Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology - Research Publications
Permanent URI for this collection
Search Results
1 - 10 of 21
-
ItemNo Preview AvailableInvestigation of Intervention Solutions to Enhance Adherence to Oral Anticancer Medicines in Adults: Overview of Reviews(JMIR PUBLICATIONS, INC, 2022-04-27)BACKGROUND: Adherence to anticancer medicines is critical for the success of cancer treatments; however, nonadherence remains challenging, and there is limited evidence of interventions to improve adherence to medicines in patients with cancer. OBJECTIVE: This overview of reviews aimed to identify and summarize available reviews of interventions to improve adherence to oral anticancer medicines in adult cancer survivors. METHODS: A comprehensive search of 7 electronic databases was conducted by 2 reviewers who independently conducted the study selection, quality assessment using the A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2, and data extraction. The PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) 2020 checklist was adapted to report the results. RESULTS: A total of 29 reviews were included in the narrative synthesis. The overall quality of the systematic reviews was low. The 4 main strategies to promote adherence were focused on education, reminders, behavior and monitoring, and multicomponent approaches. Digital technology-based interventions were reported in most reviews (27/29, 93%). A few interventions applied theories (10/29, 34%), design frameworks (2/29, 7%), or engaged stakeholders (1/29, 3%) in the development processes. The effectiveness of interventions was inconsistent between and within reviews. However, interventions using multiple strategies to promote adherence were more likely to be effective than single-strategy interventions (12/29, 41% reviews). Unidirectional communication (7/29, 24% reviews) and technology alone (11/29, 38% reviews) were not sufficient to demonstrate improvement in adherence outcomes. Nurses and pharmacists played a critical role in promoting patient adherence to oral cancer therapies, especially with the support of digital technologies (7/29, 24% reviews). CONCLUSIONS: Multicomponent interventions are potentially effective in promoting patient adherence to oral anticancer medicines. The seamless integration of digital solutions with direct clinical contacts is likely to be effective in promoting adherence. Future research for developing comprehensive digital adherence interventions should be evidence-based, theory-based, and rigorously evaluated.
-
ItemTimely initiation of chemotherapy: a systematic literature review of six priority cancers - results and recommendations for clinical practice(WILEY, 2017-01)This review evaluated the association between time-to-chemotherapy (TTC) and survival in six priority cancers. A systematic review of the literature was undertaken for papers indexed in the MEDLINE and Cochrane Library databases from the earliest index until April 2014. The methodology used has been published in a separate paper (Guidelines for timely initiation of chemotherapy: a proposed framework for access to medical oncology and haematology cancer clinics and chemotherapy services). The optimal timing of chemotherapy in breast cancer is unclear as available studies are of low quality, report inconsistent results and are limited to the adjuvant setting. However, increased TTC may have a negative prognostic impact, and delays beyond 4 weeks should be avoided. Studies suggest that the optimal timing for initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy for surgically resected colorectal cancer is 4-8 weeks post-surgery. Timing of chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer does not influence survival. There is a paucity of studies to guide the timing of chemotherapy for the treatment of lymphoma and myeloma; no definitive conclusions can be drawn, and clinician discretion should be applied. The optimal timing of chemotherapy in lung cancer is unclear; however, rapid tumour growth and poor disease prognosis suggest that delays should be avoided wherever possible. The optimal timing of chemotherapy in ovarian cancer is unclear as available studies are of low level, report inconsistent results and are limited to the post-surgery setting; however, increased TTC may have a negative prognostic impact; therefore, delays beyond 4 weeks should be avoided.
-
ItemImpact of COVID-19 on cancer service delivery: a follow-up international survey of oncology clinicians(ELSEVIER, 2020-10)BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a vast impact on cancer service delivery around the world. Previously reported results from our international survey of oncology clinicians, conducted through March-April 2020, found that clinicians reported altering management in both the curative and palliative settings and not in proportion to the COVID-19 case burden in their region of practice. This follow-up survey, conducted from 27th September to 7th November 2020, aimed to explore how attitudes and practices evolved over the 2020 pandemic period. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: Participants were medical, radiation and surgical oncologist and trainees. Surveys were distributed electronically via ESMO and other collaborating professional societies. Participants were asked to compare their practice prior to the pandemic to both the period of March-April 2020, referred to as the 'early' period, and the current survey period, referred to as the 'later' period. RESULTS: One hundred and seventy-two oncology clinicians completed the survey. The majority of respondents were medical oncologists (n = 136, 79%) and many were from Europe (n = 82, 48%). In the 'early' period, 88% (n = 133) of clinicians reported altering their practice compared to 63% (n = 96) in the 'later' period. Compared to prior to the pandemic, clinicians reported fewer new patient presentations in the 'early' period and a trend towards more patients presenting with advanced disease in the 'later' period. CONCLUSIONS: Results indicate a swing back towards pre-COVID-19 practices despite an increase in the rate of cumulative COVID-19 cases across 2020. The impact of these changes on cancer associated morbidity and mortality remains to be measured over the months and years to come.
-
ItemThe potential "additive" thromboembolic risk of radiotherapy(WILEY, 2019-06)
-
ItemPulmonary function testing for the early detection of drug-induced lung disease: a systematic review in adults treated with drugs associated with pulmonary toxicity(WILEY, 2020-11)Pulmonary function tests (PFT) are sometimes monitored during treatment with known pulmonary toxic drugs to detect asymptomatic drug-induced interstitial lung disease (DILD). We conducted a systematic review to assess the accuracy of PFT, including the diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide (DLCO), for early detection of DILD in a range of drugs. Using a pre-specified, registered review protocol, OvidMEDLINE and EMBASE were searched from 1946 to February 2018. Two reviewers independently screened abstracts and reviewed full-text articles for inclusion. Included studies were assessed for risk of bias using adapted QUADAS-2 domains and primary outcome data were extracted and entered into RevMan5 to estimate sensitivity and specificity with 95% confidence intervals (CI). The search identified 4065 citations and included 42 studies. The most commonly studied drugs were bleomycin and amiodarone. Due to clinical heterogeneity between studies, a pooled analysis was not performed. Sensitivity of monitoring with DLCO varied between 0 and 100%, with the majority of studies finding a sensitivity of <80%. CI were wide for the majority of studies. Specificity was less than 90% in all studies. Risk of bias was high for the majority of studies for the quality domain of reference standard. The findings of this review do not support routine PFT for early detection of DILD. Due to methodological limitations, the relatively small number of participants and the low prevalence of DILD in the included studies, there remains significant uncertainty about the sensitivity of PFT to screen for DILD.
-
ItemImpact of a risk-stratified thromboprophylaxis protocol on the incidence of postoperative venous thromboembolism and bleeding(WILEY, 2020-08)Efforts to reduce postoperative venous thromboembolism are challenging due to heterogeneity in thromboprophylaxis practice. As a result, a 'one-size-fits-all' approach that accounts for surgery-specific risk, but fails to account for patient-level variation, is often adopted by healthcare networks. Updated clinical practice guidelines have advocated an individualised risk-stratified approach that balances the risk:benefit ratio associated with thromboprophylaxis; however, there are limited data confirming effectiveness of these recommendations on the incidence of postoperative venous thromboembolism and bleeding. We developed the surgical-thrombo-embolism-prevention protocol, a novel risk-stratified algorithm that classified patients into low-, intermediate-, and high-risk profiles according to surgical procedure and patient baseline medical risk. Expert-endorsed risk-specific thromboprophylaxis strategies were then applied. A staged quality improvement program was developed to implement the protocol. We postulated that compliance with the protocol would reduce postoperative venous thromboembolism rates without increasing the incidence of postoperative bleeding. Between June 2013 and March 2018, we evaluated the efficacy, safety and sustainability of this risk-stratified approach in 24,953 surgical admissions at a dedicated cancer centre. By final implementation, program compliance was 91%. Postoperative venous thromboembolism rates reduced from 3.1 per 1000 surgical admissions to 0.6 per 1000 surgical admissions (relative risk reduction 79%; p < 0.005). Postoperative bleeding rates also declined from 10.0 per 1000 surgical admissions to 6.3 per 1000 surgical admissions (relative risk reduction 37%; p = 0.02). Sustained improvement was evident more than 3 years after implementation. Implementation of the surgical-thrombo-embolism-prevention protocol significantly reduced the incidence of postoperative venous thromboembolism supporting its validation at other institutions.
-
ItemNo Preview AvailableReal world outcomes in KRAS G12C mutation positive non-small cell lung cancer(ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD, 2020-08)BACKGROUND: KRAS mutations are found in 20-30 % of non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC) and were traditionally considered undruggable. KRASG12C mutation confers sensitivity to KRASG12C covalent inhibitors, however its prognostic impact remains unclear. This study assesses the frequency, clinical features, prevalence of brain metastases and outcomes in KRASG12C NSCLC in a real-world setting. METHODS: Patients enrolled in the prospective Thoracic Malignancies Cohort (TMC) between July 2012 to October 2019 with recurrent/metastatic non-squamous NSCLC, available KRAS results, and without EGFR/ALK/ROS1 gene aberrations, were selected. Data was extracted from TMC and patient records. Clinicopathologic features, treatment and overall survival (OS) was compared for KRAS wildtype (KRASWT) and KRAS mutated (KRASmut); and KRASG12C and other (KRASother) mutations. RESULTS: Of 1386 NSCLC patients, 1040 were excluded: non-metastatic/recurrent (526); unknown KRAS status (356); ALK/EGFR/ROS1 positive (154); duplicate (4). Of 346 patients analysed, 144 (42 %) were KRASmut, of whom 65 (45 %) were KRASG12C. All patients with KRASG12C were active or ex-smokers, compared to 92 % of KRASother and 83 % of KRASWT. The prevalence of brain metastases during follow-up was similar between KRASmut and KRASWT (33 % vs 40 %, p = 0.17), and KRASG12C and KRASother (40 % vs 41 %, p = 0.74). The proportion of patients receiving one or multiple lines of systemic therapy was comparable. OS was similar between KRASmut and KRASWT (p = 0.54), and KRASG12C and KRASother (p = 0.39). CONCLUSION: Patients with KRASmut and KRASWT, and KRASG12C and KRASother NSCLC have comparable clinical features, treatment and survival. While not prognostic, KRASG12C may be an important predictive biomarker as promising KRASG12C covalent inhibitors continue to be developed.
-
ItemImpact of COVID-19 on cancer service delivery; results from an international survey of oncology clinicians(WILEY, 2020-11)OBJECTIVES: To report clinician-perceived changes to cancer service delivery in response to COVID-19. DESIGN: Multidisciplinary Australasian cancer clinician survey in collaboration with the European Society of Medical Oncology. SETTING: Between May and June 2020 clinicians from 70 countries were surveyed; majority from Europe (n=196; 39%) with 1846 COVID-19 cases per million people, Australia (AUS)/New Zealand (NZ) (n=188; 38%) with 267/236 per million and Asia (n=75; 15%) with 121 per million at time of survey distribution. PARTICIPANTS: Medical oncologists (n=372; 74%), radiation oncologists (n=91; 18%) and surgical oncologists (n=38; 8%). RESULTS: Eighty-nine per cent of clinicians reported altering clinical practices; more commonly among those with versus without patients diagnosed with COVID-19 (n=142; 93% vs n=225; 86%, p=0.03) but regardless of community transmission levels (p=0.26). More European clinicians (n=111; 66.1%) had treated patients diagnosed with COVID-19 compared with Asia (n=20; 27.8%) and AUS/NZ (n=8; 4.8%), p<0.001. Many clinicians (n=307; 71.4%) reported concerns that reduced access to standard treatments during the pandemic would negatively impact patient survival. The reported proportion of consultations using telehealth increased by 7.7-fold, with 25.1% (n=108) of clinicians concerned that patient survival would be worse due to this increase. Clinicians reviewed a median of 10 fewer outpatients/week (including non-face to face) compared with prior to the pandemic, translating to 5010 fewer specialist oncology visits per week among the surveyed group. Mental health was negatively impacted for 52.6% (n=190) of clinicians. CONCLUSION: Clinicians reported widespread changes to oncology services, in regions of both high and low COVID-19 case numbers. Clinician concerns of potential negative impacts on patient outcomes warrant objective assessment, with system and policy implications for healthcare delivery at large.
-
ItemLung cancer prognostic index: a risk score to predict overall survival after the diagnosis of non-small-cell lung cancer(NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP, 2017-08-22)INTRODUCTION: Non-small-cell lung cancer outcomes are poor but heterogeneous, even within stage groups. To improve prognostic precision we aimed to develop and validate a simple prognostic model using patient and disease variables. METHODS: Prospective registry and study data were analysed using Cox proportional hazards regression to derive a prognostic model (hospital 1, n=695), which was subsequently tested (Harrell's c-statistic for discrimination and Cox-Snell residuals for calibration) in two independent validation cohorts (hospital 2, n=479 and hospital 3, n=284). RESULTS: The derived Lung Cancer Prognostic Index (LCPI) included stage, histology, mutation status, performance status, weight loss, smoking history, respiratory comorbidity, sex, and age. Two-year overall survival rates according to LCPI in the derivation and two validation cohorts, respectively, were 84, 77, and 68% (LCPI 1: score⩽9); 61, 61, and 42% (LCPI 2: score 10-13); 33, 32, and 14% (LCPI 3: score 14-16); 7, 16, and 5% (LCPI 4: score ⩾15). Discrimination (c-statistic) was 0.74 for the derivation cohort, 0.72 and 0.71 for the two validation cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: The LCPI contributes additional prognostic information, which may be used to counsel patients, guide trial eligibility or design, or standardise mortality risk for epidemiological analyses.
-
ItemDynamic Thromboembolic Risk Modelling to Target Appropriate Preventative Strategies for Patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer(MDPI, 2019-01)Prevention of cancer-associated thromboembolism (TE) remains a significant clinical challenge and priority world-wide safety initiative. In this prospective non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) cohort, longitudinal TE risk profiling (clinical and biomarker) was undertaken to develop risk stratification models for targeted TE prevention. These were compared with published models from Khorana, CATS, PROTECHT, CONKO, and CATS/MICA. The NSCLC cohort of 129 patients, median follow-up 22.0 months (range 5.6-31.3), demonstrated a hypercoagulable profile in >75% patients and TE incidence of 19%. High TE risk patients were those receiving chemotherapy with baseline fibrinogen ≥ 4 g/L and d-dimer ≥ 0.5 mg/L; or baseline d-dimer ≥ 1.5 mg/L; or month 1 d-dimer ≥ 1.5 mg/L. The model predicted TE with 100% sensitivity and 34% specificity (c-index 0.67), with TE incidence 27% vs. 0% for high vs. low-risk. A comparison using the Khorana, PROTECHT, and CONKO methods were not discriminatory; TE incidence 17⁻25% vs. 14⁻19% for high vs. low-risk (c-index 0.51⁻0.59). Continuous d-dimer (CATS/MICA model) was also not predictive of TE. Independent of tumour stage, high TE risk was associated with cancer progression (HR 1.9, p = 0.01) and mortality (HR 2.2, p = 0.02). The model was tested for scalability in a prospective gastrointestinal cancer cohort with equipotency demonstrated; 80% sensitivity and 39% specificity. This proposed TE risk prediction model is simple, practical, potent and can be used in the clinic for real-time, decision-making for targeted thromboprophylaxis. Validation in a multicentre randomised interventional study is underway (ACTRN12618000811202).