Search

Dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase deficiency is a rare inherited disorder. Approximately 3% of people of European ancestry are likely to have a partial deficiency in this enzyme. These individuals are typically asymptomatic until exposed to 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) or capecitabine (which forms 5-FU) for treatment of gastrointestinal or breast cancer. These individuals are then at considerably increased risk of severe to life-threatening adverse events. There are four well established risk variants within the DPYD gene that encodes dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase. Although consensus guidelines for genotype-guided dosing of 5-FU and capecitabine have existed for a number of years, the implementation of this type of personalised medicine has not been widely adopted. This viewpoint covers the current state of knowledge about both genotype and phenotype testing, as well as the reported cost-savings and clinical effectiveness of pre-screening patients followed by dose-adjustment. Recent recommendations by agencies and professional societies, both in Europe and the USA, highlight the need for New Zealand oncologists to begin an informed discussion about whether it is now an appropriate time to advocate for routine access to testing for this enzyme deficiency in New Zealand cancer patients.

Fewer than 5% of adult cancer patients participate in clinical trials, with multiple patient, clinician and institutional barriers identified. This study aimed to explore patient factors that impact access to cancer trials in New Zealand.A questionnaire that included demographics and factors that might impact trial participation was circulated via nine district health boards (DHBs) and four cancer foundations to patients with a cancer diagnosis.Between July 2016 and August 2017, 691 patients responded, 62% female and 77% aged50 years. Most patients (86%) would consider trial participation, which differed by income (p=0.0001) but not by age, tumour type or gender. Patients would consider attending another hospital (44%) or relocating (11%); 10% considered trials a last resort. Advantageous factors to participation included: benefiting others (92%), better treatment (82%), more scans and longer follow-up (47% and 51%). Disincentives included fear of randomisation (78%), treatment toxicities (71%), time and cost of more visits (40%) and unspecified future research (32%).Identified barriers to trial participation were similar in New Zealand to other developed countries. In this motivated cohort, patients are very interested in trial participation at any stage of their treatment and did not mind extra travel or tests.

Thirty-day mortality has been proposed to be a useful indicator of avoidable harm to patients from systemic anticancer therapies (SACT). As a quality assurance tool, we assessed the 30-day mortality rate at Auckland City Hospital and compared this with international standards.Clinical characteristics and treatment details of medical oncology patients who died within 30 days of SACT from October 2014-September 2015 were collected and compared with data from a similar series performed from October 2008-September 2009. SACT was limited to chemotherapy or biologic agents.From October 2014-September 2015, 1,965 patients received 2,145 treatment regimens. Forty-seven patients (2.2%) died within 30 days of SACT. Treatment was given with palliative intent in 42 patients (in 89%) and curative intent in five (11%). Mortality rates did not change with time (2.8% in 2009 vs 2.2% in 2015). Of the patient who died within 30 days, ECOG performance status at the time of chemotherapy was one in 16 patients (34.0%), two in nine patients (19.1%) and 3/4 in nine of the 47 patients (19.1%). All patients treated with curative intent had a PS of 0 or 1. Most patients who died within 30 days were on first- or second-line therapy (45 and 38% respectively). Two-thirds of patients with a PS of 3/4 were receiving first-line therapy. Approximately half the patients died during their first cycle of therapy (48.9%).Our local 30-day mortality data compares favourably to international benchmarks of 5% and has not increased over time. Performance of similar studies locally and nationally should be undertaken to continue to assess and improve the quality of our patient care.

New Zealand has one of the highest incidences of rectal cancer in the world, and its optimal management requires a multidisciplinary approach. A National Rectal Cancer Summit was convened in August 2013 to discuss management of rectal cancer in the New Zealand context, to highlight controversies and discuss domestic priorities for the future. This paper summarises the priorities for treatment, research and policy for rectal cancer services in New Zealand identified as part of the Summit in August. The following priorities were identified: - Access to high-quality information for service planning, review of outcomes, identification of inequities and gaps in provision, and quality improvement; - Engagement with the entire sector, including private providers; - Focus on equity; - Emerging technologies; - Harmonisation of best practice; - Importance of multidisciplinary team meetings. In conclusion, improvements in outcomes for patients with rectal cancer in New Zealand will require significant engagement between policy makers, providers, researchers, and patients in order to ensure equitable access to high quality treatment, and strategic incorporation of emerging technologies into clinical practice. A robust clinical information framework is required in order to facilitate monitoring of quality improvements and to ensure that equitable care is delivered.

To identify the time taken from referral to first treatment of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) in the Auckland region and benchmark these against available guidelines for timeliness.Retrospective study of clinical records of all patients diagnosed with CRC identified from the national registry and Auckland regional databases in the years 2001 and 2005. Data extracted included demographics, dates and types of interventions and the patient journey from referral to initiation of first treatment.Of the 1128 patients diagnosed and treated in these cohorts, 68% were referred through their general practitioner and 58% saw a surgeon at their first specialist appointment. Seventy-nine percent received initial treatment with curative intent. The median time from initial referral to first treatment was 35 days, with only 68% of patients being treated within 62 days of initial referral.The colorectal patient journey is complicated by multiple pathways of presentation and treatment and by patient choice. These factors need to be considered when assessing the acceptability of transit times based on summary data. That nearly one-third of patients did not complete the United Kingdom-based target of 62 days from referral to first treatment indicates there is a need for further improvement in service delivery for patients developing CRC in the Auckland region.

In 2005 the National Screening Unit of the Ministry of Health appointed a Colorectal Screening Advisory Group to provide independent strategic advice and recommendations on population screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) in New Zealand.Evidence-based review of relevant literature and assessment of CRC screening using the New Zealand Criteria to Assess Screening Programmes.Guaiac faecal occult blood test (FOBTg), immunochemical FOBT (FOBTi), flexible sigmoidoscopy, colonoscopy, and CT colonography were considered. FOBTg is the only test supported by high quality evidence from randomised controlled trials but has limited sensitivity and achieves modest CRC mortality reduction over time. FOBTi has higher analytical sensitivity than FOBTg and would be assumed to achieve greater mortality reduction. A CRC screening programme requires substantial planning and resources. Currently public hospitals cannot deliver timely diagnostic or surveillance colonoscopy.The Advisory Group recommends that a feasibility study of CRC screening using FOBTi be undertaken. This would help determine the performance of the FOBTi in the New Zealand population and whether the New Zealand health system could support an acceptable, effective and economically efficient CRC screening programme. To optimise the diagnosis and treatment of colorectal cancer there is an immediate need to expand colonoscopy services and to ensure that throughout New Zealand the treatment outcomes for CRC, both surgical and oncological, meet international standards.

To determine treatment practices of New Zealand physicians who manage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).A questionnaire on the treatment of NSCLC was emailed to all respiratory physicians, medical oncologists, and radiation oncologists in New Zealand. Respondents were asked to select the treatment they would offer in six lung cancer case scenarios.Thirty-one (81%) respiratory physicians, 15 (71%) medical oncologists, and 8 (30%) radiation oncologists responded to the questionnaire. Surgery was selected (by all groups) as the best option for early-stage disease NSCLC. Radiotherapy or combination chemo/radiotherapy (for locally advanced disease) was favoured by 37% of respiratory physicians for stage IIIa and 28% for stage IIIb--compared with medical oncologists (100% and 80%) and radiation oncologists (86% and 28%). Chemotherapy for 'fit' patients with advanced disease was favoured by only 11% of respiratory physicians, compared with 67% of medical oncologists and 33% of radiation oncologists. Best supportive care (BSC) was the favoured treatment for patients with advanced disease with poor performance patients.This study demonstrates considerable heterogeneity in the choice of treatment for NSCLC between specialities, particularly for locally advanced and advanced disease. These findings suggest international guidelines are not being adhered to, and variations in treatment may potentially have outcome implications for patients.