Rural-Urban Disparities in Receipt of Surgery for Potentially Resectable Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Access to cancer care, especially surgery, is limited in rural areas. However, the specific reasons rural patient populations do not receive surgery for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is unknown. We investigated geographic disparities in reasons for failure to receive guideline-indicated surgical treatment for patients with potentially resectable NSCLC. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was used to identify patients with clinical stage I-IIIA (N0-N1) NSCLC between 2004 and 2018. Patients from rural areas were compared to urban areas, and the reason for nonreceipt of surgery was evaluated. Adjusted odds of (1) primary nonsurgical management, (2) surgery being deemed contraindicated due to risk, (3) surgery being recommended but not performed, and (4) overall failure to receive surgery were determined. RESULTS: The study included 324,785 patients with NSCLC with 42,361 (13.0%) from rural areas. Overall, 62.4% of patients from urban areas and 58.8% of patients from rural areas underwent surgery (P < 0.001). Patients from rural areas had increased odds of (1) being recommended primary nonsurgical management (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 1.14, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.05-1.23), (2) surgery being deemed contraindicated due to risk (aOR: 1.19, 95% CI: 1.07-1.33), (3) surgery being recommended but not performed (aOR: 1.13, 95% CI: 1.01-1.26), and (4) overall failure to receive surgery (aOR: 1.21, 95% CI: 1.13-1.29; all P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: There are geographic disparities in the management of NSCLC. Rural patient populations are more likely to fail to undergo surgery for potentially resectable disease for every reason examined.

Unbundling Bundles: Evaluating the Association of Individual Colorectal Surgical Site Infection Reduction Bundle Elements on Infection Rates in a Statewide Collaborative.

BACKGROUND: Surgical site infection reduction bundles are effective but can be complex and resource intensive. Understanding which bundle elements are associated with reduced surgical site infections may guide concise bundle implementation. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the association of individual surgical site infection reduction bundle elements with infection rates. DESIGN: This was a post-hoc analysis of a prospective cohort study. SETTING: This study took place at Illinois Surgical Quality Improvement Collaborative hospitals. PATIENTS: Patients who had elective colorectal resections at participating hospitals from 2016 to 2017. INTERVENTIONS: The intervention was a 16-element colorectal surgical site infection reduction bundle. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Surgical site infection rates were compared among patients by adherence with each bundle element using χ 2 tests and multivariable logistic regression. Principal component analysis identified composites of correlated bundle elements. Coincidence analysis identified combinations of bundle elements or principal component composites associated with the absence of surgical site infection. RESULTS: Among 2722 patients, 192 (7.1%) developed a surgical site infection. Infections were less likely when oral antibiotics (OR 0.63 [95% CI 0.41-0.97]), wound protectors (OR 0.55 [95% CI 0.37-0.81]), and occlusive dressings (OR 0.71 [95% CI 0.51-1.00]) were used. Bundle elements were reduced into 5 principal component composites. Adherence with the combination of oral antibiotics, wound protector, or redosing intravenous antibiotic prophylaxis plus chlorhexidine-alcohol intraoperative skin preparation was associated with the absence of infection (consistency = 0.94, coverage = 0.96). Four of the 5 principal component composites in various combinations were associated with the absence of surgical site infection, whereas the composite consisting of occlusive dressing placement, postoperative dressing removal, and daily postoperative chlorhexidine incisional cleansing had no association with the outcome. LIMITATIONS: The inclusion of hospitals engaged in quality improvement initiatives may limit the generalizability of these data. CONCLUSION: Bundle elements had varying association with infection reduction. Implementation of colorectal surgical site infection reduction bundles should focus on the specific elements associated with low surgical site infections. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B808 . DESEMPAQUETANDO PAQUETES EVALUACIN DE LA ASOCIACIN DE ELEMENTOS INDIVIDUALES DEL PAQUETE DE REDUCCIN DE INFECCIONES DEL SITIO QUIRRGICO COLORRECTAL CON LAS TASAS DE INFECCIN EN UNA COLABORACIN ESTATAL: ANTECEDENTES:Los paquetes de reducción de infecciones del sitio quirúrgico son efectivos pero pueden ser complejos y requieren muchos recursos. Comprender qué elementos del paquete están asociados con la reducción de las infecciones del sitio quirúrgico puede guiar la implementación concisa del paquete.OBJETIVO:Evaluar la asociación de los elementos individuales del paquete de reducción de infecciones del sitio quirúrgico con las tasas de infección.DISEÑO:Análisis post-hoc de un estudio de cohorte prospectivo.ESCENARIO:Hospitales colaborativos para la mejora de la calidad quirúrgica de Illinois.PACIENTES:Resecciones colorrectales electivas en los hospitales participantes entre 2016 y 2017.INTERVENCIONES:Paquete de reducción de infección del sitio quirúrgico colorrectal de 16 elementos.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Se compararon las tasas de infección del sitio quirúrgico entre los pacientes según la adherencia con cada elemento del paquete mediante pruebas de Chi cuadrado y regresión logística multivariable. El análisis de componentes principales identificó compuestos de elementos de paquete correlacionados. El análisis de coincidencia identificó combinaciones de elementos del haz o compuestos de componentes principales asociados con la ausencia de infección del sitio quirúrgico.RESULTADOS:Entre 2722 pacientes, 192 (7,1%) desarrollaron una infección del sitio quirúrgico. Las infecciones fueron menos probables cuando se administraron antibióticos orales (OR 0,63 (IC 95% 0,41-0,97)), protectores de heridas (OR 0,55 (IC 95% 0,37-0,81)) y vendajes oclusivos (OR 0.71 (IC 95% 0,51-1,00]) fueron usados. Los elementos del paquete se redujeron a 5 grupos de componentes principales. La adherencia a la combinación de (1) antibióticos orales, (2) protector de heridas o (3) redosificación de profilaxis antibiótica intravenosa más preparación de la piel intraoperatoria con clorhexidina-alcohol se asoció con la ausencia de infección (consistencia = 0,94, cobertura = 0,96). Cuatro de los cinco grupos de componentes principales en varias combinaciones se asociaron con la ausencia de infección del sitio quirúrgico, mientras que el grupo que consiste en la colocación del apósito oclusivo, la remosión del apósito en posoperatorio y la limpieza incisional posoperatoria diaria con clorhexidina no tuvo asociación con el resultado.LIMITACIONES:La inclusión de hospitales que participan en iniciativas de mejora de la calidad puede limitar la generalización de estos datos.CONCLUSIONES:Los elementos del paquete tuvieron una asociación variable con la reducción de la infección. La implementación de paquetes de reducción de infecciones del sitio quirúrgico colorrectal debe centrarse en los elementos específicos asociados con pocas infecciones del sitio quirúrgico. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B808 . (Traducción-Juan Carlos Reyes ).

Rural-urban survival disparities for patients with surgically treated lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Nonsmall-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is a common diagnosis among patients living in rural areas and small towns who face unique challenges accessing care. We examined differences in survival for surgically treated rural and small-town patients compared to those from urban and metropolitan areas. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was used to identify surgically treated NSCLC patients from 2004 to 2016. Patients from rural/small-town counties were compared to urban/metro counties. Differences in patient clinical, sociodemographic, hospital, and travel characteristics were described. Survival differences were examined with Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: The study included 366 373 surgically treated NSCLC patients with 12.4% (n = 45 304) categorized as rural/small-town. Rural/small-town patients traveled farther for treatment and were from areas characterized by lower income and education(all p < 0.001). Survival probabilities for rural/small-town patients were worse at 1 year (85% vs. 87%), 5 years (48% vs. 54%), and 10 years (26% vs. 31%) (p < 0.001). Travel distance >100 miles (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.11, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.07-1.16, vs. <25 miles) and living in a rural/small-town county (HR = 1.04, 95% CI: 1.01-1.07) were associated with increased risk for death. CONCLUSIONS: Rural and small-town patients with surgically treated NSCLC had worse survival outcomes compared to urban and metropolitan patients.

The quality of screening colonoscopy in rural and underserved areas.

BACKGROUND: Screening colonoscopy effectiveness depends on procedure quality; however, knowledge about colonoscopy quality in rural and underserved areas is limited. This study aimed to describe the characteristics and quality of colonoscopy and to examine predictors of colonoscopy quality at rural and underserved hospitals. METHODS: Adults undergoing colonoscopy from April 2017 to March 2019 at rural or underserved hospitals across the Illinois Surgical Quality Improvement Collaborative were prospectively identified. The primary outcome was colorectal adenoma detection, and secondary outcomes included bowel preparation adequacy, cecum photodocumentation, and withdrawal time. Performance was benchmarked against multisociety guidelines, and multivariable logistic regression was used to examine patient, physician, and procedure characteristics associated with adenoma detection. RESULTS: In total, 4217 colonoscopy procedures were performed at 8 hospitals, including 1865 screening examinations performed by 19 surgeons, 9 gastroenterologists, and 2 family practitioners. Physician screening volume ranged from 2 to 218 procedures (median 50; IQR 23-74). Adenoma detection occurred in 26.6% of screening procedures (target: ≥ 25%), 90.7% had adequate bowel preparation (target: ≥ 85%), 93.1% had cecum photodocumentation (target: ≥ 95%), and mean withdrawal time was 8.1 min (target: ≥ 6). Physician specialty was associated with adenoma detection (gastroenterologists: 36.9% vs. surgeons: 22.5%; OR 2.30, 95% CI 1.40-3.77), but adequate bowel preparation (OR 1.15, 95% CI 0.76-1.73) and cecum photodocumentation (OR 1.56, 95% CI 0.91-2.69) were not. CONCLUSION: Colonoscopies performed at rural and underserved hospitals meet many quality metrics; however, quality varied widely. As physicians are scarce in rural and underserved areas, individualized interventions to improve colonoscopy quality are needed.

Addressing the gap in laparoscopic common bile duct exploration training for rural surgeons: imparting procedural ability is not enough.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) is an underutilized therapy for choledocholithiasis. The driving factors of this practice gap are poorly defined. We sought to evaluate the attitudes and practice patterns of surgeons who underwent training courses using an LCBDE simulator. METHODS: Surgeons completed a half-day simulator-based LCBDE curriculum at national courses, including the American College of Surgeons Advanced Skills Training for Rural Surgeons and the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons annual meeting. Attitudes were assessed with Likert surveys immediately before and after curriculum completion. Follow-up surveys were distributed electronically. RESULTS: 159 surgeons completed training during six courses. Surgeon attitudes regarding the overall superiority of LCBDE vs. ERCP shifted towards favoring LCBDE after course participation (4.0 vs 3.3; Likert scale 1-5, p < 0.001). 44% of surgeons completed follow-up surveys at a mean of 3 years post-course. Surgeons remained confident in their ability to perform LCBDE, with only 14% rating their skill as a significant barrier to practice, as compared with 43% prior to course participation (p < 0.01). However, only 28% of surgeons saw an increase in LCBDE volume. Deficiencies in operating room (OR) staff knowledge and instrument availability were the most significant barriers to post-course practice implementation and were inversely correlated with LCBDE case volume (ρ = - 0.44 and - 0.47, both p < 0.01). Surgeons for whom OR staff knowledge of LCBDE was not a significant barrier performed nearly 4 times more LCBDE than those who rated staff knowledge as a moderate, strong, or complete barrier. CONCLUSIONS: Surgeons trained at an LCBDE course retained long-term confidence in their procedural ability. Practice implementation was hindered by deficiencies in OR staff knowledge and instrument availability. Surgeons with knowledgeable operating room staff performed significantly more LCBDEs than those with less capable assistance. These barriers should be addressed in future curricula to improve procedural adoption.

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Colorectal Cancer Screening, Version 2.2020.

The NCCN Guidelines for Colorectal Cancer (CRC) Screening describe various colorectal screening modalities as well as recommended screening schedules for patients at average or increased risk of developing sporadic CRC. They are intended to aid physicians with clinical decision-making regarding CRC screening for patients without defined genetic syndromes. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on select recent updates to the NCCN Guidelines, including a section on primary and secondary CRC prevention, and provide context for the panel's recommendations regarding the age to initiate screening in average risk individuals and follow-up for low-risk adenomas.

Leveraging a Comprehensive Program to Implement a Colorectal Surgical Site Infection Reduction Bundle in a Statewide Quality Improvement Collaborative.

OBJECTIVES: Our objective was to examine the implementation and associated clinical outcomes of a comprehensive surgical site infection (SSI) reduction bundle in a large statewide surgical quality improvement collaborative leveraging a multifaceted implementation strategy. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Bundled perioperative interventions reduce colorectal SSI rates when enacted at individual hospitals, but the ability to implement comprehensive SSI bundles and to examine the resultant clinical effectiveness within a larger, diverse population of hospitals is unknown. METHODS: A multifaceted SSI reduction bundle was developed and implemented in a large statewide surgical quality improvement collaborative through a novel implementation program consisting of guided implementation, data feedback, mentorship, process improvement training/coaching, and targeted-implementation toolkits. Bundle adherence and ACS NSQIP outcomes were examined preimplementation versus postimplementation. RESULTS: Among 32 hospitals, there was a 2.5-fold relative increase in the proportion of patients completing at least 75% of bundle elements (preimplementation = 19.5% vs. postimplementation = 49.8%, P = 0.001). Largest adherence gains were seen in wound closure re-gowning/re-gloving (24.0% vs. 62.0%, P < 0.001), use of clean closing instruments (32.1% vs. 66.2%, P = 0.003), and preoperative chlorhexidine bathing (46.1% vs. 77.6%, P < 0.001). Multivariable analyses showed a trend toward lower risk of superficial incisional SSI in the postimplementation period compared to baseline (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.49-10.2, P = 0.06). As the adherence in the number of bundle elements increased, there was a significant decrease in superficial SSI rates (lowest adherence quintile, 4.6% vs. highest, 1.5%, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: A comprehensive multifaceted SSI reduction bundle can be successfully implemented throughout a large quality improvement learning collaborative when coordinated quality improvement activities are leveraged, resulting in a 30% decline in SSI rates. Lower superficial SSI rates are associated with the number of adherent bundle elements a patient receives, rendering considerable benefits to institutions capable of implementing more components of the bundle.

For Patients with Early Rectal Cancer, Does Local Excision Have an Impact on Recurrence, Survival, and Quality of Life Relative to Radical Resection?

BACKGROUND: The most appropriate treatment for early-stage rectal cancers is controversial. The advantages of local excision regarding morbidity and function must be weighed against poorer oncologic efficacy. This study aimed to clarify further the role for local excision in the treatment of rectal cancer. METHODS: A systematic review of Medline, SCOPUS, and Cochrane databases was conducted. Relevant studies were selected using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Data addressing five key questions about outcomes of local versus radical resection of rectal cancer were analyzed. RESULTS: The 16 studies identified by this study were mostly retrospective, and none were randomized. Local excision was associated with fewer complications and better functional outcome than radical resection. Of 12 studies evaluating local recurrence, 6 showed a higher local recurrence rate among patients who underwent local excision. Two additional studies showed no increase in local recurrence rate among patients who underwent local excision of T1 lesions but a significantly higher local recurrence rate among those who underwent local excision of T2 lesions. High histologic grade, angiolymphatic invasion, perineural invasion, and depth within submucosa were features associated with a higher risk of local recurrence. In 7 of 15 studies, long-term survival was reduced compared with that of patients who underwent radical resection. CONCLUSIONS: Although local excision for early-stage rectal cancer is associated with increased local recurrence and decreased overall survival compared with radical resection, local excision may be appropriate for select individuals who have T1 tumors with no adverse pathologic features.

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Colorectal, Version 2.2019.

Identifying individuals with hereditary syndromes allows for improved cancer surveillance, risk reduction, and optimized management. Establishing criteria for assessment allows for the identification of individuals who are carriers of pathogenic genetic variants. The NCCN Guidelines for Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Colorectal provide recommendations for the assessment and management of patients with high-risk colorectal cancer syndromes. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on criteria for the evaluation of Lynch syndrome and considerations for use of multigene testing in the assessment of hereditary colorectal cancer syndromes.

Controversies in Surgical Oncology: Does the Minimally Invasive Approach for Rectal Cancer Provide Equivalent Oncologic Outcomes Compared with the Open Approach?

BACKGROUND: Compared with open surgery, minimally invasive surgery for colon cancer has been shown to improve short-term outcomes and yield equivalent long-term oncologic results. It remains to be seen if oncologic outcomes for the minimally invasive approach for rectal cancer are equivalent to traditional open rectal resection. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of Medline, SCOPUS, and Cochrane databases. Relevant studies were selected using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Five key questions comparing minimally invasive and open oncologic outcomes for rectal cancer were specifically analyzed. A meta-analysis was not done due to heterogeneity of studies. RESULTS: Forty-five studies met inclusion criteria, including six randomized controlled trials. The laparoscopic approach to rectal resection was not more likely than the traditional open approach to have clear circumferential and distal margins, a complete total mesorectal excision grade, ≥ 12 lymph nodes in the resected specimen, reduced local recurrence rates, or reduced overall survival rates. Two randomized trials revealed that successful laparoscopic resection was not noninferior to open. CONCLUSIONS: Caution should be exercised when choosing surgical options for rectal cancer. Results of randomized trials could not prove that short-term oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic surgery were equivalent to those after open surgery even when performed by surgeons with laparoscopic expertise. However, reported long-term data have not shown a difference in outcomes between laparoscopic and open surgery. Future advances in minimally invasive technology may improve oncologic margins but these will require careful study and scrutiny.

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Colorectal Cancer Screening, Version 1.2018.

The NCCN Guidelines for Colorectal Cancer (CRC) Screening outline various screening modalities as well as recommended screening strategies for individuals at average or increased-risk of developing sporadic CRC. The NCCN panel meets at least annually to review comments from reviewers within their institutions, examine relevant data, and reevaluate and update their recommendations. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize 2018 updates to the NCCN Guidelines, with a primary focus on modalities used to screen individuals at average-risk for CRC.

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Colorectal, Version 3.2017.

The NCCN Guidelines for Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Colorectal provide recommendations for the management of patients with high-risk syndromes associated with an increased risk of colorectal cancer (CRC). The NCCN Panel for Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Colorectal meets at least annually to assess comments from reviewers within their institutions, examine relevant data, and reevaluate and update their recommendations. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on genes newly associated with CRC risk on multigene panels, the associated evidence, and currently recommended management strategies.

Evaluation of a novel mentor program to improve surgical care for US hospitals.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a novel mentor program for 27 US surgeons, charged with improving quality at their respective hospitals, having been paired 1:1 with 27 surgeon mentors through a state-wide quality improvement (QI) initiative. DESIGN: Mixed-methods utilizing quantitative surveys and in-depth semi-structured interviews. SETTING: The Illinois Surgical Quality Improvement Collaborative (ISQIC) utilized a novel Mentor Program to guide surgeons new to QI. PARTICIPANTS: All mentor-mentee pairs received the survey (n = 27). Purposive sampling identified a subset of mentors (n = 8) and mentees (n = 4) for in-depth semi-structured interviews. INTERVENTION: Surgeons with expertise in QI mentored surgeons new to QI. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: (i) Quantitative: self-reported satisfaction with the mentor program; (ii) Qualitative: key themes suggesting actions and strategies to facilitate mentorship in QI. RESULTS: Mentees expressed satisfaction with the mentor program (n = 24, 88.9%) and agreed that mentorship is vital to ISQIC (n = 24, 88.9%). Analysis of interview data revealed four key themes: (i) nuances of data management, (ii) culture of quality and safety, (iii) mentor-mentee relationship and (iv) logistics. Strategies from these key themes include: utilize raw data for in-depth QI understanding, facilitate presentations to build QI support, identify opportunities for in-person meetings and establish scheduled conference calls. The mentor's role required sharing experiences and acting as a resource. The mentee's role required actively bringing questions and identifying barriers. CONCLUSIONS: Mentorship plays a vital role in advancing surgeon knowledge and engagement with QI in ISQIC. Key themes in mentorship reflect strategies to best facilitate mentorship, which may serve as a guide to other collaboratives.

Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Colorectal Version 1.2016, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

This is a focused update highlighting the most current NCCN Guidelines for diagnosis and management of Lynch syndrome. Lynch syndrome is the most common cause of hereditary colorectal cancer, usually resulting from a germline mutation in 1 of 4 DNA mismatch repair genes (MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, or PMS2), or deletions in the EPCAM promoter. Patients with Lynch syndrome are at an increased lifetime risk, compared with the general population, for colorectal cancer, endometrial cancer, and other cancers, including of the stomach and ovary. As of 2016, the panel recommends screening all patients with colorectal cancer for Lynch syndrome and provides recommendations for surveillance for early detection and prevention of Lynch syndrome-associated cancers.

The anthropometric definition of the rectum is highly variable.

PURPOSE: The precise definition of the rectum is essential for localizing colorectal pathology, yet current definitions are nebulous. The objective of this study is to determine the anthropometric definition of common pelvic landmarks in relation to patient characteristics. METHODS: Seventy-one patients underwent open proctectomy with intra-operative measurements from the anal verge to various pelvic landmarks, and patient characteristics were evaluated. Analyses were performed using Spearman correlation and Wilcoxon rank sum. RESULTS: The mean landmark distance was dentate line = 1.7 cm (range 0.8-4.0 cm), puborectalis muscle = 4.2 cm (range 2.0-8.0 cm), anterior peritoneal reflection = 13.2 cm (range 8.5-21.0 cm), sacral promontory = 17.9 cm (range 13.0-26.0 cm), and confluence of the taenia = 25.5 cm (range 16.0-44.0 cm). Men had longer mean distances to the dentate line (p = 0.0003), puborectalis muscle (p = 0.03), and anterior peritoneal reflection (p = 0.02). Patient weight significantly correlated with distance to all landmarks except for the confluence of the taenia, which did not correlate with any patient factor. CONCLUSIONS: The location of common pelvic landmarks is highly variable. The use of predefined absolute measurements from the anal verge to localize rectal pathology is inaccurate and fails to account for patient variability.

Colorectal Cancer Screening, Version 1.2015.

The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Colorectal Cancer Screening provide recommendations for selecting individuals for colorectal cancer screening, and for evaluation and follow-up of colon polyps. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize major discussion points of the 2015 NCCN Colorectal Cancer Screening panel meeting. Major discussion topics this year were the state of evidence for CT colonography and stool DNA testing, bowel preparation procedures for colonoscopy, and guidelines for patients with a positive family history of colorectal cancer.

Residents Need a Dynamic Approach to Leadership Education: A Qualitative Study.

OBJECTIVE: Leadership is an essential skill for surgeons, but it is not systematically taught in residency. The objective of this study was to explore the current experiences, motivators, and perspectives on leadership training of general surgery residents. DESIGN/SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Semi-structured focus groups were conducted with 20 general surgery residents at an academic training program. Six in-person sessions (one for each postgraduate year and research) were recorded, transcribed, and de-identified. Data were inductively coded by 2 independent researchers and analyzed thematically. Discrepancies were discussed and resolved through consensus. RESULTS: Participants described developing their leadership skills prior to residency through formal (e.g., job and military) and informal (e.g., extracurricular) experiences. Most reported that leadership development during residency occurred informally (e.g., emulating mentors, trial-and-error). Evolving responsibilities and expectations shaped residents' leadership values: junior residents focused on student and task management and adaptation to new teams; mid-level residents emphasized emotional intelligence and delivery of resident feedback; and senior residents stressed team engagement, inspiring the team, and teaching/mentoring. Major transition periods between residency levels were identified as critical times for leadership training as they allow for self-reflection, motivating residents to participate in a leadership curriculum. Employing level appropriate and immediately applicable content during this time would encourage curriculum attendance and prepare residents for new roles. CONCLUSIONS: There is a lack of formal leadership training in general surgery residency. There is an opportunity to design and implement leadership training that engages surgical residents with level-relevant content and strategies. Transition periods offer optimal timing for maximal curricula uptake.

Colorectal cancer screening.

Mortality from colorectal cancer can be reduced by early diagnosis and by cancer prevention through polypectomy. These NCCN Guidelines for Colorectal Cancer Screening describe various colorectal screening modalities and recommended screening schedules for patients at average or increased risk of developing colorectal cancer. In addition, the guidelines provide recommendations for the management of patients with high-risk colorectal cancer syndromes, including Lynch syndrome. Screening approaches for Lynch syndrome are also described.

In colorectal cancer mast cells contribute to systemic regulatory T-cell dysfunction.

T-regulatory cells (Treg) and mast cells (MC) are abundant in colorectal cancer (CRC) tumors. Interaction between the two is known to promote immune suppression or loss of Treg functions and autoimmunity. Here, we demonstrate that in both human CRC and murine polyposis the outcome of this interaction is the generation of potently immune suppressive but proinflammatory Treg (DeltaTreg). These Treg shut down IL10, gain potential to express IL17, and switch from suppressing to promoting MC expansion and degranulation. This change is also brought about by direct coculture of MC and Treg, or culture of Treg in medium containing IL6 and IL2. IL6 deficiency in the bone marrow of mice susceptible to polyposis eliminated IL17 production by the polyp infiltrating Treg, but did not significantly affect the growth of polyps or the generation of proinflammatory Treg. IL6-deficient MC could generate proinflammatory Treg. Thus, MC induce Treg to switch function and escalate inflammation in CRC without losing T-cell-suppressive properties. IL6 and IL17 are not needed in this process.

Association of travel distance, surgical volume, and receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy with survival among patients with resectable lung cancer.

Objective: Regionalization of surgery for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) to high-volume centers (HVCs) improves perioperative outcomes but frequently increases patient travel distance. Travel might decrease rates of adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) use, however, the relationship of distance, volume, and receipt of AC with outcomes is unknown. Our objective was to evaluate the association of distance, volume, and receipt of AC with overall survival among patients with NSCLC. Methods: Patients with stage I to IIIA (N0-N1) NSCLC were identified between 2004 and 2018 using the National Cancer Database. Distance to surgical facility was categorized into quartiles (<5.1, 5.1 to <11.5, 11.5 to <28.1, and ≥28.1 miles), and HVCs were defined as those that perform ≥40 annual resections. Patient characteristics and likelihood of receiving AC anywhere were determined. Propensity score-matched survival analysis was performed using Cox models and Kaplan-Meier curves. Results: Of the 131,982 patients included, 35,658 (27.0%) were stage II to IIIA. Of the stage II to IIIA cohort, 49.6% received AC, 13.1% traveled <5.1 miles to low-volume centers (LVCs), and 18.1% traveled ≥28.1 miles to HVCs (P < .001). Among stage II to IIIA patients who traveled ≥28.1 miles to HVCs, 45% received AC versus 51.5% who traveled <5.1 miles to LVCs (incidence rate ratio, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.83-0.94; <5.1 miles to LVC reference). Patients with stage II to IIIA NSCLC who traveled ≥28.1 miles to HVCs and did not receive AC had higher mortality rates than those who traveled <5.1 miles to LVCs and received AC (median overall survival, 52.3 vs 36.7 months; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.26-1.57). Conclusions: Increasing travel distance to surgical treatment is associated with decreased likelihood of receiving AC for patients with stage II to IIIA (N0-N1) NSCLC.