Research from JAMA — Adherence to Surgical Care Improvement Project Measures and the Association With Postoperative Infections

BACKGROUND: After a colonoscopy that is negative for cancer, a subset of patients may be diagnosed with colorectal cancer, also termed interval cancer. The frequency and predictors have not been well studied in a population‐based US cohort.METHODS: The authors used the linked Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)‐Medicare database to identify 57,839 patients aged ≥69 years who were diagnosed with colorectal cancer between 1994 and 2005 and who underwent colonoscopy within 6 months of cancer diagnosis. Colonoscopy performed between 6 and 36 months before cancer diagnosis was a proxy for interval cancer.RESULTS: By using the case definition, 7.2% of patients developed interval cancers. Factors that were associated with interval cancers included proximal tumor location (distal colon: multivariable odds ratio [OR], 0.42; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.390‐0.46; rectum: OR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.42‐0.53), increased comorbidity (OR, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.68 2.14 for ≥3 comorbidities), a previous diagnosis of diverticulosis (OR, 6.00; 95% CI, 5.57‐6.46), and prior polypectomy (OR, 1.74; 95% CI, 1.62‐1.87). Risk factors at the endoscopist level included a lower polypectomy rate (OR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.63‐0.78 for the highest quartile), higher colonoscopy volume (OR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.13‐1.43), and specialty other than gastroenterology (colorectal surgery: OR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.16‐1.83; general surgery: OR, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.24‐1.62; internal medicine: OR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.17‐1.63; family practice: OR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.00‐1.35).CONCLUSIONS: A significant proportion of patients developed interval colorectal cancer, particularly in the proximal colon. Contributing factors likely included both procedural and biologic factors, emphasizing the importance of meticulous examination of the mucosa. Cancer 2012;118: 3044–52. © 2011 American Cancer Society.

Purpose: To assess the prevalence of comorbidity, disability, and geriatric syndromes, or a combination thereof, in elders with cancer receiving home health care (HHC). Patients and Methods: Using the Ohio Cancer Incidence Surveillance System, we identified Ohio residents 65 years of age or older who were diagnosed with incident breast (n = 952), prostate (n = 324), or colorectal cancer (n = 1,276) during the 28-month study period, August 1999 through November 2001. We used the Outcome and Assessment Information Set, a database compiling comprehensive assessment forms completed for all HHC patients, to group individuals in independent and overlapping categories of comorbidity, disability, and geriatric syndromes on the basis of the patients' clinical condition 14 days before the date of the assessment. Results: The proportion with no comorbidity, disability, or geriatric syndromes was 26.4% in breast cancer patients, 12.0% in prostate cancer patients, and 14.0% in colorectal cancer patients. The proportion of patients presenting all three entities at once was 11.7%, 24.7%, and 15.7%, respectively, in three cancer sites. As expected, the proportion of patients with no comorbidity, disability, or geriatric syndromes declined gradually with increasing age, and that of patients with all three entities was highest among patients 85 years or older. Conclusion: The proposed taxonomy will help us gain a more nuanced understanding of older cancer patients' clinical presentation and may lead to a more accurate identification of older patients who might benefit from standard cancer treatment, and those who might experience adverse outcomes.

Summary: Objective: To examine national trends of pediatric epilepsy surgery usage in the United States between 1997 and 2009.Methods: We performed a serial cross‐sectional study of pediatric epilepsy surgery using triennial data from the Kids’ Inpatient Database from 1997 to 2009. The rates of epilepsy surgery for lobectomies, partial lobectomies, and hemispherectomies in each study year were calculated based on the number of prevalent epilepsy cases in the corresponding year. The age‐race‐sex adjusted rates of surgeries were also estimated. Mann‐Kendall trend test was used to test for changes in the rates of surgeries over time. Multivariable regression analysis was also performed to estimate the effect of time, age, race, and sex on the annual incidence of epilepsy surgery.Results: The rates of pediatric epilepsy surgery increased significantly from 0.85 epilepsy surgeries per 1,000 children with epilepsy in 1997 to 1.44 epilepsy surgeries per 1,000 children with epilepsy in 2009. An increment in the rates of epilepsy surgeries was noted across all age groups, in boys and girls, all races, and all payer types. The rate of increase was lowest in blacks and in children with public insurance. The overall number of surgical cases for each study year was lower than 35% of children who were expected to have surgery, based on the estimates from the Connecticut Study of Epilepsy.Significance: In contrast to adults, pediatric epilepsy surgery numbers have increased significantly in the past decade. However, epilepsy surgery remains an underutilized treatment for children with epilepsy. In addition, black children and those with public insurance continue to face disparities in the receipt of epilepsy surgery.