Planning for programme sustainability is a key contributor to health and development, especially in low-income and middle-income countries. A consensus evidence-based operational framework would facilitate policy and research advances in understanding, measuring, and improving programme sustainability. We did a systematic review of both conceptual frameworks and empirical studies about health-programme sustainability. On the basis of the review, we propose that sustainable health programmes are regarded as complex systems that encompass programmes, health problems targeted by programmes, and programmes' drivers or key stakeholders, all of which interact dynamically within any given context. We show the usefulness of this approach with case studies drawn from the authors' experience.

Background & objectives: Identifying the impacts of COVID-19 on patients’ and practitioners’ access to legal assisted dying and euthanasia (AD&E) services is vital to informing service continuity in an ongoing pandemic. Methods: An anonymous online survey collected qualitative and quantitative data from health practitioners and agencies providing legal AD&E services ( n = 89), complemented by semi-structured interviews with 18 survey respondents who volunteered. Results: Following governments’ responses to the dynamic pandemic context, rates of AD&E inquiries and requests fluctuated across and within jurisdictions, based on a complex interaction of factors affecting patient access to AD&E agencies and assessors as services were disrupted. Service flexibility and nimbleness became key elements in continuing service availability and included calculated ‘rule-breaking’ considered justifiable to adhere to established bioethics. Making innovative adjustments to usual practice led to reviewing the effectiveness of AD&E services and laws, resulting in providers now improving services and lobbying for legislative change.

No abstract

e now have two years' experience in providing voluntary assisted dying to terminally ill patients in Victoria. Western Australian legislation will come into force on 1 July 2021; Tasmanian legislation has received Royal assent, and the early stages of implementation are underway. The South Australian Voluntary Assisted Dying Bill has been passed by both Houses and may have been sent for Royal assent by the time this article is published. The Queensland Law Reform Commission report and draft bill 1 were tabled in parliament on 18 May 2021; a bill is expected to be tabled in the New South Wales parliament in late 2021. There have been calls for the Commonwealth to repeal the Euthanasia Laws Act 1997 to reinstate Australian territories' rights to debate voluntary assisted dying legislation.

Background: Administration of antibiotics has been suggested to have a negative impact on cancer outcome in patients who start immune checkpoints inhibitors (iCPI) therapy due to changes in the gut microbiota.Clinical trial identification: NCT03928938.

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has been developed over the course of the last 50 years. This technique has been shown to improve diagnosis, provide more accurate local information with regards to staging and enhance prediction of surgical resectability. Further to this, minimally-invasive local techniques have been developed, and continue to be developed, to provide both active and palliative management within the treatment schema for pancreatic cancer (PC).

Background The COVID-19 pandemic has necessitated a restructuring of cancer care due to resourcing demands and revised risk-benefit considerations which relate the risks of cancer progression with the risks of COVID-19 related morbidity and mortality. Specific treatment adjustments for individual patients have not been widely reported. The impact of treatment changes on the outcome of cancer patients have also not been well documented. We report the experience of a large Australian metropolitan multisite cancer service that undertook proactive review of systemic anti-cancer therapy (SACT) of all patients in response to the pandemic. The aim was to re-balance the risks and benefits of current treatment strategies in light of the pandemic. Method From March-April 2020, all current SACT orders (excluding those related to clinical trials) were reviewed by an independent team of clinicians. Patients on curative therapy, or with large perceived benefit were reviewed but not included in further processing. For all other SACT orders, a documented recommendation regarding planned treatment was sent to the patient's individual clinician for consideration. A categorical assessment of the recommendations is presented. Results 570 SACT orders were reviewed, pertaining to 317 patients. 731 individual recommendations were made. The cohort consisted of 130 males and 187 females, with a median age of 62 years. Treatment was undertaken with curative intent in 38% of patients, while 62% of patients were treated with palliative intent. Distribution by tumour types was typical of epidemiology and casemix of a metropolitan oncology service. The most frequent recommendations made by the independent review team were: no change (23%), change in formulation of same drug (9%), shorten duration of treatment (9%), treatment break (8%), re-evaluate benefit of current treatment (8%), treatment cessation (7%), and referral for home-based treatment (6%). Overall, 71% of recommendations of the review team were accepted by the patient’s individual clinician. A variation to recommendations suggested by the review team was implemented for 8% of SACT orders. Recommendations which were not implemented were mostly initiated by the patient’s individual clinician (70%), while 14% were due to patient choice. Conclusion This is the only dataset known to date of the impact of COVID-19 on adjustments of SACT for cancer patients at the start of the pandemic in Australia, and provides key insights into discrete adjustments made for cancer patients. The majority of patients underwent modifications in their cancer therapy made in the context of competing risks to their health posed by COVID-19. Citation Format: Elizabeth Liow, Cameron McLaren, Samuel Tipping-Smith, Sarah Latham, Jun Beng Kong, Marissa Lam, Caroline Lum, Amy Body, Peter Briggs, Eva Segelov. Systemic anticancer treatment changes at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in a large Australian metropolitan health service [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Virtual Meeting: COVID-19 and Cancer; 2021 Feb 3-5. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Clin Cancer Res 2021;27(6_Suppl):Abstract nr P19.

No abstract