scholarly journals American Society of Clinical Oncology Symposium highlights quality-of-care issues

Cancer ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 121 (4) ◽  
pp. 489-489
Author(s):  
Carrie Printz
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Care ◽  
Clinical Oncology ◽  
American Society

Clinical Oncology Practice 2015: Preparing for the Future

2015 ◽  
pp. e622-e627 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael P. Kosty ◽  
Anupama Kurup Acheson ◽  
Eric D. Tetzlaff
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Oncology ◽  
Nurse Practitioners ◽  
Cancer Care ◽  
Medical Knowledge ◽  
Physician Assistants ◽  
The United States ◽  
Practice Model ◽  
American Society ◽  
Oncology Practice

The clinical practice of oncology has become increasingly complex. An explosion of medical knowledge, increased demands on provider time, and involved patients have changed the way many oncologists practice. What was an acceptable practice model in the past may now be relatively inefficient. This review covers three areas that address these changes. The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) National Oncology Census defines who the U.S. oncology community is, and their perceptions of how practice patterns may be changing. The National Cancer Institute (NCI)-ASCO Teams in Cancer Care Project explores how best to employ team science to improve the efficiency and quality of cancer care in the United States. Finally, how physician assistants (PAs) and nurse practitioners (NPs) might be best integrated into team-based care in oncology and the barriers to integration are reviewed.

Quality of Abstracts Describing Randomized Trials in the Proceedings of American Society of Clinical Oncology Meetings: Guidelines for Improved Reporting

2004 ◽  
Vol 22 (10) ◽  
pp. 1993-1999 ◽  
Author(s):  
Monika K. Krzyzanowska ◽  
Melania Pintilie ◽  
Christine Brezden-Masley ◽  
Rebecca Dent ◽  
Ian F. Tannock
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Oncology ◽  
Statistical Tests ◽  
Quality Score ◽  
Final Report ◽  
Quality Of Reporting ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
End Point ◽  
American Society ◽  
Almost All

Purpose To evaluate the quality of reporting in abstracts describing randomized controlled trials (RCTs) included in the Proceedings of American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) meetings and to propose reporting guidelines for abstracts that are submitted to future meetings. Methods Guidelines for reporting of RCTs in abstracts were developed by extracting key elements from published guidelines for full reports of RCTs, and modified based on an expert survey. Abstracts presenting results of RCTs with sample size ≥ 200 were identified from the ASCO Proceedings for the years 1989 to 1998. Information regarding the quality of each abstract was extracted, and a quality score (possible range, 0 to 10) was assigned based on adherence to the guidelines. Results Brief description of the intervention, explicit identification of the primary end point, and presentation of results accompanied by statistical tests were regarded by experts as the most important items to include in an abstract, whereas presentation of secondary and subgroup analyses was the least important. Deficiencies in reporting were present in almost all of the 510 abstracts; for example, only 22% of the abstracts provided explicit identification of the primary end point. The median quality score was 5.5 (range, 2.0 to 8.5); the quality score improved with time (P < .0001) and was better for oral or plenary presentations (P = .0003). Conclusion The quality of reporting of RCTs in abstracts submitted to Annual Meetings of ASCO is suboptimal. Although space precludes the inclusion of details required in the final report, abstracts could be improved through the use of explicit minimal guidelines, which are suggested in this article.

scholarly journals Quality of care in clinical oncology: from the dreamworld to the real world of outcome assessment

2006 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 177-178 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Tassinari ◽  
B. Poggi ◽  
E. Tamburini ◽  
M. Fantini ◽  
S. Nicoletti ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Care ◽  
Outcome Assessment ◽  
Clinical Oncology ◽  
Real World ◽  
The Real

Use of epoetin and darbepoetin in patients with cancer: 2007 American Society of Hematology/American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline update

Blood ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 111 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-41 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Douglas Rizzo ◽  
Mark R. Somerfield ◽  
Karen L. Hagerty ◽  
Jerome Seidenfeld ◽  
Julia Bohlius ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Oncology ◽  
Package Insert ◽  
Cochrane Collaboration ◽  
Conclusive Evidence ◽  
Thromboembolic Risk ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
American Society ◽  
Dose Modifications ◽  
The Cochrane Collaboration

Purpose: To update the American Society of Clinical Oncology/American Society of Hematology (ASCO/ASH) recommendations for the use of epoetin. The guideline was expanded to address use of darbepoetin and thromboembolic risk associated with these agents. Method: An Update Committee (“Committee”) reviewed and analyzed data published since 2002 through July 2007. MEDLINE and the Cochrane Collaboration Library databases were searched. Recommendations: For patients with chemotherapy-associated anemia, the Committee continues to recommend initiating an erythropoiesis-stimulating agent (ESA) as hemoglobin (Hb) approaches, or falls below, 10 g/dL, to increase Hb and decrease transfusions. ESA treatment continues to be recommended for patients with low-risk myelodysplasia for similar reasons. There is no evidence showing increased survival as a result of ESA treatment. Conclusive evidence is lacking that, absent clinical circumstances necessitating earlier treatment, initiating ESAs at Hb levels greater than 10 g/dL either spares more patients from transfusion or substantially improves their quality of life. Starting doses and dose modifications based on response or lack thereof should follow the package insert. Continuing ESAs beyond 6 to 8 weeks in the absence of response, assuming appropriate dose increase has been attempted in nonresponders as per US Food and Drug Administration–approved label, does not seem to be beneficial, and ESA therapy should be discontinued. The Committee recommends monitoring iron stores and supplementing iron intake for ESA-treated patients. ESAs should be used cautiously with chemotherapy, or in clinical states, associated with elevated risk for thromoembolic complications. The Committee also cautions against ESA use for patients with cancer who are not receiving chemotherapy, since recent trials report increased thromboembolic risks and decreased survival under these circumstances.

Outcomes of cancer treatment for technology assessment and cancer treatment guidelines. American Society of Clinical Oncology.

1996 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 671-679 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Cancer Treatment ◽  
Clinical Oncology ◽  
Patient Outcomes ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Working Group ◽  
Treatment Guidelines ◽  
Guideline Development ◽  
American Society

In 1993, the Health Services Research Committee of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) charged an Outcomes Working Group with defining the outcomes of adult and pediatric cancer treatment to be used for technology assessment and development of cancer treatment guidelines. The Working Group defined by consensus outcomes for technology assessment and guideline development, focusing on cancer treatments. The Working Group considered a variety of perspectives on outcomes, including those of patients, physicians, clinical investigators, ASCO, and policy makers. Because ASCO's guidelines will define what constitutes the best treatment and not whether that treatment should be paid for, the Working Group gave higher priority to the clinical and clinical research perspectives than to the health policy perspective. Survival is the most important outcome of cancer treatment. An improvement in at least disease-free survival is a prerequisite for recommending adjuvant therapy. In the case of metastatic cancer, treatment can be recommended even without an improvement in survival, if it improves quality of life. Quality of life includes global quality of life, as well as its physical, psychologic, and social dimensions. To be an outcome of cancer treatment, quality-of-life measures must be sensitive to clinically meaningful changes produced by treatment; evaluations must control for placebo effects and determinants of quality of life not related to cancer or its treatment. Toxicity, both short and long term, is vitally important, with the latter being particularly critical in children. The value of cancer outcomes like tumor response (eg, complete or partial response) and biomarkers (eg, CA-125) for technology assessment and guideline development depends on their ability to predict patient outcomes (survival and quality of life) or to influence decisions about treatment. Complete response is an important outcome when it predicts survival. Progression is important because it signals the need to change or stop treatment. Cost-effectiveness is an especially important outcome to consider when the benefits of treatment are modest or the costs are high. Patient outcomes (eg, survival and quality of life) should receive higher priority than cancer outcomes (eg, response rate), but both types of outcomes are important in technology assessment and guideline development. Multiple outcomes should be considered because no single outcome adequately describes the results of cancer treatment. In general, there is no minimum benefit above which treatments are justified; rather, benefits should be balanced against toxicity and cost.

Evaluation of Spanish hospitals participating in the Quality Oncology Practice Initiative program.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (29_suppl) ◽  
pp. 222-222
Author(s):  
Rafael Lopez ◽  
Antonio Antón ◽  
Enrique Aranda ◽  
Alfredo Carrato ◽  
Manuel Constenla ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Care ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Pathology Report ◽  
Tobacco Use Cessation ◽  
Counseling And Assessment ◽  
American Society ◽  
Oncology Practice ◽  
Initiative Program

222 Background: Measuring and tracking quality of care is highly relevant in today’s healthcare. The Quality Oncology Practice Initiative (QOPI) program is a referral for evaluating oncology practices worldwide. The ECO Foundation (Excellence and Quality in Oncology), a collaboration of oncology experts from the major Spanish hospitals involved in cancer treatment, reached an agreement with ASCO (American Society of Clinical Oncology) to include Spanish hospitals in its QOPI program. Methods: We analyzed the results of the QOPI core module measures from 19 Spanish hospitals submitting their data in nine rounds (from Fall 2015 to Fall 2019). Results: Of the 19 hospitals, 15 participated more than once; none participated in all 9 rounds (2 hospitals participated in 8 rounds). The highest scores were for pathology report confirming malignancy, documenting plan of care for moderate/severe pain and chemotherapy dose, and chemotherapy administered to patients with metastatic solid tumor with performance status undocumented. Measures regarding a summary of chemotherapy treatment, tobacco use cessation counseling, and assessment of patient emotional well-being were among the lowest scored measures. Six of the 15 practices who participated repeatedly achieved a better score in their last round compared to their first. Overall, scores of Spanish hospitals improved from 67.79% in Fall 2015 to 68.91% in Fall 2019. Conclusions: This is the first study to evaluate QOPI scores in Spain; it showed that repeated participation enhances quality of care, although there is room for improvement. The ECO Foundation will continue supporting and engaging with practices to increase their participation in order to improve oncology care and implement strategies that address the areas for improvement.

Platelet Transfusion for Patients With Cancer: Clinical Practice Guidelines of the American Society of Clinical Oncology*

2001 ◽  
Vol 19 (5) ◽  
pp. 1519-1538 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles A. Schiffer ◽  
Kenneth C. Anderson ◽  
Charles L. Bennett ◽  
Steven Bernstein ◽  
Linda S. Elting ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Oncology ◽  
Platelet Transfusion ◽  
Research Committee ◽  
Services Research ◽  
Medline Search ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
Randomized Design ◽  
American Society ◽  
Platelet Transfusions

OBJECTIVE: To determine the most effective, evidence-based approach to the use of platelet transfusions in patients with cancer. OUTCOMES: Outcomes of interest included prevention of morbidity and mortality from hemorrhage, effects on survival, quality of life, toxicity reduction, and cost-effectiveness. EVIDENCE: A complete MedLine search was performed of the past 20 years of the medical literature. Keywords included platelet transfusion, alloimmunization, hemorrhage, threshold and thrombocytopenia. The search was broadened by articles from the bibliographies of selected articles. VALUES: Levels of evidence and guideline grades were rated by a standard process. More weight was given to studies that tested a hypothesis directly related to one of the primary outcomes in a randomized design. BENEFITS/HARMS/COST: The possible consequences of different approaches to the use of platelet transfusion were considered in evaluating a preference for one or another technique producing similar outcomes. Cost alone was not a determining factor. RECOMMENDATIONS: Appendix A summarizes the recommendations concerning the choice of particular platelet preparations, the use of prophylactic platelet transfusions, indications for transfusion in selected clinical situations, and the diagnosis, prevention, and management of refractoriness to platelet transfusion. VALIDATION: Five outside reviewers, the ASCO Health Services Research Committee, and the ASCO Board reviewed this document. SPONSOR: American Society of Clinical Oncology

scholarly journals American Society of Pediatric Nephrology Position Paper on Linking Reimbursement to Quality of Care: Table 1.

2005 ◽  
Vol 16 (8) ◽  
pp. 2263-2269 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sharon P. Andreoli ◽  
Eileen D. Brewer ◽  
Sandra Watkins ◽  
Barbara Fivush ◽  
Neil Powe ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Care ◽  
Pediatric Nephrology ◽  
Position Paper ◽  
American Society

Use of Epoetin and Darbepoetin in Patients With Cancer: 2007 American Society of Clinical Oncology/American Society of Hematology Clinical Practice Guideline Update

2008 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 132-149 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Douglas Rizzo ◽  
Mark R. Somerfield ◽  
Karen L. Hagerty ◽  
Jerome Seidenfeld ◽  
Julia Bohlius ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Oncology ◽  
Package Insert ◽  
Cochrane Collaboration ◽  
Conclusive Evidence ◽  
Thromboembolic Risk ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
American Society ◽  
Dose Modifications ◽  
The Cochrane Collaboration

PurposeTo update the American Society of Clinical Oncology/American Society of Hematology (ASCO/ASH) recommendations for the use of epoetin. The guideline was expanded to address use of darbepoetin and thromboembolic risk associated with these agents.MethodAn Update Committee (“Committee”) reviewed and analyzed data published since 2002 through July 2007. MEDLINE and the Cochrane Collaboration Library databases were searched.RecommendationsFor patients with chemotherapy-associated anemia, the Committee continues to recommend initiating an erythropoiesis-stimulating agent (ESA) as hemoglobin (Hb) approaches, or falls below, 10 g/dL, to increase Hb and decrease transfusions. ESA treatment continues to be recommended for patients with low-risk myelodysplasia for similar reasons. There is no evidence showing increased survival as a result of ESA treatment. Conclusive evidence is lacking that, absent clinical circumstances necessitating earlier treatment, initiating ESAs at Hb levels greater than 10 g/dL either spares more patients from transfusion or substantially improves their quality of life. Starting doses and dose modifications based on response or lack thereof should follow the package insert. Continuing ESAs beyond 6 to 8 weeks in the absence of response, assuming appropriate dose increase has been attempted in nonresponders as per US Food and Drug Administration–approved labeling, does not seem to be beneficial, and ESA therapy should be discontinued. The Committee recommends monitoring iron stores and supplementing iron intake for ESA-treated patients. ESAs should be used cautiously with chemotherapy, or in clinical states, associated with elevated risk for thromboembolic complications. The Committee also cautions against ESA use for patients with cancer who are not receiving chemotherapy, since recent trials report increased thromboembolic risks and decreased survival under these circumstances.

scholarly journals Quality Initiative in Clinical Practice: A Single Institution Appraisal of Quality Metrics in the Management of Newly Diagnosed Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma Based on the American Society of Hematology Practice Improvement Module

Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 4781-4781
Author(s):  
Alina Bischin ◽  
David M. Aboulafia ◽  
Prakash Vishnu ◽  
Kevin Knopf ◽  
Ruqin Chen
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Care ◽  
B Cell ◽  
Cell Lymphoma ◽  
B Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Quality Metrics ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Large B Cell Lymphoma ◽  
American Society ◽  
Large B Cell

Abstract ABSTRACT Background: In 2014, the American Society of Hematology (ASH) established a practice improvement module (PIM) incorporating quality metrics for management of diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Such PIMs have allowed physicians to monitor the quality of care in their practice. We implemented a DLBCL quality improvement initiative (QII) at our institution in January, 2015. In an appraisal of this initiative, we reviewed the ASH PIM metrics and included several others to assess adherence to guidelines for treatment of DLBCL and to examine the need for institutional improvement. Methods: Patients who were newly diagnosed with DLBCL and received treatment at our institution from January 2006 through December 2017 were identified. Electronic medical records were reviewed for documentation of ASH PIM quality measures (e.g., key pathologic features of DLBCL, lymphoma staging, screening for hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection in patients receiving rituximab-based chemotherapy, etc). We also reviewed the proportion of patients who had assessment of prognosis by revised International Prognostic Index (r-IPI) score, testing for hepatitis C (HCV), HIV viral infections, chemotherapy education, and the addition of rituximab in the treatment regimen of CD20+ DLBCL. Results: Following implementation of the QII, our institution saw improvement in most quality metrics. Particularly significant were improvements in reporting of key molecular features (45.45% to 91.6%, P < 0.0001), screening for HBV (41.82% to 91.67%, P < 0.001) and HIV infections (33.94% to 87.5%, P < 0.0001). All patients post-QII had a PET-CT scan for staging of DLBCL and there was a significantly lower use of bone marrow biopsy (61.2% to 33.33%, P = 0.011). Conclusion: Implementation of a quality initiative and employing standardized metrics can aid in improving institutional quality of care for patients with newly diagnosed DLBCL, and allows opportunity to build and ensure better adherence to evolving national and professional patient care guidelines. Figure. Figure. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document