Yin Ling Woo1, Maria Kyrgiou, Andrew Bryant, Thomas Everett, Heather O Dickinson. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Affiliated with University Malaya Cancer Research Institute, Faculty of Medicine, University Malaya, Lembah Pantai, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. ylwoo@ummc.edu.my
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Gynaecological cancers are the second most common cancers among women. It has been suggested that centralised care improves outcomes but consensus is lacking. This systematic review assesses the effectiveness of centralisation of care for patients with gynaecological cancer, in particular, survival advantage. METHODS: A comprehensive search of the Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Group Trials Register, CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library, Issue 4, 2010), MEDLINE, and EMBASE up to November 2010 was conducted. Registers of clinical trials, abstracts of scientific meetings, and reference lists of included studies were also searched. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, controlled before-and-after studies, interrupted time series studies, and observational studies were included and multivariable analysis to adjust for baseline case mix were used. RESULTS: Five retrospective observational studies met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis of three studies assessing over 9000 women suggested that institutions with gynaecologic oncologists on site may prolong survival in women with ovarian cancer, compared to community or general hospitals: hazard ratio (HR) of death was 0.90 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82 to 0.99). Similarly, another meta-analysis of three studies assessing over 50,000 women, found that teaching centres or regional cancer centres may prolong survival in women with any gynaecological cancer compared to community or general hospitals (HR 0.91; 95% CI 0.84 to 0.99). The largest of these studies included all gynaecological malignancies and assessed 48,981 women, so the findings extend beyond ovarian cancer. One study compared community hospitals with semi-specialised gynaecologists versus general hospitals and reported non-significantly better disease-specific survival in women with ovarian cancer (HR 0.89; 95% CI 0.78 to 1.01). The findings of included studies were highly consistent. CONCLUSIONS: The meta-analysis provides evidence to suggest that women with gynaecological cancer who received treatment in specialised centres had longer survival than those managed elsewhere.
OBJECTIVE: Gynaecological cancers are the second most common cancers among women. It has been suggested that centralised care improves outcomes but consensus is lacking. This systematic review assesses the effectiveness of centralisation of care for patients with gynaecological cancer, in particular, survival advantage. METHODS: A comprehensive search of the Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Group Trials Register, CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library, Issue 4, 2010), MEDLINE, and EMBASE up to November 2010 was conducted. Registers of clinical trials, abstracts of scientific meetings, and reference lists of included studies were also searched. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, controlled before-and-after studies, interrupted time series studies, and observational studies were included and multivariable analysis to adjust for baseline case mix were used. RESULTS: Five retrospective observational studies met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis of three studies assessing over 9000 women suggested that institutions with gynaecologic oncologists on site may prolong survival in women with ovarian cancer, compared to community or general hospitals: hazard ratio (HR) of death was 0.90 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82 to 0.99). Similarly, another meta-analysis of three studies assessing over 50,000 women, found that teaching centres or regional cancer centres may prolong survival in women with any gynaecological cancer compared to community or general hospitals (HR 0.91; 95% CI 0.84 to 0.99). The largest of these studies included all gynaecological malignancies and assessed 48,981 women, so the findings extend beyond ovarian cancer. One study compared community hospitals with semi-specialised gynaecologists versus general hospitals and reported non-significantly better disease-specific survival in women with ovarian cancer (HR 0.89; 95% CI 0.78 to 1.01). The findings of included studies were highly consistent. CONCLUSIONS: The meta-analysis provides evidence to suggest that women with gynaecological cancer who received treatment in specialised centres had longer survival than those managed elsewhere.
Authors: Renee A Cowan; Roisin E O'Cearbhaill; Ginger J Gardner; Douglas A Levine; Kara Long Roche; Yukio Sonoda; Oliver Zivanovic; William P Tew; Evis Sala; Yulia Lakhman; Hebert A Vargas Alvarez; Debra M Sarasohn; Svetlana Mironov; Nadeem R Abu-Rustum; Dennis S Chi Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2015-10-28 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: A K Sinno; X Li; R E Thompson; E J Tanner; K L Levinson; R L Stone; S M Temkin; A N Fader; D S Chi; K Long Roche Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2017-03-30 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: M Fung-Kee-Fung; E B Kennedy; J Biagi; T Colgan; D D'Souza; L M Elit; A Hunter; J Irish; R McLeod; B Rosen Journal: Curr Oncol Date: 2015-08 Impact factor: 3.677
Authors: B Van Calster; K Van Hoorde; W Froyman; J Kaijser; L Wynants; C Landolfo; C Anthoulakis; I Vergote; T Bourne; D Timmerman Journal: Facts Views Vis Obgyn Date: 2015
Authors: James C Glasbey; Dmitri Nepogodiev; Joana F F Simoes; Omar Omar; Elizabeth Li; Mary L Venn; Mohammad K Abou Chaar; Vita Capizzi; Daoud Chaudhry; Anant Desai; Jonathan G Edwards; Jonathan P Evans; Marco Fiore; Jose Flavio Videria; Samuel J Ford; Ian Ganly; Ewen A Griffiths; Rohan R Gujjuri; Angelos G Kolias; Haytham M A Kaafarani; Ana Minaya-Bravo; Siobhan C McKay; Helen M Mohan; Keith J Roberts; Carlos San Miguel-Méndez; Peter Pockney; Richard Shaw; Neil J Smart; Grant D Stewart; Sudha Sundar Mrcog; Raghavan Vidya; Aneel A Bhangu Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2020-10-06 Impact factor: 44.544