Postoperative infectious complications worsen oncologic outcomes following pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) remains the only curative option for patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Infectious complications (IC) can negatively impact patient outcomes and delay adjuvant therapy in most patients. This study aims to determine IC effect on overall survival (OS) following PD for PDAC. STUDY DESIGN: Patients who underwent PD for PDAC between 2010 and 2020 were identified from a single institutional database. Patients were categorized into two groups based on whether they experienced IC or not. The relationship between postoperative IC and OS was investigated using Kaplan-Meier and Cox-regression multivariate analysis. RESULTS: Among 655 patients who underwent PD for PDAC, 197 (30%) experienced a postoperative IC. Superficial wound infection was the most common type of infectious complication (n = 125, 63.4%). Patients with IC had significantly more minor complications (Clavien-Dindo [CD] < 3; [59.4% vs. 40.2%, p < 0.001]), major complications (CD ≥ 3; [37.6% vs. 18.8%, p < 0.001]), prolonged LOS (47.2% vs 20.3%, p < 0.001), biochemical leak (6.1% vs. 2.8%, p = 0.046), postoperative bleeding (4.1% vs. 1.3%, p = 0.026) and reoperation (9.6% vs. 2.2%, p < 0.001). Time to adjuvant chemotherapy was delayed in patients with IC versus those without (10 vs. 8 weeks, p < 0.001). Median OS for patients who experienced no complication, noninfectious complication, and infectious complication was 33.3 months, 29.06 months, and 27.58 months respectively (p = 0.023). On multivariate analysis, postoperative IC were an independent predictor of worse OS (HR 1.32, p = 0.049). CONCLUSIONS: IC following PD for PDAC independently predict worse oncologic outcomes. Thus, efforts to prevent and manage IC should be a priority in the care of patients undergoing PD for PDAC.

Robotic Pancreaticoduodenectomy: Increased Adoption and Improved Outcomes: Is Laparoscopy Still Justified?

OBJECTIVE: To compare the rate of postoperative 30-day complications between laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) and robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD). BACKGROUND: Previous studies suggest that minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MI-PD)-either LPD or RPD-is noninferior to open pancreaticoduodenectomy in terms of operative outcomes. However, a direct comparison of the two minimally invasive approaches has not been rigorously performed. METHODS: Patients who underwent MI-PD were abstracted from the 2014 to 2019 pancreas-targeted American College of Surgeons National Sample Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) dataset. Optimal outcome was defined as absence of postoperative mortality, serious complication, percutaneous drainage, reoperation, and prolonged length of stay (75th percentile, 11 days) with no readmission. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to compare optimal outcome of RPD and LPD. RESULTS: A total of 1540 MI-PDs were identified between 2014 and 2019, of which 885 (57%) were RPD and 655 (43%) were LPD. The rate of RPD cases/year significantly increased from 2.4% to 8.4% ( P =0.008) from 2014 to 2019, while LPD remained unchanged. Similarly, the rate of optimal outcome for RPD increased during the study period from 48.2% to 57.8% ( P <0.001) but significantly decreased for LPD (53.5% to 44.9%, P <0.001). During 2018-2019, RPD outcomes surpassed LPD for any complication [odds ratio (OR)=0.58, P =0.004], serious complications (OR=0.61, P =0.011), and optimal outcome (OR=1.78, P =0.001). CONCLUSIONS: RPD adoption increased compared with LPD and was associated with decreased overall complications, serious complications, and increased optimal outcome compared with LPD in 2018-2019.

A protein-based machine learning approach to the identification of inflammatory subtypes in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: The inherently immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment along with the heterogeneity of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) limits the effectiveness of available treatment options and contributes to the disease lethality. Using a machine learning algorithm, we hypothesized that PDAC may be categorized based on its microenvironment inflammatory milieu. METHODS: Fifty-nine tumor samples from patients naïve to treatment were homogenized and probed for 41 unique inflammatory proteins using a multiplex assay. Subtype clustering was determined using t-distributed stochastic neighbor embedding (t-SNE) machine learning analysis of cytokine/chemokine levels. Statistics were performed using Wilcoxon rank sum test and Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. RESULTS: t-SNE analysis of tumor cytokines/chemokines revealed two distinct clusters, immunomodulating and immunostimulating. In pancreatic head tumors, patients in the immunostimulating group (N = 26) were more likely to be diabetic (p = 0.027), but experienced less intraoperative blood loss (p = 0.0008). Though there were no significant differences in survival (p = 0.161), the immunostimulating group trended toward longer median survival by 9.205 months (11.28 vs. 20.48 months). CONCLUSION: A machine learning algorithm identified two distinct subtypes within the PDAC inflammatory milieu, which may influence diabetes status as well as intraoperative blood loss. Opportunity exists to further explore how these inflammatory subtypes may influence treatment response, potentially elucidating targetable mechanisms of PDAC's immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment.

Appendectomy Is Oncologically Equivalent to Right Hemicolectomy for Well-Differentiated T1 Appendiceal Adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Right hemicolectomy is recommended for appendiceal adenocarcinoma but may not be needed for early stage disease. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine whether appendectomy offers adequate oncologic outcomes for T1 appendiceal adenocarcinoma from a national cohort of patients. DESIGN: Patients with T1 appendiceal adenocarcinoma (mucinous and nonmucinous histology) treated with either a right hemicolectomy or appendectomy between 2004 and 2016 were retrieved. Multivariate Cox regression analysis was used to identify predictors of overall survival. SETTING: The study was conducted using a national cancer database. PATIENTS: A total of 320 patients (median age, 62 y; 47% women) were identified: 69 (22%) underwent an appendectomy and 251 (78%) underwent a right hemicolectomy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Overall survival was measured. RESULTS: Nonmucinous adenocarcinoma was identified in 194 (61%), whereas 126 (39%) had mucinous adenocarcinoma. Of the overall cohort, 43% had well-differentiated histology, 39% had moderately differentiated disease, and 4% had poorly differentiated tumors. The rate of lymph node metastasis was lower in well-differentiated tumors (3%) compared with moderately (10%) or poorly differentiated tumors (25%). On univariate survival analysis, right hemicolectomy was associated with improved 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival in patients with moderately/poorly differentiated disease ( p < 0.001) but not for well-differentiated disease ( p = 1.000). After adjustment, right hemicolectomy was associated with overall survival improvement for moderately/poorly differentiated T1 adenocarcinoma (HR = 0.26 [95% CI, 0.08-0.82]; p = 0.02) but not for well-differentiated disease. LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by its retrospective nature. CONCLUSIONS: The current analysis from the National Cancer Database demonstrates that appendectomy is associated with equivalent survival to right hemicolectomy for well-differentiated T1 adenocarcinoma, whereas for moderately and poorly differentiated disease, right hemicolectomy is oncologically superior to appendectomy. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B689 . LA APENDICECTOMA ES ONCOLGICAMENTE EQUIVALENTE A LA HEMICOLECTOMA DERECHA PARA EL ADENOCARCINOMA APENDICULAR T BIEN DIFERENCIADO: ANTECEDENTES:La hemicolectomía derecha se recomienda para el adenocarcinoma apendicular, pero puede no ser necesaria para la enfermedad en estadio temprano.OBJETIVO:Este estudio tuvo como objetivo determinar si la apendicectomía ofrece resultados oncológicos adecuados para el adenocarcinoma apendicular T1 de una cohorte nacional de pacientes.DISEÑO:Se recuperaron pacientes con adenocarcinoma apendicular T1 (histología mucinoso y no mucinoso) tratados con hemicolectomía derecha o apendicectomía entre 2004-2016. Se utilizó un análisis de regresión de Cox multivariante para identificar los predictores de la supervivencia global.ENTORNO CLÍNICO:Base de datos nacional sobre cáncer.PACIENTES:Se identificaron un total de 320 pacientes (mediana de edad 62 años, 47% mujeres): 69 (22%) se sometieron a una apendicectomía y 251 (78%) se sometieron a una hemicolectomía derecha.PRINCIPAL MEDIDA DE RESULTADO:Sobrevida global.RESULTADOS:Se identificó adenocarcinoma no mucinoso en 194 (61%) mientras que 126 (39%) tenían adenocarcinoma mucinoso. De la cohorte general, el 43% tenía una histología bien diferenciada, el 39% tenía una enfermedad moderadamente diferenciada y el 4% tenía tumores poco diferenciados. La tasa de metástasis en los ganglios linfáticos fue menor en los tumores bien diferenciados (3%) en comparación con los tumores moderadamente (10%) o pobremente diferenciados (25%). En el análisis de sobrevida univariante, la hemicolectomía derecha se asoció con una mejor sobrevida general a 1, 3, y 5 años en pacientes con enfermedad moderada / pobremente diferenciada ( p < 0,001) pero no para la enfermedad bien diferenciada ( p = 1,000). Después del ajuste, la hemicolectomía derecha se asoció con una mejora de la sobrevida general para el adenocarcinoma T1 moderadamente / poco diferenciado (HR = 0,26, IC del 95%: 0,08-0,82, p = 0,02) pero no para la enfermedad bien diferenciada.LIMITACIONES:Este estudio estuvo limitado por su naturaleza retrospectiva.CONCLUSIONES:El análisis actual de la base de datos nacional de cáncer demuestra que la apendicectomía se asocia con una sobrevida similar a la hemicolectomía derecha para el adenocarcinoma T1 bien diferenciado, mientras que para la enfermedad moderada y pobremente diferenciada, la hemicolectomía derecha es oncológicamente superior a la apendicectomía. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B689 . (Traducción-Dr. Yazmin Berrones-Medina ).

A phase II study of neoadjuvant liposomal irinotecan with 5-FU and oxaliplatin (NALIRIFOX) in pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

For patients with localized pancreatic cancer with minimal vascular involvement, optimal survivability requires a multidisciplinary approach of surgical resection and systemic chemotherapy. FOLFIRINOX is a combination chemotherapy regimen that offers promising results in the perioperative and metastatic settings; however, it can cause significant adverse effects. Such toxicity can negatively impact some patients, resulting in chemotherapy discontinuation or surgical unsuitability. In an effort to reduce toxicities and optimize outcomes, this investigation explores the safety and feasibility of substituting liposomal irinotecan (nal-IRI) for nonliposomal irinotecan to improve tumor drug delivery and potentially reduce toxicity. This regimen, NALIRIFOX, has the potential to be both safer and more effective when administered in the preoperative setting.

For patients with pancreatic cancer with little to no cancer near the blood vessels, the best life expectancy usually requires surgery and chemotherapy. FOLFIRINOX is a chemotherapy medicine that offers promising results for both patients getting surgery and for patients with widespread disease. However, it can cause harmful side effects. The side effects can be so bad that the chemotherapy has to be stopped or that surgery is no longer possible. In order to reduce the harmful side effects and improve outcomes, this investigation looks into the safety and practicality of using a different version of one of the medicines. The different version hopes to improve drug delivery and reduce harmful side effects. This regimen, NALIRIFOX, can be safer and more effective in patients awaiting surgery. Clinical Trial Registration: UF-STO-PANC-004 (NCT03483038) (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Pancreaticoduodenectomy for benign and premalignant pancreatic and ampullary disease: is robotic surgery the better approach?

BACKGROUND: The robotic platform is increasingly being utilized in pancreatic surgery, yet its overall merits and putative advantages remain to be adjudicated. We hypothesize that the benefits of minimally invasive pancreatic surgery are maximized in pancreatic benign and premalignant disease, in the setting of friable pancreatic tissue and small pancreatic duct. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of our prospectively maintained pancreatic database of all consecutive patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) for benign or premalignant conditions between 2010 and 2020. Peri-operative outcomes and long-term complications were compared between robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) and open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD). RESULTS: One hundred and eighty eight (n = 188) patients met our inclusion criteria, of which 68 were OPD and 120 RPD. Malignant histologies were excluded. There were only minor differences in baseline characteristics between the two groups. Post-operative merits of the RPD included lower clinically relevant post-operative pancreatic fistula 10 (8.3%) vs 24 (35.3%), p < 0.001, fewer surgical site infections; 9 (7.5%) vs 11 (16.2%), p = 0.024, shorter operative time, greater lymph node yield; 29 (IQR 21, 38) vs 21 (IQR 13, 34), p = 0.001, and lower 90 days mortality; 1 (0.8%) vs 4 (5.9%), p = 0.039. Rates of long-term complications were similar, exception made for a higher occurrence of small bowel obstruction (SBO) 2 (1.7%) vs 4 (5.9%), p = 0.031 and need for surgical intervention for SBO 0 (0.0%) vs 2 (2.9%), p = 0.019 in the OPD group. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that RPD benefits include lower 90-day mortality, shorter LOS, and lower rates of selected complications compared to open pancreaticoduodenectomy.

National adoption of neoadjuvant chemotherapy: paradigm shift in the treatment of pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: The historical standard of care in treating operable pancreatic cancer via upfront surgery has been challenged recently using a neoadjuvant approach. The aim of the study is to examine the national practice patterns in the management of pancreatic cancer with an emphasis on the trends of neoadjuvant systemic therapy use. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional time-series study using the National Cancer Database from 2006 to 2019. Patients who underwent resection for stage I-II pancreatic adenocarcinoma were selected. RESULTS: Overall, 25% of patients had neoadjuvant chemotherapy, 49% had surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy and 26% had surgery alone. The rate of neoadjuvant chemotherapy has increased from 11% in 2006 to 43% in 2019. There was a decrease in the rate of surgery followed by chemotherapy from 48% to 38%, and a decrease in the rate of surgery alone from 41% to 19%. The rate of radiation therapy use has decreased over time, as has the resection rate, while median overall survival has steadily improved over the years. CONCLUSIONS: In 2019, the rate of using neoadjuvant systemic therapy overtook the rate of surgery first followed by adjuvant systemic therapy, marking a pragmatic national shift in the clinical management of pancreatic cancer.

The use of angiotensin system inhibitors correlates with longer survival in resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma patients.

BACKGROUND: Activities and inhibition of the Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System (RAAS) may affect the survival of resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) patients METHOD: A single-institution retrospective analysis of resected PDAC patients between 2010 and 2019. To estimate the effect of angiotensin system inhibitors (ASIs) on patient survival, we performed Kaplan Meier analysis, Cox Proportional Hazards model, Propensity Score Matching (PSM), and inverse probability weighting (IPW) analysis. RESULTS: 742 patients were included in the analysis. The average age was 67.0 years, with a median follow-up of 24.1 months. The use of ASI was associated with significantly longer overall survival in univariate (p = 0.004) and multivariable (HR = 0.70 [0.56-0.88],p = 0.003) adjusted analysis. In a propensity score-matched cohort of 400 patients, ASI use was again associated with longer overall survival (p = 0.039). Lastly, inverse probability weighting (IPW) analysis suggested that the use of ASI was associated with an average treatment effect on the treated (ATT) of HR = 0.68 [0.53-0.86],p = 0.002) for overall survival. CONCLUSION: In this single-institution retrospective study focusing on resected PDAC patients, the use of ASI was associated with longer overall survival in multiple statistical models. Prospective clinical trials are needed before routine clinical implementation of ASI as an adjuvant to existing therapy can be recommended.

Lenvatinib inhibits the growth of gastric cancer patient-derived xenografts generated from a heterogeneous population.

BACKGROUND: Lenvatinib is a multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor that is being tested in combination with immune checkpoint inhibitors to treat advanced gastric cancer; however, little data exists regarding the efficacy of lenvatinib monotherapy. Patient-derived xenografts (PDX) are established by engrafting human tumors into immunodeficient mice. The generation of PDXs may be hampered by growth of lymphomas. In this study, we compared the use of mice with different degrees of immunodeficiency to establish PDXs from a diverse cohort of Western gastric cancer patients. We then tested the efficacy of lenvatinib in this system. METHODS: PDXs were established by implanting gastric cancer tissue into NOD.Cg-PrkdcscidIl2rgtm1Wjl/SzJ (NSG) or Foxn1nu (nude) mice. Tumors from multiple passages from each PDX line were compared histologically and transcriptomically. PDX-bearing mice were randomized to receive the drug delivery vehicle or lenvatinib. After 21 days, the percent tumor volume change (%Δvtumor) was calculated. RESULTS: 23 PDX models were established from Black, non-Hispanic White, Hispanic, and Asian gastric cancer patients. The engraftment rate was 17% (23/139). Tumors implanted into NSG (16%; 18/115) and nude (21%; 5/24) mice had a similar engraftment rate. The rate of lymphoma formation in nude mice (0%; 0/24) was lower than in NSG mice (20%; 23/115; p < 0.05). PDXs derived using both strains maintained histologic and gene expression profiles across passages. Lenvatinib treatment (mean %Δvtumor: -33%) significantly reduced tumor growth as compared to vehicle treatment (mean %Δvtumor: 190%; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Nude mice are a superior platform than NSG mice for generating PDXs from gastric cancer patients. Lenvatinib showed promising antitumor activity in PDXs established from a diverse Western patient population and warrants further investigation in gastric cancer.

Transanal excision with adjuvant therapy for pT1N0 rectal tumors with high-risk features offers equivalent survival to radical resection: A National Cancer Database analysis.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines favor transabdominal radical resection (RR) over transanal local excision (TAX) followed by adjuvant therapy (TAXa) for pT1N0 rectal tumors with high-risk features. Comparison of oncologic outcomes between these approaches is limited, although the former is associated with increased postoperative morbidity. We hypothesize that such treatment strategies result in equivalent long-term survival. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using the National Cancer Database (2010-2016) to identify patients with pT1N0 rectal adenocarcinoma with high-risk features who underwent TAX or RR for curative intent. The primary outcome was 5-year overall survival (OS), evaluated with log-rank and Cox-proportional hazards testing. RESULTS: A total of 1159 patients (age 67.4 ± 12.9 years; 56.6% male; 83.3% White) met study criteria, of which 1009 (87.1%) underwent RR and 150 (12.9%) underwent TAXa. Patients undergoing TAXa had shorter lengths of stay (RR = 6.5 days, TAXa = 2.7 days, p < 0.001). The 5-year OS was equivalent between groups. TAX without adjuvant therapy was associated with an increased risk of mortality (hazard ratio 1.81, 95% confidence interval 1.17-2.78, p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest study to demonstrate equivalent 5-year OS between TAXa and RR for T1N0 rectal cancer with high-risk features. These findings may guide the development of prospective, randomized trials and influence changes in practice recommendations for early-stage rectal cancer.

Omission of Right Hemicolectomy May be Safe for Some Appendiceal Goblet Cell Adenocarcinomas: A Survival Analysis of the National Cancer Database.

BACKGROUND: Appendiceal goblet cell adenocarcinomas (GCC) are rare tumors with clinical behavior between classic carcinoids and adenocarcinomas. Current guidelines recommend right hemicolectomy for all GCCs. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The National Cancer Database was retrospectively queried for appendiceal GCCs undergoing appendectomy or right hemicolectomy between 2004 and 2016. Demographics, tumor characteristics, and post-operative outcomes were collected. The primary outcome was overall survival, which was examined by surgical type and tumor T stage. Multivariate logistic regression was utilized to identify predictors of survival. RESULTS: In total, 1083 GCCs were included, and 81.8% underwent right hemicolectomy. Mean age was 57 years, and 89% were White. Patients undergoing hemicolectomy had higher T-stage tumors (66.6%/14.4% T3/T4 vs. 55.8%/8.1%, p < 0.001). Lymph node positivity increased with T stage (1.1%, 2.1%, 9.9%, and 29.1% for T1-T4). GCCs undergoing colectomy were more frequently moderately or poorly differentiated (16.7%/9.0% vs. 12.2%/6.6%, p = 0.011). Appendectomy surgical margins were positive in 17.3% (3.4% hemicolectomy, p < 0.001). In T3/T4 tumors, a significant survival benefit at 5 years was observed in patients undergoing colectomy as compared with appendectomy (85.4% vs. 82.0%, p = 0.028). On multivariate analysis, lymph node positivity markedly decreased survival overall for the entire cohort (HR 7.58, p < 0.001) and for T3/T4 tumors (HR 7.63, p < 0.001). In patients with T3/T4 tumors, there was a trend towards improved survival with right hemicolectomy (HR 0.42, p = 0.068). CONCLUSION: Omitting right hemicolectomy can be considered for select T1/T2 appendiceal GCCs with negative appendectomy margins, given low rates of lymph node metastases and lack of survival benefit with right hemicolectomy.

Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma Lessens the Deleterious Effect of Omission of Adjuvant Chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Despite controversy regarding the role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in pancreatic adenocarcinoma, nearly half of resected patients do not receive chemotherapy postoperatively. This study aimed to examine whether use of NAC compensates for omission of adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) for resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma. METHODS: Adults with resected stages 1 to 3 pancreatic adenocarcinoma were enrolled from the National Cancer Database NCDB (2006-2016). Overall survival (OS) analyses were used to examine the impact of NAC on those who did not receive AC. RESULTS: The study analyzed a national cohort of 56,286 patients: 30% without chemotherapy, 11% with NAC, 54% with AC, and 5% with NAC plus AC. Use of NAC increased by more than 400% from 2006 to 2016, whereas the rates for omission of chemotherapy remained unchanged. The OS rates were similar between the patients who received NAC and those who received AC (hazard ratio, 0.97; p = 0.21). Among the patients who did not receive AC, NAC was associated with improved OS (26.7 vs. 18.4 months; p < 0.0001). The patients who did not receive AC but underwent NAC had a median OS comparable with the OS of those who received AC alone (26.9 vs. 24.7 months). In the adjusted analysis, the use of NAC for those without AC was significantly associated with improved OS (estimate, - 0.24; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Although data are limited regarding the survival benefit derived from neoadjuvant versus adjuvant chemotherapy in pancreatic adenocarcinoma, nearly half of patients do not receive adjuvant chemotherapy. This study demonstrates that the use of NAC lessens the survival disadvantage caused by omission of AC. Despite controversy, NAC may be considered for pancreatic adenocarcinoma patients given the high likelihood that adjuvant chemotherapy will be omitted.

The Role of Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Non-Metastatic Goblet Cell Carcinoid of the Appendix: An 11-Year Experience from the National Cancer Database.

BACKGROUND: Goblet cell carcinoids (GCC) are an aggressive, albeit rare, subtype of appendiceal tumors that exhibit distinct histologic features and lack clear treatment guidelines. We aimed to ascertain the impact of adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) for GCC in a national cohort of patients. METHODS: Patients who underwent a right hemicolectomy for stage I-III GCC of the appendix between 2006 and 2016 were selected from the National Cancer Database (NCDB). Stratification based on AC receipt was performed. Kaplan-Meier survival estimates and Cox proportional hazard regression were used to identify predictors of overall survival (OS). RESULTS: A total of 867 patients were identified, of whom 124 (14%) received AC. Patients in the AC group were significantly younger (54 vs. 57 years; p = 0.006) and were predominantly of male sex (60 vs. 48%; p = 0.012). On histopathology, patients in the AC group had a higher proportion of poorly/undifferentiated grade (27 vs. 5%; p < 0.001), T4 disease (35 vs. 11%; p < 0.001), and lymph node-positive disease (45 vs. 7%; p < 0.001) than patients who did not receive AC. After excluding patients diagnosed in 2016 due to a lack of follow-up data (n = 162), a survival advantage for the AC group was detected only after stratification for lymph node-positive disease (p = 0.007). On Cox proportional hazard regression, AC demonstrated an independent association with improved OS (hazard ratio 0.24, 95% confidence interval 0.084-0.683; p = 0.007). CONCLUSION: The current analysis from the NCDB supports the role of AC for GCC of the appendix, chiefly for patients with lymph node metastatic disease.

Patient Factors Limit Colon Cancer Survival at Safety-Net Hospitals: A National Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Safety-net hospitals serve a vital role in society by providing care for vulnerable populations. Existing data regarding oncologic outcomes of patients with colon cancer treated at safety-net hospitals are limited and variable. The objective of this study was to delineate disparities in treatment and outcomes for patients with colon cancer treated at safety-net hospitals. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study identified 802,304 adult patients with colon adenocarcinoma from the National Cancer Database between 2004-2016. Patients were stratified according to safety-net burden of the treating hospital as previously described. Patient, tumor, facility, and treatment characteristics were compared between groups as were operative and short-term outcomes. Cox proportional hazards regression was utilized to compare overall survival between patients treated at high, medium, and low burden hospitals. RESULTS: Patients treated at safety-net hospitals were demographically distinct and presented with more advanced disease. They were also less likely to receive surgery, adjuvant chemotherapy, negative resection margins, adequate lymphadenectomy, or a minimally invasive operative approach. On multivariate analysis adjusting for patient and tumor characteristics, survival was inferior for patients at safety-net hospitals, even for those with stage 0 (in situ) disease. CONCLUSION: This analysis revealed inferior survival for patients with colon cancer treated at safety-net hospitals, including those without invasive cancer. These findings suggest that unmeasured population differences may confound analyses and affect survival more than provider or treatment disparities.

Neoadjuvant therapy versus upfront surgery for early-stage left-sided pancreatic adenocarcinoma: A propensity-matched analysis from a national cohort of distal pancreatectomies.

BACKGROUND: There are limited data on the efficacy of neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) for early-stage distal pancreas adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Previous studies focused on adenocarcinoma of the head of the pancreas or dealt with borderline and locally advanced tumors of the body and tail. METHODS: This is a retrospective study of the National Cancer Database between 2006 and 2015. A propensity-matched analysis was performed to compare overall survival estimates between NAT and upfront resection (UR) groups. RESULTS: A total of 5003 distal pancreatectomies for PDAC were identified, of whom 408 (9%) received NAT. After 1:1 matching, 353 NAT patients were compared with 353 UR patients. NAT was associated with lower 90-day mortality. There were no differences in the number of lymph nodes retrieved, or length of stay. With matching, the NAT group had higher median overall survival compared with UR (33.0 vs. 27.0 months; p = 0.009) and adjusted overall survival (hazard ratio = 0.63, 95% confidence interval = 0.51-0.77; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The receipt of NAT followed by distal pancreatectomy for early-stage distal PDAC is associated with improved overall survival compared with UR. This study supports the use of NAT in the multimodal therapy paradigm of early-stage adenocarcinoma of the body and tail of the pancreas.

Medicaid expansion and the management of pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: Medicaid expansion under the Affordable Care Act has improved access to screening and treatment for certain cancers. It is unclear how this policy has affected the diagnosis and management of pancreatic cancer. METHODS: Using a quasi-experimental difference-in-differences (DID) approach, we analyzed Medicaid and uninsured patients in the National Cancer Data Base during two time periods: pre-expansion (2011-2012) and postexpansion (2015-2016). We investigated changes in cancer staging, treatment decisions, and surgical outcomes. RESULTS: In this national cohort, pancreatic cancer patients in expansion states had increased Medicaid coverage relative to those in nonexpansion states (DID = 17.49, p < 0.01). Medicaid expansion also led to an increase in early-stage diagnoses (Stage I/II, DID = 4.71, p = 0.03), higher comorbidity scores among surgical patients (Charlson/Deyo score 0: DID = -13.69, p = 0.02), a trend toward more neoadjuvant radiation (DID = 6.15, p = 0.06), and more positive margins (DID = 11.69, p = 0.02). There were no differences in rates of surgery, postoperative outcomes, or overall survival. CONCLUSION: Medicaid expansion was associated with improved insurance coverage and earlier stage diagnoses for Medicaid and uninsured pancreatic cancer patients, but similar surgical outcomes and overall survival. These findings highlight both the benefits of Medicaid expansion and the potential limitations of policy change to improve outcomes for such an aggressive malignancy.

Predictors of early recurrence following neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgical resection for localized pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAT) for pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is increasingly being utilized. However, a significant number of patients will experience early recurrence, possibly negating the benefit of surgery. We aimed to identify factors implicated in early disease recurrence. METHODS: A retrospective review of pancreaticoduodenectomies performed between 2005 and 2017 at our institution for PDAC following NAT was performed. A 6-month cut-off was used to stratify patients into early/late recurrence groups. Multivariate analysis was performed to identify predictors of recurrence. RESULTS: Of 273 patients, 64 (23%) developed early recurrence or died within 90 days of surgery. The median time to recurrence was 4 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.2-4.3) in the early group versus 16 months (95% CI: 13.7-19.9) in the late group. The former had higher baseline and post-NAT Ca19-9 levels than the latter (472 vs. 153 IU/ml, p = 0.001 and 71 vs. 39 IU/ml, p = 0.005, respectively). A higher positive lymph node ratio significantly increased the risk of early recurrence (hazard ratio [HR]: 15.9, p < 0.001) while adjuvant chemotherapy was protective (HR: 0.4, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Our findings acknowledge the limitations of clinically measured factors used to ascertain response to NAT and underline the need for individualized molecular markers that take into consideration the specific tumor biology.

Safety and oncologic efficacy of robotic compared to open pancreaticoduodenectomy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: Emerging data from multi-institutional and national databases suggest that robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy is safe and feasible for pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Nevertheless, there are limited reports evaluating its safety and oncologic efficacy following neoadjuvant chemotherapy. METHOD: This is a retrospective study from the 2010-2016 National Cancer Database comparing the postoperative, pathological and long-term oncologic outcomes between robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) and open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) for pancreatic adenocarcinoma following neoadjuvant chemotherapy. RESULTS: We identified 155 (5%) RPD and 3329 (95%) OPD following neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The use of the robot increased from 3 cases in 2010 to 50 cases in 2016. RPD patients were more likely to receive adjuvant chemotherapy and to be treated at academic centers. After adjustment, RPD was associated with a higher proportion of adequate lymphadenectomy, receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy, decreased rate of prolonged length of stay, and similar 90-day mortality. There was no difference in median overall survival between RPD and OPD (25.6 months vs. 27.5 months, Log Rank p = 0.879). The 1-, 3- and 5-year overall survival rates for RPD were 83%, 36% and 22% and for OPD were 86%, 38% and 22%. After adjustment, the use of robotic surgery was associated with similar overall survival compared to the open approach (HR 1.011, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.776-1.316). CONCLUSIONS: Following neoadjuvant chemotherapy, RPD is associated with similar short- and long-term mortality with the advantage of shorter length of stay, higher proportion of adequate lymphadenectomy and receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy.

Long-term oncologic outcomes of robotic and open pancreatectomy in a national cohort of pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Robotic pancreatectomy is gaining momentum; however, limited data exist on the long-term survival of this approach for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). The objective of this study is to compare the long-term oncologic outcomes of robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) and robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) to open surgery in patients with PDAC. STUDY DESIGN: Robotic and open pancreatectomy for stages I-III PDAC were obtained from the 2010 to 2016 National Cancer Database. RESULTS: We identified 17 831 pancreaticoduodenectomies and 2718 distal pancreatectomies of which 626 (4%) and 332 (12%) were robotic, respectively. There was no difference in median overall survival between RPD (22.0 months) and open pancreatoduodenectomy (21.8 months; logrank P = .755). The adjusted hazard ratio [HR] was 1.014 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.903-1.139). The median overall survival for RDP (35.3 months) was higher than open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) (24.9 months; logrank P = .001). The adjusted HR suggests a benefit to RDP compared to ODP (HR, 0.744; 95% CI: 0.632-0.868) CONCLUSION: In a national cohort of resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma, the robotic platform was associated with similar long-term survival for pancreaticoduodenectomy, but improved survival for distal pancreatectomy.

Long-term survival following minimally invasive extended cholecystectomy for gallbladder cancer: A 7-year experience from the National Cancer Database.

BACKGROUND: Open extended cholecystectomy (O-EC) has long been the recommended treatment for resectable gallbladder cancer (GBC), while the minimally-invasive approach for EC (MIS-EC) remains controversial. Our aim was to analyze overall survival of GBC patients treated with MIS-EC vs O-EC at the national level. METHODS: A retrospective review of the National Cancer Database of patients with resectable GBC (2010-2016) and treated with either MIS-EC or O-EC was performed. Overall survival (OS) was compared by the surgical approach. RESULTS: A total of 680 patients were identified, of whom 235 (34.6%) underwent MIS-EC. There were no differences in the rates of positive margins between MIS-EC and O-EC (14% vs 19%, respectively; P = .278), and in the mean lymph node yield (6.54 vs 6.66, respectively; P = .914). The median survival following MIS-EC was significantly higher than that of O-EC (39 vs 26 months; P = .048). After stratification by pathological stage and after adjustment, there was no significant difference in OS between the groups (HR = 0.9, 95% CI, 0.6-1.5). CONCLUSION: In this large national cohort, MIS-EC oncologic outcomes were noninferior to the O-EC. Proficiency with MIS techniques, proper patient selection, and referral to specialized centers may allow a greater benefit from this treatment modality.