Search

Background: Different sets of quality indicators are used to identify areas for improvement in ovarian cancer care. This study reports transparently on how (surgical) indicators were measured and on the association between hospital volume and indicator results in Belgium, a country setting without any centralisation of ovarian cancer care., Methods: From the population-based Belgian Cancer Registry, patients with a borderline malignant or invasive epithelial ovarian tumour diagnosed between 2014 and 2018 were selected and linked to health insurance and vital status data (n = 5119). Thirteen quality indicators on diagnosis and treatment were assessed and the association with hospital volume was analysed using logistic regression adjusted for case-mix., Results: The national results for most quality indicators on diagnosis and systemic therapy were around the predefined target value. Other indicators showed results below the benchmark: genetic testing, completeness of staging surgery, lymphadenectomy with at least 20 pelvic/para-aortic lymph nodes removed, and timely start of chemotherapy after surgery (within 42 days). Ovarian cancer care in Belgium is dispersed over 100 hospitals. Lower volume hospitals showed poorer indicator results compared to higher volume hospitals for lymphadenectomy, staging, timely start of chemotherapy and genetic testing. In addition, surgery for advanced stage tumours was performed less often in lower volume hospitals., Conclusions: The indicators that showed poorer results on a national level were also those with poorer results in lower-volume hospitals compared to higher-volume hospitals, consequently supporting centralisation. International benchmarking is hampered by different (surgical) definitions between countries and studies., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (© 2024 Elsevier Ltd, BASO ∼ The Association for Cancer Surgery, and the European Society of Surgical Oncology. All rights reserved.)

Background: Oncological care was considerably impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Worrisome declines in diagnostic procedures and cancer diagnoses in 2020 have been reported; however, nationwide, population-based evidence is limited. Quantification of the magnitude and distribution of the remaining outstanding diagnoses is likewise lacking., Methods: Using accelerated delivery of data from pathology laboratories to the Belgian Cancer Registry, we compared the nationwide rates of new diagnoses of invasive cancers in 2020 to 2019., Results: We observed a 44% reduction in total diagnoses of invasive cancers in April 2020 compared with April 2019, coinciding with the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. The reduction was largest in older patients and for skin cancers (melanoma and nonmelanoma). Reductions in diagnosis were less pronounced among children and adolescents (0-19 years). A smaller decline was observed for most cancers with typically poorer prognosis or obvious symptoms, including some hematological malignancies, lung, and pancreatic cancer. Suspension of organized population screening programs was reflected in a strong decline in diagnosis in the screening age groups for female breast cancer (56%) and for colorectal cancer in both men (49%) and women (60%). The number of diagnoses began to increase from the end of April and stabilized at the beginning of June at or just above 2019 levels. There has yet to be a complete recovery in cancer diagnoses, with an estimated 6%, or ∼4000 diagnoses, still outstanding for all of 2020. Among solid tumors, head and neck cancers have the largest remaining year-over-year decrease in diagnoses at 14%., Conclusion: These results add to the evidence of a profound impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on oncological care and identify groups at risk for continuing diagnostic delays. These data should stimulate health care providers worldwide to facilitate targeted, accessible, and efficient procedures for detection of cancers affected by this delay., Competing Interests: Disclosure The authors have declared no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)