Should the surgeon or the general practitioner (GP) follow up patients after surgery for colon cancer? A randomized controlled trial protocol focusing on quality of life, cost-effectiveness and serious clinical events

Knut M Augestad, Barthold Vonen, Ranveig Aspevik, Torunn Nestvold, Unni Ringberg, Roar Johnsen, Jan Norum, Rolv-Ole Lindsetmo, Knut M Augestad, Barthold Vonen, Ranveig Aspevik, Torunn Nestvold, Unni Ringberg, Roar Johnsen, Jan Norum, Rolv-Ole Lindsetmo

Abstract

Background: All patients who undergo surgery for colon cancer are followed up according to the guidelines of the Norwegian Gastrointestinal Cancer Group (NGICG). These guidelines state that the aims of follow-up after surgery are to perform quality assessment, provide support and improve survival. In Norway, most of these patients are followed up in a hospital setting. We describe a multi-centre randomized controlled trial to test whether these patients can be followed up by their general practitioner (GP) without altering quality of life, cost effectiveness and/or the incidence of serious clinical events.

Methods and design: Patients undergoing surgery for colon cancer with histological grade Dukes's Stage A, B or C and below 75 years of age are eligible for inclusion. They will be randomized after surgery to follow-up at the surgical outpatient clinic (control group) or follow-up by the district GP (intervention group). Both study arms comply with the national NGICG guidelines. The primary endpoints will be quality of life (QoL) (measured by the EORTC QLQ C-30 and the EQ-5D instruments), serious clinical events (SCEs), and costs. The follow-up period will be two years after surgery, and quality of life will be measured every three months. SCEs and costs will be estimated prospectively. The sample size was 170 patients.

Discussion: There is an ongoing debate on the best method of follow-up for patients with CRC. Due to a wide range of follow-up programmes and paucity of randomized trials, it is impossible to draw conclusions about the best combination and frequency of clinic (or family practice) visits, blood tests, endoscopic procedures and radiological examinations that maximize the clinical outcome, quality of life and costs. Most studies on follow-up of CRC patients have been performed in a hospital outpatient setting. We hypothesize that postoperative follow-up of colon cancer patients (according to national guidelines) by GPs will not have any impact on patients' quality of life. Furthermore, we hypothesize that there will be no increase in SCEs and that the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio will improve.

Trial registration: This trial has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov. The trial registration number is: NCT00572143.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Trial Flow Chart

References

    1. Cancer in Norway 2006;Cancer Registry of Norway, Institute of Population-based Cancer Research
    1. Svensson E, Grotmol T, Hoff G, Langmark F, Norstein J, Tretli S. Trends in colorectal cancer incidence in Norway by gender and anatomic site: an age-period-cohort analysis. Eur J Cancer Prev. 2002;11:489–495. doi: 10.1097/00008469-200210000-00012.
    1. Angell-Andersen E, Tretli S, Coleman MP, Langmark F, Grotmol T. Colorectal cancer survival trends in Norway 1958–1997. European Journal of Cancer. 2004;40:734–742. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2003.09.034.
    1. Abulafi AM, Williams NS. Local recurrence of colorectal cancer: the problem, mechanisms, management and adjuvant therapy. Br J Surg. 1994;81:7–19. doi: 10.1002/bjs.1800810106.
    1. Northover J. Realism or nihilism in bowel cancer follow-up? Lancet. 1998;351:1074–1076. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)79375-2.
    1. Jeffery M, Hickey BE, Hider PN. Follow-up strategies for patients treated for non-metastatic colorectal cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007:CD002200.
    1. Jeffery GM, Hickey BE, Hider P. Follow-up strategies for patients treated for non-metastatic colorectal cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2002:CD002200.
    1. Renehan AG, Egger M, Saunders MP, O'Dwyer ST. Impact on survival of intensive follow up after curative resection for colorectal cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials. Bmj. 2002;324:813. doi: 10.1136/bmj.324.7341.813.
    1. Secco GB, Fardelli R, Gianquinto D, Bonfante P, Baldi E, Ravera G, Derchi L, Ferraris R. Efficacy and cost of risk-adapted follow-up in patients after colorectal cancer surgery: a prospective, randomized and controlled trial. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2002;28:418–423. doi: 10.1053/ejso.2001.1250.
    1. Norwegian Gastrointestinal Cancer Group (NGICG) Kontrollopplegg ved kolorektalcancer (Norwegian guidelines)
    1. Sargent DJ, Wieand HS, Haller DG, Gray R, Benedetti JK, Buyse M, Labianca R, Seitz JF, O'Callaghan CJ, Francini G, et al. Disease-free survival versus overall survival as a primary end point for adjuvant colon cancer studies: individual patient data from 20,898 patients on 18 randomized trials. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:8664–8670. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2005.01.6071.
    1. Desch CE, Benson AB, 3rd, Somerfield MR, Flynn PJ, Krause C, Loprinzi CL, Minsky BD, Pfister DG, Virgo KS, Petrelli NJ. Colorectal cancer surveillance: 2005 update of an American Society of Clinical Oncology practice guideline. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:8512–8519. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2005.04.0063.
    1. EuroQol – a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. The EuroQol Group. Health Policy. 1990;16:199–208. doi: 10.1016/0168-8510(90)90421-9.
    1. Aaronson NK, Ahmedzai S, Bergman B, Bullinger M, Cull A, Duez NJ, Filiberti A, Flechtner H, Fleishman SB, de Haes JC, et al. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: a quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1993;85:365–376. doi: 10.1093/jnci/85.5.365.
    1. Campbell MJ, Julious SA, Altman DG. Estimating sample sizes for binary, ordered categorical, and continuous outcomes in two group comparisons. Bmj. 1995;311:1145–1148.
    1. King MT. The interpretation of scores from the EORTC quality of life questionnaire QLQ-C30. Qual Life Res. 1996;5:555–567. doi: 10.1007/BF00439229.
    1. Roset M, Badia X, Mayo NE. Sample size calculations in studies using the EuroQol 5D. Qual Life Res. 1999;8:539–549. doi: 10.1023/A:1008973731515.
    1. Fayers P, Aaronson N, Bjordal K, Groenvold M, Curran D, Bottomley A. European Organisiation for Research and Treatment of Cancer. Brussels; 1998. The EORTC QLQ-C30 Scoring Manual.
    1. Moher D, Schulz KF, Altman DG. The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials. Lancet. 2001;357:1191–1194. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(00)04337-3.
    1. Graupe F, Schwenk W, Bracht B, Kroner-Herwig B, Stock W. [Psychological stress on patients in tumor after-care after R0 resection of colorectal carcinomas] Chirurg. 1996;67:604–609. discussion 609–610.
    1. Kjeldsen BJ, Thorsen H, Whalley D, Kronborg O. Influence of follow-up on health-related quality of life after radical surgery for colorectal cancer. Scand J Gastroenterol. 1999;34:509–515. doi: 10.1080/003655299750026254.
    1. Kievit J. Follow-up of patients with colorectal cancer: numbers needed to test and treat. Eur J Cancer. 2002;38:986–999. doi: 10.1016/S0959-8049(02)00061-8.
    1. Korner H, Soreide K, Stokkeland PJ, Soreide JA. Systematic follow-up after curative surgery for colorectal cancer in Norway: a population-based audit of effectiveness, costs, and compliance. J Gastrointest Surg. 2005;9:320–328. doi: 10.1016/j.gassur.2004.09.023.
    1. Glimelius B. Palliative treatment of patients with colorectal cancer. Scand J Surg. 2003;92:74–83.
    1. Renehan AG, Egger M, Saunders MP, O'Dwyer ST. Mechanisms of improved survival from intensive followup in colorectal cancer: a hypothesis. Br J Cancer. 2005;92:430–433.
    1. Bruinvels DJ, Stiggelbout AM, Klaassen MP, Kievit J, Dik J, Habbema F, Velde CJ Van de. Follow-up after colorectal cancer: current practice in The Netherlands. Eur J Surg. 1995;161:827–831.
    1. Mella J, Datta SN, Biffin A, Radcliffe AG, Steele RJ, Stamatakis JD. Surgeons' follow-up practice after resection of colorectal cancer. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 1997;79:206–209.
    1. Virgo KS, Wade TP, Longo WE, Coplin MA, Vernava AM, Johnson FE. Surveillance after curative colon cancer resection: practice patterns of surgical subspecialists. Ann Surg Oncol. 1995;2:472–482. doi: 10.1007/BF02307079.
    1. Renehan AG, O'Dwyer ST, Whynes DK. Cost effectiveness analysis of intensive versus conventional follow up after curative resection for colorectal cancer. Bmj. 2004;328:81. doi: 10.1136/bmj.328.7431.81.
    1. Norum J, Olsen JA. A cost-effectiveness approach to the Norwegian follow-up programme in colorectal cancer. Ann Oncol. 1997;8:1081–1087. doi: 10.1023/A:1008265614183.
    1. Wattchow DA, Weller DP, Esterman A, Pilotto LS, McGorm K, Hammett Z, Platell C, Silagy C. General practice vs surgical-based follow-up for patients with colon cancer: randomised controlled trial. Br J Cancer. 2006;94:1116–1121. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6603052.
    1. Grunfeld E, Levine MN, Julian JA, Coyle D, Szechtman B, Mirsky D, Verma S, Dent S, Sawka C, Pritchard KI, et al. Randomized trial of long-term follow-up for early-stage breast cancer: a comparison of family physician versus specialist care. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:848–855. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2005.03.2235.
    1. Khatcheressian JL, Smith TJ. Randomized trial of long-term follow-up for early-stage breast cancer: a comparison of family physician versus specialist care. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:835–837. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2005.04.5153.
    1. Holtedahl K, Norum J, Anvik T, Richardsen E. Do cancer patients benefit from short-term contact with a general practitioner following cancer treatment? A randomised, controlled study. Support Care Cancer. 2005;13:949–956. doi: 10.1007/s00520-005-0869-5.
    1. Papagrigoriadis S, Koreli A. The needs of general practitioners in the follow-up of patients with colorectal cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2001;27:541–544. doi: 10.1053/ejso.2001.1106.
    1. Anvik T, Holtedahl KA, Mikalsen H. "When patients have cancer, they stop seeing me" – the role of the general practitioner in early follow-up of patients with cancer – a qualitative study. BMC Fam Pract. 2006;7:19. doi: 10.1186/1471-2296-7-19.

Source: PubMed

Sponsorit ja yhteistyökumppanit

Sairaudet

Huumeiden interventiot

3
Tilaa