The Study of PIK3CA Hotspot Mutations and Co-Occurring with EGFR, KRAS, and TP53 Mutations in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

Objective: PIK3CA-mutant non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is associated with other genetic mutations and may influence treatment strategies and clinical outcomes. We aimed to characterize PIK3CA mutations co-occurring with several major driver mutations using data from published cohorts and our medical center. Materials and Methods: We analyzed NSCLC patients harboring PIK3CA mutations from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and Memorial Sloan Kettering (MSK) databases and retrospectively identified NSCLC patients with PIK3CA-mutants at a single medical center from our electronic records. The Log rank test was used to determine the association between PIK3CA mutations and overall survival (OS) in NSCLC patients. Results: Common hotspot mutations in PIK3CA were found in exon 9 (c.1633G > A, E545K, and c.1624G > A, E542K) and exon 20 (c.3140A > G, H1047R) in all cohorts. Co-occurring mutations of PIK3CA with EGFR, KRAS, and TP53 have been frequently observed in patients with NSCLC, with different percentages in these datasets generated by different background. PIK3CA mutations were observed to be significantly associated with poor OS in lung adenocarcinomas patients in the MSKCC cohort (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.519, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.301-0.896; P <0.05). Conclusion: PIK3CA co-occurring mutations in other genes may represent distinct subsets of NSCLC. Further elucidation of the roles of PIK3CA hotspot mutations combined with other driver mutations, including EGFR and KRAS, is needed to guide effective treatment in patients with advanced NSCLC.

Risk Factors Associated With Anastomotic Stricture in Patients Undergoing Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy: Experience From a High-Volume Center.

BACKGROUND: Esophageal cancer is a prevalent cancer, with a high incidence in low socioeconomic category countries. Minimally invasive esophagectomy is increasingly being used to treat this malignant condition. However, anastomotic stricture is a serious complication post esophagectomy. The study aims to enhance diagnostic consistency, improve treatment methods, guide patient management, stratify outcomes, and offer evidence-based preventive interventions. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 550 patients who had minimally invasive esophagus surgery was carried out at Shaukat Khanum Memorial Cancer Hospital and Research Centre in Lahore between 2015 and 2020. All patients were treated with radical resection. For tumors of the lower esophagus and gastroesophageal junction, transhiatal esophagectomy was used; for tumors of the middle and upper thoracic esophagus, right video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) was used in a three-stage procedure. Patients were routinely followed up two weeks after discharge, then every three, six, and 12 months. RESULTS: The mean age and BMI were 46.7 years and 19.4 kg/m2, respectively. Anastomotic leaks were rare, with only 13 patients experiencing them. The grade of tumor differentiation was poor, moderate, and well-differentiated. The study found that older age, high Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status, and malignancies located in the upper and middle one-third of the esophagus had significant associations with anastomotic stricture. However, some variables, like sex, did not show significant associations in either analysis. CONCLUSION: The study reveals that factors such as older patient age, high ECOG performance status, single comorbidity, and malignancies located in the upper and middle one-third of the esophagus significantly influence anastomotic stricture. The study suggests that measures against anastomotic stricture such as endoscopic procedures and minimally invasive esophagectomy should be implemented to minimize the complications.

Introduction of a New Satellite Model for Participation in Clinical Trials in a Consortial Comprehensive Cancer Center with Four University Hospitals in Germany.

INTRODUCTION: The trend toward personalized medicine leads to very small study cohorts for clinical trials, which makes it difficult to recruit patients in a single study center. On the other hand, the administrative effort required to initiate a clinical trial is very high. As a result, Germany runs the risk of falling behind other countries as a trial location. For this reason, the Center for Integrated Oncology Aachen Bonn Cologne Duesseldorf (CIO ABCD) has been working on the challenge of a new satellite model in which the main trial center is the only one to conclude a trial center contract with the sponsor and also handles all formalities with it. The remaining sites constitute the satellites. In contrast to former satellite models, the entire study-related interventions are carried out at each site in the present model. METHODS: In order to evaluate the approvability of the model, contact was made with both higher federal authorities and the responsible inspectorate, and none of them declared themselves responsible for a possible basic approval. The four ethics committees contacted agreed to the model subject to certain framework conditions. In addition, the model was validated by the preparation of several legal opinions on various issues (medical, labor, antitrust law). CONCLUSION: Study participation close to home is a decisive advantage for multimorbid patients. As up to four locations form a trial site in the model, a large catchment area can be covered with reduced administrative costs. The satellite model developed is intended to give patients broader access to medical innovations in cancer therapy.

Clinical ethics consultation services: public-facing information on NCI-designated cancer center websites.

Clinical ethics consultation services (CECS) can be particularly complex in oncology, and widespread misconceptions exist about their nature. As a result, visibility and accessibility of information regarding CECS is critical. We investigated the availability and content of information regarding CECS on websites of NCI-designated comprehensive cancer centers and cancer centers (CCs). Each website was reviewed for information on CECS and reviewed for benchmarks partially derived from the American Society of Bioethics and Humanities recommendations for CECS. Our analysis revealed that of 70 NCI-designated center websites, 38 had information on CECS, and 17 were found directly on these sites. When CECS information was available, most websites provided a mission statement (71%) and an explanation of what constitutes an ethics consult (74%). Few provided a description of the consult process (45%) or service membership (39%). Our findings reveal a significant gap in CECS visibility on the websites of NCI-designated CCs.

Palliative care in dermatooncology - Current practice in German dermatooncological centers and specialist offices.

BACKGROUND: Dermato-oncology patients are often treated in certified skin cancer centers or dermato-oncological specialist offices. Especially in higher tumor stages, patients develop symptoms, either disease-related or due to therapy-related side effects, requiring treatment. Despite a markedly improved prognosis since the introduction of targeted therapies and immunotherapies, advance care planning is required in progressive disease. It is unclear how palliative care of skin cancer patients is currently organized in dermato-oncology. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In a nationwide survey, all certified skin cancer centers and dermato-oncological specialist offices in Germany were contacted and asked to participate in this anonymized survey. RESULTS: Overall, 45 responses (42%) were received. The majority (98%) of the respondents screen the patients on a regular basis for distressing symptoms, and all centers are connected to palliative medical care providers. Only 5% of the medical staff members have the additional qualification "palliative medicine". In 68% of the participating institutions, the opportunity for care planning is offered to patients. For 89%, palliative care is relevant for everyday work, and 82% desire more research opportunities on this topic. CONCLUSIONS: This survey has shown that palliative care plays a major role in dermato-oncological work. Given that only a small proportion of the staff have received specialized training in palliative care, however, an increase of this proportion would be desirable for comprehensive care.

External validation of the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center preoperative nomogram predicting lymph node invasion in a cohort of high-grade prostate cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Commonly used preoperative nomograms predicting clinical and pathological outcomes in prostate cancer (PCa) patients have not been yet validated in high-grade only PCa patients. Our objective is to perform an external validation of the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) preoperative nomogram as a predictor of lymph node invasion (LNI) in a cohort of high-grade PCa patients. METHODS: We included patients with high-grade PCa (Gleason ≥8) treated at our institution between 2011 and 2020 with radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection without receiving neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy. The area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operator characteristic (ROC) was used to quantify the accuracy of the model to predict LNI. A calibration plot was used to evaluate the model's precision, and a decision curve analysis was computed to evaluate the net benefit associated with its use. This study was approved by our institution's ethics board. RESULTS: A total of 242 patients with a median age of 66 (60-71) years were included. LNI was observed in 70 (29%) patients with a mean of 16 (median = 15; range = 2-42) resected nodes. The MSKCC nomogram discriminative accuracy, as evaluated by the AUC-ROC was 79.0% (CI: [0.727-0.853]). CONCLUSION: The MSKCC preoperative nomogram is a good predictor of LNI and a useful tool associated with net clinical benefit in this patient population.

The Addition of Systemic Terbinafine to Antifungal Combination Therapy in the Treatment of Disseminated Drug-Resistant Mold Infections in a National Cancer Institute Comprehensive Cancer Center: A Six-Year Study.

Introduction Combination antifungal regimens are frequently employed in the treatment of invasive fungal infections in patients who are immunocompromised, particularly for cancer and transplant patients. Terbinafine is a potential agent of interest for combination regimens. Methods We reviewed data over a six-year period examining patient outcomes in terms of both mortality and distribution of pathogens. The total number of patients in our study was 64. The use of terbinafine versus no terbinafine in combination therapy was assessed. Of the 64 patients analyzed, only 14 received terbinafine. Mortality was calculated for both groups, and demographics were analyzed by descriptive statistics. Results There was no statistical difference in mortality outcomes in either group. The addition of terbinafine was well tolerated and did not appear to result in any undue toxicity concerns. Discussion We wish to draw greater attention to this potential agent within our armamentarium for invasive fungal infections. To our knowledge, the total number of patients in our study, while small, represents the largest reported cohort in the literature to date. Sensitivities are crucial to be obtained for fungal pathogens as this likely undermined the utility of terbinafine in our study with larger than expected numbers of multidrug-resistant Fusarium. With limited patient numbers, a multicenter trial would be beneficial to further examine terbinafine in combination regimens.

Influence of Certification Program on Treatment Quality and Survival for Rectal Cancer Patients in Germany: Results of 13 Certified Centers in Collaboration with AN Institute.

INTRODUCTION: The certification of oncological units as colorectal cancer centers (CrCCs) has been proposed to standardize oncological treatment and improve the outcomes for patients with colorectal cancer (CRC). The proportion of patients with CRC in Germany that are treated by a certified center is around 53%. Lately, the effect of certification on the treatment outcomes has been critically discussed. AIM: Our aim was to investigate the treatment outcomes in patients with rectal carcinoma at certified CrCCs, in German hospitals of different medical care levels. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of a prospective, multicentric database (AN Institute) of adult patients who underwent surgery for rectal carcinoma between 2002 and 2016. We included 563 patients from 13 hospitals of different medical care levels (basic, priority, and maximal care) over periods of 5 years before and after certification. RESULTS: The certified CrCCs showed a significant increase in the use of laparoscopic approach for rectal cancer surgery (5% vs. 55%, p < 0.001). However, we observed a significantly prolonged mean duration of surgery in certified CrCCs (161 Min. vs. 192 Min., p < 0.001). The overall morbidity did not improve (32% vs. 38%, p = 0.174), but the appearance of postoperative stool fistulas decreased significantly in certified CrCCs (2% vs. 0%, p = 0.036). Concerning the overall in-hospital mortality, we registered a positive trend in certified centers during the five-year period after the certification (5% vs. 3%, p = 0.190). The length of preoperative hospitalization (preop. LOS) was shortened significantly (4.71 vs. 4.13 days, p < 0.001), while the overall length of in-hospital stays was also shorter in certified CrCCs (20.32 vs. 19.54 days, p = 0.065). We registered a clear advantage in detailed, high-quality histopathological examinations regarding the N, L, V, and M.E.R.C.U.R.Y. statuses. In the performed subgroup analysis, a significantly longer overall survival after certification was registered for maximal medical care units (p = 0.029) and in patients with UICC stage IV disease (p = 0.041). In patients with UICC stage III disease, we registered a slightly non-significant improvement in the disease-free survival (UICC III: p = 0.050). CONCLUSIONS: The results of the present study indicate an improvement in terms of the treatment quality and outcomes in certified CrCCs, which is enforced by certification-specific aspects such as a more differentiated surgical approach, a lower rate of certain postoperative complications, and a multidisciplinary approach. Further prospective clinical trials are necessary to investigate the influence of certification in the treatment of CRC patients.

A framework for building comprehensive cancer center's capacity for bidirectional engagement.

PURPOSE: Community engagement has benefits for cancer centers' work and for its researchers. This study examined the experiences and perceptions of community engagement by members of the Case Comprehensive Cancer Center (Case CCC) to create and implement a framework to meet the needs of the entire cancer center. METHODS: This study included three phases: 1) Semi-structured interviews with 12 researchers from a basic science program to identify needs and suggestions for the support of community engagement; 2) Preliminary interview results informed the development of a survey of 86 cancer center members' about their awareness of and readiness to integrate community outreach and engagement into their research; and 3) The Case CCC Office of Community Outreach and Engagement reviewed the results from phases 1 and 2 to develop and then utilize a framework of engagement opportunities. RESULTS: In the interviews and surveys, cancer center members recognized the importance of community engagement and expressed an interest in participating in COE-organized opportunities for bidirectional engagement. While participation barriers include communication issues, limited awareness of opportunities, and competing priorities, members were open to learning new skills, changing approaches, and utilizing services to facilitate engagement. The framework outlines engagement opportunities ranging from high touch, low reach to low touch, and high reach and was used to develop specific services. CONCLUSION: This study identified varying needs around community engagement using an approach aimed at understanding the perspectives of a community of scientists. Implementing the framework enables reaching scientists in different ways and facilitates scientists' recognition of and engagement with opportunities.

Treatment in certified cancer centers is related to better survival in patients with colon and rectal cancer: evidence from a large German cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Certified cancer centers aim to ensure high-quality care by establishing structural and procedural standards according to evidence-based guidelines. Despite the high clinical and health policy relevance, evidence from a nation-wide study for the effectiveness of care for colorectal cancer in certified centers vs. other hospitals in Germany is still missing. METHODS: In a retrospective cohort study covering the years 2009-2017, we analyzed patient data using demographic information, diagnoses, and treatments from a nationwide statutory health insurance enriched with information on certification. We investigated whether patients with incident colon or rectal cancer did benefit from primary therapy in a certified cancer center. We used relative survival analysis taking into account mortality data of the German population and adjustment for patient and hospital characteristics via Cox regression with shared frailty for patients in hospitals with and without certification. RESULTS: The cohorts for colon and rectal cancer consisted of 109,518 and 51,417 patients, respectively, treated in a total of 1052 hospitals. 37.2% of patients with colon and 42.9% of patients with rectal cancer were treated in a certified center. Patient age, sex, comorbidities, secondary malignoma, and distant metastases were similar across groups (certified/non-certified) for both colon and rectal cancer. Relative survival analysis showed significantly better survival of patients treated in a certified center, with 68.3% (non-certified hospitals 65.8%) 5-year survival for treatment of colon cancer in certified (p < 0.001) and 65.0% (58.8%) 5-year survival in case of rectal cancer (p < 0.001), respectively. Cox regression with adjustment for relevant covariates yielded a lower hazard of death for patients treated in certified centers for both colon (HR = 0.92, 95% CI = 0.89-0.95) and rectal cancer (HR = 0.92, 95% CI = 0.88-0.95). The results remained robust in a series of sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: This large cohort study yields new important evidence that patients with colorectal cancer have a better chance of survival if treated in a certified cancer center. Certification thus provides one powerful means to improve the quality of care for colorectal cancer. To decrease the burden of disease, more patients should thus receive cancer care in a certified center.

The Cancer Screening and Survivorship Program at Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center.

Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center (Roswell) is the only NCI-designated cancer center in New York State outside of the New York City metropolitan area. The Cancer Screening and Survivorship Program combines cancer screening services with survivorship care in a freestanding centralized clinic with providers also dispersed to see survivors in other clinical areas. The aims of the program are to provide comprehensive, patient-centered care to cancer survivors and their families and caregivers by addressing symptoms, supporting wellness, prevention and quality of life, and engaging community primary care providers in a shared-care model. The clinic is led by an onco-generalist, defined as an internal medicine trained physician serving cancer survivor's medical issues from all cancer disease sites. Roswell's Cancer Screening and Survivorship Program growth and development is guided by ongoing research related to patient needs and barriers to care, overall quality of life, health promotion and prevention, as well as education and training to build a more robust cancer survivorship workforce. The cancer center leadership has identified the expansion of cancer survivorship paired with community outreach and engagement, PCP outreach and education, and comprehensive cancer screening services as one of the key strategic areas of growth over the next decade. With the investment in our long-term strategic plan, we expect to continue to grow and serve a broader community of cancer survivors and further our research related to the structure and outcomes of our programmatic activities. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: This program provides robust whole-person care for cancer survivors and provides an example of successful infrastructure for cancer survivorship.

Health System Integration and Cancer Center Access for Rural Hospitals.

BACKGROUND: Cancer centers provide superior care but are less accessible to rural populations. Health systems that integrate a cancer center may provide broader access to quality surgical care, but penetration to rural hospitals is unknown. METHODS: Cancer center data were linked to health system data to describe health systems based on whether they included at least one accredited cancer center. Health systems with and without cancer centers were compared based on rural hospital presence. Bivariate tests and multivariable logistic regression were used with results reported as P-values and odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: Ninety percent of cancer centers are in a health system, and 72% of health systems (434/607) have a cancer center. Larger health systems (P = .03) with more trainees (P = .03) more often have cancer centers but are no more likely to include rural hospitals (11% vs 6%, P = .43; adjusted OR .69, 95% CI .28-1.70). The minority of cancer centers not in health systems (N = 95) more often serve low complexity patient populations (P = .02) in non-metropolitan areas (P = .03). DISCUSSION: Health systems with rural hospitals are no more likely to have a cancer center. Ongoing health system integration will not necessarily expand rural patients' access to surgical care under existing health policy infrastructure and incentives.

The role of community outreach and engagement in evaluation of NCI Cancer Center Support Grants.

PURPOSE: National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated cancer centers are required to consider their impact on the catchment area they serve. These activities are facilitated by community outreach and engagement (COE) activities as specified in the Cancer Center Support Grant (CCSG) request for applications. While the critical importance of COE activities to NCI-designated cancer centers is well known, it is less clear what impact the COE component has on the overall CCSG merit descriptor and score. METHODS: We undertook an online survey of all 62 NCI-designated Comprehensive and Clinical centers who reported their COE merit descriptor and overall CCSG priority score as of Fall 2021. RESULTS: Of 48 (77%) of responding centers, we identified a strong correlation between the COE merit descriptor and the overall numerical CCSG score received by the center (Spearman's rank correlation coefficient r = 0.360, p = 0.0053). When stratifying this relationship by center type, we observed a very strong correlation between COE and CCSG ratings for comprehensive cancer centers (n = 40; r = 0.544; p = 0.0003) but not for non-comprehensive cancer centers (n = 8; r = 0.073; p = 0.864). CONCLUSION: COE component merit descriptors for comprehensive cancer center CCSG evaluations are strongly correlated with the overall cancer center review score.

A proposed framework for the implementation of head and neck cancer treatment at a new cancer center from a radiation oncology perspective.

BACKGROUND: Establishing a new head and neck cancer (HNC) treatment center requires multidisciplinary team management and expertise. To our knowledge, there are no clear recommendations or guidelines in the literature for the commencement of HNC radiation therapy (RT) at a new cancer center. We propose a novel framework outlining the necessary components required to set-up a new radiation therapy HNC treatment. METHODS: We reviewed the infrastructure and methodology in the commencement of HNC radiation therapy in our cancer care center and invited several external, experienced metropolitan head and neck radiation oncologists to develop a novel consensus guideline that may be used by new RT centers to treat HNC. Recommendations were presented to our internal and external staff specialists using a survey questionnaire with ratings utilized to determine consensus using pre-defined thresholds as per the American Society of Clinical Oncology Guidelines Methodology Manual. CONCLUSION: This consensus recommendation aims to improve RT utilization whilst advocating for optimal patient outcomes by presenting a framework for new radiation therapy centers ready to step up and manage the treatment of head and neck cancer patients. We propose these evidence-based consensus guidelines endorsed by external HNC radiation oncologists.

International study on the prevalence of malnutrition in centralized care for colorectal cancer patients.

Objectives: Patients with different diseases may show signs of malnutrition both before and during the hospital stay. The presence of malnutrition may impact the recovery and length of stay and consequently the costs. Early identification of malnutrition is thus a critical factor. The objective of this multicenter study is to determine the prevalence of malnutrition in colorectal cancer centers. Another objective is to investigate possible consequences, such as complications or length of stay. In addition, the study aims to demonstrate the relevance of nutrition management in colorectal cancer centers. At the same time, relevant requirements clearly demanded by the Certification Commission for Certified Colorectal Cancer Centers are met through implementation of the study. Methods: Between 2019 and 2021, patients in colorectal cancer centers were examined in the preoperative phase. In addition to questions about patients' state of health and nutrition, the validated screening forms-Subjective Global Assessment (SGA) and Nutritional Risk Screening Tool 2002 (NRS 2002)-were used to assess malnutrition. The data were processed by univariate analysis. Results: In total, data records of 3,102 patients were evaluated. The mean age of the participants was 68.5 ± 11.9 years, and their average body mass index (BMI) was 26.8 ± 5.3 kg/m2. The SGA questionnaire indicated that 23 % of the participants suffered from malnutrition and 38 % were at risk of malnutrition (NRS≥3). Malnutrition was found more frequently in patients with colorectal carcinomas than in patients with rectal carcinomas (53.1 vs. 32.1 %). The length of stay in hospital and the rate of complications were significantly higher when malnutrition was identified. Conclusions: Approximately one in three to four patients with a colorectal carcinoma has an increased risk of malnutrition. The two screening methods calculated a different prevalence (23 and 38 %). Any malnutrition that is present demonstrably has a significant impact both on the rate of complications and the length of stay and may therefore have a decisive influence on the costs. The results of this multicenter study underscore the need for systematic screening for malnutrition and at the same time should increase clinics awareness of the importance of establishing a nutrition management policy.

Cancer Center Staff Satisfaction: Descriptive Results of a Canadian Study.

Caring for cancer patients is generally considered very rewarding work, but it can also be stressful and demanding. Therefore, it is important for oncology healthcare professionals to feel satisfied with their work environment in order to provide the best care possible. An ethics-approved 61-item staff satisfaction survey was developed in-house to gain insights regarding workplace satisfaction among all staff at The Ottawa Hospital Cancer Center. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the responses. A total of 478 individuals completed the online survey, with 75.1% women, 23.2% men, and 1.7% preferring not to say. This represented the vast majority (>75%) of cancer center staff. The approximate breakdown according to healthcare professional type was as follows: 21% nurses, 20% radiation therapists, 18% physicians, 13% clerical staff, and 28% other types of staff. Almost all (97.4%) generally enjoyed their work, with 60% stating "very much" and 37.4% stating "a little bit", and 93.3% found working with cancer patients rewarding. The overall satisfaction level at work was high, with 30.1% reporting "very satisfied" and 54.2% "somewhat satisfied". However, in terms of their work being stressful, 18.6% stated it was "very much" and 62.1% "a little bit". Also, in terms of their workload, 61.3% stated it was "very busy" and 10% stated it was "excessively busy". The most enjoyable aspects of work were listed as interactions with colleagues, interactions with patients, and learning new things. The least enjoyable aspects of work were excessive workload, a perceived unsupportive work environment, and technology problems. Levels of satisfaction and stress at work varied according to role at the cancer center. Most cancer center staff seem to enjoy their work and find it rewarding. However, the work environment can be challenging and stressful. Areas for improvement include managing workloads, ensuring staff feel supported, and improving the user-friendliness of technology.

Flow cytometric signature of CD371-positive B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia.

OBJECTIVES: Multiparametric flow cytometry (MFC) aids in the diagnosis and management of B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (B-ALL) by establishing a baseline immunophenotype for leukemic cells and measuring minimal residual disease (MRD) throughout the course of treatment. Aberrant expression patterns of myeloid markers in B-ALL are also examined during long-term surveillance. Here, we investigated the utility of the newly described myeloid marker cluster of differentiation (CD)371 in MRD surveillance via MFC in patients with CD371-positive B-ALL. METHODS: Eight-color MFC with standard panels (including CD371) was used to evaluate 238 patients with newly diagnosed B-ALL. Expression levels of key markers were retrospectively assessed at diagnosis, as well as days 15 and 33 of therapy. RESULTS: CD371 was expressed in 8.4% of patients with B-ALL. CD371 positivity was associated with older age at diagnosis, higher expression levels of CD34 and CD38, and lower expression levels of CD10 and CD20. Residual leukemic cells demonstrated decreased CD10 expression and increased CD45 expression after therapy, whereas CD371 expression remained stable. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with CD371-positive B-ALL exhibit a specific signature that merits further analysis, particularly because it has been associated with DUX4 rearrangement.

Treatment of Colorectal Cancer in Certified Centers: Results of a Large German Registry Study Focusing on Long-Term Survival.

(1) Background: The WiZen study is the largest study so far to analyze the effect of the certification of designated cancer centers on survival in Germany. This certification program is provided by the German Cancer Society (GCS) and represents one of the largest oncologic certification programs worldwide. Currently, about 50% of colorectal cancer patients in Germany are treated in certified centers. (2) Methods: All analyses are based on population-based clinical cancer registry data of 47.440 colorectal cancer (ICD-10-GM C18/C20) patients treated between 2009 and 2017. The primary outcome was 5-year overall survival (OAS) after treatment at certified cancer centers compared to treatment at other hospitals; the secondary endpoint was recurrence-free survival. Statistical methods included Kaplan-Meier analysis and multivariable Cox regression. (3) Results: Treatment at certified hospitals was associated with significant advantages concerning 5-year overall survival (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.89, 0.96, adjusted for a broad range of confounders) for colon cancer patients. Concentrating on UICC stage I-III patients, for whom curative treatment is possible, the survival benefit was even larger (colon cancer: HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.84, 0.94; rectum cancer: HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.84, 0.97). (4) Conclusions: These results encourage future efforts for further implementation of the certification program. Patients with colorectal cancer should preferably be directed to certified centers.