Niveditha Rajadevan, Ariane Flinkier, Hugo Saunders, Yeh Chen Lee, Clare Scott, Pearly Khaw, Prue Allan, Claire Davies, John Andrews, Michelle Wilson, Janine M Lombard, Michelle Harrison, Heshani Nesfield, Anna DeFazio, Tarek Meniawy, Kylie L Gorringe
{"title":"粘液性卵巢癌:澳大利亚和新西兰的实践调查。","authors":"Niveditha Rajadevan, Ariane Flinkier, Hugo Saunders, Yeh Chen Lee, Clare Scott, Pearly Khaw, Prue Allan, Claire Davies, John Andrews, Michelle Wilson, Janine M Lombard, Michelle Harrison, Heshani Nesfield, Anna DeFazio, Tarek Meniawy, Kylie L Gorringe","doi":"10.1111/ajo.13792","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Mucinous ovarian carcinoma (MOC) is a rare ovarian cancer with limited evidence to support clinical care.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Aims</h3>\n \n <p>We undertook a clinician survey to better understand current practice in treating MOC in Australia and New Zealand, and to determine any features associated with variation in care. In addition, we aimed to understand future research priorities.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>A RedCap survey was distributed to clinician members of the Australia New Zealand Gynaecological Oncology Group (ANZGOG). Questions included respondent demographics, three case studies and future research priorities. Clinicians were asked questions specific to their speciality.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Respondents (<i>n</i> = 47) were commonly experienced gynae-oncology specialists, most often surgical (38%) or medical (30%) oncologists. There was good consensus for surgical approaches for stage I disease; however, variation in practice was noted for advanced or recurrent MOC. Variation was also observed for medical oncologists; in early-stage disease there was no clear consensus on whether to offer chemotherapy, or which regimen to recommend. For advanced and recurrent disease a wide range of chemotherapy options was considered, with a trend away from an ovarian-type toward gastrointestinal (GI)-type regimens in advanced MOC. This practice was reflected in future research priorities, with ‘Is a GI chemotherapy regimen better than an ovarian regimen?’ the most highly ranked option, followed by ‘Should stage 1C patients receive chemotherapy?’</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Although the number of respondents limited the analyses, it was clear that chemotherapy selection was a key point of divergence for medical oncologists. Future research is needed to establish well-evidenced guidelines for clinical care of MOC.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":55429,"journal":{"name":"Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology","volume":"64 4","pages":"319-325"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/ajo.13792","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mucinous ovarian carcinoma: A survey of practice in Australia and New Zealand\",\"authors\":\"Niveditha Rajadevan, Ariane Flinkier, Hugo Saunders, Yeh Chen Lee, Clare Scott, Pearly Khaw, Prue Allan, Claire Davies, John Andrews, Michelle Wilson, Janine M Lombard, Michelle Harrison, Heshani Nesfield, Anna DeFazio, Tarek Meniawy, Kylie L Gorringe\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/ajo.13792\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background</h3>\\n \\n <p>Mucinous ovarian carcinoma (MOC) is a rare ovarian cancer with limited evidence to support clinical care.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Aims</h3>\\n \\n <p>We undertook a clinician survey to better understand current practice in treating MOC in Australia and New Zealand, and to determine any features associated with variation in care. In addition, we aimed to understand future research priorities.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>A RedCap survey was distributed to clinician members of the Australia New Zealand Gynaecological Oncology Group (ANZGOG). Questions included respondent demographics, three case studies and future research priorities. Clinicians were asked questions specific to their speciality.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Respondents (<i>n</i> = 47) were commonly experienced gynae-oncology specialists, most often surgical (38%) or medical (30%) oncologists. There was good consensus for surgical approaches for stage I disease; however, variation in practice was noted for advanced or recurrent MOC. Variation was also observed for medical oncologists; in early-stage disease there was no clear consensus on whether to offer chemotherapy, or which regimen to recommend. For advanced and recurrent disease a wide range of chemotherapy options was considered, with a trend away from an ovarian-type toward gastrointestinal (GI)-type regimens in advanced MOC. This practice was reflected in future research priorities, with ‘Is a GI chemotherapy regimen better than an ovarian regimen?’ the most highly ranked option, followed by ‘Should stage 1C patients receive chemotherapy?’</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>Although the number of respondents limited the analyses, it was clear that chemotherapy selection was a key point of divergence for medical oncologists. Future research is needed to establish well-evidenced guidelines for clinical care of MOC.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55429,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology\",\"volume\":\"64 4\",\"pages\":\"319-325\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/ajo.13792\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ajo.13792\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ajo.13792","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:粘液性卵巢癌(MOC)是一种罕见的卵巢癌,支持临床治疗的证据有限。目的:我们开展了一项临床医生调查,以更好地了解澳大利亚和新西兰目前治疗粘液性卵巢癌的做法,并确定与治疗差异相关的任何特征。此外,我们还旨在了解未来的研究重点:我们向澳大利亚-新西兰妇科肿瘤组织(ANZGOG)的临床医生成员发放了一份RedCap调查问卷。问题包括受访者的人口统计学特征、三项病例研究和未来研究重点。临床医生被问及与其专业相关的问题:受访者(n = 47)通常都是经验丰富的妇科肿瘤专家,最常见的是外科肿瘤专家(38%)或内科肿瘤专家(30%)。对于 I 期疾病的手术方法已达成良好共识;但对于晚期或复发性 MOC,实践中存在差异。内科肿瘤学家的做法也不尽相同;对于早期疾病,是否提供化疗或推荐哪种化疗方案没有明确的共识。对于晚期和复发性疾病,则考虑了多种化疗方案,在晚期 MOC 中,化疗方案有从卵巢型向胃肠道(GI)型转变的趋势。这种做法反映在未来的研究重点中,"胃肠道化疗方案比卵巢化疗方案更好吗?"是排名最高的选项,其次是 "1C 期患者是否应该接受化疗?尽管受访者人数限制了分析结果,但化疗选择显然是肿瘤内科医生分歧的关键点。未来的研究需要为 MOC 的临床治疗制定有据可依的指南。
Mucinous ovarian carcinoma: A survey of practice in Australia and New Zealand
Background
Mucinous ovarian carcinoma (MOC) is a rare ovarian cancer with limited evidence to support clinical care.
Aims
We undertook a clinician survey to better understand current practice in treating MOC in Australia and New Zealand, and to determine any features associated with variation in care. In addition, we aimed to understand future research priorities.
Methods
A RedCap survey was distributed to clinician members of the Australia New Zealand Gynaecological Oncology Group (ANZGOG). Questions included respondent demographics, three case studies and future research priorities. Clinicians were asked questions specific to their speciality.
Results
Respondents (n = 47) were commonly experienced gynae-oncology specialists, most often surgical (38%) or medical (30%) oncologists. There was good consensus for surgical approaches for stage I disease; however, variation in practice was noted for advanced or recurrent MOC. Variation was also observed for medical oncologists; in early-stage disease there was no clear consensus on whether to offer chemotherapy, or which regimen to recommend. For advanced and recurrent disease a wide range of chemotherapy options was considered, with a trend away from an ovarian-type toward gastrointestinal (GI)-type regimens in advanced MOC. This practice was reflected in future research priorities, with ‘Is a GI chemotherapy regimen better than an ovarian regimen?’ the most highly ranked option, followed by ‘Should stage 1C patients receive chemotherapy?’
Conclusions
Although the number of respondents limited the analyses, it was clear that chemotherapy selection was a key point of divergence for medical oncologists. Future research is needed to establish well-evidenced guidelines for clinical care of MOC.
期刊介绍:
The Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology (ANZJOG) is an editorially independent publication owned by the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RANZCOG) and the RANZCOG Research foundation. ANZJOG aims to provide a medium for the publication of original contributions to clinical practice and/or research in all fields of obstetrics and gynaecology and related disciplines. Articles are peer reviewed by clinicians or researchers expert in the field of the submitted work. From time to time the journal will also publish printed abstracts from the RANZCOG Annual Scientific Meeting and meetings of relevant special interest groups, where the accepted abstracts have undergone the journals peer review acceptance process.