Cargando…

Benchmarking trial between France and Australia comparing management of primary rectal cancer beyond TME and locally recurrent rectal cancer (PelviCare Trial): rationale and design

BACKGROUND: Among patients with rectal cancer, 5–10 % have a primary rectal cancer beyond the total mesorectal excision plane (PRC-bTME) and 10 % recur locally following primary surgery (LRRC). In both cases, patients ‘care remains challenging with a significant worldwide variation in practice regar...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Denost, Quentin, Saillour, Florence, Masya, Lindy, Martinaud, Helene Maillou, Guillon, Stephanie, Kret, Marion, Rullier, Eric, Quintard, Bruno, Solomon, Michael
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4820920/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27044252
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12885-016-2286-1
_version_ 1782425495419224064
author Denost, Quentin
Saillour, Florence
Masya, Lindy
Martinaud, Helene Maillou
Guillon, Stephanie
Kret, Marion
Rullier, Eric
Quintard, Bruno
Solomon, Michael
author_facet Denost, Quentin
Saillour, Florence
Masya, Lindy
Martinaud, Helene Maillou
Guillon, Stephanie
Kret, Marion
Rullier, Eric
Quintard, Bruno
Solomon, Michael
author_sort Denost, Quentin
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Among patients with rectal cancer, 5–10 % have a primary rectal cancer beyond the total mesorectal excision plane (PRC-bTME) and 10 % recur locally following primary surgery (LRRC). In both cases, patients ‘care remains challenging with a significant worldwide variation in practice regarding overall management and criteria for operative intervention. These variations in practice can be explained by structural and organizational differences, as well as cultural dissimilarities. However, surgical resection of PRC-bTME and LRRC provides the best chance of long-term survival after complete resection (R0). With regards to the organization of the healthcare system and the operative criteria for these patients, France and Australia seem to be highly different. A benchmarking-type analysis between French and Australian clinical practice, with regards to the care and management of PRC-bTME and LRRC, would allow understanding of patients’ care and management structures as well as individual and collective mechanisms of operative decision-making in order to ensure equitable practice and improve survival for these patients. METHODS/DESIGN: The current study is an international Benchmarking trial comparing two cohorts of 120 consecutive patients with non-metastatic PRC-bTME and LRRC. Patients with curative and palliative treatment intent are included. The study design has three main parts: (1) French and Australian cohorts including clinical, radiological and surgical data, quality of life (MOS SF36, FACT-C) and distress level (Distress thermometer) at the inclusion, 6 and 12 months; (2) experimental analyses consisting of a blinded inter-country reading of pelvic MRI to assess operatory decisions; (3) qualitative analyses based on MDT meeting observation, semi-structured interviews and focus groups of health professional attendees and conducted by a research psychologist in both countries using the same guides. The primary endpoint will be the clinical resection rate. Secondary end points will be concordance rate between French and Australian operative decisions based on the inter-country reading MRI, post-operative mortality and morbidity rates, oncological outcomes based on resection status and one-year overall and disease-free survival, patients’ quality of life and distress level. Qualitative analysis will compare obstacles and facilitators of operative decision-making between both countries. DISCUSSION: Benchmarking can be defined as a comparison and learning process which will allow, in the context of PRC-bTME and LRRC, to understand and to share the whole process management of these patientsbetween Farnce and Australia. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02551471. (date of registration: 09/14/2015)
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4820920
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-48209202016-04-06 Benchmarking trial between France and Australia comparing management of primary rectal cancer beyond TME and locally recurrent rectal cancer (PelviCare Trial): rationale and design Denost, Quentin Saillour, Florence Masya, Lindy Martinaud, Helene Maillou Guillon, Stephanie Kret, Marion Rullier, Eric Quintard, Bruno Solomon, Michael BMC Cancer Study Protocol BACKGROUND: Among patients with rectal cancer, 5–10 % have a primary rectal cancer beyond the total mesorectal excision plane (PRC-bTME) and 10 % recur locally following primary surgery (LRRC). In both cases, patients ‘care remains challenging with a significant worldwide variation in practice regarding overall management and criteria for operative intervention. These variations in practice can be explained by structural and organizational differences, as well as cultural dissimilarities. However, surgical resection of PRC-bTME and LRRC provides the best chance of long-term survival after complete resection (R0). With regards to the organization of the healthcare system and the operative criteria for these patients, France and Australia seem to be highly different. A benchmarking-type analysis between French and Australian clinical practice, with regards to the care and management of PRC-bTME and LRRC, would allow understanding of patients’ care and management structures as well as individual and collective mechanisms of operative decision-making in order to ensure equitable practice and improve survival for these patients. METHODS/DESIGN: The current study is an international Benchmarking trial comparing two cohorts of 120 consecutive patients with non-metastatic PRC-bTME and LRRC. Patients with curative and palliative treatment intent are included. The study design has three main parts: (1) French and Australian cohorts including clinical, radiological and surgical data, quality of life (MOS SF36, FACT-C) and distress level (Distress thermometer) at the inclusion, 6 and 12 months; (2) experimental analyses consisting of a blinded inter-country reading of pelvic MRI to assess operatory decisions; (3) qualitative analyses based on MDT meeting observation, semi-structured interviews and focus groups of health professional attendees and conducted by a research psychologist in both countries using the same guides. The primary endpoint will be the clinical resection rate. Secondary end points will be concordance rate between French and Australian operative decisions based on the inter-country reading MRI, post-operative mortality and morbidity rates, oncological outcomes based on resection status and one-year overall and disease-free survival, patients’ quality of life and distress level. Qualitative analysis will compare obstacles and facilitators of operative decision-making between both countries. DISCUSSION: Benchmarking can be defined as a comparison and learning process which will allow, in the context of PRC-bTME and LRRC, to understand and to share the whole process management of these patientsbetween Farnce and Australia. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02551471. (date of registration: 09/14/2015) BioMed Central 2016-04-04 /pmc/articles/PMC4820920/ /pubmed/27044252 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12885-016-2286-1 Text en © Denost et al. 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Study Protocol
Denost, Quentin
Saillour, Florence
Masya, Lindy
Martinaud, Helene Maillou
Guillon, Stephanie
Kret, Marion
Rullier, Eric
Quintard, Bruno
Solomon, Michael
Benchmarking trial between France and Australia comparing management of primary rectal cancer beyond TME and locally recurrent rectal cancer (PelviCare Trial): rationale and design
title Benchmarking trial between France and Australia comparing management of primary rectal cancer beyond TME and locally recurrent rectal cancer (PelviCare Trial): rationale and design
title_full Benchmarking trial between France and Australia comparing management of primary rectal cancer beyond TME and locally recurrent rectal cancer (PelviCare Trial): rationale and design
title_fullStr Benchmarking trial between France and Australia comparing management of primary rectal cancer beyond TME and locally recurrent rectal cancer (PelviCare Trial): rationale and design
title_full_unstemmed Benchmarking trial between France and Australia comparing management of primary rectal cancer beyond TME and locally recurrent rectal cancer (PelviCare Trial): rationale and design
title_short Benchmarking trial between France and Australia comparing management of primary rectal cancer beyond TME and locally recurrent rectal cancer (PelviCare Trial): rationale and design
title_sort benchmarking trial between france and australia comparing management of primary rectal cancer beyond tme and locally recurrent rectal cancer (pelvicare trial): rationale and design
topic Study Protocol
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4820920/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27044252
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12885-016-2286-1
work_keys_str_mv AT denostquentin benchmarkingtrialbetweenfranceandaustraliacomparingmanagementofprimaryrectalcancerbeyondtmeandlocallyrecurrentrectalcancerpelvicaretrialrationaleanddesign
AT saillourflorence benchmarkingtrialbetweenfranceandaustraliacomparingmanagementofprimaryrectalcancerbeyondtmeandlocallyrecurrentrectalcancerpelvicaretrialrationaleanddesign
AT masyalindy benchmarkingtrialbetweenfranceandaustraliacomparingmanagementofprimaryrectalcancerbeyondtmeandlocallyrecurrentrectalcancerpelvicaretrialrationaleanddesign
AT martinaudhelenemaillou benchmarkingtrialbetweenfranceandaustraliacomparingmanagementofprimaryrectalcancerbeyondtmeandlocallyrecurrentrectalcancerpelvicaretrialrationaleanddesign
AT guillonstephanie benchmarkingtrialbetweenfranceandaustraliacomparingmanagementofprimaryrectalcancerbeyondtmeandlocallyrecurrentrectalcancerpelvicaretrialrationaleanddesign
AT kretmarion benchmarkingtrialbetweenfranceandaustraliacomparingmanagementofprimaryrectalcancerbeyondtmeandlocallyrecurrentrectalcancerpelvicaretrialrationaleanddesign
AT rulliereric benchmarkingtrialbetweenfranceandaustraliacomparingmanagementofprimaryrectalcancerbeyondtmeandlocallyrecurrentrectalcancerpelvicaretrialrationaleanddesign
AT quintardbruno benchmarkingtrialbetweenfranceandaustraliacomparingmanagementofprimaryrectalcancerbeyondtmeandlocallyrecurrentrectalcancerpelvicaretrialrationaleanddesign
AT solomonmichael benchmarkingtrialbetweenfranceandaustraliacomparingmanagementofprimaryrectalcancerbeyondtmeandlocallyrecurrentrectalcancerpelvicaretrialrationaleanddesign