Primary care vs. oncology-driven surveillance following adjuvant chemotherapy in resected pancreas cancer.
Journal Articles
Overview
Research
Identity
Additional Document Info
View All
Overview
abstract
421 Background: Major oncology societies outline different recommendations following curative intent treatment for pancreas cancer and this has resulted in wide variations in practice among institutions. We aim to describe patterns of surveillance and evaluate their impact on outcomes. Methods: A total of 147 adult patients who received at least one cycle of adjuvant chemotherapy with gemcitabine or 5-fluorouracil monotherapy at any of the British Columbia Cancer Agency centers between 2004 and 2015 were included in this analysis. Surveillance strategies were divided into two groups: discharged to primary care physicians (PCP) or follow up with oncologists that included regular clinical assessments, laboratory testing and/or diagnostic imaging. Results: Median age at diagnosis was 64 (range 38-85) years and 48% were men. More patients were followed by oncologists than PCP (66% vs. 44%). Among the measured prognostic factors, only patients with advanced tumor stage (T3/4) were more likely to be followed by cancer specialists (78% vs. 62%, P = 0.03), while age, gender, performance status, node status, pathologic grade and surgical margins were balanced between the two groups. In the entire cohort, 100 (68%) patients had a documented recurrence. Patient followed by oncologists were more likely to receive chemotherapy on recurrence than those followed by PCP (58% vs. 34%, respectively, P = 0.03). The median overall survival (OS) was 2.82 (95% CI 2.17-3.32) years in the oncology group and 3.35 (95% CI 2.85-5.06) years in the PCP group while the median relapse free survival (RFS) was 2.4 (95% CI 2.07-4.59) and 1.4 (95%CI 1.37-1.77) years, respectively. On multivariate analysis, there was no significant difference in OS between oncology and PCP-driven surveillance (HR 1.23; 95% CI 0.74-2.04, P = 0.4); however, RFS favored the PCP group (HR 1.62; 95% CI 1.01-2.56, P = 0.04, for oncology). Conclusions: In this population-based analysis, surveillance tests and imaging performed by oncologists detected recurrences earlier when compared to follow up by PCPs, but this did not result in OS differences. PCPs may have a larger role in the follow up care of selected patients with resected pancreas cancer.
