Real-world use of immune checkpoint inhibitors in advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to describe real-world use of immune checkpoint inhibitors for women with advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer. METHODS: Adult women with advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer who received at least one line of systemic treatment between January 1, 2014 and November 1, 2020, then followed to May 31, 2021 in a nationwide electronic health record-derived de-identified database. Chi-Squared test or Welch's 2-sample t-tests were used to compare patient and clinical factors associated with immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment. Time to next treatment analyses were performed based on the treatment line of the immune checkpoint inhibitor. Sankey plots depicted patient-level temporal systemic treatment. RESULTS: During our study period, 326 women received their first immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment, increasing from 12 patients in 2016 to 148 in 2020. Factors associated with ever receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors included disease stage (p=0.002), mismatch repair (MMR)/microsatellite instability (MSI) status (p<0.001), performance status (p=0.001), and prior radiation receipt (p<0.001) and modality (p=0.003). The most common immune checkpoint inhibitor regimen was pembrolizumab (47.9%) followed by pembrolizumab and lenvatinib (34.7%). Immune checkpoint inhibitors were given as first, second, and third or greater lines of therapy in 24.5%, 41.7%, and 46.1% of evaluable patients. The median time to next treatment was significantly longer if given as an earlier line of treatment (p=0.008). There were significant differences in treatment line of immune checkpoint inhibitor by region (p=0.004), stage (p<0.001), and prior radiation receipt (p=0.014) and modality (p=0.009). Among 326 patients who received immune checkpoint inhibitors, 114 (34.9%) received subsequent treatment including chemotherapy (43.9%), additional immune checkpoint inhibitors (29.8%), and other (26.3%) with no differences in demographic or clinical characteristics based on the type of post-immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment. CONCLUSION: In an observational retrospective real-world database study, immune checkpoint inhibitors were used in 14.7% of patients with advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer across multiple lines of treatment, including after initial immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment.

Effect of Medicaid expansion on cancer treatment and survival among Medicaid beneficiaries and the uninsured.

BACKGROUND: The Affordable Care Act expanded Medicaid coverage for people with low income in the United States. Expanded insurance coverage could promote more timely access to cancer treatment, which could improve overall survival (OS), yet the long-term effects of Medicaid expansion (ME) remain unknown. We evaluated whether ME was associated with improved timely treatment initiation (TTI) and 3-year OS among patients with breast, cervical, colon, and lung cancers who were affected by the policy. METHODS: Medicaid-insured or uninsured patients aged 40-64 with stage I-III breast, cervical, colon, or non-small cell lung cancer within the National Cancer Database (NCDB). A difference-in-differences (DID) approach was used to compare changes in TTI (within 60 days) and 3-year OS between patients in ME states versus nonexpansion (NE) states before (2010-2013) and after (2015-2018) ME. Adjusted DID estimates for TTI and 3-year OS were calculated using multivariable linear regression and Cox proportional hazards regression models, respectively. RESULTS: ME was associated with a relative increase in TTI within 60 days for breast (DID = 4.6; p < 0.001), cervical (DID = 5.0 p = 0.013), and colon (DID = 4.0, p = 0.008), but not lung cancer (p = 0.505). In Cox regression analysis, ME was associated with improved 3-year OS for breast (DID hazard ratio [HR] = 0.82, p = 0.009), cervical (DID-HR = 0.81, p = 0.048), and lung (DID-HR = 0.87, p = 0.003). Changes in 3-year OS for colon cancer were not statistically different between ME and NE states (DID-HR, 0.77; p = 0.075). CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that expanded insurance coverage can improve treatment and survival outcomes among low income and uninsured patients with cancer. As the debate surrounding ME continues nationwide, our findings serve as valuable insights to inform the development of policies aimed at fostering accessible and affordable healthcare for all.

Improving the palliative-procedure decision-making process for patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis: A secondary analysis.

BACKGROUND: Peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) is common in patients with advanced gynecologic and gastrointestinal cancers. Frequently, patients with PC undergo palliative surgery or procedures to manage disease-related complications and side effects. However, there are limited data regarding patients' and family caregivers' decision-making processes about these procedures. Thus, we sought to describe the decision-making experiences of patients with PC who elect to pursue palliative surgical procedures and their family caregivers. METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of qualitative data collected during a pilot randomized controlled trial of BOLSTER, a nurse-led telehealth intervention for patients with PC and their caregivers after an acute hospitalization and palliative procedure. Participants in both study arms described their experiences in semi-structured interviews. We re-analyzed coded qualitative data with a focus on understanding decision-making experiences surrounding palliative surgery and procedures using conventional content analysis. RESULTS: Interviews from 32 participants, 23 patients and 9 caregivers, were analyzed. Participants reported their decision-making was complicated by illness uncertainty and a desire for clear, effective communication with surgical and medical oncology teams. Participants requested more information about the impact of palliative procedures on their daily life. Several also noted that, without improved understanding, a misalignment between patient and family caregiver goals and palliative procedures may inadvertently increase suffering. CONCLUSION: Discussions related to patients' goals and preferences can improve the quality of treatment decision-making in patients with PC and their caregivers. Future research should test interventions to improve advanced cancer patients' illness understanding and decision-making surrounding palliative surgery and procedures.

Feasibility and acceptability of a nurse-led telehealth intervention (BOLSTER) to support patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis and their caregivers: A pilot randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with advanced gynecologic (GYN) and gastrointestinal (GI) cancers frequently develop peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC), which limits prognosis and diminishes health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Palliative procedures may improve PC symptoms, yet patients and caregivers report feeling unprepared to manage ostomies, catheters, and other complex needs. Our objectives were to (1) assess the feasibility of an efficacy trial of a nurse-led telehealth intervention (BOLSTER) for patients with PC and their caregivers; and (2) assess BOLSTER's acceptability, potential to improve patients' HRQoL and self-efficacy, and potential impact on advance care planning (ACP). METHODS: Pilot feasibility RCT. Recently hospitalized adults with advanced GYN and GI cancers, PC, and a new complex care need and their caregivers were randomized 1:1 to BOLSTER or enhanced discharge planning (EDP). We defined feasibility as a ≥ 50% approach-to-consent ratio and acceptability as ≥70% satisfaction with BOLSTER. We assessed patients' HRQoL and self-efficacy at baseline and six weeks, then compared the proportion experiencing meaningful improvements by arm. ACP documentation was identified using natural language processing. RESULTS: We consented 77% of approached patients. In the BOLSTER arm, 91.0% of patients and 100.0% of caregivers were satisfied. Compared to EDP, more patients receiving BOLSTER experienced improvements in HRQoL (68.4% vs. 40.0%) and self-efficacy for managing symptoms (78.9% vs. 35.0%) and treatment (52.9% vs. 42.9%). The BOLSTER arm had more ACP documentation. CONCLUSIONS: BOLSTER is a feasible and acceptable intervention with the potential to improve patients' HRQoL and promote ACP. An efficacy trial comparing BOLSTER to usual care is underway. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03367247; PI: Wright.

A colostomy for large bowel obstruction at the end of life: What do patients gain from palliative surgery?

OBJECTIVES: Malignant large bowel obstruction (LBO) is a frequent complication affecting women with gynecologic cancers and is an indication for emergent surgery. However, the life expectancy and subsequent medical care utilization are unknown. We sought to estimate overall survival (OS) following colostomy and describe subsequent healthcare utilization among patients with advanced gynecologic malignancies. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients with advanced gynecologic cancers who underwent colostomy with palliative intent due to LBO at our institution between March 2014 and January 2023. Summary statistics were used to describe the clinical and demographic characteristics of the study population. OS was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and we defined healthcare utilization at the end-of-life using criteria published by the National Quality Forum. RESULTS: A total of 78 patients were included. The median age at the time of surgery was 61 (range: 34-83), and most patients had recurrent ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer (n = 51, 65.4%), followed by cervical cancer (n = 16, 20.5%), and uterine cancer (n = 10, 12.8%). The median Charlson comorbidity index was 3 and median postoperative length of stay was five days (range: 1-26). The median follow-up for all patients was 4.5 months (range: 0.07-46.2), and the median OS was 4.5 months (95% CI: 2.9-6.0), including 12 patients (15.4%) with <30-day OS and 21 (26.9%) with <60-day OS. In the last 30 days of life, 62.7% of patients were re-admitted to the hospital, 53.0% were seen in the emergency department, and 18.5% were admitted to an intensive care unit. CONCLUSIONS: A significant proportion of patients died within 60 days of surgery, and many had high healthcare utilization at the end of life.

Vaccination of Adults With Cancer: ASCO Guideline.

PURPOSE: To guide the vaccination of adults with solid tumors or hematologic malignancies. METHODS: A systematic literature review identified systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and nonrandomized studies on the efficacy and safety of vaccines used by adults with cancer or their household contacts. This review builds on a 2013 guideline by the Infectious Disease Society of America. PubMed and the Cochrane Library were searched from January 1, 2013, to February 16, 2023. ASCO convened an Expert Panel to review the evidence and formulate recommendations. RESULTS: A total of 102 publications were included in the systematic review: 24 systematic reviews, 14 RCTs, and 64 nonrandomized studies. The largest body of evidence addressed COVID-19 vaccines. RECOMMENDATIONS: The goal of vaccination is to limit the severity of infection and prevent infection where feasible. Optimizing vaccination status should be considered a key element in the care of patients with cancer. This approach includes the documentation of vaccination status at the time of the first patient visit; timely provision of recommended vaccines; and appropriate revaccination after hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation, chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy, or B-cell-depleting therapy. Active interaction and coordination among healthcare providers, including primary care practitioners, pharmacists, and nursing team members, are needed. Vaccination of household contacts will enhance protection for patients with cancer. Some vaccination and revaccination plans for patients with cancer may be affected by the underlying immune status and the anticancer therapy received. As a result, vaccine strategies may differ from the vaccine recommendations for the general healthy adult population vaccine.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines.

Efficacy, safety, and feasibility of Apixaban for postoperative venous thromboembolism prophylaxis following open gynecologic cancer surgery at a comprehensive cancer center.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate safety, efficacy, and feasibility of apixaban for postoperative venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis following open gynecologic cancer surgery at a comprehensive cancer center. METHODS: This retrospective, cohort study included patients with gynecologic cancer who underwent open surgery between 3/2021 and 3/2023 and received 28-day postoperative VTE prophylaxis. Patients on therapeutic anticoagulation preoperatively were excluded. Predictors of 90- and 30-day VTE and 30-day bleeding events were determined using multivariable logistic regression, adjusting for known confounders. RESULTS: 452 patients were included in the cohort: 348 received apixaban and 104 received enoxaparin. Those who received enoxaparin were more likely to be American Society of Anesthesiologists class III/IV (compared to I/II) (p = 0.033), current or former smokers (p = 0.012) and have a higher BMI (p < 0.001), Charlson Comorbidity Index (p = 0.005), and age (p = 0.046). 30-day VTE rate was significantly lower in the apixaban group (0.6%) compared to the enoxaparin group (6.2%) (adjusted OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.03-0.56; p = 0.006). 90-day VTE rate was 2.7% and 6.2% in the apixaban and enoxaparin groups, respectively (adjusted OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.38-1.92; p = 0.704). Major bleeding complications (2.4% vs. 2.0%) and minor bleeding complications (0.9% vs. 3.0%) were similar in the apixaban and enoxaparin groups, respectively, on multivariate analyses. The median patient out of pocket cost was $10 (IQR 0.0-40.0) for apixaban and $20 (IQR 3.7-67.7) for enoxaparin (p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings along with previously published data suggest that apixaban should be considered the standard of care for VTE prophylaxis in patients undergoing open surgery for gynecologic malignancies.

Determination of quality of life-related health utilities for surgical complications in ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the health state utilities of ovarian cancer patients, clinicians, and non-cancer controls regarding surgical complications in ovarian cancer. METHODS: Utilities for 14 surgical complications were assessed from patients with recently diagnosed or recurrent ovarian cancer, clinicians, and non-cancer controls using the visual analog scale (VAS) and time trade-off (TTO) methods. Health state utilities were converted to a 0-to-1 scale, where 0 represents the least favorable outcome and 1 represents the most favorable outcome. RESULTS: Fifty patients, 50 clinicians, and 50 controls participated. Median VAS scores were lower than TTO scores across all groups (p < 0.01). Patients viewed 'bleeding requiring transfusion' most favorably (VAS utility 0.75), followed in order by less favorable utility scores for hernia, thromboembolism, pleural effusion, abscess, ileus/bowel obstruction, wound infection, bowel obstruction requiring surgery, anastomotic leak requiring drain, temporary ostomy, anastomotic leak requiring surgery, genito-urinary fistula, permanent ostomy, and genito-intestinal fistula (VAS utility 0.2). Overall, clinicians perceived complications more favorably than patients by VAS (overall utility score 0.49 vs 0.43, p < 0.01), but not by the TTO. There were no differences in overall utility scores between patients and controls. Patients who had not experienced certain surgical complications had less favorable scores than patients who did (utility score for ostomy = 0.2 for patients without ostomy vs. 0.7 for patients with ostomy, p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: This study establishes health state utilities for surgical complications associated with ovarian cancer. These utilities can be used in future cost-effectiveness evaluations to determine quality-adjusted outcomes and may help in counseling patients during the shared decision-making process.

Longitudinal perioperative patient-reported outcomes in open compared with minimally invasive hysterectomy.

BACKGROUND: There are few prospective studies in the gynecologic surgical literature that compared patient-reported outcomes between open and minimally invasive hysterectomies within enhanced recovery after surgery pathways. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare prospectively collected perioperative patient-reported symptom burden and interference measures in open compared with minimally invasive hysterectomy cohorts within enhanced recovery after surgery pathways. STUDY DESIGN: We compared patient-reported symptom burden and functional interference in 646 patients who underwent a hysterectomy (254 underwent open surgery and 392 underwent minimally invasive surgery) for benign and malignant indications under enhanced recovery after surgery protocols. Outcomes were prospectively measured using the validated MD Anderson Symptom Inventory, which was administered perioperatively up to 8 weeks after surgery. Cohorts were compared using Fisher exact and chi-squared tests, adjusted longitudinal generalized linear mixed modeling, and Kaplan Meier curves to model return to no or mild symptoms. RESULTS: The open cohort had significantly worse preoperative physical functional interference (P=.001). At the time of hospital discharge postoperatively, the open cohort reported significantly higher mean symptom severity scores and more moderate or severe scores for overall (P<.001) and abdominal pain (P<.001), fatigue (P=.001), lack of appetite (P<.001), bloating (P=.041), and constipation (P<.001) when compared with the minimally invasive cohort. The open cohort also had significantly higher interference in physical functioning (score 5.0 vs 2.7; P<.001) than the minimally invasive cohort at the time of discharge with no differences in affective interference between the 2 groups. In mixed modeling analysis of the first 7 postoperative days, both cohorts reported improved symptom burden and functional interference over time with generally slower recovery in the open cohort. From 1 to 8 postoperative weeks, the open cohort had worse mean scores for all evaluated symptoms and interference measures except for pain with urination, although scores indicated mild symptomatic burden and interference in both cohorts. The time to return to no or mild symptoms was significantly longer in the open cohort for overall pain (14 vs 4 days; P<.001), fatigue (8 vs 4 days; P<.001), disturbed sleep (2 vs 2 days; P<.001), and appetite (1.5 vs 1 days; P<.001) but was significantly longer in the minimally invasive cohort for abdominal pain (42 vs 28 days; P<.001) and bloating (42 vs 8 days; P<.001). The median time to return to no or mild functional interference was longer in the open than in the minimally invasive hysterectomy cohort for physical functioning (36 vs 32 days; P<.001) with no difference in compositive affective functioning (5 vs 5 days; P=.07) between the groups. CONCLUSION: Open hysterectomy was associated with increased symptom burden in the immediate postoperative period and longer time to return to no or mild symptom burden and interference with physical functioning. However, all patient-reported measures improved within days to weeks of both open and minimally invasive surgery and differences were not always clinically significant.

Randomized phase 2 trial of tremelimumab and durvalumab in combination versus sequentially in recurrent platinum-resistant ovarian cancer.

BACKGROUND: Single-agent immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have demonstrated limited responses in recurrent ovarian cancer; however, 30%-40% of patients achieve stable disease. The primary objective was to estimate progression-free survival (PFS) after sequential versus combination cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 and programmed death ligand 1 ICIs in patients with platinum-resistant high-grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC). METHODS: Patients were randomized to a sequential arm (tremelimumab followed by durvalumab on progression) or a combination arm (tremelimumab plus durvalumab, followed by durvalumab) via a Bayesian adaptive design that made it more likely for patients to be randomized to the more effective arm. The primary end point was immune-related PFS (irPFS). RESULTS: Sixty-one subjects were randomized to sequential (n = 38) or combination therapy (n = 23). Thirteen patients (34.2%) in the sequential arm received durvalumab. There was no difference in PFS in the sequential arm (1.84 months; 95% CI, 1.77-2.17 months) compared with the combination arm (1.87 months; 95% CI, 1.77-2.43 months) (p = .402). In the sequential arm, no responses were observed, although 12 patients (31.6%) demonstrated stable disease. In the combination arm, two patients (8.7%) had partial response, whereas one patient (4.4%) had stable disease. Adverse events were consistent with those previously reported for ICIs. Patient-reported outcomes were similar in both arms. CONCLUSIONS: There was no difference in irPFS for combination tremelimumab plus durvalumab compared to tremelimumab alone (administered as part of a sequential treatment strategy) in a heavily pretreated population of patients with platinum-resistant HGSOC. Response rates were comparable to prior reports, although the combination regimen did not add significant benefit, as has been previously described.

Experiences of patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis-related complex care needs and their caregivers.

BACKGROUND: Patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) frequently undergo palliative procedures, yet these patients and their caregivers report being unprepared to manage ostomies, drains, and other complex care needs at home. The purpose of this study was to characterize the unique needs of these patients and their caregivers during care transitions. METHODS: Patients completed measures of health status and advance care planning, caregivers completed measures of preparedness and burden, and all participants completed measures of depression and anxiety. Participants detailed their experiences in individual, semi-structured interviews. We analyzed data using descriptive statistics and conventional content analysis. RESULTS: Sixty-one patients and 39 caregivers completed baseline measures. Twenty-four (39.3%) patients acknowledged their terminal illness and seven (11.5%) had discussed end-of-life care preferences with clinicians. Most (26/39, 66.7%) caregivers provided daily care. Among caregivers who managed symptoms, few were taught how to do so (6/20, 30%). Seven patients (11.5%) and seven caregivers (17.9%) met case criteria for anxiety, while 15 patients (24.6%) and two caregivers (5.1%) met case criteria for depression. Interview participants described a diagnosis of PC as a turning point for which there is no road map and identified the need for health systems change to minimize suffering. CONCLUSION: Patients with PC and their caregivers are highly burdened by symptoms and care needs. Patients' prognostic understanding and advance care planning are suboptimal. Interventions that train patients with PC and their caregivers to perform clinical care tasks, facilitate serious illness conversations, and provide psychosocial support are needed.

Evaluation of a tiered opioid prescription algorithm in an ERAS pathway: exploring opportunities for further refinement.

BACKGROUND: Opioid over-prescription is wasteful and contributes to the opioid crisis. We implemented a personalized tiered discharge opioid protocol and education on opioid disposal to minimize over-prescription. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the intervention by investigating opioid use post-discharge for women undergoing abdomino-pelvic surgery, and patient adherence to opioid disposal education. METHODS: We analyzed post-discharge opioid consumption among 558 patients. Eligible patients included those who underwent elective gynecologic surgery, were not taking scheduled opioids pre-operatively, and received discharge opioids according to a tiered prescribing algorithm. A survey assessing discharge opioid consumption and disposal safety knowledge was distributed on post-discharge day 21. Over-prescription was defined as >20% of the original prescription left over. Descriptive statistics were used for analysis. RESULTS: The survey response rate was 61% and 59% in the minimally invasive surgery and open surgery cohorts, respectively. Overall, 42.8% of patients reported using no opioids after hospital discharge, 45.2% in the minimally invasive surgery and 38.6% in the open surgery cohort. Furthermore, 74.9% of respondents were over-prescribed, with median age being statistically significant for this group (p=0.004). Finally, 46.4% of respondents expressed no knowledge regarding safe disposal practices, with no statistically significant difference between groups (p>0.99). CONCLUSION: Despite implementation of the tiered discharge opioid algorithm aimed to personalize opioid prescriptions to estimated need, we still over-prescribed opioids. Additionally, despite targeted education, nearly half of all patients who completed the survey did not know how to dispose of their opioid tablets. Additional efforts are needed to further refine the algorithm to reduce over-prescription of opioids and improve disposal education.

Rate of venous thromboembolism on an enhanced recovery program after gynecologic surgery.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism is a life-threatening complication of surgery. An Enhanced Recovery After Surgery program is a multimodal care pathway that facilitates faster recovery from surgery. The rate of venous thromboembolism after gynecologic surgery on an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery program is unknown. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the rate of venous thromboembolism within 30 days of gynecologic surgery on an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery pathway performed at a cancer center. STUDY DESIGN: Data were collected prospectively on Enhanced Recovery After Surgery pathway gynecologic patients undergoing open surgery (November 3, 2014, to March 31, 2021) and minimally invasive surgery (February 1, 2017, to March 31, 2021). Care was delivered at a tertiary cancer care center located in a large urban area. Patients undergoing emergency surgery or multispecialty surgeries were excluded. Patients undergoing open surgery were to receive heparin prophylaxis before surgery, sequential compression devices during surgery and admission, and low-molecular-weight heparin prophylaxis during admission. If diagnosed with malignancy, patients were to receive extended venous thromboembolism prophylaxis for 28 days after surgery. For minimally invasive surgery, patients received only sequential compression devices during surgery and no heparin prophylaxis before or after surgery. Venous thromboembolism events were included if detected on imaging obtained for symptoms or other indications. Descriptive statistics and bivariate statistical analyses were performed. RESULTS: Of 3329 patients, 1519 (45.6%) underwent laparotomy, 1452 (43.6%) underwent laparoscopy, and 358 (10.8%) underwent robotic surgery. The incidence rates of venous thromboembolism were 0.6% (n=21; 95% confidence interval, 0.4%-0.9%) overall, 1.1% (n=16, 95% confidence interval, 0.6%-1.7%) in the open approach, and 0.3% (n=5; 95% confidence interval, 0.3%-0.6%) in the minimally invasive approach (P=.02). The incidence rates of venous thromboembolism among the 1999 patients with malignancy were 0.9% (n=18; 95% confidence interval, 0.5%-1.4%) overall, 1.4% (n=15; 95% confidence interval, 0.7%-2.2%) in the open approach, and 0.3% (n=3; 95% confidence interval, 0.1%-0.9%) in the minimally invasive approach. The incidence rates of venous thromboembolism among the 1165 patients with benign disease were 0.3% (n=3; 95% confidence interval, 0.1%-0.7%) overall, 0.3% (n=1; 95% confidence interval, 0.0%-1.7%) in the open approach, and 0.2% (n=2; 95% confidence interval, 0.0%-0.9%) in the minimally invasive approach. CONCLUSION: The rate of venous thromboembolism among patients undergoing laparotomy and minimally invasive surgery on an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery pathway was ≤1%. This study established a benchmark for the rate of venous thromboembolism after gynecologic surgery on an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery pathway performed at a cancer center.

Secondary validation of an ovarian cancer-specific comorbidity index in a US population.

OBJECTIVES: The Ovarian Cancer Comorbidity Index (OCCI) is an age-specific index developed and previously found to be more predictive of overall and cancer-specific survival than the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). The objective was to perform secondary validation of the OCCI in a US population. METHODS: A cohort of ovarian cancer patients undergoing primary or interval cytoreductive surgery from January 2005 to January 2012 was identified in SEER-Medicare. OCCI scores were calculated with the regression coefficients determined from the original developmental cohort for five comorbidities. Cox regression analyses were used to calculate associations between the OCCI risk groups and 5-year overall survival and 5-year cancer-specific survival in comparison to the CCI. RESULTS: A total of 5052 patients were included. Median age was 74 (range 66-82) years. 47% (n=2375) had stage III and 24% (n=1197) had stage IV disease at diagnosis. 67% had a serous histology subtype (n=3403). All patients were categorized as moderate (48.4%) or high risk (51.6%). The prevalence of the five predictive comorbidities were: coronary artery disease 3.7%, hypertension 67.5%, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease 16.7%, diabetes 21.8%, and dementia 1.2%. Controlling for histology, grade, and age-stratification, worse overall survival was associated with both a higher OCCI (hazard ratio (HR) 1.57; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.46 to 1.69) and CCI (HR 1.96; 95% CI 1.66 to 2.32). Cancer-specific survival was associated with the OCCI (HR 1.33; 95% CI 1.22 to 1.44) but was not associated with the CCI (HR 1.15; 95% CI 0.93 to 1.43). CONCLUSIONS: This internationally developed comorbidity score for ovarian cancer patients is predictive for both overall and cancer-specific survival in a US population. CCI was not predictive for cancer-specific survival. This score may have research applications when utilizing large administrative datasets.

Association between COVID-19 and Postoperative Neurological Complications and Antipsychotic Medication Use after Cancer Surgery: A Retrospective Study.

INTRODUCTION: Millions of Americans infected with the severe acute respiratory syndrome-associated coronavirus-19 (COVID-19) need oncologic surgery. Patients with acute or resolved COVID-19 illness complain of neuropsychiatric symptoms. How surgery affects postoperative neuropsychiatric outcomes such as delirium is unknown. We hypothesize that patients with a history of COVID-19 could have an exaggerated risk of developing postoperative delirium after undergoing major elective oncologic surgery. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study to determine the association between COVID-19 status and antipsychotic drugs during postsurgical hospitalization as a surrogate of delirium. Secondary outcomes included 30 days of postoperative complications, length of stay, and mortality. Patients were grouped into pre-pandemic non-COVID-19 and COVID-19-positive groups. A 1:2 propensity score matching was used to minimize bias. A multivariable logistic regression model estimated the effects of important covariates on the use of postoperative psychotic medication. RESULTS: A total of 6003 patients were included in the study. Pre- and post-propensity score matching demonstrated that a history of preoperative COVID-19 did not increase the risk of antipsychotic medications postoperatively. However, respiratory and overall 30-day complications were higher in COVID-19 individuals than in pre-pandemic non-COVID-19 patients. The multivariate analysis showed that the odds of using postoperative antipsychotic medication use for the patients who had COVID-19 compared to those who did not have the infection were not significantly different. CONCLUSION: A preoperative diagnosis of COVID-19 did not increase the risk of postoperative antipsychotic medication use or neurological complications. More studies are needed to reproduce our results due to the increased concern of neurological events post-COVID-19 infection.

Patient-reported symptoms at discharge and risk of complications after gynecologic surgery.

OBJECTIVE: Current gaps in knowledge limit clinicians from fully implementing patient-reported outcomes in routine post-operative care. METHODS: This prospective study assessed symptoms via the gynecologic module of the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory (MDASI-PeriOp-GYN) in patients who underwent open laparotomy. RESULTS: At discharge, patient-reported moderate to severe (≥4 on a 0-10 scale) abdominal bloating or abdominal cramping, combined with length of stay of ≥4 days, were found to be associated with a higher risk of 30-day post-operative grade II-IV complications by the Clavien-Dindo system (all p values <0.01). Also, length of stay of ≥4 days and moderate to severe urinary urgency at discharge were found to be associated with the need for re-admission (all p values <0.01). CONCLUSION: This study defined the clinically meaningful symptoms that related to the risk of developing important complications after discharge from major open gynecological surgery.These findings support the integration of assessment of patient-reported outcomes into patient-centered post-operative care.

Medicaid Expansion and Postoperative Mortality in Women with Gynecologic Cancer: A Difference-in-Difference Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The association between Medicaid expansion and postoperative mortality after surgery for gynecologic cancer is unknown. Our objective was to compare 30- and 90-day postoperative mortality after gynecologic cancer surgery before and after 2014 in states that did and did not expand Medicaid. METHODS: We searched the National Cancer Database for women aged 40-64 years old between 2010 and 2016 who underwent surgery for a primary gynecologic malignancy. We used pre/post and quasi-experimental difference-in-difference (DID) multivariable logistic regressions to evaluate mortality pre-2014 (2010-2013) and post-2014 (2014-2016) for states that did and did not expand Medicaid in January 2014. We completed univariable logistic regressions for covariates of interest. RESULTS: Among 169,731 women, 30-day postoperative mortality in expansion states after 2014 significantly decreased for endometrial cancer (odds ratio [OR] 0.42, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.26-0.67) and ovarian cancer (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.46-0.99) and increased for cervical cancer (OR 3.82, 95% CI 1.12-13.01). Compared with non-expansion states, expansion states had improved 30-day postoperative mortality for endometrial cancer after 2014 (DID OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.31-0.96). Univariable analysis demonstrated improved 30-day postoperative mortality for Black women with endometrial cancer in expansion states (DID OR 0.22, 95% CI 0.05-0.95). There was improved 90-day postoperative mortality for endometrial cancer in expansion states (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.50-0.85), and improved 90-day postoperative mortality for Midwestern women with ovarian cancer in expansion states on univariable analysis (DID OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.26-0.91). CONCLUSIONS: State Medicaid legislation was associated with improved postoperative survival in women with endometrial cancer and subgroups of women with endometrial and ovarian cancer.

Neoadjuvant checkpoint inhibitor immunotherapy for resectable mucosal melanoma.

Background: Neoadjuvant checkpoint inhibition (CPI) has recently demonstrated impressive outcomes in patients with stage 3 cutaneous melanoma. However, the safety, efficacy, and outcome of neoadjuvant CPI in patients with mucosal melanoma (MM) are not well studied as MM is a rare melanoma subtype. CPI such as combination nivolumab and ipilimumab achieves response rates of 37-43% in unresectable or metastatic MM but there is limited data regarding the efficacy of these agents in the preoperative setting. We hypothesize that neoadjuvant CPI is a safe and feasible approach for patients with resectable MM. Method: Under an institutionally approved protocol, we identified adult MM patients with resectable disease who received neoadjuvant anti-PD1 +/- anti-CTLA4 between 2015 to 2019 at our institution. Clinical information include age, gender, presence of nodal involvement or satellitosis, functional status, pre-treatment LDH, tumor mutation status, and treatment data was collected. Outcomes include event free survival (EFS), overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), pathologic response rate (PRR), and grade ≥3 toxicities. Results: We identified 36 patients. Median age was 62; 58% were female. Seventy-eight percent of patients received anti-PD1 + anti-CTLA4. Node positive disease or satellite lesions was present at the time of treatment initiation in 47% of patients. Primary sites of disease were anorectal (53%), urogenital (25%), head and neck (17%), and esophageal (6%). A minority of patients did not undergo surgery due to complete response (n=3, 8%) and disease progression (n=6, 17%), respectively. With a median follow up of 37.9 months, the median EFS was 9.2 months with 3-year EFS rate of 29%. Median OS had not been reached and 3-year OS rate was 55%. ORR was 47% and PRR was 35%. EFS was significantly higher for patients with objective response and for patients with pathologic response. OS was significantly higher for patients with pathologic response. Grade 3 toxicities were reported in 39% of patients. Conclusion: Neoadjuvant CPI for resectable MM is a feasible approach with signs of efficacy and an acceptable safety profile. As there is currently no standard approach for resectable MM, this study supports further investigations using neoadjuvant therapy for these patients.

Temporal Patterns and Adoption of Germline and Somatic BRCA Testing in Ovarian Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the testing rate, patient characteristics, temporal trends, timing, and results of germline and somatic BRCA testing in patients with ovarian cancer using real-world data. METHODS: We included a cross-sectional subset of adult patients diagnosed with ovarian cancer between January 1, 2011, and November 30, 2018, who received frontline treatment and were followed for at least 1 year in a real-world database. The primary outcome was receipt of BRCA testing, classified by biosample source as germline (blood or saliva) or somatic (tissue). Lines of therapy (frontline, second line, third line) were derived based on dates of surgery and chemotherapy. Descriptive statistics were analyzed. RESULTS: Among 2,557 patients, 72.2% (n=1,846) had at least one documented BRCA test. Among tested patients, 62.5% (n=1,154) had only germline testing, 10.6% (n=197) had only somatic testing, and 19.9% (n=368) had both. Most patients had testing before (9.7%, n=276) or during (48.6%, n=1,521) frontline therapy, with 17.6% (n=273) tested during second-line and 12.7% (n=129) tested during third-line therapy. Patients who received BRCA testing, compared with patients without testing, were younger (mean age 63 years vs 66 years, P <.001) and were more likely to be treated at an academic practice (10.4% vs 7.0%, P =.01), with differences by Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score ( P <.001), stage of disease ( P <.001), histology ( P <.001), geography ( P <.001), and type of frontline therapy ( P <.001), but no differences based on race or ethnicity. The proportion of patients who received BRCA testing within 1 year of diagnosis increased from 24.6% of patients in 2011 to 75.6% of patients in 2018. CONCLUSION: In a large cohort of patients with ovarian cancer, significant practice disparities existed in testing for actionable BRCA mutations. Despite increased testing over time, many patients did not receive testing, suggesting missed opportunities to identify patients appropriate for targeted therapy and genetic counseling.