Search

Introduction: The profile and outcomes of head and neck cancer throughout Australia has changed over the past decade. The aim of this study was to perform a population‐based analysis of incidence, demographics, stage, treatments and outcomes of patients diagnosed with oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC), with a particular focus on HPV‐associated disease. Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data within the Queensland Oncology Repository (QOR) and analysed by the Queensland Cancer Control Analysis Team. The cohort included patients diagnosed in Queensland between 1 January 2015 and 31 December 2019. Outcome measures included incidence of new OPSCC cases, age‐standardised rates (ASR) (3‐year average), demographics, p16 status, stage (8th Edition American Joint Commission on Cancer), treatments, and 2‐ and 5‐year overall survival. Results: There were 1527 newly diagnosed OPSCC, representing 96% (1527/1584) of all oropharyngeal cancers. It was the most common head and neck cancer diagnosed, with oral cavity cancer being the second most common (n = 1171). Seventy‐seven percent were p16 positive (1170/1527), of which 87% (1019/1170) were male. The median age was 61 years and 49% (568/1170) presented with Stage I disease. The ASR was 6.3/100,000, representing a 144% incidence increase since 1982 (2.6/100,000). Radiotherapy was utilised in 91% of p16+ cases with 2‐ and 5‐ year overall survival of 89% and 79%, respectively. Conclusion: OPSCC is now the most common mucosal head and neck cancer diagnosed in Queensland, having surpassed oral cavity cancer. The majority are HPV‐associated (p16+), presenting with early‐stage disease with a favourable prognosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: Hospital admissions secondary to immune‐related adverse events (irAE) arising from immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) are likely to increase with increasing use of this class of drug. We sought to determine the characteristics and outcomes of hospital admissions due to irAE. Methods: A retrospective analysis of patients treated with ICI at two tertiary hospitals in Queensland (Australia) was performed. Patients who received at least one dose of ICI for a nonhaematological malignancy between the 1st January 2016 and 1st January 2017 were included. All subsequent hospital admissions were analyzed. Results: A total of 140 patients were included, with the most common malignancies being non‐small‐cell‐cell lung cancer (41%) and melanoma (18%), and most patients received anti‐PD1 treatment (78%). A sum of 76 patients accounted for 116 admissions. Comparing admissions due to irAE and non‐irAE, those admitted for irAE had a significantly longer duration on ICI prior to admission (173 vs 105 days, P = 0.04) but durations of admissions were similar (9.0 vs 8.5 days, P = 0.85). Fifteen patients (11% overall cohort) accounted for 18 admissions attributable to 16 separate irAE. irAE was not considered as a differential diagnosis on admission in 7 patients (38%). In those patients, commencement of corticosteroids was delayed (1.5 days, P = 0.01) but this did not translate into adverse outcomes such as prolonged admissions, prolonged steroid use or long‐term complications. All patients with irAE were managed with high‐dose corticosteroids. One death resulted from irAE (pneumonitis). Conclusions: A sum of 11% patients receiving ICI required hospital admission for irAE. The relatively high rate of irAE as a missed differential diagnosis on admission suggests a need for improved cross‐discipline awareness, education, and institutional management guidelines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Sars-CoV-2 is a novel coronavirus responsible for COVID-19 officially declared pandemic in March 2020. Health systems worldwide responded with swift changes to increase workflow capacity while protecting the vulnerable, including those with cancer. This led to unprecedented and rapid restructuring of health service provision. Published data from the 2003 SARS pandemic focuses on medical and nursing staff, overlooking other departmental employees such as administration officers or food service workers. Our protocol aims to document directives and adjustments communicated to staff in two cancer care departments and correlate this with measures of distress and perceived preparedness across the spectrum of all staff involved in cancer care., Methods and Analysis: We use a semiqualitative approach comprising weekly diarising of events and simultaneous staff surveys. Principal investigators will document changes at a metropolitan quaternary cancer centre and a regional cancer centre. Communications, directives and changes will be diarised in real time in four executional domains. Simultaneously, prospective voluntary self-administered online surveys will be conducted at regular intervals by staff. The survey assesses the perceived institutional preparedness and personal well-being, with a combination of Likert scaled and open response questions. A semiquantitative self-assessment of distress adapted from National Comprehensive Cancer Network distress thermometer is incorporated. Additionally, open-text personal reflections on themes including difficult decisions will be invited. Survey participants will be drawn from various work areas of the cancer care departments: administrative staff, health professionals, for example, allied health, ancillary workers, nursing and medical., Ethics and Dissemination: The study has been reviewed and approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee (LNR/2020/QRBW/62982). Published literature on domains of distress neglects categories of healthcare worker who form an essential part of the care delivery team. Our study hopes to gather insights about psychosocial impact and adjustment which could direct responses in future emergencies., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Activity-based funding (ABF) is a means of healthcare reimbursement, where hospitals are allocated funding based on the number and mix of clinical activity. The ABF model is based solely on Australian refined diagnosis-related group (AR-DRG) classifications of hospital encounters. Each AR-DRG is allocated a weighted activity unit (WAU) translating to cost value to determine ongoing funding allocations for each hospital annually., Aim: We explored cost consequences of AR-DRG coding variances within our Medical Oncology department over a 6-month period., Methods: All inpatient encounters for medical oncology from 1 January to 30 June 2014 were identified and paired with actual AR-DRG coding sheets submitted by the hospital coders. Inpatient charts were manually reviewed by a Medical Oncology Registrar to capture any changes or additional AR-DRGs, which were subsequently evaluated for total WAU value variance. Applying 1 WAU = $4676 as per the 2014 Queensland model, cost consequences were calculated., Results: A total of 116 encounters was identified for 72 patients. Of 116 patients, 95 (81%) had additional diagnoses captured, leading to an AR-DRG and WAU change in 26 encounters. The total reimbursement variance for this period was $143 404.07. Cost consequences resulted from: (i) use of abbreviations in clinical notes unable to be coded; and (ii) diagnoses not documented despite treatment delivered as per medication charts., Conclusion: Clinical note documentation ultimately determines the future funding of our healthcare system. Appropriate communication and education of medical staff and hospital coders are vital to ensure precise documentation and accurate AR-DRG coding for optimal and appropriate reimbursement in this funding model., (© 2019 Royal Australasian College of Physicians.)