Flulike illness and exposure to sick or dead poultry.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Animals↗
Biomedical subjects
Patti A Groome
Publications and source records attributed to Patti A Groome.
Interrater reliability of measurements of comorbid illness should be reported.
OBJECTIVE: Comorbidity indices are commonly used to stratify patients to control for treatment selection bias. The objectives here were to review the reporting of interrater reliability when studies use comorbidity indices in clinical research publications and to report the interrater reliability of four common indices in a particular research setting. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Four trained abstractors reviewed the same 40 charts of patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck from a regional cancer center. Scores for the Charlson Index, the Index of Co-existent Disease, the Cumulative Illness Rating Scale, and the Kaplan-Feinstein Classification were calculated, and the intraclass correlation coefficient was used to assess interrater reliability. RESULTS: The details on the training of abstractors and the results of interrater reliability tests are not commonly reported. In our study setting, the Charlson Index had excellent reliability and the others had acceptable reliability. CONCLUSION: If the quality of a study using an index or scale is to be assessed, the reliability and interrater reliability of the score assignment process should be reported.
Carcinoma, Squamous Cell↗
Predictive validity of five comorbidity indices in prostate carcinoma patients treated with curative intent.
BACKGROUND: Comorbidity is important to consider in clinical research on curative prostate carcinoma because of the role of competing risks. Five chart-based comorbidity indices were assessed for their ability to predict survival. METHODS: This was a case-cohort study of prostate carcinoma patient cohort treated with curative intent in Toronto and Southeast Cancer Care Ontario regions between 1990 and 1996; the subcohort was drawn from these men, whereas cases were cohort members who died from causes other than prostate carcinoma. Comorbidity data were obtained from medical charts (269 subjects). Vital status, age, area of residence, and socioeconomic status information were available. Predictive validity was quantified by the percent variance explained (PVE) over and above age using proportional hazards modeling. RESULTS: The Chronic Disease Score (CDS) (PVE = 11.3%; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 3.5-22.8%), Index of Coexistent Disease (ICED) (PVE = 9.0%; 95% CI, 2.9-17.9%), Cumulative Illness Rating Scale (CIRS) (PVE = 7.2%; 95% CI, 1.4-17.1%), Kaplan-Feinstein Index (PVE = 4.9%; 95% CI, 0.6-12.8%), and Charlson Index (PVE = 3.8%; 95% CI, 0.3-10.9%) each explained some outcome variability beyond age. PVE differences among indices were not statistically significant. A comorbidity identified at the time of cancer diagnosis was the cause of death in 59.2% of cases (75% for cardiac or vascular causes). CONCLUSIONS: The better-performing, more comprehensive indices (CDS, ICED, and CIRS) would be useful in measuring and controlling for comorbidity in this setting. The CDS was easiest to apply and explained the most outcome variability.
Aged↗
Compromised local control due to treatment interruptions and late treatment breaks in early glottic cancer: Population-based outcomes study supporting need for intensified treatment schedules.
PURPOSE: This population-based study describes the treatment of early glottic cancer in Ontario, Canada and assesses whether treatment variations were associated with treatment effectiveness. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We studied 491 T1N0 and 213 T2N0 patients. Data abstracted from charts included age, sex, stage, treatment details, disease control, and survival. RESULTS: The total dose ranged from 50 to 70 Gy, and the daily dose ranged from 1.9 to 2.8 Gy. In 90%, treatment duration was between 25 and 50 days. Field sizes, field reductions, beam arrangement, and beam energy varied. Late treatment breaks occurred in 13.6% of T1N0 and 27.1% of T2N0 cases. Local control was comparable to other reports for T1N0 (82% at 5 years), but was only 63.2% in T2N0. Variables associated with local failure in T1N0 were age less than 49 years (relative risk [RR], 3.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.49-6.90) and >3 treatment interruption days (RR, 2.43; 95% CI, 1.00-5.91). In T2N0, these were field reduction (RR, 2.33; 95% CI, 1.23-4.42) and late treatment breaks (RR, 2.19; 95% CI, 1.09-4.41). CONCLUSION: Some aspects of treatment for early glottic cancer were associated with worse local control. Problems with protracted treatment are of particular concern, underscoring the need for randomized studies to intensify radiotherapy.
Age Factors↗
A population-based study of the waiting times for prostatectomy in Ontario.
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Despite the high incidence of prostate cancer in Canada, there is currently limited information describing how these patients are being managed. The aim of this study was to review the surgical waiting times for radical prostatectomy in Ontario, utilizing existing population-based cancer databases, and to describe factors associated with prolonged waiting times. METHODS: This is a retrospective, population-based, observational study of men diagnosed with prostate cancer in Ontario between 1980 and 2000. The sources of data include the Ontario Cancer Registry linked to hospital discharge data, as well as census data from Statistics Canada. Study variables include age, county of residence, teaching hospital status, hospital surgical volume, area-level median household income and cause-specific survival. Waiting times were compared across study variables using univariate and graphical methods. Survival was compared across geographic regions with differing average wait times. RESULTS: We identified 9524 men treated with radical prostatectomy in Ontario over the study period and found the percentage of all patients with the disease who were treated surgically increasing from 3% to 20% over the last 2 decades. The overall time to prostatectomy has almost doubled with a median waiting time of 55 days in earlier eras to 91 days in 1996-2000. A few counties had significantly different wait times, whereas age and socio-economic factors were not associated with wait times across most eras. In the most recent eras, acute care hospitals and hospitals with higher surgical volumes had significantly higher waiting times (up to 20 days longer in 1996-2000, p<0.0001). Patients living in regions with the shortest wait times had statistically significant worse survival (p=0.02), implying that triaging has a greater impact than the potential effect of prolonged waits. CONCLUSIONS: The observed increases in waiting times for radical prostatectomy from this study are similar to the known increases in waiting times for radiotherapy. This increased time to treatment is an illustration of the stress on the health care system in Ontario.
Aged↗
The process for continuous improvement of the TNM classification.
The TNM classification is a worldwide benchmark for reporting the extent of malignant disease and is a major prognostic factor in predicting the outcome of patients with cancer. The objectives for cancer staging were defined by the International Union Against Cancer (UICC) TNM Committee almost 50 years ago and are still broadly applicable today. To keep pace with the modern demands of evidence-based practice, the UICC introduced a structured process for introducing changes to the TNM classification. The elements of the TNM process were determined to include the development of unambiguous criteria for the information and documentation required to consider changes in the classification, establishment of a well-defined process for the annual review of relevant literature, formation of site-specific expert panels, and the participation of experts from all over the world in the TNM review process. Communication between the oncology community and those involved in the TNM classification was established as being essential to the success of the process. The process, which was introduced in 2002, will be tested over the next 3-4 years and evaluated. In addition to the formal process, individual initiative, involvement by the national staging committees, and group consensus are required. Furthermore, increased involvement by the experts should improve the understanding and dissemination of the TNM classification.
Communication↗
Performance of different radiotherapy workload models.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the performance of different radiotherapy workload models using a prospectively collected dataset of patient and treatment information from a single center. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Information about all individual radiotherapy treatments was collected for 2 weeks from the three linear accelerators (linacs) in our department. This information included diagnosis code, treatment site, treatment unit, treatment time, fields per fraction, technique, beam type, blocks, wedges, junctions, port films, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status. We evaluated the accuracy and precision of the original and revised basic treatment equivalent (BTE) model, the simple and complex Addenbrooke models, the equivalent simple treatment visit (ESTV) model, fields per hour, and two local standards of workload measurement. RESULTS: Data were collected for 2 weeks in June 2001. During this time, 151 patients were treated with 857 fractions. The revised BTE model performed better than the other models with a mean [observed -predicted] of 2.62 (2.44-2.80). It estimated 88.0% of treatment times within 5 min, which is similar to the previously reported accuracy of the model. CONCLUSION: The revised BTE model had similar accuracy and precision for data collected in our center as it did for the original dataset and performed the best of the models assessed. This model would have uses for patient scheduling, and describing workloads and case complexity.
Appointments and Schedules↗
Management and outcome differences in supraglottic cancer between Ontario, Canada, and the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results areas of the United States.
PURPOSE: We compared the management and outcome of supraglottic cancer in Ontario, Canada, with that in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program areas in the United States. METHODS: Electronic, clinical, and hospital data were linked to cancer registry data and supplemented by chart review where necessary. Stage-stratified analyses compared initial treatment and survival in the SEER areas (n = 1,643) with a random sample from Ontario (n = 265). We also compared laryngectomy rates at 3 years in those patients 65 years and older at diagnosis. RESULTS: Radical surgery was more commonly used in SEER, with absolute differences increasing with increasing stage: I/II, 17%; III, 36%; and IV, 45%. The 5-year survival rates were 74% in Ontario and 56% in SEER for stage I/II disease (P =.01), 55.7% in Ontario and 46.8% in SEER for stage III disease (P =.40), and 28.5% in Ontario and 29.1% in SEER for stage IV disease (P =.28). Cancer-specific survival results mirrored the overall survival results with the exception of stage IV disease, for which 34.6% of Ontario patients survived their cancer compared with 38.1% in SEER (P =.10). This stage IV difference was more pronounced when we further controlled for possible cause of death errors by restricting the comparison to patients with a single primary cancer (P =.01). Three-year actuarial laryngectomy rates differed. In stage I/II, these rates were 3% in Ontario compared with 35% in SEER (P < 10(-3)). In stage III disease, the rates were 30% and 54%, respectively (P =.03), and in stage IV disease they were 33% and 64% (P =.002). CONCLUSION: There are large differences in the management of supraglottic cancer between the SEER areas of the United States and Ontario. Long-term larynx retention was higher in Ontario, where radiotherapy is widely regarded as the treatment of choice and surgery is reserved for salvage. In stages I to III, survival was similar in the two regions despite the differences in treatment policy. In stage IV, there may be a small survival advantage in the U.S. SEER areas related to the higher use of primary surgery.
Aged↗
Squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck in Ontario, Canada, and in southeastern Norway.
OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: Reports comparing case mix, treatments, and outcomes between different countries are uncommon in head and neck oncology. Prospective databases of unselected patients from regional cancer centers in southeastern Ontario, Canada, and southeastern Norway were compared. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective comparative study of two prospective databases. METHODS: The case mix, treatments, and disease-specific mortality were compared using frequency tables, Kaplan-Meier survival curves, and the log rank test. RESULTSThe case mix, except for differences in oral cavity, oropharynx, and the recorded tumor (T) category, was similar, and the treatments were different. There was no statistical difference in overall survival for all patients, as well as for some sites. CONCLUSIONS: The results of treatments, based on different overall treatment polices, for all patients were similar. The differences in recorded T category with no statistical difference in overall survival suggest a difference in staging assignment and raises a question about the reliability of the TNM staging process.
Adult↗
A comparison of published head and neck stage groupings in laryngeal cancer using data from two countries.
The combination of T, N, and M classifications into stage groupings is meant to facilitate a number of activities including: the estimation of prognosis and the comparison of therapeutic interventions among similar groups of cases. We tested the UICC/AJCC fifth edition stage grouping and six other TNM-based groupings proposed for head and neck cancer for their ability to meet these expectations in laryngeal cancer using data from Ontario, Canada, and the area of Southern Norway surrounding Oslo. We defined four criteria to assess each grouping scheme: (1) the subgroups defined by T, N, and M comprising a given group within a grouping scheme have similar survival rates (hazard consistency); (2) the survival rates differ among the groups (hazard discrimination); (3) the prediction of cure is high (outcome prediction); and (4) the distribution of patients among the groups is balanced. We previously identified or derived a measure for each criterion, and the findings were summarized using a scoring system. The range of scores was from 0 (best) to 7 (worst). The data sets were population-based, with 861 cases from Ontario and 642 cases from Southern Norway. Clinical stage assignment was used and the outcome of interest was cause-specific survival. Summary scores across the seven schemes had similar ranges: 0.9 to 5.1 in Ontario and 1.8 to 5.7 in Southern Norway, but the ranking varied. Summing the scores across the two datasets, the TANIS-7 scheme (Head & Neck 1993;15:497-503) ranked first, and was ranked high in both datasets (first and second, respectively). The UICC/AJCC scheme ranked sixth out of seven schemes, and its ranking was fifth and seventh, respectively. UICC/AJCC stage groupings were defined without empirical investigation. When tested, this scheme did not perform best. Our results suggest that the usefulness of the TNM system could be enhanced by optimizing the design of stage groupings through empirical investigation.
Carcinoma, Squamous Cell↗
Measuring comorbidity in patients with head and neck cancer.
BACKGROUND: Comorbidities are diseases or conditions that coexist with a disease of interest. The importance of comorbidities is that they can alter treatment decisions, change resource utilization, and confound the results of survival analysis. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine the best comorbidity index to use in survival analysis of patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. METHOD: Four validated indexes, with very different methodologies (i.e., the Charlson Index, the Cumulative Illness Rating Scale, the Kaplan-Feinstein Classification, the Index of Co-existent Disease), were tested using data from 379 unselected consecutive patients with complete 3-year follow-up from the Kingston Regional Cancer Center. Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox Proportional Hazards Regression were used to stratify patients into three levels of increasing severity of comorbidity for each index. The Proportion of Variance Explained and Receiver Operating Characteristics curves were used to compare the performance of the indexes. CONCLUSION: The Kaplan-Feinstein Classification was the most successful in stratifying patients in this population.
Adult↗