Unmasking inequity: emergency presentations in ovarian cancer care.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Biomedical subjects
Publications and source records attributed to Sudha Sundar.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Randomized controlled trials remain fundamental to evidence generation in oncology but are increasingly complex, costly, and often misaligned with real-world practice. Traditional explanatory trials, designed under ideal, controlled conditions, frequently enroll highly selected populations, limiting generalizability and underrepresenting key groups such as older adults, patients with comorbidities, and those from low- and middle-income countries. Pragmatic clinical trials offer an alternative by evaluating interventions under routine care conditions, with broader eligibility, simplified procedures, and patient-centered outcomes. To address these challenges, the Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup convened an international brainstorming meeting in May 2025 with multi-disciplinary experts, patients, and advocates to define priorities and develop a roadmap for pragmatic trials in gynecologic oncology. Key discussions emphasized embedding trial design within routine care, aligning eligibility criteria and procedures with standard practice, minimizing non-essential data collection, and prioritizing outcomes meaningful to patients, including quality of life. Innovative designs such as registry-based randomized trials, trials-within-cohorts, and cluster randomization were highlighted as feasible approaches to improve efficiency while preserving internal validity. Integration of patient-reported outcomes and real-world data was considered achievable when carefully streamlined. Major challenges identified included regulatory heterogeneity, consent complexity, data interoperability, and funding limitations, particularly in multi-national settings. Proposed solutions include simplified consent models, centralized ethics processes, hybrid funding strategies, and the responsible use of artificial intelligence to enhance patient identification, recruitment, and potential development of synthetic control arms. Patient engagement was recognized as essential to ensure relevance, feasibility, and equity. Incorporation of patient-reported outcomes was discussed as key to informing acceptance and tolerability. In summary, pragmatic trials within Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup represent a critical pathway to generate efficient, inclusive, and practice-changing evidence in gynecologic cancers across diverse health care settings.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
This study aims to assess trends in compliance with current colposcopy guidelines in 10 gynaecological units in four English counties since 1996; to identify constraints on compliance and suggest change in practice. All 10 gynaecology units in Oxfordshire, Buckinghamshire, Northamptonshire and Berkshire participated. Data were collected prospectively by colposcopists from 23,500 new referrals across a 55-month period from September 1996 to March 2001. The Oxford Cancer Intelligence Unit performed collation, quality assurance and retrieval of data for incomplete records. Audit results were disseminated annually to colposcopists via the Regional Colposcopy Group. Colposcopy waiting times exceeded the standards, but waiting times for high-grade referrals showed statistically significant improvement. Six standards were achieved; relating to accuracy, appropriateness of management and outcomes. The seven unmet standards relate to waiting times, colposcopist's caseload, follow-up policy and the proportion of cervical epithelial neoplasia (CIN) on histology. Changes in practice are suggested, constraints on compliance are identified and the appropriateness of some guidelines is questioned.