MasDA Mastectomy Decisions Audit 2015

Similar documents
National Breast Cancer Audit next steps. Martin Lee

Guideline for the Management of Patients Suitable for Immediate Breast Reconstruction

Unexplained National Differences in the Management of DCIS Revealed by Audit: the Sloane Project Experience

National Cancer Peer Review Sarcoma. Julia Hill Acting Deputy National Co-ordinator

Shared Care Pathway for Soft Tissue Sarcomas Presenting to Site Specialised MDTs. Gynaecological sarcomas Version 1

Guideline for the Diagnosis of Breast Cancer

Consent OPEN AND LAPAROSCOPIC INGUINAL HERNIA REPAIR: NORTH WEST CONSENTING PRACTICES. Audit Protocol. Prepared by: Project steering committee NWRC

Audit Report. Breast Cancer Quality Performance Indicators. Patients diagnosed during Published: February 2018

Work Programme/Service Delivery Plan 2010/2013

RUTGERS CANCER INSTITUTE OF NEW JERSEY - ROBERT WOOD JOHNSON MEDICAL SCHOOL INTERDISCIPLINARY BREAST SURGERY FELLOWSHIP CORE EDUCATIONAL OBJECTIVES

Shared Care Pathway for Soft Tissue Sarcomas Presenting to Site Specialised MDTs Lung /chest wall sarcomas incl. pulmonary metastatectomy Version 2

Table of contents. Page 2 of 40

Suspected CANcer (SCAN) Pathway Information for patients

Integrated Cancer Services Action Plan. Colchester Hospital University NHS Foundation Trust 31 March 2014

BreastScreen Aotearoa Annual Report 2015

Activity Report March 2013 February 2014

Coversheet for Network Site Specific Group Agreed Documentation

Activity Report April 2013 March 2014

POLICY FOR CLINICAL AUDIT OF NEW CASES OF INVASIVE CERVICAL CANCER AND DISCLOSURE OF RESULTS

Activity Report July 2012 June 2013

Guideline for the referral to the Late Effects Multi Disciplinary Team

Mammo-50 Eligibility Queries

Activity Report April 2013 March 2014

NCIN Breast Cancer Workshop 13 March 2014 Hilton Metropole, NEC, Birmingham. Kieran Horgan, Dick Rainsbury, Mark Sibbering, Gill lawrence

Protocol for emergency surgical intervention in patients with a brain tumour v3

SELF ASSESSMENT REPORT (MULTI-DISCIPLINARY TEAM)

11. NATIONAL DAFNE CLINICAL AND RESEARCH DATABASE

Chief Investigator Adele Francis University of Birmingham UK. Prof MWR Reed (CoI) University of Sheffield

Activity Report April 2012 March 2013

Activity Report April 2012 March 2013

Audit. Public Health Monitoring Report on 2006 Data. National Breast & Ovarian Cancer Centre and Royal Australasian College of Surgeons.

National Cancer Peer Review Programme

Breast Surgery When Less is More and More is Less. E MacIntosh, MD June 6, 2015

BREAST IMPLANT SURGERY INDIVIDUAL FUNDING REQUEST POLICY

Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy with Immediate Reconstruction: Added Benefits, Added Risks

Oncoplastic breast surgery in a Danish perspective II: Reconstructive strategy in oncoplastic breast surgery

Quality Standards for Diagnosis and Treatment in Breast Units Across Greater Manchester

Guideline for the Follow-up of Patients with Gynaecological Malignancies

SELF ASSESSMENT REPORT (MULTI-DISCIPLINARY TEAM)

Ovarian Cancer Quality Performance Indicators

Breast Cancer Services in Germany

Activity Report July 2014 June 2015

An Integrated National Strategy for Breast Cancer Audit. Martin Lee Gill Lawrence

Audit Report. Breast Cancer Quality Performance Indicators. Patients diagnosed during Published: December 2015 NORTH OF SCOTLAND PLANNING GROUP

SOUTH EAST SCOTLAND CANCER NETWORK (SCAN) PROSPECTIVE CANCER AUDIT

Research Article A Nationwide Cross-Sectional Survey of UK Breast Surgeons Views on the Management of Ductal Carcinoma In Situ

SOUTH EAST SCOTLAND CANCER NETWORK PROSPECTIVE CANCER AUDIT

NEWCASTLE CLINICAL TRIALS UNIT STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES

Waikato Breast Cancer Register March 2010

Educational Goals and Objectives for Rotations on: Breast, Wound and Plastic Surgery

SCREENING FOR BOWEL CANCER USING FLEXIBLE SIGMOIDOSCOPY REVIEW APPRAISAL CRITERIA FOR THE UK NATIONAL SCREENING COMMITTEE

HTA commissioned call

Report prepared on behalf of the Scottish Head and Neck Cancer Networks by the WoSCAN Information Team

Breast Surgery Criteria Based Access Protocol Supporting people in Dorset to lead healthier lives

ESSO Advanced Course on Breast Cancer Surgery

Guidelines for the Management of Renal Cancer West Midlands Expert Advisory Group for Urological Cancer

Improving services for upper GI (OG) cancer Application template (Version 2)

Activity Report March 2012 February 2013

ANNEX 1 OBJECTIVES. At the completion of the training period, the fellow should be able to:

EUSOMA GUIDELINES Prof Robert Mansel President Elect EUSOMA Cardiff University. mansel

Upper GI Cancer Network Site-Specific Group. Work Programme/Service Delivery Plan 2011/14

Upper GI Cancer Quality Performance Indicators

National Audit of Breast Cancer in Older Patients. Part of the National Clinical Audit Patient Outcomes Programme Annual Report

United Kingdom and Ireland Association of Cancer Registries (UKIACR) Performance Indicators 2018 report

Re-audit of Radiotherapy Waiting Times 2005

Authors and Co-Authors,

LIPOSUCTION (COSMETIC) INDIVIDUAL FUNDING REQUEST POLICY

The Hepatitis C Action Plan for Scotland: Draft Guidelines for Hepatitis C Care Networks

TRIAL SYNOPSIS LORIS. The Low Risk DCIS Trial. Chief Investigator. Miss Adele Francis

West Midlands Sarcoma Advisory Group

Clinical Commissioning Policy: Chemotherapy Algorithms for Adults and Children. January 2013 Reference: NHS England XXX/X/X.

INTERNAL VALIDATION REPORT (MULTI-DISCIPLINARY TEAM)

28 th September Author Jeremy Gilbert Bariatric Nurse Specialist

Training in Gynaecological Oncology LOG BOOK

Using Cancer Registration and MDT Data to Provide Information on Recurrent and Metastatic Breast Cancer

PERCUTANEOUS TIBIAL NERVE STIMULATION (PTNS) TREATMENT FOR URINARY INCONTINENCE SECONDARY CARE PRIOR APPROVAL POLICY

PRESCRIBING BY RADIOGRAPHERS: A VISION PAPER

Clinical Guidelines for the Management of Breast Cancer West Midlands Expert Advisory Group for Breast Cancer

2010 National Audit of Dementia (Care in General Hospitals)

Cancer National Specialist Advisory Group. Welsh Breast Cancer Clinical Audit for Patients Diagnosed 2008

Guidelines for Management of Penile Cancer

Clinical guideline Published: 25 June 2013 nice.org.uk/guidance/cg164

My Personalized Breast Cancer Worksheet

Cancer Access Policy. Key Points

Handheld Radiofrequency Spectroscopy for Intraoperative Assessment of Surgical Margins During Breast-Conserving Surgery

Breast cancer reconstruction surgery (immediate and delayed) across Ontario: Patient indications and appropriate surgical options

Updates on the Conflict of Postoperative Radiotherapy Impact on Survival of Young Women with Cancer Breast: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Adult Patient Information and Consent Form

Interval Cancers in BreastScreen Aotearoa

Staging Issues: Lung Cancer & Mesothelioma. Mick Peake Clinical Lead, NCIN Chair, Lung SSCRG

The Research Registryâ Guidebook

SENTINEL LYMPH NODE BIOPSY FOR PATIENTS WITH EARLY-STAGE BREAST CANCER

Guidelines for the Management of Prostate Cancer West Midlands Expert Advisory Group for Urological Cancer

PEER REVIEW VISIT REPORT (MULTI-DISCIPLINARY TEAM)

Selective Dorsal Rhizotomy (SDR) Scotland Service Pathway

Audit Report Report of the 2011 Clinical Audit Data

NHS breast screening Helping you decide

PROMOTING HUMAN ORGAN DONATION AND TRANSPLANTATION IN NORTHERN IRELAND. Consultation Proposals & Response Questionnaire

BreastScreen Victoria Annual Statistical Report

Brain and CNS Clinical Network Group (CNG)

Transcription:

MasDA Mastectomy Decisions Audit 2015 AUDIT PROTOCOL FULL TITLE Mastectomy Decisions Audit: a prospective, multi-centre, population-based audit SHORT TITLE MasDA CHIEF INVESTIGATORS Mrs Jagdeep K Singh, General Surgery Registrar, West Midlands Research Collaborative Email: jagdeep.rai@some.oxon.org Mr Sekhar Marla, General Surgery Registrar, West Midlands Research Collaborative Email: sekhar.marla@gmail.com Mrs Katherina McEvoy, Oncoplastic Breast Fellow, Birmingham City Hospital Email: katherinamcevoy@nhs.net Miss Adele Francis, Consultant Breast Surgeon, University Hospital Birmingham Email: adelefrancis@doctors.org.uk On behalf of the West Midlands Research Collaborative. Supported by the Birmingham Surgical Trials Consortium and Independent Cancer Patients Voice. Date: 08/07/2015

TABLE OF CONTENTS KEY CONTACTS TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 PROTOCOL SUMMARY 2.0 ABSTRACT 3.0 INTRODUCTION 4.0 RATIONALE OF PROPOSED STUDY 5.0 OBJECTIVES 6.0 DESIGN AND METHODS 7.0 DATA COLLECTION 8.0 REFERENCES 9.0 APPENDIX MasDA Audit Protocol v1.8 2

KEY CONTACTS Jagdeep K Singh, MasDA project lead, West Midlands Research Collaborative, c/o Academic Department of Surgery, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK Email: masda@wmresearch.org.uk This protocol was developed by the MasDA steering group and members of the West Midlands Research Collaborative Committee Miss Adele Francis Mr Michael Hallissey Miss Fiona Hoar Dr Dan Rea Mrs Jagdeep K Singh Mrs Katherina McEvoy Mr Sekhar Marla Mr Habib Tafazal Mr Dennis Remoundos Miss Mandana Pennick Mrs Maggie Wilcox MasDA Audit Protocol v1.8 3

1.0 PROTOCOL SUMMARY GENERAL INFORMATION Short Title MasDA Full Title Mastectomy Decisions Audit: a prospective, multicentre audit Sponsor West Midlands Research Collaborative (www.wmresearch.org.uk) Chief Investigators Mrs Jagdeep K Singh Mr Sekhar Marla Mrs Katherina McEvoy Miss Adele Francis Website www.wmresearch.org.uk Email masda@wmresearch.org.uk Co-ordinating Centre West Midlands Research Collaborative STUDY INFORMATION Indication To establish the proportion of mastectomies recommended by multi-disciplinary teams (MDT). Design Observational audit Primary Outcome To determine the indications for recommending mastectomy in the UK in 2015 STUDY TIMELINES Main study period 01/07/2015 31/09/2015 Follow-up duration 0 End of Trial Definition 12 weeks Data submission 30/11/15 Data analysis December 2015 Results available March 2016 MasDA Audit Protocol v1.8 4

2.0 ABSTRACT Background: Over 19,000 mastectomies are performed per annum in the UK for invasive breast cancer and in situ disease. Several large datasets have all demonstrated considerable variation in mastectomy rates in units across the UK. The reason for this national variation remains unknown. It is unclear what proportion of mastectomies performed are based on patient choice or are recommended by multidisciplinary teams (MDT). Aims: The Mastectomy Decisions Audit (MasDA) aims to identify the reasons for recommending and performing mastectomies in 2015. It will attempt to describe current UK practice in MDT decision-making for patients undergoing mastectomy. It will also investigate whether post-operative histology confirms the rationale for advising mastectomy as treatment of choice for invasive breast cancer and in situ disease. Methods: This multi-centre, prospective, national audit will commence on 1st July 2015. Data collection will run for 12 weeks from the start date of data collection. Data will be collected using a standardised pro-forma and entered locally at each centre on to a secure web application (REDCap TM ). All women aged >18 years undergoing an elective mastectomy for invasive or in situ disease in the UK, either as an initial procedure with or without immediate reconstruction, or following breast conserving surgery (BCS), are eligible for this study. Audit Standard: Indications for mastectomy as per the Surgical Guidelines for the Management of Breast Cancer by the Association of Breast Surgery (ABS) 2009 and the ABS Breast Screening Audit Report 2010-2011. MasDA Audit Protocol v1.8 5

3.0 INTRODUCTION MasDA is a collaborative trainee-led, prospective, national audit, which aims to identify why mastectomies are clinically advised and performed in the UK. Over 19,000 mastectomies are performed per annum in the UK for invasive breast cancer and in situ disease. Several large UK studies including the National Mastectomy and Breast Reconstruction Audit 1, the NHS Breast Screening Programme Report on screen detected breast cancers 2 and the Breast Cancer Clinical Outcome Measures project reports 3 have all demonstrated considerable variation in mastectomy rates in units across the UK. Surgical treatment decisions for breast cancer involve the interplay between the patient, their clinicians and family members. Where breast conservation is considered possible, patients are offered a choice between BCS and mastectomy. It seems, however, that regional variation in patient preference for mastectomy exists 4. Patients may prefer to undergo a mastectomy rather than BCS because of concerns over disease recurrence and avoidance of adjuvant radiotherapy or the need for further surgery 5. Nevertheless, patient choice alone is unlikely to account for all the variation in observed mastectomy rates. Even if offered a choice, most patients will receive the treatment recommended by their surgeon. The ABS Surgical Guidelines for the Management of Breast Cancer 2009 6 and the ABS Breast Screening Audit Report 2010-2011 7 provide some guidance on recommending mastectomy, for example patients with multifocal/multicentric disease, previous radiotherapy, large (>4cm) areas of micro-calcifications, family history or large tumour to breast volume ratio which would probably result in a poor cosmetic outcome. In clinical practice, the indications for recommending mastectomy have not previously been assessed in the UK. Data from the NHS Breast Screening Programme between 2003 and 2012 suggests that variation in multidisciplinary assessments between units may contribute to the variation in mastectomy rates. For instance, between 2010-2011 regional mastectomy rates for screen-detected tumours <20mm in diameter varied between 11 and 46% 7. MasDA aims to provide an evidence base of current practice in order to establish why mastectomies are clinically advised by MDTs. Data will be collected on patients MasDA Audit Protocol v1.8 6

that choose to have a mastectomy; however this cohort will be excluded from the main analysis as the focus of the study is to establish the rationale for recommending a mastectomy. We will identify whether the post-operative histology confirms the preoperative diagnosis and hence the rationale for advising mastectomy as the treatment of choice. Information will be acquired regarding current practices in neoadjuvant treatment. The audit findings will aim to enable us to develop recommendations for reducing the variation in mastectomy rates nationwide. All patients undergoing mastectomy for breast cancer or in situ disease, either as an initial procedure or following BCS, in any UK breast unit, will be eligible for inclusion in the audit. 4.0 RATIONALE OF PROPOSED AUDIT Substantial variation in mastectomy rates is known to exist across the UK. Patient preference for mastectomy alone is unlikely to account for the variation in observed mastectomy rates. It is therefore important to audit the rationale for recommending mastectomy at MDT meetings. 5.0 OBJECTIVES (i) Determine the indications for recommending mastectomy by MDTs. (ii) Identify whether the post-operative histology confirms the rationale for advising mastectomy as the treatment of choice. 6.0 DESIGN AND METHODS Prospective, multi-centre audit o Any UK Breast Unit is eligible to enter patients. A named consultant or breast trainee will act as the local lead investigator. Data collection will be completed by a team of local surgical trainees/breast care nurses working at that hospital. This study of current practice will be MasDA Audit Protocol v1.8 7

registered and approved by each individual hospital s clinical audit department. Patient Eligibility o All women over the age of 18 years who undergo mastectomy +/- reconstruction for invasive breast cancer or in situ disease. Audit phases o The audit will be performed across eligible centres from 1 st July 2015 and run for 12 weeks from the start date of data collection. A guide has been produced for local investigators wishing to include their centre (appendix 1). 7.0 DATA COLLECTION Variables to be collected: Patient details 1. Hospital No. 2. Month/Year of birth 3. Menopausal status 4. Side affected (right/left/both) Pre-operative information 5. Presentation 6. Pre-operative pathology 7. Pre-operative imaging 8. Mastectomy operation date 9. Immediate reconstruction Preoperative data 10. Patient advised to have a mastectomy 11. Patient offered a choice between BCS and mastectomy 12. Neoadjuvant treatment recommended 13. Neoadjuvant treatment given 14. Indication for mastectomy MasDA Audit Protocol v1.8 8

15. Did the patient choose to have a mastectomy? Postoperative data 16. Invasive disease a. Size of cancer in largest diameter b. Number of separate tumours c. Type of invasive cancer d. Grade e. Oestrogen receptor status f. HER2 status 17. Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) a. Whole tumour size b. Grade c. Multi-focality Data collection: o Data will be collected in a standardised pro-forma and transferred to a secure web application called REDCap TM. Local investigators will be issued with a username and password to upload data online. o Multiple local investigators will be able to enter and view data for the same breast unit. Only the members of your data collection team and the MasDA Steering Group will have details of this. Data collection points: o Patient identification: Patients undergoing mastectomy will be identified at the MDT meeting. o Pre and post-operative data: This will be completed from information collected at the post-operative MDT meeting. o Each team should regularly check that all patients are captured over the 12 week audit period by liaising with the audit co-ordinator to ensure that consecutive patients are included. o Regular checks should be performed to ensure that the data submitted via REDCap TM is as complete as possible. Validation of a unit s dataset: MasDA Audit Protocol v1.8 9

o o The supervising consultant or local lead investigator will be required to submit the total number of mastectomies performed at their Trust during the 12 week study period as recorded by the MDT co-ordinator or through local cancer database e.g. Somerset. Data completeness for all submitted fields should be 90% or greater. Data collation: o Data will be submitted centrally with all patient identifiers removed. Anonymised data will be analysed and reported by the writing committee. o Outcome data specific to each individual surgeon who participates will not be collected. o Anonymised hospital data will be compared; but individual surgeons, hospitals or NHS Trusts will not be identified and will be kept strictly anonymous. Units will have access to their individual data on request. Authorship: o Manuscript preparation will be performed by a writing committee. All contributors (medical students, doctors, clinical nurse specialists and supervising consultants) will be listed as Pubmed citable on any peer review publications that arise from the audit (see T D Pinkney et al. (2013). Impact of wound edge protection devices on surgical site infection after laparotomy: multicentre randomised controlled trial (ROSSINI Trial). British Medical Journal 2013;347:f4305 as an example). In return, each collaborating team should participate in the creating of the local system, registering the audit, identifying patients and data collection. o Medical students and Foundation Year Doctors that contribute to data collection will be provided with certificates to verify their contribution to the study. o Units that fail to submit data for at least 90% of the total number of mastectomies performed may be excluded from the Pubmed citable list. MasDA Audit Protocol v1.8 10

9.0 REFERENCES 1. First Annual Report of the National Mastectomy and Breast Reconstruction Audit 2008. 2. Association of Breast Surgery NHS Breast Screening Audit Report 2009-2010. 3. Breast Cancer Clinical Outcome Measures Second All Breast Cancer Report 2007. 4. Ballinger, R. S., K. F. Mayer, et al. (2008). "Patients' decision-making in a UK specialist centre with high mastectomy rates." Breast 17(6): 574-9. 5. Katz, S. J., P. M. Lantz, et al. (2001). "Correlates of surgical treatment type for women with noninvasive and invasive breast cancer." J Womens Health Gend Based Med 10(7): 659-70. 6. Association of Breast Surgery at British Association of Surgical Oncology (2009). "Surgical guidelines for the management of breast cancer." Eur J Surg Oncol 35 Suppl 1: 1-22. 7. Association of Breast Surgery NHS Breast Screening Audit Report 2010-2011. MasDA Audit Protocol v1.8 11

12.0 APPENDIX Appendix 1: How to register this audit Every hospital has an audit department which should be able to advise on the information required to register the project. Please contact them well in advance to ensure all the paper work is correct (we would recommend at least one month prior to the study commencing). At Trust level: 1. Identify a local lead investigator at each trust this is a Consultant who agrees to support the study 2. Create a team including medical students, FY1-2, CTs and StRs 3. Contact your hospital s Clinical Audit Department preferably by email a. They will provide you with a standard audit form to complete, via email or from the intranet b. You can copy and paste from this protocol c. Ensure that the audit department know that this is part of a larger project and that you will send anonymised data for central collation via secure web application REDCap TM. 4. Once the form is completed, you may need to ask your supervising consultant to sign it 5. Form submission a. Submit the form and protocol to the Audit Department as soon as possible 6. Please forward the written approval or email to masda@wmresearch.org.uk MasDA Audit Protocol v1.8 12