Post-Treatment surveillance intensity and overall survival in prostate cancer survivors (AFT-30).

BACKGROUND: Post-treatment surveillance affects millions of cancer survivors, but empiric data to guide clinical practice is lacking. This study assessed whether the intensity of surveillance testing after radical prostatectomy (RP) or radiation therapy (RT) for localized prostate cancer is associated with overall survival. METHODS: Men diagnosed with localized prostate cancer between 2005 and 2010 who underwent RP or RT at a Commission on Cancer-accredited facility were randomly sampled. Primary data collected of 10,147 patients sampled across 1007 facilities were linked with existing data from the National Cancer Database. Analysis examined whether intensity of surveillance measured as the number of PSA tests in the first year after primary treatment [categorized as 0-1 (low intensity), 2 (medium) or ≥ 3 (high intensity) PSA tests] was associated with overall survival. Secondary outcomes included recurrence-free survival (RFS) and subsequent use of imaging tests, biopsy procedures, and salvage treatment. RESULTS: Median follow-up exceeded 8 years from prostate cancer diagnosis. OS was not statistically significantly different across surveillance intensity groups among RT (P = .59) or RP (P = .29) patients. RFS was not statistically significantly different across surveillance intensity groups for RT (P = .13) patients, but was for RP (P = .01) patients with high intensity associated with the worse RFS. In both treatments, higher surveillance intensity was associated with more procedures and salvage treatments. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with localized prostate cancer, more frequent PSA surveillance testing after radical prostatectomy or radiation therapy was associated with increased procedures and salvage treatments but not overall survival.

A Four-Arm Randomized Clinical Trial of Topical Pain Control for Sentinel Node Radiotracer Injections in Patients with Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Radioactive tracer injections for breast cancer sentinel lymph node mapping can be painful. In this randomized trial, we compared four approaches to topical pain control for radiotracer injections. METHODS: Breast cancer patients were randomized (9 April 2021-8 May 2022) to receive the institutional standard of ice prior to injection (n = 44), or one of three treatments: ice plus a vibrating distraction device (Buzzy®; n = 39), 4% lidocaine patch (n = 44), or 4% lidocaine patch plus ice plus Buzzy® (n = 40). Patients completed the Wong-Baker FACES® pain score (primary outcome) and a satisfaction with pain control received scale (secondary). Nuclear medicine technologists (n = 8) rated perceived pain control and ease of administration for each patient. At study conclusion, technologists rank-ordered treatments. Data were analyzed as intention-to-treat. Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used to compare pain scores of control versus pooled treatment arms (primary) and then control to each treatment arm individually (secondary). RESULTS: There were no differences in pain scores between the control and treatment groups, both pooled and individually. Eighty-five percent of patients were 'satisfied/very satisfied' with treatment received, with no differences between groups. No differences in providers' perceptions of pain were observed, although providers perceived treatments involving Buzzy© more difficult to administer (p < 0.001). Providers rated lidocaine patch as the easiest, with ice being second. CONCLUSION: In this randomized trial, no differences in patient-reported pain or satisfaction with treatment was observed between ice and other topical treatments. Providers found treatments using Buzzy® more difficult to administer. Given patient satisfaction and ease of administration, ice is a reasonable standard.

The disproportionate burden of Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD) in diverse older adults diagnosed with cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Older adults living with Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD) who are then diagnosed with cancer are an understudied population. While the role of cognitive impairment during and after cancer treatment have been well-studied, less is understood about patients who are living with ADRD and then develop cancer. The purpose of this study is to contribute evidence about our understanding of this vulnerable population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of a linked, representative family of databases of cancer registries and Medicare administrative claims that make up the SEER-Medicare database. Older adults ages 68 and older with a first primary cancer type: breast, cervical, colorectal, lung, oral, or prostate were eligible for inclusion (N = 337,932). Prevalence estimates of ADRD across cancer types and a 5% non-cancer comparison sample were compared by patient factors. RESULTS: The overall prevalence of patients who had an ADRD diagnosis anytime in the three years prior to their cancer diagnosis was 5.6%. Patients with ADRD were more likely to be female, older (over age 75), a racial/ethnic minority, single, with multiple chronic conditions, and a tumor diagnosed early (stage I) or were unstaged. Black patients with colorectal and oral cancer had the highest and second highest prevalence of ADRD compared to White patients (13.46% vs 7.95% and 12.64% vs 7.82% respectively, p < .0001). We observed the highest prevalence of ADRD among Black patients for breast (11.85%), cervical (11.98%), lung (8.41%), prostate (4.83), and the 5% sample (9.50%, p > .0001). DISCUSSION: The higher prevalence of ADRD among Black and Latine older adults with cancer not only aligns with the trend observed in our non-cancer comparison sample, but also, these findings demonstrate the compounded risk experienced by minoritized older adults over the life course. The greater than expected prevalence of patients with ADRD who go on to develop cancer demonstrates better assessment of cognition is urgently needed. Accurate identification of these vulnerable populations is critical to improve assessment, care coordination, and address inequities in screening and treatment planning.

The influence of anatomic stage and receptor status on first recurrence for breast cancer within 5 years (AFT-01).

BACKGROUND: Risk-stratified follow-up guidelines that account for the absolute risk and timing of recurrence may improve the quality and efficiency of breast cancer follow-up. The objective of this study was to assess the relationship of anatomic stage and receptor status with timing of the first recurrence for patients with local-regional breast cancer and generate risk-stratified follow-up recommendations. METHODS: The authors conducted a secondary analysis of 8007 patients with stage I-III breast cancer who enrolled in nine Alliance legacy clinical trials from 1997 to 2013 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02171078). Patients who received standard-of-care therapy were included. Patients who were missing stage or receptor status were excluded. The primary outcome was days from the earliest treatment start date to the date of first recurrence. The primary explanatory variable was anatomic stage. The analysis was stratified by receptor type. Cox proportional-hazards regression models produced cumulative probabilities of recurrence. A dynamic programming algorithm approach was used to optimize the timing of follow-up intervals based on the timing of recurrence events. RESULTS: The time to first recurrence varied significantly between receptor types (p < .0001). Within each receptor type, stage influenced the time to recurrence (p < .0001). The risk of recurrence was highest and occurred earliest for estrogen receptor (ER)-negative/progesterone receptor (PR)-negative/Her2neu-negative tumors (stage III; 5-year probability of recurrence, 45.5%). The risk of recurrence was lower for ER-positive/PR-positive/Her2neu-positive tumors (stage III; 5-year probability of recurrence, 15.3%), with recurrences distributed over time. Model-generated follow-up recommendations by stage and receptor type were created. CONCLUSIONS: This study supports considering both anatomic stage and receptor status in follow-up recommendations. The implementation of risk-stratified guidelines based on these data has the potential to improve the quality and efficiency of follow-up.

Reexamining Time From Breast Cancer Diagnosis to Primary Breast Surgery.

Importance: Although longer times from breast cancer diagnosis to primary surgery have been associated with worse survival outcomes, the specific time point after which it is disadvantageous to have surgery is unknown. Identifying an acceptable time to surgery would help inform patients, clinicians, and the health care system. Objective: To examine the association between time from breast cancer diagnosis to surgery (in weeks) and overall survival and to describe factors associated with surgical delay. The hypothesis that there is an association between time to surgery and overall survival was tested. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a case series study that used National Cancer Database (NCDB) data from female individuals diagnosed with breast cancer from 2010 to 2014 (with 5-year follow-up to 2019). The NCDB uses hospital registry data from greater than 1500 Commission on Cancer-accredited facilities, accounting for 70% of all cancers diagnosed in the US. Included participants were females 18 years or older with stage I to III ductal or lobular breast cancer who underwent surgery as the first course of treatment. Patients with prior breast cancer, missing receptor information, neoadjuvant or experimental therapy, or who were diagnosed with breast cancer on the date of their primary surgery were excluded. Multivariable Cox regression was used to evaluate factors associated with overall survival. Patients were censored at death or last follow-up. Covariates included age and tumor characteristics. Multinomial regression was performed to identify factors associated with longer time to surgery, using surgery 30 days or less from diagnosis as the reference group. Data were analyzed from March 15 to July 7, 2022. Exposures: Time to receipt of primary breast surgery. Measures: The primary outcome measure was overall survival. Results: The final cohort included 373 334 patients (median [IQR] age, 61 [51-70] years). On multivariable Cox regression analysis, time to surgery 9 weeks (57-63 days) or later after diagnosis was associated with worse overall survival (hazard ratio, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.08-1.23; P < .001) compared with surgery between 0 to 4 weeks (1-28 days). By multinomial regression, factors associated with longer times to surgery (using surgery 1-30 days from diagnosis as a reference) included the following: (1) younger age, eg, the adjusted odds ratio (OR) for patients 45 years or younger undergoing surgery 31 to 60 days from diagnosis was 1.32 (95% CI, 1.28-1.38); 61 to 74 days, 1.64 (95% CI, 1.52-1.78); and greater than 74 days, 1.58 (95% CI, 1.46-1.71); (2) uninsured or Medicaid status, eg, the adjusted OR for patients with Medicaid undergoing surgery 31 to 60 days from diagnosis was 1.35 (95% CI, 1.30-1.39); 61 to 74 days, 2.13 (95% CI, 2.01-2.26); and greater than 74 days, 3.42 (95% CI, 3.25-3.61); and (3) lower neighborhood household income, eg, the adjusted OR for patients with household income less than $38,000 undergoing surgery 31 to 60 days from diagnosis was 1.35 (95% CI, 1.02-1.07); 61 to 74 days, 1.21 (95% CI, 1.15-1.27); and greater than 74 days, 1.53 (95% CI, 1.46-1.61). Conclusions and Relevance: Findings of this case series study suggest the use of 8 weeks or less as a quality metric for time to surgery. Time to surgery of greater than 8 weeks may partly be associated with disadvantageous social determinants of health.

Greater patient sharing between hospitals is associated with better outcomes for transferred emergency general surgery patients.

BACKGROUND: Access to emergency surgical care has declined as the rural workforce has decreased. Interhospital transfers of patients are increasingly necessary, and care coordination across settings is critical to quality care. We characterize the role of repeated hospital patient sharing in outcomes of transfers for emergency general surgery (EGS) patients. METHODS: A multicenter study of Wisconsin inpatient acute care hospital stays that involved transfer of EGS patients using data from the Wisconsin Hospital Association, a statewide hospital discharge census for 2016 to 2018. We hypothesized that higher proportion of patients transferred between hospitals would result in better outcomes. We examined the association between the proportion of EGS patients transferred between hospitals and patient outcomes, including in-hospital morbidity, mortality, and length of stay. Additional variables included hospital organizational characteristics and patient sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. RESULTS: One hundred eighteen hospitals transferred 3,197 emergency general surgery patients over the 2-year study period; 1,131 experienced in-hospital morbidity, mortality, or extended length of stay (>75th percentile). Patients were 62 years old on average, 50% were female, and 5% were non-White. In the mixed-effects model, hospitals' proportion of patients shared was associated with lower odds of an in-hospital complication; specifically, when the proportion of patients shared between two hospitals doubled, the relative odds of any outcome changed by 0.85. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest the importance of emergent relationships between hospital dyads that share patients in quality outcomes. Transfer protocols should account for established efficiencies, familiarity, and coordination between hospitals. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and Epidemiological; Level III.

Follow-up and Cancer Survivorship.

Survivorship focuses on individual's health and well-being. Assessing for cancer recurrence is a follow-up priority for survivors and providers. However, providers also emphasize the importance of assessing for adherence to ongoing treatment. Providers should also assess for sequelae of local-regional and systemic treatment. Assessing for mental health is important, as many cancer survivors experience anxiety or depression. Finally, survivors should be encouraged to have ongoing visits with their primary care to ensure screening for other health conditions. This article reviews the recommendations for survivorship and the level of evidence supporting each aspect of high-quality survivorship care.

Local/Regional Recurrence Rates After Breast-Conserving Therapy in Patients Enrolled in Legacy Trials of the Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology (AFT-01).

OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate local/regional recurrence rates after breast-conserving surgery in a cohort of patients enrolled in legacy trials of the Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology and to evaluate variation in recurrence rates by receptor subtype. BACKGROUND: Multiple randomized controlled trials have demonstrated equivalent survival between breast conservation and mastectomy, albeit with higher local/regional recurrence rates after breast conservation. However, absolute rates of local/regional recurrence have been declining with multi-modality treatment. METHODS: Data from 5 Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology legacy trials that enrolled women diagnosed with breast cancer between 1997 and 2010 were included. Women who underwent breast-conserving surgery and standard systemic therapies (n=4,404) were included. Five-year rates of local/regional recurrence were estimated from Kaplan-Meier curves. Patients were censored at the time of distant recurrence (if recorded as the first recurrence), death, or last follow-up. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were used to identify factors associated with time to local/regional recurrence, including patient age, tumor size, lymph node status, and receptor subtype. RESULTS: Overall 5-year recurrence was 4.6% (95% CI=4.0-5.4%). Five-year recurrence rates were lowest in those with ER+ or PR+ tumors (Her2+ 3.4% [95% CI 2.0-5.7%], Her2- 4.0% [95% CI 3.2-4.9%]) and highest in the triple-negative subtype (7.1% [95% CI 5.4-9.3%]). On multivariable analysis, increasing nodal involvement and triple-negative subtype were positively associated with recurrence ( P <0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Rates of local/regional recurrence after breast conservation in women with breast cancer enrolled in legacy trials of the Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology are significantly lower than historic estimates. This data can better inform patient discussions and surgical decision-making.

Incidence of radiation-associated sarcoma after breast-conserving surgery plus radiation.

BACKGROUND: Radiation-associated sarcoma (RAS) is a rare sequela of radiotherapy. Radiotherapy modalities for breast conservation and radiation treatment (BCT) have changed over time. We sought to determine if the incidence of RAS after BCT has changed over time. METHODS: We identified breast cancer survivors (diagnosed 1988-2012) treated with BCT within the SEER database. We excluded patients with prior cancer, <1-year follow-up/survival, and nonexternal beam radiation (n = 276 301). We identified patients with a subsequent chest sarcoma diagnosis. The primary predictor variable was a 5-year period of breast cancer diagnosis year (1988-1992, 1993-1997, etc.). The incidence of sarcoma was estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method, censoring at sarcoma diagnosis, death, or last follow-up (available through December 2017). Given the known latency of RAS, we used Joinpoint analysis to identify the time point at which RAS incidence significantly increased (start of the analytic window). A log-rank test assessed differences in RAS incidence by diagnosis year. RESULTS: The incidence of RAS was 0.03% at 5 years (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.03-0.04) and 0.16% at 10 years (95% CI: 0.14-0.18). No statistical difference in RAS incidence by diagnosis year was observed (p = 0.2). CONCLUSIONS: RAS remains a rare but persistent sequela after BCT. As new radiation modalities become more common, ongoing surveillance is necessary to track these rare events.

Systems of Care Factors Should Be Considered in Regionalization of Congenital Cardiac Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Regionalization of care has been proposed to optimize outcomes in congenital cardiac surgery (CCS). We hypothesized that hospital infrastructure and systems of care factors could also be considered in regionalization efforts. METHODS: Observed-to-expected (O/E) mortality ratio and hospital volumes were obtained between 2015 and 2018 from public reporting data. Using a resource dependence framework, we examined factors obtained from American Hospital Association, Children's Hospital Association, and hospital websites. Linear regression models were estimated with volume only, then with hospital factors, stratified by procedural complexity. Robust regression models were reestimated to assess the impact of outliers. RESULTS: We found wide variation in the volume of congenital cardiac surgeries performed (89-3920) and in the surgical outcomes (O/E ratio range, 0.3-3.1). Six outlier hospitals performed few high-complexity cases with high mortality. Univariate analysis including all cases indicated that higher volume predicted lower O/E ratio (ß = -0.02; SE = 0.008; P = .011). However, this effect was driven by the most complex cases. Models stratified by The Society of Thoracic Surgeons-European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery category show that volume is a significant predictor only in category 5 cases (ß = -1.707; SE = 0.663; P = .012). Robust univariate regression accounting for outliers found no effect of volume on O/E ratio (ß = 0.005; SE = 0.002; P = .975). Elimination of outliers through robust multivariate regression decreased the volume-outcome relationship and found a modest relationship between health plan ownership and outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Systems of care factors should be considered in addition to volume in designing regionalization in CCS. Patient-level data sets will better define these factors.

Increasing socioeconomically disadvantaged patients' engagement in breast cancer surgery decision-making through a shared decision-making intervention (A231701CD): protocol for a cluster randomised clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: Socioeconomic disparities for breast cancer surgical care exist. Although the aetiology of the observed socioeconomic disparities is likely multifactorial, patient engagement during the surgical consult is critical. Shared decision-making may reduce health disparities by addressing barriers to patient engagement in decision-making that disproportionately impact socioeconomically disadvantaged patients. In this trial, we test the impact of a decision aid on increasing socioeconomically disadvantaged patients' engagement in breast cancer surgery decision-making. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This multisite randomised trial is conducted through 10 surgical clinics within the National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP). We plan a stepped-wedge design with clinics randomised to the time of transition from usual care to the decision aid arm. Study participants are female patients, aged ≥18 years, with newly diagnosed stage 0-III breast cancer who are planning breast surgery. Data collection includes a baseline surgeon survey, baseline patient survey, audio-recording of the surgeon-patient consultation, a follow-up patient survey and medical record data review. Interviews and focus groups are conducted with a subset of patients, surgeons and clinic stakeholders. The effectiveness of the decision aid at increasing patient engagement (primary outcome) is evaluated using generalised linear mixed-effects models. The extent to which the effect of the decision aid intervention on patient engagement is mediated through the mitigation of barriers is tested in joint linear structural equation models. Qualitative interviews explore how barriers impact engagement, especially for socioeconomically disadvantaged women. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This protocol has been approved by the National Cancer Institute Central Institutional Review Board, and Certificate of Confidentiality has been obtained. We plan to disseminate the findings through journal publications and national meetings, including the NCORP network. Our findings will advance the science of medical decision-making with the potential to reduce socioeconomic health disparities. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT03766009).

Surveillance Imaging vs Symptomatic Recurrence Detection and Survival in Stage II-III Breast Cancer (AFT-01).

BACKGROUND: Guidelines for follow-up after locoregional breast cancer treatment recommend imaging for distant metastases only in the presence of patient signs and/or symptoms. However, guidelines have not been updated to reflect advances in imaging, systemic therapy, or the understanding of biological subtype. We assessed the association between mode of distant recurrence detection and survival. METHODS: In this observational study, a stage-stratified random sample of women with stage II-III breast cancer in 2006-2007 and followed through 2016 was selected, including up to 10 women from each of 1217 Commission on Cancer facilities (n = 10 076). The explanatory variable was mode of recurrence detection (asymptomatic imaging vs signs and/or symptoms). The outcome was time from initial cancer diagnosis to death. Registrars abstracted scan type, intent (cancer-related vs not, asymptomatic surveillance vs not), and recurrence. Data were merged with each patient's National Cancer Database record. RESULTS: Surveillance imaging detected 23.3% (284 of 1220) of distant recurrences (76.7%, 936 of 1220 by signs and/or symptoms). Based on propensity-weighted multivariable Cox proportional hazards models, patients with asymptomatic imaging compared with sign and/or symptom detected recurrences had a lower risk of death if estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PR) negative, HER2 negative (triple negative; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.73, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.54 to 0.99), or HER2 positive (HR = 0.51, 95% CI = 0.33 to 0.80). No association was observed for ER- or PR-positive, HER2-negative (HR = 1.14, 95% CI = 0.91 to 1.44) cancers. CONCLUSIONS: Recurrence detection by asymptomatic imaging compared with signs and/or symptoms was associated with lower risk of death for triple-negative and HER2-positive, but not ER- or PR-positive, HER2-negative cancers. A randomized trial is warranted to evaluate imaging surveillance for metastases results in these subgroups.

Perspectives of Wisconsin Providers on Factors Influencing Receipt of Post-Mastectomy Breast Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: The objective is to determine perspectives of general surgeons, plastic surgeons, and cancer navigators on factors contributing to breast cancer patients' decision for post-mastectomy reconstruction, especially for women facing financial hardship. METHODS: We mailed Wisconsin general and plastic surgeons who performed >5 breast cancer procedures annually a survey, including a postcard inviting cancer navigators to participate. Descriptive statistics summarize item responses. McNemar's chi-squared tests evaluated surgeons' perspectives of factors influencing reconstruction for all women compared to women facing financial hardship. RESULTS: Respondents include 70 general surgeons, 18 plastic surgeons, and 9 navigators. Respondents perceived preference-related factors as important, including "does not want more surgery" (85% reported it important overall and 77% for financial hardship women) and "reconstructed breast is not important to her" (77% vs. 61%). Surgeons perceived logistical factors were more important for women facing financial hardship, including "capacity to be away from work or home responsibilities for recovery" (30% reported important overall and 60% for financial hardship women), "concerned about out-of-pocket costs" (26% vs. 57%), and "frequent visits to complete reconstruction too burdensome" (27% vs. 49%). CONCLUSION: Our findings demonstrate Wisconsin surgeons and cancer navigators perceive logistical concerns influence reconstruction decisions for women facing financial hardship.

Barriers to breast reconstruction for socioeconomically disadvantaged women.

PURPOSE: Socioeconomic disparities in post-mastectomy breast reconstruction exist. Key informants have suggested that finding providers who accept Medicaid insurance and longer travel time to a plastic surgeon are important barriers. Our objective was to assess the relationship between these factors and reconstruction for socioeconomically disadvantaged women in Wisconsin. METHODS: We identified women < 75 years of age with stage 0-III breast cancer who underwent mastectomy using the Wisconsin Cancer Reporting System. Women in the most disadvantaged state-based tertile of the Area Deprivation Index were included (n = 1809). Geocoding determined turn-by-turn drive time from women's address to the nearest accredited Commission on Cancer or National Accreditation Program for Breast Centers. Multivariable logistic regression determined the relationship between reconstruction, Medicaid, and travel time, controlling for patient factors known to impact reconstruction. Average adjusted predicted probabilities of receiving reconstruction were calculated. RESULTS: Most patients had early-stage breast cancer (51% stage 0/I) and 15.2% had Medicaid. 37% of women underwent reconstruction. Socioeconomically disadvantaged women with Medicaid (OR = 0.62, 95% CI 0.46-0.84) and longer travel times (OR = 0.99, 95% CI 0.99-1.0) were less likely to receive reconstruction. Patients with the lowest predicted probability of reconstruction were those with Medicaid who lived furthest from a plastic surgeon. CONCLUSION: Among socioeconomically disadvantaged women, Medicaid and travel remained associated with lower rates of reconstruction. Further work will explore opportunities to improve access to reconstruction for women with Medicaid. This is particularly challenging as it may require socioeconomically disadvantaged women to travel further to receive care.

A Statewide Approach to Reducing Re-excision Rates for Women With Breast-conserving Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: Test the effectiveness of benchmarked performance reports based on existing discharge data paired with a statewide intervention to implement evidence-based strategies on breast re-excision rates. BACKGROUND: Breast-conserving surgery (BCS) is a common breast cancer surgery performed in a range of hospital settings. Studies have demonstrated variations in post-BCS re-excision rates, identifying it as a high-value improvement target. METHODS: Wisconsin Hospital Association discharge data (2017-2019) were used to compare 60-day re-excision rates following BCS for breast cancer. The analysis estimated the difference in the average change preintervention to postintervention between Surgical Collaborative of Wisconsin (SCW) and nonparticipating hospitals using a logistic mixed-effects model with repeated measures, adjusting for age, payer, and hospital volume, including hospitals as random effects. The intervention included 5 collaborative meetings in 2018 to 2019 where surgeon champions shared guideline updates, best practices/challenges, and facilitated action planning. Confidential benchmarked performance reports were provided. RESULTS: In 2017, there were 3692 breast procedures in SCW and 1279 in nonparticipating hospitals; hospital-level re-excision rates ranged from 5% to >50%. There was no statistically significant baseline difference in re-excision rates between SCW and nonparticipating hospitals (16.1% vs. 17.1%, P =0.47). Re-excision significantly decreased for SCW but not for nonparticipating hospitals (odds ratio=0.69, 95% confidence interval=0.52-0.91). CONCLUSIONS: Benchmarked performance reports and collaborative quality improvement can decrease post-BCS re-excisions, increase quality, and decrease costs. Our study demonstrates the effective use of administrative data as a platform for statewide quality collaboratives. Using existing data requires fewer resources and offers a new paradigm that promotes participation across practice settings.

Social Justice and Equity: Why Older Adults With Cancer Belong-A Life Course Perspective.

The population of older adults with cancer in the United States is rapidly increasing, which will have a substantial impact on the oncology and public health workforces across the cancer continuum, from prevention to end of life. Unfortunately, inequities in existing social structures that cause increased psychosocial stressors have led to disparities in the incidence of cancer and the morbidity and mortality of cancer for individuals from marginalized backgrounds. It is imperative that older adults, especially those from historically marginalized backgrounds, be adequately represented in all stages of cancer research to address health inequities. Continued efforts and progress toward achieving social justice and health equity require a deeper commitment to and better understanding of the impact of social determinants of health within the cancer domain. Undoubtedly, a more holistic and integrated view that extends beyond the biologic and genetic factors of health must be adopted for health entities to recognize the critical role of environmental, behavioral, and social determinants in cancer health disparities. Against this backdrop, this paper uses a life course approach to present a multifactorial framework for understanding and addressing cancer disparities in an effort to advance social justice and health equity for racially and ethnically diverse older adults.

Incidence of Second Primary Melanoma in Cutaneous Melanoma Survivors.

BACKGROUND: Cutaneous melanoma survivors are at increased risk of a second primary melanoma. Valid estimates facilitate counseling on recommended surveillance after a melanoma diagnosis. However, most estimates of 5- and 10-year incidences of second melanomas are from older cohorts and/or single institutions. This study aimed to determine the 5- and 10-year incidences of second primary cutaneous melanomas in survivors of cutaneous melanoma. METHODS: The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database was used to identify cases of non-metastatic, first cutaneous melanoma diagnosed between 1998 and 2012 (follow-up through December 2017). Eligible survivors were 18 years old or older who underwent surgery as a treatment component. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used to estimate 5- and 10-year incidences of a second melanoma, excluding new diagnoses within 3 months after the initial diagnosis. Patients were censored at second melanoma diagnosis, death, or 10-years, whichever was first. Multivariable Cox regression analysis was used to identify factors associated with a second cutaneous melanoma diagnosis. RESULTS: The study cohort comprised 152,811 patients. The incidence of second primary melanoma was 3.9% at 5 years (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.8-4.0%) and 6.7% at 10 years (95% CI, 6.6-6.9%). Older age, male sex, and regional disease were associated with increased risk of a second primary melanoma diagnosis. CONCLUSION: Melanoma survivors are at risk of a second primary melanoma, making routine skin surveillance part of recommended follow-up evaluation. A higher incidence of second melanoma with older age and regional disease at presentation is possibly explained by increased health care use providing more diagnostic opportunities, whereas male sex may represent an inherent risk factor.

Rates of Ipsilateral Local-regional Recurrence in High-risk Patients Undergoing Immediate Post-mastectomy Reconstruction (AFT-01).

BACKGROUND: Some surgeons remain hesitant to perform immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) in patients with higher risk cancers owing to concerns about cancer recurrence and/or detection. Our objective was to determine the rate of ipsilateral local-regional recurrence for stage II/III patients who underwent IBR. METHODS: The National Cancer Database special study mechanism was used to create a stratified sample of women diagnosed with stage II/III breast cancer from 1217 facilities. Demographic, tumor, and recurrence data for women who underwent mastectomy with or without IBR were abstracted, including location of recurrence and method of detection. Estimates of 5-year local-regional recurrence rates were calculated and factors associated with recurrence were identified with multivariable Cox regression. RESULTS: Some 13% (692/5318) of stage II/III patients underwent IBR after mastectomy. Patients undergoing IBR were younger (P < .001), with fewer comorbid conditions (P < .001), and with lower tumor burden in the breast (P = .001) and the lymph nodes (P = 0.01). The 5-year rate of ipsilateral local-regional recurrence was 3.6% with no significant difference between patients with or without IBR (3.0% vs. 3.7%, P = .4). Most recurrences were detected by the patient (45%) or on physician examination (24%). Reconstruction was not associated with recurrence on multivariable analysis (hazard ratio = 0.83, P = .52). CONCLUSION: Women with stage II/III breast cancer selected for IBR had similar rates of ipsilateral local-regional recurrence compared with those undergoing mastectomy alone. Offering IBR after mastectomy in a patient-centered manner to select patients with stage II/III breast cancer is an acceptable consideration.

The Relative Impact of Specific Postoperative Complications on Older Patients Undergoing Hip Fracture Repair.

BACKGROUND: Hip fractures affect a vulnerable population and are associated with high rates of morbidity, mortality, and resource utilization. Although postoperative complications are a known driver of mortality and resource utilization, the comparative impacts of specific complications on outcomes is unknown. This study assessed which complications are associated with the highest effects on mortality and resource utilization for older patients who undergo hip fracture repair. METHODS: Patients ≥ 65 years of age who underwent hip fracture repair during 2016-2017 included in the Hip Fracture Targeted ACS NSQIP (American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program) database populated the data set. Prolonged hospitalization (≥ 75th percentile) and 30-day mortality and readmission were the primary outcomes. Population attributable fractions (PAFs) were used to quantify the anticipated reduction in the primary outcomes that would result from complete prevention of 10 postoperative complications. RESULTS: Of 17,755 patients across 117 hospitals, 70.9% were female, 26.0% were over age 90, 22.8% had an American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score of 4-5, and 53.9% presented with an intertrochanteric fracture. Postoperative delirium affected 29.8% of patients and was associated with death (PAF 18.0%; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 13.2-22.5), prolonged hospitalization (PAF 14.3%; 95% CI = 12.7-15.8), and readmission (PAF 15.0%; 95% CI = 11.3-18.6). Pneumonia affected 4.1% of patients and was associated with death (PAF 10.9%; 95% CI = 8.9-12.8), prolonged hospitalization (PAF 4.0%; 95% CI = 3.5-4.5), and readmission (PAF 9.1%; 95% CI = 7.5-10.7). The impact of the other eight complications was comparatively small. CONCLUSION: Postoperative delirium and pneumonia are the highest-impact complications for older hip fracture repair patients. These complications should be prioritized in quality improvement efforts that target this patient population.