1

RESAR – runs on the board

Where are we at and where are we going?

David Gyork iPeter MacCal lum Cancer Centre, Melbourne

2

Dr Mark Fairweather, Boston

1. Complexity Score Project

Dr Hayden Snow, Melbourne

2. Global patterns of care

Dr Marco Fiore, Milan

3. Difference between anticipated and actual surgical plans

Current projectsShort summary of f i rs t pro jects us ing the database

3

RESAR Survey

Survey sent out to all participating units

• 16 Responses from 3 countries• Strong input with extensive feedback• Overall strong support for the collaborative

4

How long do you estimate is spent for data collection and entry per patient?

20 minutes – 3 hours

Q1

5

Have you reviewed the RESAR Data Dictionary recently?

Yes – 100%

Q2

6

Are there data points currently included in the registry that you consider overly burdensome and unlikely to be of value to research output in the future?

Yes – 56%

Q3 • Histology – some molecular markers old, not relevant to all cases

• Lab values – different units in different health systems

• Not all measures routinely reported – eg Hounsfield units, % lipomatous lesion on imaging

• Relation of tumour to organ – subjective and not necessarily relevant to resection

• Anticipated resection – generally decided intraoperatively, psoas fascia routine?

• Specific chemo dosing

7

Are there data points not currently included that you would like to see included going forward? If yes, which ones

Yes – 44%

Q4 • Pelvic and mesenteric sarcoma

• Patient factors - Prior XRT; germline data

• Preop - Size of core biopsy; Size of DDLPS within WD/DDLPS on imaging; weight loss/Preop TPN; Consider serial pre-op bloods for neoadjuvant therapy

• Periop – ERAS; Hospital LoS; Reconstuction options

• Post-op - QoL / PROs

• More XRT data – replanning required? (Volume (cc) of CTV1 and PTV1; Volume of CTV2 and PTV2 Radiation coverage parameters: (PTV D95%, D90%, Dmean, Dmax, Dmin)

8

Please list your top 5 research questions that you would like to answer about RPS using the RESAR data?

Q5 • Define cutoff for low/intermediate/high volume centres• Correlate lab values with periop outcomes• Patterns of care – rates of RT and Chemo use• Functional analysis after iliopsoas and femoral n resection• Management of SFT• RT – does dose/field/technique impact on outcome• Impact of transfusion/tpn on outcome

• Pelvic sarcoma outcome – use of reconstruction/extent of exenteration

• Primary inoperable patients – describe patterns• Correlate preop biopsy to outcome• Real life correlative study for STRASS + STRASS 2• Completion resection after prior incomplete resection

9

Other thoughts • Keep registry open ongoing (n=7) vs limited duration (n=3)

• For limited duration consider 5 years data collection followed by prolonged period of follow up

• Continue registry as long as STRASS 2 recuits then reassess

• Centralised data collection and registry trials (n=4)

• Change name to World RPSWG

10

Visit our website at www.tarpswg.org

D

TARPSWGwww.tarpswg.org

@TARPSWGDISCUSSION

W R I T E S O M E T H I N G H E R E