Observational study to estimate the proportion of surgical site infection following excision of ulcerated skin tumours (OASIS study)

BACKGROUND

Ulceration is a recognized risk factor for surgical site infection (SSI); however, the proportion of patients developing SSI after excision of an ulcerated skin cancer is unknown.

AIM

To determine the proportion of participants with SSI after surgical excision of an ulcerated skin cancer. A secondary aim was to assess feasibility outcomes to inform the design of a randomized controlled trial to investigate the benefits and harms of perioperative antibiotics following excision of ulcerated tumours.

METHODS

This was a multicentre, prospective, observational study of patients undergoing excision of an ulcerated skin cancer between March 2019 and March 2020. Prior to surgical excision, surface swabs of the ulcerated tumours of participants recruited from one centre were undertaken to determine organism growth. At 4 weeks after surgery, all participants were e-mailed or posted the Wound Healing Questionnaire (WHQ) to determine whether they had developed SSI.

RESULTS

In total, 148 participants were recruited 105 (70.9%) males; mean ± SD age 77.1 ± 12.3 years. Primary outcome data were available for 116 (78.4%) participants, of whom 35 (30.2%) were identified as having an SSI using the WHQ with a cutoff score of 8, and 47 (40.5%) were identified with a cutoff score of 6. Using the modified WHQ in participants with wounds left to heal by secondary intention, 33 (28.4%) and 43 (37.1%) were identified to have SSI respectively.

CONCLUSION

This prospective evaluation of SSI identified with the WHQ following excision of ulcerated skin cancers demonstrated a high proportion with SSI. The WHQ was acceptable to patients; however, further evaluation is required to ensure validity in assessing skin wounds.

Adjuvant bevacizumab for melanoma patients at high risk of recurrence: survival analysis of the AVAST-M trial

Background

Bevacizumab is a recombinant humanised monoclonal antibody to vascular endothelial growth factor shown to improve survival in advanced solid cancers. We evaluated the role of adjuvant bevacizumab in melanoma patients at high risk of recurrence.

Patients and methods

Patients with resected AJCC stage IIB, IIC and III cutaneous melanoma were randomised to receive either adjuvant bevacizumab (7.5 mg/kg i.v. 3 weekly for 1 year) or standard observation. The primary end point was detection of an 8% difference in 5-year overall survival (OS) rate; secondary end points included disease-free interval (DFI) and distant metastasis-free interval (DMFI). Tumour and blood were analysed for prognostic and predictive markers.

Results

Patients (n=1343) recruited between 2007 and 2012 were predominantly stage III (73%), with median age 56 years (range 18–88 years). With 6.4-year median follow-up, 515 (38%) patients had died [254 (38%) bevacizumab; 261 (39%) observation]; 707 (53%) patients had disease recurrence [336 (50%) bevacizumab, 371 (55%) observation]. OS at 5 years was 64% for both groups [hazard ratio (HR) 0.98; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82–1.16, P = 0.78). At 5 years, 51% were disease free on bevacizumab versus 45% on observation (HR 0.85; 95% CI 0.74–0.99, P = 0.03), 58% were distant metastasis free on bevacizumab versus 54% on observation (HR 0.91; 95% CI 0.78–1.07, P = 0.25). Forty four percent of 682 melanomas assessed had a BRAF^V600 mutation. In the observation arm, BRAF mutant patients had a trend towards poorer OS compared with BRAF wild-type patients (P = 0.06). BRAF mutation positivity trended towards better OS with bevacizumab (P = 0.21).

Conclusions

Adjuvant bevacizumab after resection of high-risk melanoma improves DFI, but not OS. BRAF mutation status may predict for poorer OS untreated and potential benefit from bevacizumab.

Clinical Trial Information

ISRCTN 81261306; EudraCT Number: 2006-005505-64

Generating new evidence, improving clinical practice and developing research capacity: the benefits of recruiting to the U.K. Dermatology Clinical Trials Network's STOP GAP and BLISTER trials

Clinical trials may benefit clinical practice in three ways: firstly, clinicians may change their practice according to the new trial evidence; secondly, clinical processes can improve when working on a trial; and thirdly, research capacity is increased. We held a meeting to present and discuss the results of two large multicentre randomized controlled trials delivered through the U.K. Dermatology Clinical Trials Network. Investigators gave reflections on how the trials had changed their clinical practice. The STOP GAP trial showed that prednisolone and ciclosporin are equally effective as first-line systemic treatment for pyoderma gangrenosum. The final decision of which treatment to use should be based on the different adverse event profiles of the two drugs in relation to comorbidities, along with age, disease severity and patient preference. The BLISTER trial showed that starting people with pemphigoid on doxycycline produces acceptable short-term effectiveness and a superior safety profile to oral corticosteroids. Recruiting to these trials has led to the development of new specialist clinics with improved documentation. It has increased the profile of participating departments and embedded research in the department's activities. Helping to design and run these trials has also allowed trial staff to develop new skills in research design, which has been beneficial for career development. These and other benefits of recruiting to the trials are summarized here. We hope that these reflections will inspire wider involvement in clinical research.