactorial problem, it was not possible to predict which patients will experience stoma-related bother. It is therefore of importance to prevent stoma-related symptoms and optimise stoma function to reduce long-term bother and increase stoma acceptance.

Humoral response to Clostridium difficile in inflammatory bowel disease, including correlation with immunomodulatory treatment.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: An abnormal immune response to intestinal bacteria has been observed in Crohn's disease (CD). Clostridium difficile infection incidence and severity are increased in CD, but reports on the humoral response have provided conflicting results. We aimed to shed light on the possible role of C. difficile in CD pathogenesis by paying attention to the influence of immunomodulatory treatment on the humoral response. METHODS: A total of 71 consecutive outpatients with CD, 67 with ulcerative colitis (UC), and 121 healthy controls were analyzed for serum IgA and IgG to C. difficile toxins A and B. RESULTS: IgA levels were similar in all study groups. IgG to toxin A was increased similarly in CD and UC (P = 0.02 for both). In contrast, IgG to toxin B was elevated only in CD patients not receiving disease-modifying anti-inflammatory bowel disease drugs (DMAID) (n = 16) (P = 0.0001), while the CD medication subgroup (n = 47) had a level similar to healthy controls. The UC results were not influenced by DMAID treatment. CONCLUSION: Our findings add support to the idea of a disturbed interaction between intestinal cells and the microbiota being part of the CD disease mechanism. An abnormal immune response to C. difficile toxin B may be a critical component of this interaction.

Function, information, and contributions: An evaluation of national multidisciplinary team meetings for rare cancers.

National virtual multidisciplinary team meetings have been established in Swedish cancer care in response to centralized treatment of rare cancers. Though national meetings grant access to a large multidisciplinary network, we hypothesized that video-based meetings may challenge participants' contributions to the case discussions. We investigated participants' views and used observational tools to assess contributions from various health professionals during the multidisciplinary team meetings. Data on participants' views were collected using an electronic survey distributed to participants in six national multidisciplinary team meetings for rare cancers. Data from observations were obtained from the multidisciplinary team meetings for penile cancer, anal cancer, and vulvar cancer using the standardized observational tools Meeting Observational Tool and Metric of Decision-Making that assess multidisciplinary team meeting functionality and participants' contributions to the case discussions. Participants overall rated the multidisciplinary team meetings favorably with high scores for development of individual competence and team competence. Lower scores applied to multidisciplinary team meeting technology, principles for communicating treatment recommendations, and guidelines for evaluating the meetings. Observational assessment resulted in high scores for case histories, leadership, and teamwork, whereas patient-centered care and involvement of care professionals received low scores. National virtual multidisciplinary team meetings are feasible and receive positive ratings by the participants. Case discussions cover medical perspectives well, whereas patient-centered aspects achieve less attention. Based on these findings, we discuss factors to consider to further improve treatment recommendations from national multidisciplinary team meetings.

Determinants of variable resource use for multidisciplinary team meetings in cancer care.

BACKGROUND: Multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTMs) have developed into standard of care to provide expert opinion and to grant evidence-based recommendations on diagnostics and treatment of cancer. Though MDTMs are associated with a range of benefits, a growing number of cases, complex case discussion and an increasing number of participants raise questions on cost versus benefit. We aimed to determine cost of MDTMs and to define determinants hereof based on observations in Swedish cancer care. METHODS: Data were collected through observations of 50 MDTMs and from questionnaire data from 206 health professionals that participated in these meetings. RESULTS: The MDTMs lasted mean 0.88 h and managed mean 12.6 cases with mean 4.2 min per case. Participants were mean 8.2 physicians and 2.9 nurses/other health professionals. Besides the number of cases discussed, meeting duration was also influenced by cancer diagnosis, hospital type and use of video facilities. When preparatory work, participation and post-MDTM work were considered, physicians spent mean 4.1 h per meeting. The cost per case discussion was mean 212 (range 91-595) EUR and the cost per MDTM was mean 2675 (range 1439-4070) EUR. CONCLUSIONS: We identify considerable variability in resource use for MDTMs in cancer care and demonstrate that 84% of the total cost is derived from physician time. The variability demonstrated underscores the need for regular and structured evaluations to ensure cost effective MDTM services.

Follow-up after colorectal cancer surgery.

Although most institutions offer some kind of follow-up to patients operated on for colorectal cancer, its value with respect to prolonged survival has been challenged. However, improved results of liver surgery and chemotherapy make it reasonable to assume that a follow-up programme leading to detection of more asymptomatic recurrences would result in improved survival. Liver metastases and extramural local recurrences are the most common secondary lesions and 5-year survival rates of about 30% are reported after radical resection. From these observations a survival benefit could be expected when follow-up is directed to these forms of recurrence. From six randomized studies, six comparative cohort studies and four meta-analyses it can be concluded that an intensive follow-up programme results in more recurrences being resected for cure and about a 10% higher 5-year survival rate compared with less intensive or no follow-up. However, the differences in the follow-up protocols make it difficult to conclude how a follow-up programme should be designed. Liver imaging and carcinoembryonic antigen assay should probably be included, while the yield of frequent colonoscopies is small. A follow-up regimen based on these principles is suggested. Future studies should focus on which tests are the most cost-effective for follow-up after colorectal cancer resection.