Multidisciplinary cancer conferences for gastrointestinal malignancies result in measureable treatment changes: a prospective study of 149 consecutive patients.

BACKGROUND: In most jurisdictions, a minority of patients are discussed at multidisciplinary cancer conference (MCC) despite recommendations for such reviews. We assessed the impact of MCC review of gastrointestinal (GI) cancers at a stand-alone cancer center. METHODS: Patient data were prospectively collected on consecutive cases presented at a GI MCC during a 6-month period. Original treatment plans were collected confidentially before presentation and compared to post-MCC treatment plans. We defined changes in management plans as major (change in treatment modality) or minor (testing prior to original plan). RESULTS: A total of 149 cases were evaluated: 115 upper GI (gastric/small bowel-10 %, liver-32 %, pancreaticobiliary-36 %), and 34 lower GI (23 %). Reasons for presentation were: questions regarding progression/metastases (44 %), management (26 %), diagnosis (21 %), pathology (15 %), and resectability (7 %). Physicians were certain of their original plans being the final recommendations in 84 % (n = 125). Change in management was recommended in 36 %; 72 % were major and 28 % were minor. Patients underwent all recommended treatments at our institution in 77 % of cases, a portion in 5 %, and no recommended treatments in 18 %. On multivariate analysis, physician degree of certainty for original management plan was not predictive of a change in management plan (p = 0.61). CONCLUSIONS: Although certainty of prediscussion treatment plan is high, changes in treatment recommendations occurred in more than one-third of patients after GI MCC. This prospective study demonstrates the value of MCC in GI cancer sites, even at a stand-alone cancer center.

Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) at uncommon locations: a large population based analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Sparse information is available about GISTs in uncommon locations. Our large database analysis aims to determine the characteristics of GISTs in the esophagus, colon and rectum and compare to gastric GISTs. METHODS: The Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database was queried from 1990 to 2009 using CS SCHEMA v0203. Characteristics of each location were compared to gastric GISTs. RESULTS: 4411 GIST (29 esophageal, 2658 stomach, 1463 small intestine, 126 colonic, and 135 rectal) from 1990 to 2009 were identified. Univariate and multivariate predictors of worse disease specific survival in both the entire cohort and surgical resection group include older age, male gender, tumor size > 5 cm, no surgical intervention and anatomical location. Although less likely to undergo surgical resection, esophageal GIST (all patients and resected) had a comparable survival to gastric GIST. A higher proportion of colonic GISTs presented with distant disease and had a worse disease specific survival when compared to rectal GISTs. CONCLUSION: Our results show a rising incidence in GISTs and highlight the characteristics of GISTs based on anatomical location. In addition, this is the first study to demonstrate that colonic GISTs behave differently when compared to rectal GISTs and warrants further prospective evaluation.

Morbidity and mortality associated with gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: Surgery alone is often inadequate for advanced-stage gastric cancer. Surgical complications may delay adjuvant therapy. Understanding these complications is needed for multidisciplinary planning. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) database was queried for patients who underwent gastrectomy for malignancy (ICD-9 code 151.x) from 2005 to 2010. Thirty-day mortality and morbidity were evaluated. RESULTS: Overall, 2,580 patients underwent gastrectomy for malignancy, divided as total gastrectomy 999 (38.7 %) and partial gastrectomy 1,581 (61.3 %). Overall, serious morbidity occurred in 23.6 %, and the 30-day mortality was 4.1 %. Patients receiving a total gastrectomy were younger and healthier than those receiving a partial gastrectomy for the following measured criteria: age, diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and hypertension. Serious morbidity and mortality were significantly higher in the total gastrectomy group than the partial gastrectomy group (29.3 vs. 19.9 %, p < 0.001; and 5.4 vs. 3.4 %, p < 0.015, respectively). The inclusion of additional procedures increased the risk of mortality for the following: splenectomy (odds ratio [OR] 2.8; p < 0.001), pancreatectomy (OR 3.5; p = 0.001), colectomy (OR 3.6; p < 0.001), enterectomy (OR 2.7; p = 0.030), esophagectomy (OR 3.5; p = 0.035). Abdominal lymphadenectomy was not associated with increased morbidity (OR 1.1; p = 0.41); rather, it was associated with decreased mortality (OR 0.468; p = 0.028). CONCLUSIONS: Gastrectomy for cancer as currently practiced carries significant morbidity and mortality. Inclusion of additional major procedures increases these risks. The addition of lymphadenectomy was not associated with increased morbidity or mortality. Strategies are needed to optimize surgical outcomes to ensure delivery of multimodality therapy for advanced-stage disease.

Transhiatal versus transthoracic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a 2005-2011 NSQIP comparison of modern multicenter results.

BACKGROUND: The surgical approach to esophageal cancer continues to be controversial. A transthoracic approach is often advocated for better oncologic staging and improved survival. A transhiatal approach is often preferred due to a perceived decreased operative morbidity and mortality. METHODS: Using the American College of Surgeons-National Surgical Quality Improvement Project (ACS-NSQIP) participant-use file, patients were identified who underwent either a transhiatal or transthoracic esophagectomy for cancer at participating hospitals from 2005 to 2011. Demographic, clinical, intra-operative variables, and 30-day morbidity and mortality were collected. RESULTS: Of the 1,428 patients that had esophagectomy, 750 (52.5%) had a transhiatal (TH) resection and 678 (47.5%) had a transthoracic (TT) resection. The transhiatal group was older (66 vs. 63 years, P = 0.003) with a lower ASA class (2.84 vs. 2.91, P = 0.025). Operative time was greater in the TT group (364 vs. 298 min, P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in 30 day overall mortality (TH = 2.9%, TT = 4.7%, P = 0.095) however a trend favored the TH group. Serious morbidity remains clinically significant in both groups (TH = 39.6%, TT = 43.5%, P = 0.146). The TH group had a significantly higher superficial wound infection rate (11.6% vs. 6.2%, P < 0.001) while the TT group required more perioperative blood transfusions (12.5% vs. 8.9%, P = 0.032) and returns to operating room (14.5% vs. 10.9%, P = 0.046). CONCLUSION: Serious morbidity continues to be high for both types of esophagectomy. There needs to be continued efforts to diminish these complications.