Search

Background: Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is used to treat stage I non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in nonsurgical candidates, although guidelines specify that inoperability be determined in multidisciplinary fashion. We characterized NSCLC patients treated with SBRT undergoing thoracic surgical evaluation (TSUe) and quantified TSUe's impact on time to treatment, receipt of diagnostic staging procedures, and health care costs., Methods: Adults with newly diagnosed NSCLC undergoing SBRT were identified in the MarketScan all-payer claims database (2014-2018). TSUe was defined as an outpatient encounter with a thoracic surgeon or multispecialty group. Time to treatment and total costs in the 6 months preceding treatment were examined using multivariable regression by receipt of TSUe, adjusting for demographic and clinical factors., Results: Of 1894 patients, 36.3% (n = 687) underwent TSUe. Compared with patients without TSUe, these patients were younger (mean age, 73.6 vs 76.3 years) and more likely to undergo invasive biopsy/staging procedures (90% vs 82%) or pulmonary function testing (80.6% vs 69.5%). Patients undergoing TSUe had a median time to treatment of 64 days (interquartile range, 43-98 days), compared with 44 days (interquartile range, 29-70 days) for no TSUe. Adjusted time to treatment was 43% longer (incident rate ratio, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.32-1.54; P < .001) with TSUe. Patients undergoing TSUe also incurred 30% higher costs (adjusted cost ratio, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.20-1.41; P < .001)., Conclusions: Among patients with early-stage NSCLC undergoing SBRT as primary treatment, a minority are evaluated by a thoracic surgeon. Because they have a longer time to treatment, more invasive diagnostic procedures, and higher costs, this represents a targetable gap to make workup protocols more efficient., (Copyright © 2023 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Standard of care for resectable pancreatic cancer is a combination of surgical resection (SR) and multiagent chemotherapy (MCT). We aim to determine whether SR or MCT is associated with superior survival for patients receiving only single-modality therapy., Methods: Patients with stage I-IIb pancreatic head adenocarcinoma who received either MCT or SR were identified in the NCDB (2013-2015). Following a piecewise approach to estimating hazards over the course of follow-up, conditional overall survival (OS) at 30, 60, and 90 days after treatment initiation was estimated using landmark analyses., Results: 3103 patients received MCT alone (60.3%) and 2043 underwent SR alone (39.7%). SR had an OS disadvantage at 30 (HR 3.99, 95% CI 3.12-5.11) and 60 days (HR 1.85, 95% CI 1.4-2.45), but an OS advantage after 90 days (HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.55-0.64). In a landmark analysis conditioned on 90 days survival post treatment initiation, median OS was improved for SR (17.0 vs. 12.2 months, p < 0.0001); SR improved 3-year OS by 21.3% (p < 0.05), despite patients being older (median 72 vs. 67 years, p < 0.0001) with higher Charlson-Deyo comorbidity scores (≥2: 11.2 vs. 8.6%, p = 0.006)., Conclusion: For patients with resectable pancreatic cancer, SR is associated with superior long-term survival compared to MCT., (Copyright © 2021 International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association Inc. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Older patients are often considered high-risk surgical candidates for locally advanced esophageal cancer, and the benefit of surgery in this population is unclear. This national analysis examines the effect of age on esophagectomy outcomes and compares surgery versus chemoradiation in older patients., Methods: The National Cancer Database was used to identify patients with clinical stage II to III esophageal adenocarcinoma undergoing surgery or definitive chemoradiation between 2004 and 2015. Restricted cubic splines were used to examine the relationship between age and survival after esophagectomy, and maximally selected rank statistics were used to identify an age at which survival worsened. We used Cox proportional hazard models including an interaction term between age and treatment to compare overall survival, as well as survival of patients receiving esophagectomy versus definitive chemoradiation., Results: Of 17,495 patients, 11,680 underwent esophagectomy and 5815 received chemoradiation. Survival after esophagectomy worsened with increasing age and decreased considerably after age 73 (hazard ratio = 1.05, 95% confidence interval, 1.04-1.06, per increasing year after 73 versus hazard ratio = 1.01, 95% confidence interval, 1.00-1.01, per increasing year to 73; both P < .001). Chemoradiation was increasingly used over surgery as age increased. The interaction between age and treatment was significant, and a graph of this interaction demonstrated a survival benefit for surgery over chemoradiation at most ages, including octogenarians., Conclusions: Survival worsens with age after esophagectomy for locally advanced esophageal cancer. However, esophagectomy is associated with improved survival compared with definitive chemoradiation at most ages, including octogenarians. Esophagectomy may be considered over chemoradiation for patients who can tolerate surgery regardless of age., (Copyright © 2021 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Induction therapy for patients with cT2N0M0 esophageal cancer is controversial. We performed a retrospective cohort analysis of the National Cancer Database to examine the patterns of use of induction therapy for this population., Methods: The National Cancer Database was queried for patients with cT2N0M0 esophageal cancer who underwent esophagectomy (2004-2015). Patients were stratified by upfront surgery or induction therapy. Overall survival was analyzed and a multivariable logistic regression performed to identify factors associated with receipt of induction therapy., Results: Overall 2540 patients met study criteria: 1177 (46%) received upfront esophagectomy and 1363 (53%) received induction therapy. Patients receiving induction therapy were more likely to be younger, male, without comorbidities, privately insured, and treated at a nonacademic center. These patients were also less likely to be treated in highest volume surgery centers. In multivariable regression, factors independently associated with receipt of induction therapy included later year of diagnosis, increasing tumor size, and increasing tumor grade. Factors associated with upfront esophagectomy included advancing age, comorbidities, lack of insurance, geographic location, and highest volume centers. The receipt of induction chemotherapy was not associated with a survival benefit compared with no induction therapy., Conclusions: Several patient-, treatment center-, and tumor-related factors are associated with receipt of induction therapy for cT2N0M0 esophageal cancer, although induction therapy is not associated with a survival benefit. Further inquiry into these differences and the potential benefit or lack thereof of induction therapy should be conducted to provide more equitable and appropriate care for patients with esophageal cancer., (Copyright © 2021 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Isolated limb infusion (ILI) is a minimally-invasive procedure for delivering high-dose regional chemotherapy to treat melanoma in-transit metastases confined to a limb. The aim of this international multi-centre study was to identify predictive factors for toxicity and response., Methods: Data of 687 patients who underwent a first ILI for melanoma in-transit metastases confined to the limb between 1992 and 2018 were collected at five Australian and four US tertiary referral centres., Results: After ILI, predictive factors for increased limb toxicity (Wieberdink grade III/IV limb toxicity, n = 192, 27.9%) were: female gender, younger age, procedures performed before 2005, lower limb procedures, higher melphalan dose, longer drug circulation and ischemia times, and increased tissue hypoxia. No patient experienced grade V toxicity (necessitating amputation). A complete response (n = 199, 28.9%) was associated with a lower stage of disease, lower burden of disease (BOD) and thinner Breslow thickness of the primary melanoma. Additionally, an overall response (combined complete and partial response, n = 441, 64.1%) was associated with female gender, Australian centres, procedures performed before 2005, lower limb procedures and lower actinomycin-D doses. On multivariate analysis, higher melphalan dose remained a predictive factor for toxicity, while lower stage of disease and lower BOD remained predictive factors for overall response., Conclusion: ILI is safe and effective to treat melanoma in-transit metastases. Predictive factors for toxicity and response identified in this study will allow improved patient selection and optimization of intra-operative parameters to increase response rates, while keeping toxicity low., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest None., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd, BASO ~ The Association for Cancer Surgery, and the European Society of Surgical Oncology. All rights reserved.)

Background: Approximately 38% of patients with colorectal cancer will develop isolated liver metastases. Sidedness of colon tumor is identified in non-metastatic and unresected metastatic cancers as predictive of survival, yet its dedicated analysis in resected liver metastases is minimal. Our primary aim was to assess whether left-sided primary tumors improve prognosis in stage IV cancer patients undergoing curative-intent liver metastasectomy; it was hypothesized that it would., Methods: This is a retrospective, observational cohort study from 1996 to 2016 in a single tertiary-care facility. Survival from diagnosis was calculated via Kaplan-Meier method and compared between the right and left sides via log-rank analysis., Results: Median survival differs significantly between colorectal tumors of the right and left origins after hepatic metastasectomy in 612 patients. In patients with right-sided tumors, median survival from diagnosis was 4.5 years (IQR 4.1-5.3), and 6.3 years (IQR 5.6-6.9) in those with left tumors (HR 1.5, 95% CI 1.38-1.60, p < 0.001)., Conclusion: As in studies on earlier-stage or unresected metastatic disease, tumor sidedness is an important prognostic factor in patient survival with liver metastasectomy. Clinical risk scores should include side of primary tumor. Further work is needed to determine the molecular basis for this difference., (Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: The National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines recommend consideration of surgery for clinical T4a esophageal adenocarcinoma. There are limited data on the outcomes of patients with T4a adenocarcinoma treated with surgery vs definitive chemoradiation, however., Methods: The National Cancer Database was used to identify patients from 2010-2015 with clinical T4aN0-3M0 esophageal adenocarcinoma, and grouped by receipt of surgery (with or without perioperative therapy) or definitive, concurrent chemoradiation. Patients receiving incomplete definitive therapy or with missing survival information were excluded. Overall survival was evaluated with Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazard analyses., Results: Of 182 patients in the study, 85 (47%) underwent esophagectomy and 97 (53%) underwent chemoradiation. In the surgery cohort, 79 patients (93%) received perioperative chemotherapy. Unadjusted and multivariable analyses demonstrated a significant survival benefit associated with surgery compared with definitive chemoradiotherapy (adjusted hazard ratio 0.32; 95% confidence interval 0.21, 0.50). A 1:1 propensity score-matched analysis of 63 patient pairs also revealed a significant overall survival benefit with surgery compared with chemoradiotherapy alone (hazard ratio 0.26; 95% confidence interval 0.16, 0.43)., Conclusions: In this national analysis, surgery for cT4a esophageal adenocarcinoma was associated with improved outcomes when compared with definitive chemoradiation. Surgery should be considered for medically fit patients with cT4aN0-3M0 esophageal adenocarcinoma., (Copyright © 2019 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common, often deadly cause of preventable harm for hospitalized patients. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Meaningful Use VTE-6 measure automatically captures data documented in a Meaningful Use-certified electronic health record (EHR) to identify patients with potentially preventable VTE, defined as those who developed radiologically confirmed, in-hospital VTE and did not receive prophylaxis between admission and the day prior to the diagnostic test order date. The validity of the Meaningful Use VTE-6 measure was assessed by reviewing the quality of VTE prophylaxis provided to patients identified by the measure., Methods: A retrospective chart review was performed on all patients identified by VTE-6 during the first year of Meaningful Use Stage 1. The following information was abstracted from the Meaningful Use-certified EHR: patient demographics, clinical data, VTE prophylaxis prescribed and administered, and diagnostic testing. These data were then analyzed to assess prevention efforts prior to each VTE event and identify potential targets for improvement., Results: Fifteen patients were identified as having sustained potentially preventable VTE by the Meaningful Use VTE-6 measure. Nine (60%) of the 15 patients identified were false positives and did not meet the rationale of the measure. For only 6 (40%) of the 15 patients was VTE considered to be truly potentially preventable; those patients provided targets for quality improvement measures., Conclusions: The majority of patients identified by the Meaningful Use VTE-6 algorithm did not suffer truly potentially preventable VTE. Misclassification of VTE as "potentially preventable" hinders efforts to target true opportunities for quality improvement.