Advertisement

Description and analysis of clinical pathways for oesophago-gastric adenocarcinoma, in 10 European countries (the EURECCA upper gastro intestinal group – European Registration of Cancer Care)

Published:February 05, 2016DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2016.01.001

      Abstract

      Aims

      Outcomes for patients with oesophago-gastric cancer are variable across Europe. The reasons for this variability are not clear. The aim of this study was to describe and analyse clinical pathways to understand differences in service provision for oesophageal and gastric cancer in the countries participating in the EURECCA Upper GI group.

      Methods

      A questionnaire was devised to assess clinical presentation, diagnosis, staging, treatment, pathology, follow-up and service frameworks across Europe for patients with oesophageal and gastric cancer. The questionnaire was issued to experts from 14 countries. The responses were analysed quantitatively and qualitatively and compared.

      Results

      The response rate was (10/14) 71.4%. The approach to diagnosis was similar. Most countries established a diagnosis within 3 weeks of presentation. However, there were different approaches to staging with variable use of endoscopic ultrasound reflecting availability. There has been centralisation of treatments in most countries for oesophageal surgery. The most consistent area was the approach to pathology. There were variations in access to specialist nurse and dietitian support. Although most countries have multidisciplinary teams, their composition and frequency of meetings varied. The two main areas of significant difference were research and audit and overall service provision. Observations on service framework indicated that limited resources restricted many of the services.

      Conclusion

      The principle approaches to diagnosis, treatment and pathology were similar. Factors affecting the quality of patient experience were variable. This may reflect availability of resources. Standard pathways of care may enhance both the quality of treatment and patient experience.

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to European Journal of Surgical Oncology
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • De Angelis R.
        • Sant M.
        • Coleman M.P.
        • et al.
        • EUROCARE-5 Working Group
        Cancer survival in Europe 1999–2007 by country and age: results of EUROCARE-5 – a population-based study.
        Lancet Oncol. 2014; 15: 23-34
        • Messager M.
        • de Steur W.
        • van Sandick J.
        • et al.
        • The EURECCA upper GI group
        Variations among 5 European countries for curative treatment of resectable oesophageal and gastric cancer: a survey from the EURECCA Upper GI Group (European Registration of Cancer Care).
        Eur J Surg Oncol. 2016; 42: 116-122
        • Kreys E.D.
        • Koeller J.M.
        Role of clinical pathways in health care provision: focus on cancer treatment.
        Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2013; 70: 1081-1085
        • Deneckere S.
        • Euwema M.
        • Van Herck P.
        • et al.
        Care pathways lead to better teamwork: results of a systematic review.
        Soc Sci Med. 2012; 75: 264-268
        • Van Houdt S.
        • Heyrman J.
        • Vanhaecht K.
        • et al.
        Care pathways across the primary-hospital care continuum: using the multi-level framework in explaining care coordination.
        BMC Health Serv Res. 2013; 13: 296-308
        • de Steur W.O.
        • Henneman D.
        • Allum W.H.
        • et al.
        Common data items in seven European oesophagogastric cancer surgery registries: towards a European upper GI cancer audit (EURECCA Upper GI).
        Eur J Surg Oncol. 2014; 40: 325-329
      1. European Registration of Cancer Care. 2013 (Available from:)
        • Allum W.H.
        • Blazeby J.M.
        • Griffin S.M.
        • et al.
        • Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons of Great Britain and Ireland, the British Society of Gastroenterology and the British Association of Surgical Oncology
        Guidelines for the management of oesophageal and gastric cancer.
        Gut. 2011; 60: 1449-1472
        • Moenig S.P.
        • Meyer H.J.
        • Allum W.H.
        • et al.
        Third international conference of the European Union Network of Excellence on gastric and esophagogastric junction cancer, Cologne, Germany, June 2012.
        Gastric Cancer. 2015; 18: 193-199
        • Waddell T.
        • Verheij M.
        • Allum W.
        • et al.
        • European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO)
        Gastric cancer: ESMO-ESSO-ESTRO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. European Society of Surgical Oncology (ESSO). European Society of Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO).
        Eur J Surg Oncol. 2014; 40: 584-591
        • Stahl M.
        • Mariette C.
        • Haustermans K.
        • et al.
        • ESMO Guidelines Working Group
        Oesophageal cancer: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up.
        Ann Oncol. 2013; 24: 51-56
        • Lutz M.P.
        • Zalcberg J.R.
        • Ducreux M.
        • et al.
        • First St Gallen EORTC Gastrointestinal Cancer Conference 2012 Expert Panel
        Highlights of the EORTC St. Gallen International Expert Consensus on the primary therapy of gastric, gastroesophageal and oesophageal cancer – differential treatment strategies for subtypes of early gastroesophageal cancer.
        Eur J Cancer. 2012; 48: 2941-2953
        • Lordick F.
        • Allum W.
        • Carneiro F.
        • et al.
        Unmet needs and challenges in gastric cancer: the way forward.
        Cancer Treat Rev. 2014; 40: 692-700
        • Wouters M.W.
        • Gooiker G.A.
        • van Sandick J.W.
        • et al.
        The volume-outcome relation in the surgical treatment of esophageal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
        Cancer. 2012; 118: 1754-1763
        • Groene O.
        • Chadwick G.
        • Riley S.
        • et al.
        Re-organisation of oesophago-gastric cancer services in England and Wales: a follow-up assessment of progress and remaining challenges.
        BMC Res Notes. 2014; 7: 24-31
        • Mortensen K.
        • Nilsson M.
        • Slim K.
        • et al.
        • Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS®) group
        Consensus guidelines for enhanced recovery after gastrectomy: enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS®) Society recommendations.
        Br J Surg. 2014; 101: 1209-1229
        • Rotter T.
        • Kinsman L.
        • James E.
        • et al.
        Clinical pathways: effects on professional practice, patient outcomes, length of stay and hospital costs.
        Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010; 3: CD006632
        • Jensen L.S.
        • Nielsen H.
        • Mortensen P.B.
        • et al.
        Enforcing centralization for gastric cancer in Denmark.
        Eur J Surg Oncol. 2010; 361: 50-54
        • Palser T.R.
        • Cromwell D.A.
        • Hardwick R.H.
        • et al.
        Re-organisation of oesophago-gastric cancer care in England: progress and remaining challenges.
        BMC Health Serv Res. 2009; 9: 204-212