Search

OBJECTIVE: To determine if composite measures based on process indicators are consistent with short-term outcome indicators in surgical colorectal cancer care. DESIGN: Longitudinal analysis of consistency between composite measures based on process indicators and outcome indicators for 85 Dutch hospitals. SETTING: The Dutch Surgical Colorectal Audit database, the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: 4732 elective patients with colon carcinoma and 2239 with rectum carcinoma treated in 85 hospitals were included in the analyses. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: All available process indicators were aggregated into five different composite measures. The association of the different composite measures with risk-adjusted postoperative mortality and morbidity was analysed at the patient and hospital level. RESULTS: At the patient level, only one of the composite measures was negatively associated with morbidity for rectum carcinoma. At the hospital level, a strong negative association was found between composite measures and hospital mortality and morbidity rates for rectum carcinoma (p<0.05), and hospital morbidity rates for colon carcinoma. CONCLUSIONS: For individual patients, a high score on the composite measures based on process indicators is not associated with better short-term outcome. However, at the hospital level, a good score on the composite measures based on process indicators was consistent with more favourable risk-adjusted short-term outcome rates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: The treatment tradeoff method (TTM) has been developed specifically for decision making at the level of the individual patient. The task is tailored to the clinical decision problem at hand and may therefore be more relevant to patients than methods of outcome valuation. Despite its wide use in oncology research, few methodological studies regarding validity have been conducted. OBJECTIVE AND METHODS: The present study evaluates the validity of the TTM in rectal cancer patients who had undergone either 1 of 2 surgery types: 1 requiring a permanent stoma (stoma group) and 1 involving a postoperative risk of fecal incontinence (no-stoma group). The authors relate the surgery preference scores to the utilities of the 2 main surgery outcome states as well as to their utility difference. RESULTS: Surgery preference was more strongly associated with the utility difference (r > 0.54 in the total patient group) than with the utilities of the surgery outcome states per se (r < 0.44 in the total patient group). In the stoma group, surgery preference was especially related to the utility of incontinence and in the no-stoma group especially to the utility of a permanent stoma. CONCLUSIONS: Patients indeed use their valuations of treatment outcomes states, especially those they are less familiar with, in determining their preference for one treatment over another. In clinical practice, the TTM may be used to obtain an indication of the treatment preference of an individual patient and may also be helpful to detect patients' motives to choose one treatment over another. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research has shown that patients' preferences for adjuvant chemotherapy do not change as a result of experience. However, the preferences of experienced patients are usually more favourable than those of inexperienced patients. These results indicate a shift in preferences after the decision to proceed with adjuvant chemotherapy has been made, but before actual experience. We tested this assumption in early-stage breast and colorectal cancer patients. We asked patients to provide their preferences for chemotherapy before surgery and thus before they knew whether chemotherapy would be advised (T(1)), after surgery but before the start of chemotherapy (T(2)) and about 1 month after chemotherapy (T(3)). Patients who did not undergo chemotherapy co-operated at similar points in time. Preferences were measured on a nine-point scale, ranging from (1) 'very strong preference for no chemotherapy' to (9) 'very strong preference for chemotherapy'. As hypothesized, the preferences of patients who would be treated with chemotherapy became more favourable after the treatment decision had been made (n = 7, P = 0.06). The preferences of patients for whom chemotherapy was not part of the treatment plan showed the opposite effect (n = 38, P = 0.03). We did not find any effect of experiencing treatment (n = 22, P = 0.62) or the passing of time (n = 81, P = 0.25) on the stability of preferences. We conclude that the frequently observed discrepancy in treatment preferences between experienced and inexperienced patients seems to be an effect of the treatment decision and not of experience of the treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Total mesorectal excision (TME) is the standard treatment for rectal cancer, while transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) is a recently introduced surgical approach for the treatment of rectal adenomas. Incorrect preoperative staging before TEM is a problem. To identify genetic changes that might correlate with tumour stage and could lead to optimized treatment selection we performed a genome-wide chromosomal instability search in a homogeneous, clinical cohort of rectal tumours. 78 rectal tumours during different clinical stages were analysed with 10K single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) arrays. Logistic regression was performed to build a quantitative model of specific chromosomal aberrations. Overall, most cases (95%) had one or more chromosomal aberrations. We observed a clear correlation between the total number of aberrations and the different tumour stages. Specifically, the chromosomal events: gain of 8q22-24, 13q and 20q, and loss of 17p and 18q12-22, were far more abundant in carcinoma than in adenoma. In adenoma fractions from cases with a carcinoma (infiltrating at least in the submucosa), twice the amount of such 'malignant aberrations' was observed, compared to pure adenomas. Furthermore, combined aberrations such as gain of 13q and loss of 18q were only found in adenomatous fractions of carcinomas and not in benign lesions. Based on these five genomic events associated with carcinoma, a clear distinction between adenoma and carcinoma tissue could be made. These data should be validated further in order that they may be used in preoperative staging of rectal tumours. Copyright © 2007 Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Accurate staging of rectal tumors is essential for making the correct treatment choice. In a previous study, we found that loss of 17p, 18q and gain of 8q, 13q and 20q could distinguish adenoma from carcinoma tissue and that gain of 1q was related to lymph node metastasis. In order to find markers for tumor staging, we searched for candidate genes on these specific chromosomes.~Background~Background~We performed gene expression microarray analysis on 79 rectal tumors and integrated these data with genomic data from the same sample series. We performed supervised analysis to find candidate genes on affected chromosomes and validated the results with qRT-PCR and immunohistochemistry.~Methods~Methods~Integration of gene expression and chromosomal instability data revealed similarity between these two data types. Supervised analysis identified up-regulation of EFNA1 in cases with 1q gain, and EFNA1 expression was correlated with the expression of a target gene (VEGF). The BOP1 gene, involved in ribosome biogenesis and related to chromosomal instability, was over-expressed in cases with 8q gain. SMAD2 was the most down-regulated gene on 18q, and on 20q, STMN3 and TGIF2 were highly up-regulated. Immunohistochemistry for SMAD4 correlated with SMAD2 gene expression and 18q loss.~Results~Results~On basis of integrative analysis this study identified one well known CRC gene (SMAD2) and several other genes (EFNA1, BOP1, TGIF2 and STMN3) that possibly could be used for rectal cancer characterization.~Conclusion~Conclusions [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]