Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 22, 2025

Author Spotlight: Genetic Profiling for Fluorouracil Response in Gastric Cancer
Published on: May 10, 2024
Understanding Barriers to Guideline-Concordant Treatment in Foregut Cancer: From Data to Solutions
Annabelle L Fonseca1,2, Rida Ahmad3, Krisha Amin3
1Department of Surgery, The University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA. afonseca@uabmc.edu.
Background:
A large proportion of patients with foregut cancers do not receive guideline-concordant treatment (GCT). This study sought to understand underlying barriers to GCT through a root cause analysis approach.
Methods:
A single-institution retrospective review of 498 patients with foregut (gastric, pancreatic, and hepatobiliary) adenocarcinoma from 2018 to 2022 was performed. Guideline-concordant treatment was defined based on National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. The Ishikawa cause and effect model was used to establish main contributing factors to non-GCT.
Results:
Overall, 34% did not receive GCT. Root causes of non-GCT included Patient, Physician, Institutional Environment and Broader System-related factors. In decreasing order of frequency, the following contributed to non-GCT: receipt of incomplete therapy (N = 28, 16.5%), deconditioning on chemotherapy (N = 26, 15.3%), delays in care because of patient resource constraints followed by loss to follow-up (N = 19, 11.2%), physician factors (N = 19, 11.2%), no documentation of treatment plan after referral to oncologic expertise (N = 19, 11.2%), loss to follow-up before oncology referral (N = 17, 10%), nonreferral to medical oncologic expertise (N = 16, 9.4%), nonreferral to surgical oncology in patients with resectable disease (N = 15, 8.8%), and complications preventing completion of treatment (N = 11, 6.5%). Non-GCT often was a function of multiple intersecting patient, physician, and institutional factors.
Conclusions:
A substantial percentage of patients with foregut cancer do not receive GCT. Solutions that may improve receipt of GCT include development of automated systems to improve patient follow-up; institutional prioritization of resources to enhance staffing; financial counseling and assistance programs; and development and integration of structured prehabilitation programs into cancer treatment pathways.
Related Concept Videos
Barrett Esophagus-II: Clinical Manifestations and Management
To diagnose Barrett's esophagus, healthcare providers often recommend an endoscopy for those showing symptoms of acid reflux. The procedure...
Peptic Ulcer Disease IV: Management
The therapeutic approach involves ensuring adequate rest, implementing drug therapy, promoting smoking cessation, making dietary modifications, and emphasizing long-term follow-up care.
Pharmacological management
The prevailing therapy for peptic ulcers involves a combination of managing the patient's current...
Enteral Nutrition II: Nasointestinal and Gastrostomy Feeding
Nasointestinal Feeding
Nasointestinal feeding involves placing a tube...
Peptic Ulcer Disease V: Surgical Management and Nursing Care
Surgical Interventions for Peptic Ulcer Disease
Nursing Ethical Principles II
Consider the following scenario, which illustrates how these principles are applied in the care of Mr. John, a fifty-year-old teacher diagnosed with metastatic liver cancer.
Initially, Mr. John's...
Barriers to Effective Communication II
Cultural barriers:
Differences in values, beliefs, religion, knowledge, and tradition can significantly impact communication. Awareness of nonverbal cues is critical, especially when conversing with a patient from a different culture. What appears appropriate in one culture may be inappropriate in another.
Semantic barriers:
As a result of their tendency to use...

