Advertisement

Are We Choosing Surveillance Imaging in Gastric and Pancreatic Cancers Wisely? A Population-Based Study

  • David L Chan
  • Matthew Cheung
  • Craig C. Earle
  • Natalie Coburn
  • Nicole Mittmann
  • Farah Rahman
  • Ning Liu
  • Simron SinghEmail author
Original Research

Abstract

Background/Objective

Although gastric and pancreatic cancers are aggressive, there is no evidence that early detection of recurrence improves overall survival. We aimed to measure the frequency of surveillance imaging in patients after curative resection for gastric and pancreatic cancers.

Methods

We performed a population-based cohort study on patients in Ontario, Canada, with a first diagnosis of gastric and pancreatic cancer in 2003–2013. Health administrative databases were linked using unique encoded identifiers to record demographics, imaging frequency, and health resource utilization.

Results

The cohort comprised 2930 patients (2151 gastric, 779 pancreatic). The median age was 69 (38% female). The cumulative incidence of CT imaging overall was 74.3% after 1 year and 82.8% by 3 years. Imaging was more likely for pancreatic cancer compared to gastric cancer (p < 0.0001). On multivariate analysis, imaging was less likely for females and older patients and varied significantly by health district. Imaging frequency increased over the study period.

Conclusions

Significant and increasing numbers of patients received surveillance imaging after resection of gastric or pancreatic cancers despite lack of data to show its benefit. This data shows the need for the Choosing Wisely Canada recommendations (published after the study period) and serve as a baseline for future analyses.

Keywords

Gastric cancer Pancreatic cancer Surveillance Choosing wisely 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences (ICES), which is funded by an annual grant from the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care (MOHLTC). The opinions, results, and conclusions reported in this paper are those of the authors and are independent from the funding sources. No endorsement by ICES or the Ontario MOHLTC is intended or should be inferred. Parts of this material are based on data and information compiled and provided by the Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI). However, the analyses, conclusions, opinions, and statements expressed herein are those of the author and not necessarily those of CIHI. Parts of this material are based on data and information provided by Cancer Care Ontario (CCO). The opinions, results, view, and conclusions reported in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of CCO. No endorsement by CCO is intended or should be inferred.

Funding

This study was supported by the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences (ICES), which is funded by an annual grant from the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care (MOHLTC). The opinions, results, and conclusions reported in this paper are those of the authors and are independent from the funding sources. No endorsement by ICES or the Ontario MOHLTC is intended or should be inferred.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

This study was approved by the institutional review board at Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Synopsis

Significant number of patients receive surveillance imaging after resected gastric or pancreatic cancers, despite the lack of data to show the benefit of such imaging.

References

  1. 1.
    Tempero M, Arnoletti JP, Ben-Josef E, Bhargava P, Casper ES, Kim P, et al. Pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Clinical practice guidelines in oncology. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw. 2007;5:998–1033.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Okines A, Verheij M, Allum W, Cunningham D, Cervantes A. On behalf of the ESMO guidelines working group. Gastric cancer: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2010;21:v50–4.  https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdq164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cunningham D, Allum WH, Stenning SP, Thompson JN, Van de Velde CJH, Nicolson M, et al. Perioperative chemotherapy versus surgery alone for resectable gastroesophageal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2006;355:11–20.  https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa055531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Neoptolemos JP, Palmer DH, Ghaneh P, Psarelli EE, Valle JW, Halloran CM, et al. Comparison of adjuvant gemcitabine and capecitabine with gemcitabine monotherapy in patients with resected pancreatic cancer (ESPAC-4): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2017;389:1011–24.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(16)32409-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cunningham D, Starling N, Rao S, Iveson T, Nicolson M, Coxon F, et al. Capecitabine and oxaliplatin for advanced esophagogastric cancer. N Engl J Med. 2008;358:36–46.  https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa073149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Von Hoff DD, Ervin T, Arena FP, Chiorean EG, Infante J, Moore M, et al. Increased survival in pancreatic cancer with nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine. N Engl J Med. 2013;369:1691–703.  https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1304369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Smyth EC, Verheij M, Allum W, Cunningham D, Cervantes A, Arnold D. Gastric cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up†. Ann Oncol. 2016;27:v38–49.  https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdw350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    D’Ugo D, Biondi A, Tufo A, Persiani R. Follow-up: the evidence. Dig Surg. 2013;30:159–68.  https://doi.org/10.1159/000350878.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Seufferlein T, Bachet JB, Van Cutsem E, Rougier P, on behalf of the ESMO Guidelines Working Group. Pancreatic adenocarcinoma: ESMO-ESDO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2012;23:vii33–40.  https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mds224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ducreux M, Cuhna AS, Caramella C, Hollebecque A, Burtin P, Goéré D, et al. Cancer of the pancreas: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2015;26:v56–68.  https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdv295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cardoso R, Coburn NG, Seevaratnam R, Mahar A, Helyer L, Law C, et al. A systematic review of patient surveillance after curative gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a brief review. Gastric Cancer. 2012;15(Suppl 1):S164–7.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10120-012-0142-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Böhner H, Zimmer T, Hopfenmüller W, Berger G, Buhr HJ. Detection and prognosis of recurrent gastric cancer--is routine follow-up after gastrectomy worthwhile? Hepatogastroenterology. 2000;47:1489–94.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tzeng C-WD, Fleming JB, Lee JE, Wang X, Pisters PWT, Vauthey J-N, et al. Yield of clinical and radiographic surveillance in patients with resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma following multimodal therapy. HPB. 2012;14:365–72.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1477-2574.2012.00445.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Witkowski ER, Smith JK, Ragulin-Coyne E, Ng S-C, Shah SA, Tseng JF. Is it worth looking? Abdominal imaging after pancreatic cancer resection: a national study. J Gastrointest Surg. 2012;16:121–8.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-011-1699-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Statistics Canada. Annual demographic estimates: Canada, provinces and territories [internet]; 2016. Available: http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/91-215-x/91-215-x2016000-eng.pdf. Accessed 24 April 2018
  16. 16.
    Robles SC, Marrett LD, Clarke EA, Risch HA. An application of capture-recapture methods to the estimation of completeness of cancer registration. J Clin Epidemiol. 1988;41:495–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Schedule of Benefits: Physician Services Under the Health Insurance Act [Internet]. Ontario Ministry of Health and Long Term Care; 2015. Available: http://www.health.gov.on.ca/en/pro/programs/ohip/sob/physserv/sob_master20160401.pdf. Accessed 24 April 2018
  18. 18.
    Hallet J, Law CHL, Cukier M, Saskin R, Liu N, Singh S. Exploring the rising incidence of neuroendocrine tumors: a population-based analysis of epidemiology, metastatic presentation, and outcomes. Cancer. 2015;121:589–97.  https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.29099.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Austin PC, van Walraven C, Wodchis WP, Newman A, Anderson GM. Using the Johns Hopkins Aggregated Diagnosis Groups (ADGs) to predict mortality in a general adult population cohort in Ontario, Canada. Med Care. 2011;49:932–9.  https://doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0b013e318215d5e2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Fine JP, Gray RJ. A proportional hazards model for the subdistribution of a competing risk. J Am Stat Assoc. 1999;94:496–509.  https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1999.10474144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Choosing Wisely Canada. Oncology - choosing wisely Canada - ten things physicians and patients should question [internet]; 2017. Available: https://choosingwiselycanada.org/oncology/. Accessed 24 April 2018
  22. 22.
    Thompson CA, Charlson ME, Schenkein E, Wells MT, Furman RR, Elstrom R, et al. Surveillance CT scans are a source of anxiety and fear of recurrence in long-term lymphoma survivors. Ann Oncol. 2010;21:2262–6.  https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdq215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Cheung MC, Mittmann N, Earle CC, Rahman F, Liu N, Singh S. Are we choosing wisely in lymphoma? Excessive use of surveillance CT imaging in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) in long-term remission. Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk. 2018;18:e27–34.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clml.2017.10.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Adam R, Delvart V, Pascal G, Valeanu A, Castaing D, Azoulay D, et al. Rescue surgery for unresectable colorectal liver metastases downstaged by chemotherapy: a model to predict long-term survival. Ann Surg. 2004;240:644–57 discussion 657-658.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Pita-Fernández S, Alhayek-Aí M, González-Martín C, López-Calviño B, Seoane-Pillado T, Pértega-Díaz S. Intensive follow-up strategies improve outcomes in nonmetastatic colorectal cancer patients after curative surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Oncol. 2015;26:644–56.  https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdu543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences CentreTorontoCanada
  2. 2.Institute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesTorontoCanada
  3. 3.Sunnybrook Research Institute, Sunnybrook Health Sciences CentreTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations