BackgroundIn most western European countries perioperative chemotherapy is a part of standard curative treatment for gastric cancer. Nevertheless, recurrence rates remain high after multimodality treatment. This study examines patterns of recurrence in patients receiving perioperative chemotherapy with surgery for gastric cancer in a real-world setting.MethodsAll patients diagnosed with gastric adenocarcinoma between 2010 and 2015 who underwent at least preoperative chemotherapy and a gastrectomy with curative intent (cT1N+/cT2-4a,X; any cN; cM0) in 18 Dutch hospitals were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Additional data on chemotherapy and recurrence were collected from medical records. Rates, patterns, and timing of recurrence were examined. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard analyses were used to determine prognostic factors for recurrence.Results408 patients were identified. After a median follow-up of 27.8 months, 36.8% of the gastric cancer patients had a recurrence of which the majority (88.8%) had distant metastasis. The 1-year recurrence-free survival was 71.8%. The risk of recurrence was higher in patients with an ypN+ stage (HR 4.92, 95% CI 3.35–7.24), partial or no tumor regression (HR 2.63, 95% CI 1.22–5.64), 3 instead of ≥ 6 chemotherapy cycles (HR 3.04, 95% CI 1.99–4.63), R1 resection (HR 1.52, 95% CI 1.02–2.26), and < 15 resected lymph nodes (HR 1.64, 95% CI 1.14–2.37).ConclusionA considerable amount of gastric cancer patients who were treated with curative intent developed a recurrence despite surgery and perioperative treatment. The majority developed distant metastases, therefore, multimodality treatment approaches should be focused on the prevention of distant rather than locoregional recurrences to improve survival.

Background Periconceptional use of oral contraceptives (OCs) has been reported to increase risks of pregnancy complications and adverse birth outcomes, but risks are suggested to differ depending on the timing of discontinuation, amount of oestrogen and progestin content. Methods Prospective cohort study among 6470 pregnancies included in the PRegnancy and Infant DEvelopment (PRIDE) Study in 2012–19. Exposure was defined as any reported use of OCs within 12 months pre-pregnancy or after conception. Outcomes of interest were gestational diabetes, gestational hypertension, pre-eclampsia, pre-term birth, low birthweight and small for gestational age (SGA). Multivariable Poisson regression using stabilized inverse probability weighting estimated relative risks (RRs) with 95% CIs. Results Any periconceptional OC use was associated with increased risks of pre-eclampsia (RR 1.38, 95% CI 0.99–1.93), pre-term birth (RR 1.38, 95% CI 1.09–1.75) and low birthweight (RR 1.45, 95% CI 1.10–1.92), but not with gestational hypertension (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.91–1.31), gestational diabetes (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.77–1.36) and SGA (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.75–1.21). Associations with pre-eclampsia were strongest for discontinuation 0–3 months pre-pregnancy, for OCs containing ≥30 µg oestrogen and for first- or second-generation OCs. Pre-term birth and low birthweight were more likely to occur when OCs were discontinued 0–3 months pre-pregnancy, when using OCs containing &lt;30 µg oestrogen and when using third-generation OCs. Associations with SGA were observed for OCs containing &lt;30 µg oestrogen and for third- or fourth-generation OCs. Conclusions Periconceptional OC use, particularly those containing oestrogen, was associated with increased risks of pre-eclampsia, pre-term birth, low birthweight and SGA.

Background Care engagement or active patient involvement in healthcare contributes to the quality of primary care, but organisational preconditions in routine practice need to be aligned. A Maturity Matrix for Care Engagement to assess and discuss these preconditions in the general practice team was developed and tested on feasibility and acceptability in general practice. Methods and findings A systematic user-centred approach was applied, starting with a scoping literature search to describe the domains on the horizontal axis of the maturity matrix. The domains and growing steps (vertical axis) were refined by patients (n = 16) and general practice staff (n = 11) in three focus group discussions and reviewed by six experts (local facilitators and scientists). Seven domains could be distinguished: Personalised Care, Shared Decision Making, Self-Management, Patient as Partner, Supportive Means, Patient Environment, and Teamwork among Healthcare Professionals. The growing steps described three to six activities per domain (n = 32 in total) that contribute to care engagement. Local facilitators implemented the tool in two general practice teams according to a user guide, starting with a two-hour kick-off meeting on care engagement. In the next step, practitioners, nurses and assistants in each practice indicated their score on the domains individually. The scores were discussed in the facilitated practice meeting which was aimed at SMART improvement plans. Feasibility and acceptability were assessed in interviews showing that the tool was well received by the pilot practices, although the practice assistants had difficulties scoring some of the activities as they did not always relate to their daily work. An assessment after three months showed changes in practice organisation towards increased care engagement. Conclusions The maturity matrix on care engagement is a tool to identify the organisational practice maturity for care engagement. Suggested adaptations must be implemented before large-scale testing.

No abstract

No abstract