a From the Department of Adult Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts; Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York; Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas; Department of Biostatistics, City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, Duarte, California; Department of Urology, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio; Department of Surgical Oncology, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, New York; Department of Medical Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; and Division of Hematology/Oncology, Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois.
The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Outcomes Database was created to assess concordance to evidence- and consensus-based guidelines and to measure adherence to quality measures on an ongoing basis. The Colorectal Cancer Database began in 2005 as a collaboration among 8 NCCN centers.
Newly diagnosed colon and rectal cancer patients presenting to 1 of 8 NCCN centers between September 1, 2005, and May 21, 2008, were eligible for analysis of concordance with NCCN treatment guidelines for colorectal cancer and with a set of quality metrics jointly developed by ASCO and NCCN in 2007. Adherence rates were determined for each metric. Center-specific rates were benchmarked against mean concordance rates for all participating centers.
A total of 3443 patients were evaluable. Mean concordance rates with NCCN colorectal cancer guidelines and ASCO/NCCN quality measures were generally high (≥ 90%). However, relatively low mean concordance rates were noted for adjuvant chemotherapy treatment recommendations within 9 months of diagnosis of stage II to III rectal cancer (81%), and neoadjuvant chemoradiation in clinical T4 rectal primaries (83%). These low rates of concordance seemed to be consistent across centers.
Adherence to guidelines and quality measures is generally high at institutions participating in the NCCN colorectal cancer database. Lack of documentation, patient refusal, delayed treatment initiation, and lack of consensus about whether treatment was essential were the primary reasons for nonconcordance. Measurement of concordance and the reasons for nonconcordance enable participating centers to understand and improve their care delivery systems.
If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.
Correspondence: Deborah Schrag, MD, Department of Adult Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, 44 Binney Street, SM 204, Boston, MA 02115. E-mail: email@example.com
EngstromPFArnolettiJPBensonAB. The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: Colon Cancer version 2 2009. Available at: http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/PDF/colon.pdf. Accessed July 23 2009.
EngstromPFArnolettiJPBensonAB. . Available at: http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/PDF/colon.pdf. Accessed July 23, 2009.
EngstromPFArnolettiJPBensonAB. The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: Rectal Cancer version 2 2009. Available at: http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/PDF/rectal.pdf. Accessed July 23 2009.
EngstromPFArnolettiJPBensonAB. . Available at: http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/PDF/rectal.pdf. Accessed July 23, 2009.