Objective: To assess changes in the choice of skin biopsy technique for assessing invasive melanoma in Victoria, and to examine the impact of partial biopsy technique on the accuracy of tumour microstaging. Design: Retrospective cross-sectional review of Victorian Cancer Registry data on invasive melanoma histologically diagnosed in Victoria during 2005, 2010, and 2015. Setting, participants: 400 patients randomly selected from each of the three years, stratified by final tumour thickness: 200 patients with thin melanoma (< 1.0 mm), 100 each with intermediate (1.0-4.0 mm) and thick melanoma (> 4.0 mm). Main outcome measures:Partial and excisional biopsies, as proportions of all skin biopsies; rates of tumour base transection and T-upstaging, and mean tumour thickness underestimation following partial biopsy.Results: 833 excisional and 337 partial diagnostic biopsies were undertaken. The proportion of partial biopsies increased from 20% of patients in 2005 to 36% in 2015 (P < 0.001); the proportion of shave biopsies increased from 9% in 2005 to 20% in 2015 (P < 0.001), with increasing rates among dermatologists and general practitioners. Ninety-four of 175 shave biopsies (54%) transected the tumour base; wide local excision subsequently identified residual melanoma in 65 of these cases (69%). Twenty-one tumours diagnosed by shave biopsy (12%) were T-upstaged. With base-transected shave biopsies, tumour thickness was underestimated by a mean 2.36 mm for thick, 0.48 mm for intermediate, and 0.07 mm for thin melanomas.Conclusion: Partial biopsy, particularly shave biopsy, was increasingly used for diagnosing invasive melanoma between 2005 and 2015. Shave biopsy has a high rate of base transection, reducing the accuracy of tumour staging, which is crucial for planning appropriate therapy, including definitive surgery and adjuvant therapy.The known: Excisional biopsy is recommended for diagnosing invasive melanoma. Some US studies have reported high rates of shave and saucerisation techniques for diagnosing invasive melanoma, raising concerns that tumour depth assessment and microstaging may be compromised.The new: Shave biopsies are increasingly used to diagnose invasive melanomas, their proportion of all melanoma biopsies rising from 9% in 2005 to 20% in 2015. Shave biopsies are associated with high rates of base transection (54%) and Tupstaging (12%), and underestimate tumour thickness by a mean 0.25 mm.The implications: Excisional biopsy remains the most appropriate diagnostic biopsy technique for invasive melanoma.

We describe adverse drug reaction (ADR) reporting characteristics and factors contributing to length of time to report by healthcare professionals. This is a retrospective study of voluntary reports to an Australian healthcare ADR Review Committee over a 2-year period (2015-2016). Descriptive and univariate models were used for outcomes, employing standardized ADR definitions. Hospital pharmacists reported 84.8% of the 555 ADRs: 70.3% were hospital onset reactions, and 71.7% were at least of moderate severity. Immunologically mediated reactions were most commonly reported (409, 73.7%). The median time to submit an ADR report was 3 (interquartile range 1-10) days. Longer median times to reporting were associated with multiple implicated agents and delayed hypersensitivity reactions, especially severe cutaneous adverse reactions. A total of 650 medications were implicated that involved multiple agents in 165/555 (29.7%) reports. Antimicrobials were the most commonly implicated agents. Immunologically mediated reactions were most commonly associated with antimicrobials and radiocontrast agents (P < .0001, odds ratio [OR] 3.6, 95%CI 2.4-5.5, and P = .04, OR 4.2, 95%CI 1.2-18.2, respectively). Opioids and psychoactive medications were more commonly implicated in nonimmunological reported ADRs (P = .0002, OR 3.9, 95%CI 1.9-7.9, and P < .0001, OR 11.4, 95%CI 4.6-27.8, respectively). Due to the predominant reporting of immunologically mediated reactions, a targeted education program is being planned to improve identification and accuracy of ADR reports, with the overall aim of improved management to ensure quality service provision and patient safety.

No abstract

Severe drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs) are often encountered by health care professionals (HCPs). We evaluated knowledge of doctors and pharmacists in the assessment and management of severe DHRs using a structured questionnaire. A cross-sectional study was conducted in 4 metropolitan hospital networks in Melbourne, Australia. A 13-question, scenario-based multiple-choice questionnaire to assess specific knowledge domains in drug hypersensitivity syndrome recognition, causality attribution, cross-reactivity patterns, appropriate diagnostic tests, and therapy was administered to HCPs of various vocation and specialty groups.Data were analyzed according to profession,self-reported experience,and preparedness in managing severe DHRs. Two hundred thirty-eight participants (45.0% senior doctors, 24.4% junior doctors, and 30.7% pharmacists) across a range of subspecialties achieved an overall median score of 7 (IQR, 5-8)-overall 55.6% correct responses to all questions-with senior doctors outperforming junior doctors and pharmacists (P < .001). The best performance by all participants was in DHR syndrome recognition (60.9%), and the poorest was in diagnostics/therapy (52.0%). HCP group and experience level were significantly associated with better performance in the knowledge domains of cross-reactivity and diagnostics/therapy (P = .003 and < .001, respectively), but not in the domains of syndrome recognition and causality attribution (P > .05). Levels of self-reported preparedness in DHR management were not associated with performance rates in any of the knowledge domains. This study demonstrated significant knowledge gaps in the recognition and management of severe drug hypersensitivity reactions. Targeted multidisciplinary education of staff caring for these patients is needed to improve knowledge gaps.