Do Children With Osteosarcoma Benefit From Pulmonary Metastasectomy?: A Systematic Review of Published Studies and "Real World" Outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To critically examine the evidence-base for survival benefit of pulmonary metastasectomy (PM) for osteosarcoma (OS) in the pediatric population. BACKGROUND: PM for OS is recommended as the standard of care in both pediatric and adult treatment protocols. Recent results from the "Pulmonary Metastasectomy in Colorectal Cancer" trial demonstrate no survival benefit from PM in colorectal cancer in adults. METHODS: A systematic review was undertaken according to "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis" guidelines. Medline, Embase, and 2 clinical trial registers were searched for all studies detailing pediatric patients with OS (<18 years) undergoing PM with a comparison cohort group that did not receive PM. RESULTS: Eleven studies met inclusion criteria dating from 1984 to 2017. All studies were retrospective and none directly compared PM versus no PM in pediatric patients as its main objective(s). Three-year survival rates ranged from 0% to 54% for PM and 0% to 16% for no PM. No patients receiving PM were usually those with unresectable disease and/or considered to have a poor prognosis. All studies were at high risk of bias and there was marked heterogeneity in the patient selection. CONCLUSIONS: There is a weak evidence base (level IV) for a survival benefit of PM for OS in pediatric patients likely due to selection bias of "favorable cases." The included studies many of which detailed outdated treatment protocols were not designed in their reporting to specifically address the questions directly. A randomized controlled trial-while ethically challenging in a pediatric population-incorporating modern OS chemotherapy protocols is needed to crucially address any "survival benefit."

Surgery for Oligometastatic Pancreatic Cancer: Defining Biologic Resectability.

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is most often metastatic at diagnosis. As systemic therapy continues to improve alongside advanced surgical techniques, the focus has shifted toward defining biologic, rather than technical, resectability. Several centers have reported metastasectomy for oligometastatic PDAC, yet the indications and potential benefits remain unclear. In this review, we attempt to define oligometastatic disease in PDAC and to explore the rationale for metastasectomy. We evaluate the existing evidence for metastasectomy in liver, peritoneum, and lung individually, assessing the safety and oncologic outcomes for each. Furthermore, we explore contemporary biomarkers of biological resectability in oligometastatic PDAC, including radiographic findings, biochemical markers (such as CA 19-9 and CEA), inflammatory markers (including neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, C-reactive protein, and scoring indices), and liquid biopsy techniques. With careful consideration of existing data, we explore the concept of biologic resectability in guiding patient selection for metastasectomy in PDAC.

Surgical metastasectomy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma in the era of targeted and immune therapy: a narrative review.

PURPOSE: Metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) still harbours a big propensity for future metastasis. Combinations of immune and targeted therapies are currently the cornerstone of management with a less clear role for surgical metastasectomy (SM). METHODS: We performed a narrative review of literature searching for the available evidence on the yield of surgical metastasectomy in the era of targeted and immune therapies. The review consisted of a PubMed search of relevant articles using the Mesh terms:" renal cell carcinoma", "surgery¼, «resection", "metastasectomy", "molecular targeted therapies", "immune checkpoint inhibitors" alone or in combination. RESULTS: In this review, we exposed the place of surgical metastasectomy within a multimodal treatment algorithm for mRCC Also, we detailed the patient selection criteria that yielded the best results when SM was performed. Finally, we discussed the feasibility and advantages of SM per organ site. CONCLUSION: Our work was able to show that SM could be proposed as a consolidation treatment to excise residual lesions that were deemed unresectable prior to a combination of systemic therapies. Contrastingly, it can be proposed as an upfront treatment, leaving systemic therapies as an alternative in case of future relapse. However, patient selection regarding their performance status, metastatic sites, number of lesions and tumorous characteristics is of paramount importance.

Is there a role for metastasis-directed therapy in bladder cancer?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This article aims to comprehensively review and critique the existing literature on the role of metastatic-directed therapy in patients with metastatic bladder cancer, particularly in oligometastatic disease state. RECENT FINDINGS: The role of metastasectomy in metastatic bladder cancer is still controversial. Several studies have demonstrated improved outcomes, particularly in a highly selected patients with small metastatic lesions or with lung or brain metastases, whereas others show no significant survival benefit. Combining metastasectomy with systemic therapies, such as immunotherapy and chemotherapy, has also shown benefits. Metastasis-directed radiotherapy is evolving as a potentially effective approach with minimal toxicity in achieving local control and improving survival, particularly in patients with oligometastatic disease. The evidence regarding the impact of several factors such as performance status, metastatic burden, and the presence of visceral metastases on outcomes is mixed. Concurrent treatment with systemic therapy may potentiate the effectiveness of metastasis-directed therapy. SUMMARY: In patients with metastatic deposits amenable to surgical resection, metastasectomy stands as a promising avenue. Metastatic-directed radiotherapy has demonstrated local control and improved survival in the evolving landscape of oligometastatic bladder cancer management. Further, well designed multicenter prospective studies are needed to support these findings and better understand the synergy between radiotherapy and systemic treatments, especially immunotherapy.

Definitions and unmet needs in the management of oligomestatic renal cell carcinoma in the modern era.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Oligometastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is a complex entity, potentially leading to a specific clinical management of these patients. Recent and ongoing trials have raised several unresolved questions that could impact clinical routine practice, advocating for the integration of novel treatment options (systemic treatment, cytoreductive surgery, or stereotactic body radiotherapy - SBRT) with varied modalities and objectives. RECENT FINDINGS: Immunotherapy represents a breakthrough in the systemic treatment of mRCC. However, many questions are still unsolved regarding the perfect timing for starting systemic and whether the systemic treatment could improve the activity of metastases-directed strategies. Moreover, the widespread use of adjuvant immunotherapy will challenge the treatment paradigm in the oligorecurrent scenario. Radical surgery of metastases and more recently SBRT - both eventually associated with systemic treatment - actually represent two important approaches to be considered in oligometastatic patients. SUMMARY: Oligometastatic RCC represents a status including a wide spectrum of clinical conditions that requires a tailored treatment approach. The correct management integrates local approaches (either metastasectomy or SRBT) and systemic (immune)-therapy. Several unmet needs have to be investigated, mainly regarding the lack of prospective randomized trials that directly compare modern therapies and different integration strategies.

Adrenal Metastasectomy in the Era of Immuno- and Targeted Therapy.

Adrenal metastasectomy has an increasing role in multimodality oncologic care for diverse primary cancer types. In this review, we discuss the epidemiology, evaluation, and contemporary best practices in the management of adrenal metastases from various primaries. Initial evaluation of suspected adrenal metastases should include diagnostic imaging to assess the extent of tumor involvement and determine surgical resectability, as well as biochemical evaluation for hormone secretion. Biopsy has a minimal role and should only be performed in tumors that are established to be non-hormone secreting and when the biopsy results would change clinical management. Adrenal metastasectomy is associated with survival benefit in selected patients. We suggest that adrenal metastasectomy has the greatest benefit in four clinical scenarios: (1) disease limited to the adrenal gland in which adrenalectomy renders the patient disease-free; (2) isolated progression in the adrenal gland in the setting of otherwise controlled metastatic extra-adrenal disease; (3) need for palliation of symptoms related to adrenal metastases; or (4) in the context of tissue-based clinical trials. Both minimally invasive and open adrenalectomy techniques are safe and appear to have equivalent oncologic outcomes. Minimally invasive approaches are favored when technically feasible while maintaining oncologic principles. A multidisciplinary evaluation including clinicians with expertise in the primary cancer type is essential to the successful management of adrenal metastases.

Survival after secondary liver resection in metastatic colorectal cancer: Comparing data of three prospective randomized European trials (LICC, CELIM, FIRE-3).

Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients with liver-limited disease (LLD) have a chance of long-term survival and potential cure after hepatic metastasectomy. However, the appropriate postoperative treatment strategy is still controversial. The CELIM and FIRE-3 studies demonstrated that secondary hepatic resection significantly improved overall survival (OS). The objective of this analysis was to compare these favorable outcome data with recent results from the LICC trial investigating the antigen-specific cancer vaccine tecemotide (L-BLP25) as adjuvant therapy in mCRC patients with LLD after R0/R1 resection. Data from mCRC patients with LLD and secondary hepatic resection from each study were analyzed for efficacy outcomes based on patient characteristics, treatment and surveillance after surgery. In LICC, 40/121 (33%) patients, in CELIM 36/111 (32%) and in FIRE-3-LLD 29/133 (22%) patients were secondarily resected, respectively. Of those, 31 (77.5%) patients in LICC and all patients in CELIM were R0 resected. Median disease-free survival after resection was 8.9 months in LICC, 9.9 months in CELIM. Median OS in secondarily resected patients was 66.1 months in LICC, 53.9 months in CELIM and 56.2 months in FIRE-3-LLD. Median age was about 5 years less in LICC compared to CELIM and FIRE-3. Secondarily resected patients of LICC, CELIM and FIRE-3 showed an impressive median survival with a tendency for improved survival for patients in the LICC trial. A younger patient cohort but also more selective surgery, improved resection techniques, deep responses and a close surveillance program after surgery in the LICC trial may have had a positive impact on survival.

Metastasectomy in renal cell carcinoma: where are we now?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Metastatic RCC has a variable natural history. Treatment choice depends on disease and patient factors, but most importantly disease burden and site of metastasis. This article highlights key variables to consider when contemplating metastasectomy for RCC and provide a narrative review on the evidence for metastasectomy in these patients. RECENT FINDINGS: Tumour subtype is associated with differing patterns of recurrence. Patients with single or few metastatic sites have better outcomes, and those with greater time interval from initial nephrectomy. Local recurrence is particularly amenable to minimally invasive surgical resection and is oncologically sound. Very well selected cases of liver or brain metastases may benefit from metastectomy, although lung and endocrine metastases have more favourable outcomes. Although site and burden of disease is important, the key determinate of outcome in metastasectomy depends mostly on the ability to achieve a complete resection. Adjuvant treatment is not currently advocated. SUMMARY: Metastasectomy should be generally reserved for cases where complete resection is achievable, unless the goal of treatment is to palliate symptoms. This field warrants ongoing research, particularly as systemic therapy and minimally invasive surgical techniques evolve. Elucidating tumour biology to inform patient selection will be important in future research.

Volume Doubling Times of Pulmonary Metastases in Patients With Bone and Soft-Tissue Sarcomas: Associations With Subsequent New Metastases and Survival After Metastasectomy.

BACKGROUND. Pulmonary metastases of bone and soft-tissue sarcoma are common and have a high recurrence rate after metastasectomy. Factors associated with postmetastasectomy recurrence are not well studied. OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to investigate the association of the volume doubling time (VDT) of pulmonary metastases with the subsequent development of new pulmonary nodules and survival after metastasectomy in patients with bone or soft-tissue sarcoma. METHODS. This retrospective study included patients with bone or soft-tissue sarcoma who, between January 2010 and December 2020, underwent first complete metastasectomy of pulmonary nodules visualized on two sequential preoperative CT scans. Semiautomatic volumetric segmentation of the pulmonary metastases was performed on the two CT scans, and VDTs were calculated. VDT was compared between patients with and without subsequent new metastases after metastasectomy. Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were performed to determine risk factors for recurrence-free survival (RFS) after metastasectomy and for postmetastasectomy overall survival (OS). RESULTS. Forty patients (21 women, 19 men; mean age, 51.1 ± 14.3 [SD] years) were included. Of these patients, 23 (57.5%) developed new metastatic nodules after metastasectomy, and 10 (25.0%) died during follow-up. Median VDT was shorter in patients with, versus those without, new metastases after metastasectomy (56 vs 140 days, p = .002). Only four of 23 patients with new metastases had VDT of 140 days or more. In multivariable analysis, older age (hazard ratio [HR], 1.06; p = .004), female sex (HR, 2.80; p = .03), and VDT less than 140 days (HR, 4.22; p = .01) were independent predictors of worse RFS. Also in multivariable analysis, only older age (HR, 1.17; p = .005) and VDT less than 50 days (HR, 8.60; p = .02) were independent predictors of worse OS. OS was significantly worse in patients with VDT less than 140 days (10 deaths among 27 patients) than in patients with VDT of 140 days or more (no deaths in 13 patients) (p = .01). CONCLUSION. In patients with bone and soft-tissue sarcoma, shorter VDT of pulmonary metastases is independently associated with subsequent new metastases after metastasectomy and worse OS. CLINICAL IMPACT. VDT of pulmonary nodules may be considered in patient selection for pulmonary metastasectomy and in postoperative patient management.

Patients with Pulmonary Metastases from Head and Neck Cancer Benefit from Pulmonary Metastasectomy, A Systematic Review.

Background and Objectives: The incidence of distant metastases in patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) is approximately 10%. Pulmonary metastases are the most frequent distant location, with an incidence of 70-85%. The standard treatment options are chemo-, immuno- and radiotherapy. Despite a benefit for long-term survival for patients with isolated pulmonary metastases, pulmonary metastasectomy (PM) is not the treatment of choice. Furthermore, many otorhinolaryngologists are not sufficiently familiar with the concept of PM. This work reviews the recent studies of pulmonary metastatic HNC and the results after pulmonary metastasectomy. Materials and Methods: PubMed, Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane library were checked for the case series' of patients undergoing metastasectomy with pulmonary metastases published since 1 January 2000. Results: We included the data of 15 studies of patients undergoing PM. The 5-year survival rates varied from 21% to 59%, with median survival from 10 to 77 months after PM. We could not identify one specific prognostic factor for long-term survival after surgery. However, at least most studies stated that PM should be planned if a complete (R0) resection is possible. Conclusions: PM showed reliable results and is supposedly the treatment of choice for patients with isolated pulmonary metastases. Patients not suitable for surgery may benefit from other non-surgical therapy. Every HNC patient with pulmonary metastases should be discussed in the multidisciplinary tumor board to optimize the therapy and the outcome.

Thoracoscopy vs thoracotomy for the management of metastatic osteosarcoma: A Pediatric Surgical Oncology Research Collaborative Study.

Complete surgical resection of pulmonary metastatic disease in patients with osteosarcoma is crucial to long-term survival. Open thoracotomy allows palpation of nodules not identified on imaging but the impact on survival is unknown. The objective of this study was to compare overall survival (OS) and pulmonary disease-free survival (DFS) in children who underwent thoracotomy vs thoracoscopic surgery for pulmonary metastasectomy. A multi-institutional collaborative group retrospectively reviewed 202 pediatric patients with osteosarcoma who underwent pulmonary metastasectomy by thoracotomy (n = 154) or thoracoscopy (n = 48). Results were analyzed by Kaplan-Meier survival estimates and multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression models. With median follow-up of 45 months, 135 (67.5%) patients had a pulmonary relapse and 95 (47%) patients were deceased. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed no significant difference in 5-year pulmonary DFS (25% vs 38%; P = .18) or OS (49% vs 42%, P = .37) between the surgical approaches of thoracotomy and thoracoscopy. In Cox regression analysis controlling for other factors impacting outcome, there was a significantly increased risk of mortality (HR 2.11; P = .027; 95% CI 1.09-4.09) but not pulmonary recurrence (HR 0.96; P = .90; 95% CI 0.52-1.79) with a thoracoscopic approach. However, in the subset analysis limited to patients with oligometastatic disease, thoracoscopy had no increased risk of mortality (HR 1.16; P = .62; 0.64-2.11). In conclusion, patients with metastatic osteosarcoma and limited pulmonary disease burden demonstrate comparable outcomes after thoracotomy and thoracoscopy for metastasectomy. While significant selection bias in these surgical cohorts limits the generalizability of the conclusions, clinical equipoise for a randomized clinical trial in patients with oligometastatic disease is supported.

Clinical outcomes and prognostic factors following the surgical resection of renal cell carcinoma spinal metastases.

The efficacy of surgical resection in metastatic renal cell carcinoma is an active and important research field in the postcytokine era. Bone metastases, especially in the spine, compromise patient performance status. Metastasectomy is indicated, if feasible, because it helps to achieve the best clinical outcomes possible compared with other treatments. This study examined the postoperative survival and prognostic factors in patients who underwent metastasectomy of spinal lesions. The retrospective study included 65 consecutive patients with metastatic renal cell carcinomas who were operated on by spinal metastasectomy between 1995 and 2017 at our institution. The cancer-specific survival times from the first spinal metastasectomy to death or the last follow-up (≥3 years) were determined using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Potential factors influencing survival were analyzed using Cox proportional hazard models. Planned surgical resection of all the spine tumors was achieved in all patients. Of these, 38 had complete metastasectomy of all visible metastases, including extraspinal lesions. In all patients, the estimated median cancer-specific survival time was 100 months. The 3-, 5-, and 10-year cancer-specific survival rates were 77%, 62%, and 48%, respectively. The survival times after spinal metastasectomy were similar in both cytokine and postcytokine groups. In multivariate analyses, postoperative disability, the coexistence of liver metastases, multiple spinal metastases, and incomplete metastasectomy were significant risk factors associated with short-term survival. Complete metastasectomy, including extraspinal metastases, was associated with improved cancer-specific survival. Proper patient selection and complete metastasectomy provide a better prognosis in metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients.

Adrenalectomy for Secondary Malignancy: Patients, Outcomes, and Indications.

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to examine a multi-institutional experience with adrenal metastases to describe survival outcomes and identify subpopulations who benefit from adrenal metastasectomy. BACKGROUND: Adrenalectomy for metastatic disease is well-described, although indications and outcomes are incompletely defined. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed of patients undergoing adrenalectomy for secondary malignancy (2002-2015) at 6 institutions. The primary outcomes were disease free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). Analysis methods included Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards. RESULTS: Of 269 patients, mean age was 60.1 years; 50% were male. The most common primary malignancies were lung (n = 125, 47%), renal cell (n = 38, 14%), melanoma (n = 33, 12%), sarcoma (n = 18, 7%), and colorectal (n = 12, 5%). The median time to detection of adrenal metastasis after initial diagnosis of the primary tumor was 17 months (interquartile range: 6-41). Post-adrenalectomy, the median DFS was 18 months (1-year DFS: 54%, 5-year DFS: 31%). On multivariable analysis, lung primary was associated with longer DFS [hazard ratio (HR): 0.49, P = 0.008). Extra-adrenal oligometastatic disease at initial presentation (HR: 1.84, P = 0.016), larger tumor size (HR: 1.07, P = 0.013), chemotherapy as treatment of the primary tumor (HR: 2.07 P = 0.027) and adjuvant chemotherapy (HR: 1.95, P = 0.009) were associated with shorter DFS. Median OS was 53 months (1-year OS: 83%, 5-year OS: 43%). On multivariable analysis, extra-adrenal oligometastatic disease at adrenalectomy (HR: 1.74, P = 0.031), and incomplete resection of adrenal metastasis (R1 margins; HR: 1.62, P = 0.034; R2 margins; HR: 5.45, P = 0.002) were associated with shorter OS. CONCLUSIONS: Durable survival is observed in patients undergoing adrenal metastasectomy and should be considered for subjects with isolated adrenal metastases.

Centralized repeated resectability assessment of patients with colorectal liver metastases during first-line treatment: prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Metastasectomy is probably underused in metastatic colorectal cancer. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of centralized repeated assessment on resectability rate of liver metastases. METHODS: The prospective RAXO study was a nationwide study in Finland. Patients with treatable metastatic colorectal cancer at any site were eligible. This planned substudy included patients with baseline liver metastases between 2012 and 2018. Resectability was reassessed by the multidisciplinary team at Helsinki tertiary referral centre upfront and twice during first-line systemic therapy. Outcomes were resectability rates, management changes, and survival. RESULTS: Of 812 patients included, 301 (37.1 per cent) had liver-only metastases. Of these, tumours were categorized as upfront resectable in 161 (53.5 per cent), and became amenable to surgery during systemic treatment in 63 (20.9 per cent). Some 207 patients (68.7 per cent) eventually underwent liver resection or ablation. At baseline, a discrepancy in resectability between central and local judgement was noted for 102 patients (33.9 per cent). Median disease-free survival (DFS) after first resection was 20 months and overall survival (OS) 79 months. Median OS after diagnosis of metastatic colorectal cancer was 80, 32, and 21 months in R0-1 resection, R2/ablation, and non-resected groups, and 5-year OS rates were 68, 37, and 9 per cent, respectively. Liver and extrahepatic metastases were present in 511 patients. Of these, tumours in 72 patients (14.1 per cent) were categorized as upfront resectable, and 53 patients (10.4 per cent) became eligible for surgery. Eventually 110 patients (21.5 per cent) underwent liver resection or ablation. At baseline, a discrepancy between local and central resectability was noted for 116 patients (22.7 per cent). Median DFS from first resection was 7 months and median OS 55 months. Median OS after diagnosis of metastatic colorectal cancer was 79, 42, and 17 months in R0-1 resection, R2/ablation, and non-resected groups, with 5-year OS rates of 65, 39, and 2 per cent, respectively. CONCLUSION: Repeated centralized resectability assessment in patients with colorectal liver metastases improved resection and survival rates.

Evolving Role of Liver Resection in Selected Patients With Metastatic Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: More effective chemotherapy regimens combined with metastasectomy have improved overall survival (OS) in several cancer populations. The value of liver resection (LR) in breast cancer liver metastasis (BCLM) remains controversial. We sought to investigate the role of LR in BCLM as a therapeutic option in patients with isolated liver metastasis. METHODS: The National Cancer Data Base (NCDB) was queried for patients with BCLM diagnosed from 2010 to 2014. The primary outcome was the OS. Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards regression were performed for intergroup comparison. RESULTS: A total of 9244 patients with BCLM were included. The median age was 58 y (IQR 49-68 y). Of them, 2632 (28.5%) patients had isolated liver metastasis, 1957 (78.2%) received chemotherapy, 93 (3.6%) underwent LR, and only 83 (3.2%) received chemotherapy and LR. Median OS for the entire cohort and for patients with isolated BCLM was 18.3 mo and 29 mo, respectively. Chemotherapy with LR was associated with superior OS compared to chemotherapy alone (69.7 versus 49.2 mo, P < 0.001) in patients with BCLM: ER+ (69.6 versus 54.1 mo, P = 0.002) and triple-negative BC (49.2 versus 17.6 mo, P = 0.006). Cox regression showed that LR, chemotherapy, and positive hormone receptor status (ER+, PR+, and/or HER2+) were independent predictors of improved OS. Advanced age and comorbidity score negatively impacted OS. CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest series thus far assessing the role of LR in patients with BCLM. LR plus chemotherapy may be associated with acceptable outcomes in selected patients with BCLM. LR should be considered in patients with isolated BCLM who had a good response to systemic therapy.

A novel preoperative risk score to guide patient selection for resection of soft tissue sarcoma lung metastases: An analysis from the United States Sarcoma Collaborative.

BACKGROUND: Surgical resection for sarcoma lung metastases has been associated with improved overall survival (OS). METHODS: Patients who underwent curative-intent resection of sarcoma lung metastases (2000-2016) were identified from the US Sarcoma Collaborative. Patients with extrapulmonary metastatic disease or R2 resections of primary tumor or metastases were excluded. Primary endpoint was OS. RESULTS: Three hundred and fifty-two patients met inclusion criteria. Location of primary tumor was truncal/extremity in 85% (n = 270) and retroperitoneal in 15% (n = 49). Forty-nine percent (n = 171) of patients had solitary and 51% (n = 180) had multiple lung metastasis. Median OS was 49 months; 5-year OS 42%. Age ≥55 (HR 1.77), retroperitoneal primary (HR 1.67), R1 resection of primary (HR 1.72), and multiple (≥2) lung metastases (HR 1.77) were associated with decreased OS(all p < 0.05). Assigning one point for each factor, we developed a risk score from 0 to 4. Patients were then divided into two risk groups: low (0-1 factor) and high (2-4 factors). The low-risk group (n = 159) had significantly better 5-year OS compared to the high-risk group (n = 108) (51% vs. 16%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: We identified four characteristics that in aggregate portend a worse OS and created a novel prognostic risk score for patients with sarcoma lung metastases. Given that patients in the high-risk group have a projected OS of <20% at 5 years, this risk score, after external validation, will be an important tool to aid in preoperative counseling and consideration for multimodal therapy.

Simultaneous versus staged resections for bilateral pulmonary metastases.

BACKGROUND: For patients with bilateral pulmonary metastases, staged resections have historically been the preferred surgical intervention. During the spring of 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic made patient travel to the hospital challenging and necessitated reduction in operative volume so that resources could be conserved. We report our experience with synchronous bilateral metastasectomies for the treatment of disease in both lungs. METHODS: Patients with bilateral pulmonary metastases who underwent simultaneous bilateral resections were compared with a cohort of patients who underwent staged resections. We used nearest-neighbor propensity score (1:1) matching to adjust for confounders. Perioperative outcomes were compared between groups using paired statistical analysis techniques. RESULTS: Between 1998 and 2020, 36 patients underwent bilateral simultaneous metastasectomies. We matched 31 pairs of patients. The length of stay was significantly shorter in patients undergoing simultaneous resection (median 3 vs. 8 days, p < .001) and operative time was shorter (156 vs. 235.5 min, p < .001) when compared to the sum of both procedures in the staged group. The groups did not significantly differ with regard to postoperative complications. CONCLUSION: In a carefully selected patient population, simultaneous bilateral metastasectomy is a safe option. A single procedure confers benefits for both the patient as well as the hospital resource system.

A Retrospective Evaluation of Operative and Postoperative Outcomes in Patients with Spinal Metastases from a Single Center to Compare Vertebrectomy with Combined Vertebrectomy and Radiofrequency Ablation.

BACKGROUND This retrospective study was conducted at a single center and aimed to evaluate operative and postoperative outcomes in patients with spinal metastases using vertebrectomy and combined vertebrectomy and radiofrequency ablation (RFA). MATERIAL AND METHODS Patients diagnosed with spinal metastases between April 2009 and March 2016 (n=49) included patients who underwent vertebrectomy (n=26) and patients who underwent combined vertebrectomy and RFA (n=23). The characteristics of the 2 groups were similar in primary tumor types, comorbidities, Tomita score, vertebral involvement, preoperative bone pain, and neurologic deficit. RESULTS The results showed for the both groups that the visual analog scale (VAS) pain score was significantly decreased (P<0.05) and the neurological status was improved after treatment. Compared with the control group (vertebrectomy only), the combination group (combined vertebrectomy and RFA) had less intraoperative blood loss (P=0.002) and shorter operation time (P<0.001). The recurrence rate was lower (P=0.003) in the patients who received combined treatment, and the period of local recurrence was prolonged (P=0.030) in the combination group. CONCLUSIONS This retrospective study showed that the selective use of combined vertebrectomy and RFA significantly reduced surgical time and blood loss, improved recovery of neurologic deficit, and reduced the tumor recurrence rate in patients with spinal metastases.

The myth of pulmonary metastasectomy.

Pulmonary metastasectomy is widely and increasingly practiced in the belief that this intervention can cure patients with colorectal cancer, and that without it few survive 5 years. No good evidence exists supporting such convictions, indeed recent trial results challenge them. What evidence underpins this acceptance of illusory truths or misconceptions?

Complete Surgical Metastasectomy of Renal Cell Carcinoma in the Post-Cytokine Era.

PURPOSE: Data supporting complete metastasectomy of metastatic renal cell carcinoma were derived primarily from the era of cytokine therapy. Whether complete metastasectomy remains beneficial in patients who receive more recently approved systemic therapies has not been well studied. The objective of this study was to examine survival outcomes among patients treated with complete metastasectomy in the era of targeted therapy and checkpoint blockade availability. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We queried our institutional nephrectomy registry and identified 586 patients who underwent partial or radical nephrectomy of unilateral, sporadic renal cell carcinoma with a first occurrence of metastasis between 2006 and 2017. Of these patients 158 were treated with complete metastasectomy. Associations of complete metastasectomy with cancer specific and overall survival were assessed using Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: Median followup after the diagnosis of metastasis was 3.9 years, during which 403 patients died, including 345 of renal cell carcinoma. Of the patients treated with complete metastasectomy 147 (93%) did not receive any systemic treatment of the index metastatic lesion(s). Two-year cancer specific survival was significantly greater in patients with vs without complete metastasectomy (84% vs 54%, p <0.001). After adjusting for age, gender, and the timing, number and location of metastases complete metastasectomy was associated with a significantly reduced likelihood of death from renal cell carcinoma (HR 0.47, 95% CI 0.34-0.65, p <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Complete surgical resection of metastases of renal cell carcinoma was associated with improved cancer specific survival in the post-cytokine era. It may be considered in appropriate patients after a process of shared decision making.