RESUMO
PURPOSE: Genitourinary (GU) multidisciplinary tumour boards (GUMTBs) are key components of patient care, as they might lead to changes in treatment plan, improved survival, and increased adherence to guidelines. However, there are no guidelines on how GUMTBs should operate or how to assess their quality of performance. METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted to identify criteria and indicators to evaluate quality in GUMTBs. A scientific committee-comprising 12 GU cancer specialists from seven disciplines-proposed a list of criteria and developed indicators, evaluated in two rounds of Delphi method. Appropriateness and utility of indicators were scored using a 9-point Likert scale. Consensus was defined as at least two-thirds of Delphi respondents selecting a score sub-category that encompassed the median score of the group. RESULTS: Forty-five criteria were selected to evaluate the quality of GUMTBs covering five dimensions: organisation, personnel, protocol and documentation, resources, and interaction with patients. Then, 33 indicators were developed and evaluated in the first round of Delphi, leading to a selection of 26 indicators in two dimensions: function, governance and resources, and GUMTB sessions. In the second round, consensus was reached on the appropriateness of all 26 indicators and on the utility of 24 of them. Index cards for criteria and indicators were developed to be used in clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS: Criteria and indicators were developed to evaluate the quality of GUMTBs, aiming to serve as a guide to improve quality of care and health outcomes in patients with GU cancer.
Assuntos
Técnica Delphi , Indicadores de Qualidade em Assistência à Saúde , Neoplasias Urogenitais , Humanos , Neoplasias Urogenitais/terapia , Qualidade da Assistência à Saúde , Equipe de Assistência ao Paciente/normas , Consenso , Oncologia/normasRESUMO
PURPOSE: To review current measures for renal cancer care and develop a comprehensive and updated list of measures for their practical use in Spain. METHODS: The study was developed by Fundación ECO, a Spanish foundation aiming to improve oncology quality of care. A systematic literature review was carried out to identify measures and knowledge gaps. A scientific committee composed of nine experts reviewed the literature findings and added measures. A preliminary list of 42 measures was evaluated with the Delphi method to gather feedback from 47 medical oncology experts in Spain. Experts scored the appropriateness of the measures and ranked their priority in two consecutive online surveys. The scientific committee reviewed the Delphi results and developed the measures. A technical group from Universidad Francisco de Vitoria conducted and oversaw the Delphi method. RESULTS: The Delphi method led to consensus on all 42 measures. The scientific committee used a prioritisation matrix to select 25 of these measures for evaluating quality of care in renal cancer. These measures regarded structure, process, and outcome and covered general management, diagnosis, treatment, follow-up, and evaluation of health outcomes. Easy-to-use index cards were developed for all 25 measures, including their definition, formula, acceptable level of attainment, and rationale. CONCLUSIONS: This manuscript aims to provide healthcare professionals with expert- and evidence-based measures that are useful for evaluating quality of care in renal cancer in Spain and cover all aspects and stages.
Assuntos
Técnica Delphi , Neoplasias Renais/terapia , Qualidade da Assistência à Saúde , Humanos , EspanhaRESUMO
PURPOSE: Letrozole is superior to tamoxifen in terms of response and breast preservation rates as primary systemic therapy (PST) in postmenopausal women with ER-positive early breast cancer. However, the optimum duration of endocrine PST remains uncertain. METHODS: A phase 2 multicentre, open-label trial was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of letrozole over a preoperative period of 4 months to 1 year. Seventy postmenopausal patients (over 65 years) were recruited in four centers. The primary endpoint was to establish the optimal duration of treatment defined as the time required to attain the maximum response by clinical palpation. RESULTS: The median age of the group was 79 years (66-91) and the median tumour size 35 mm (range 25-100 mm). No severe adverse events were reported. Fifty-six patients were evaluable for the primary objective. A total of 43 patients (76.8%) achieved an objective response; 29 (51.8%) being partial and 14 (25.0%) complete. The median time to objective response was 3.9 months (95% CI, 3.3-4.5) and the median time to maximum response was 4.2 months (95% CI, 4.0-4.5), although 20 (37.1%) patients achieved the maximal response within 6-12 months. CONCLUSIONS: Letrozole shows a high activity and excellent tolerability as neoadjuvant therapy in elderly patients with endocrine-dependent breast cancer. Four to six months of letrozole as PST is an optimum duration with modest benefits thereafter.