| 1. |
- Almquist, Martin, et al.
(författare)
-
A prospective study on an innovative online forum for peer reviewing of surgical science
- 2017
-
Ingår i: PLoS ONE. - : Public Library of Science (PLoS). - 1932-6203. ; 12:6
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background Peer review is important to the scientific process. However, the present system has been criticised and accused of bias, lack of transparency, failure to detect significant breakthrough and error. At the British Journal of Surgery (BJS), after surveying authors' and reviewers' opinions on peer review, we piloted an open online forum with the aim of improving the peer review process. Methods In December 2014, a web-based survey assessing attitudes towards open online review was sent to reviewers with a BJS account in Scholar One. From April to June 2015, authors were invited to allow their manuscripts to undergo online peer review in addition to the standard peer review process. The quality of each review was evaluated by editors and editorial assistants using a validated instrument based on a Likert scale. Results The survey was sent to 6635 reviewers. In all, 1454 (21.9%) responded. Support for online peer review was strong, with only 10% stating that they would not subject their manuscripts to online peer review. The most prevalent concern was about intellectual property, being highlighted in 118 of 284 comments (41.5%). Out of 265 eligible manuscripts, 110 were included in the online peer review trial. Around 7000 potential reviewers were invited to review each manuscript. In all, 44 of 110 manuscripts (40%) received 100 reviews from 59 reviewers, alongside 115 conventional reviews. The quality of the open forum reviews was lower than for conventional reviews (2.13 (± 0.75) versus 2.84 (± 0.71), P<0.001). Conclusion Open online peer review is feasible in this setting, but it attracts few reviews, of lower quality than conventional peer reviews.
|
|
| 2. |
- Linder, Gustav, 1981-
(författare)
-
Esophageal- and Gastroesophageal Junctional Cancer : Aspects on Staging, Treatment and Results
- 2018
-
Doktorsavhandling (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Esophageal- and gastroesophageal junctional (GEJ) cancer is the sixth cause of cancer-related death worldwide. Some improvements in care are attributed to nationwide disease-specific registries, preoperative staging and increased understanding of mechanisms affecting patient selection. Surgery, however, is a cornerstone for treatment where minimally invasive surgery and increased understanding of perioperative physiology may be beneficial. The aims of this thesis were to validate the Swedish national registry for esophageal and gastric cancer (NREV) and to explore mechanisms in patient selection, perioperative physiology, treatment-related outcomes and staging.A validation study with re-abstracted data on 400 patients determined NREV comparable to other similar registries and to have a completeness of 95.5 %. Overall accuracy was 91.1 % throughout the registry and timeliness to reporting was adequate.In a cohort of 4112 patients from NREV, high education level was associated with an increased probability of being allocated to curative treatment, as was the presence of a multidisciplinary treatment conference. High education level was associated with improved survival.By measuring intramucosal pH (pHi) in 32 patients, to describe perfusion in the gastric conduit during esophagectomy, a reduction in perfusion was seen at all surgical steps altering vascular supply to the conduit but foremost after gastric tube construction by linear stapling. Patients with low pHi on the first postoperative day were more prone to anastomotic insufficiency.In 116 patients undergoing esophagectomy (65 open and 51 minimally invasive), a retrospective cohort study regarding surgical oncological results and postoperative complications was conducted. Lymph node yield was increased, peroperative blood loss and in-hospital stay were reduced with minimally invasive esophagectomy. Postoperative complications were unaffected by surgical approach. In a prospective study of nineteen patients, whole-body integrated PET/MRI was compared to PET/CT in preoperative staging. PET/MRI was safe and feasible. Accuracy and correlations between modalities were good regarding tumor characteristics and N- and M-staging. In T-staging there were discrepancies indicating differences between modalities.The thesis presents data on the quality of NREV for future research and elaborates on patient selection, staging, perioperative physiology and treatment-related outcomes for patients with esophageal- and GEJ cancer.
|
|
| 3. |
- Martin, David, et al.
(författare)
-
Defining Major Surgery: A Delphi Consensus Among European Surgical Association (ESA) Members
- 2020
-
Ingår i: World Journal of Surgery. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0364-2313 .- 1432-2323. ; 44:7, s. 2211-2219
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- © 2020, Société Internationale de Chirurgie. Background: Major surgery is a term frequently used but poorly defined. The aim of the present study was to reach a consensus in the definition of major surgery within a panel of expert surgeons from the European Surgical Association (ESA). Methods: A 3-round Delphi process was performed. All ESA members were invited to participate in the expert panel. In round 1, experts were inquired by open- and closed-ended questions on potential criteria to define major surgery. Results were analyzed and presented back anonymously to the panel within next rounds. Closed-ended questions in round 2 and 3 were either binary or statements to be rated on a Likert scale ranging from 1 (strong disagreement) to 5 (strong agreement). Participants were sent 3 reminders at 2-week intervals for each round. 70% of agreement was considered to indicate consensus. Results: Out of 305 ESA members, 67 (22%) answered all the 3 rounds. Significant comorbidities were the only preoperative factor retained to define major surgery (78%). Vascular clampage or organ ischemia (92%), high intraoperative blood loss (90%), high noradrenalin requirements (77%), long operative time (73%) and perioperative blood transfusion (70%) were procedure-related factors that reached consensus. Regarding postoperative factors, systemic inflammatory response (76%) and the need for intensive or intermediate care (88%) reached consensus. Consequences of major surgery were high morbidity (>30% overall) and mortality (>2%). Conclusion: ESA experts defined major surgery according to extent and complexity of the procedure, its pathophysiological consequences and consecutive clinical outcomes.
|
|
| 4. |
- Toxopeus, Eelke L. A., et al.
(författare)
-
Association between Paclitaxel Clearance and Tumor Response in Patients with Esophageal Cancer
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Cancers. - : MDPI. - 2072-6694. ; 11:2
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Inter-individual variability in paclitaxel pharmacokinetics may play a role in the response to chemotherapy. Therefore, we studied the association between paclitaxel clearance and treatment response in patients with esophageal cancer. All patients who received paclitaxel (plus carboplatin) treatment for esophageal cancer between 2007 and 2013 were included. The treatment was given as neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT), induction chemotherapy (iCT), or palliative chemotherapy (pCT). The treatment response was assessed by the tumor regression grade (TRG) or by the RECIST1.1 criteria, respectively. The unbound paclitaxel clearance (CL) was estimated with NONMEM. The log-transformed clearance was related to response with ANOVA and independent sample t-tests. A total of 166 patients were included, of whom 113 received nCRT, 23 iCT and 30 pCT. In patients receiving nCRT, paclitaxel clearance was not associated with tumor regression grade (p-value = 0.25), nor with pathologically complete response (geometric mean 561.6 L/h) and residual disease (geometric mean 566.1 L/h, p-value = 0.90). In patients who underwent iCT or pCT, also no association between paclitaxel clearance and RECIST outcome was identified (iCT: p-value = 0.08 and pCT: p-value = 0.81, respectively). In conclusion, systemic paclitaxel exposure was not associated with response to common paclitaxel-based treatment regimens for esophageal cancer. Future studies should focus on tumor exposure in relation to systemic exposure and treatment outcome.
|
|
