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.

SAS1B protein [ovastacin] shows temporal and spatial restriction to oocytes in several eutherian orders and initiates translation at the primary to secondary follicle transition.

BACKGROUND: Sperm Acrosomal SLLP1 Binding (SAS1B) protein (ovastacin) is an oolemmal binding partner for the intra-acrosomal sperm protein SLLP1. RESULTS: Immunohistochemical localization revealed that SAS1B translation is restricted among adult tissues to the ovary and oocytes, SAS1B appearing first in follicles at the primary-secondary transition. Quiescent oocytes within primordial follicles and primary follicles did not stain for SAS1B. Examination of neonatal rat ovaries revealed SAS1B expression first as faint signals in postnatal day 3 oocytes, with SAS1B protein staining intensifying with oocyte growth. Irrespective of animal age or estrus stage, SAS1B was seen only in oocytes of follicles that initiated a second granulosa cell layer. The precise temporal and spatial onset of SAS1B expression was conserved in adult ovaries in seven eutherian species, including nonhuman primates. Immunoelectron micrographs localized SAS1B within cortical granules in MII oocytes. A population of SAS1B localized on the oolemma predominantly in the microvillar region anti-podal to the nucleus in ovulated MII rat oocytes and on the oolemma in macaque GV oocytes. CONCLUSIONS: The restricted expression of SAS1B protein in growing oocytes, absence in the ovarian reserve, and localization on the oolemma suggest this zinc metalloprotease deserves consideration as a candidate target for reversible female contraceptive strategies.

Omission of Axillary Dissection Following Nodal Downstaging With Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy.

Importance: Data on oncological outcomes after omission of axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) in patients with breast cancer that downstages from node positive to negative with neoadjuvant chemotherapy are sparse. Additionally, the best axillary surgical staging technique in this scenario is unknown. Objective: To investigate oncological outcomes after sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) with dual-tracer mapping or targeted axillary dissection (TAD), which combines SLNB with localization and retrieval of the clipped lymph node. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this multicenter retrospective cohort study that was conducted at 25 centers in 11 countries, 1144 patients with consecutive stage II to III biopsy-proven node-positive breast cancer were included between April 2013 and December 2020. The cumulative incidence rates of axillary, locoregional, and any invasive (locoregional or distant) recurrence were determined by competing risk analysis. Exposure: Omission of ALND after SLNB or TAD. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end points were the 3-year and 5-year rates of any axillary recurrence. Secondary end points included locoregional recurrence, any invasive (locoregional and distant) recurrence, and the number of lymph nodes removed. Results: A total of 1144 patients (median [IQR] age, 50 [41-59] years; 78 [6.8%] Asian, 105 [9.2%] Black, 102 [8.9%] Hispanic, and 816 [71.0%] White individuals; 666 SLNB [58.2%] and 478 TAD [41.8%]) were included. A total of 1060 patients (93%) had N1 disease, 619 (54%) had ERBB2 (formerly HER2)-positive illness, and 758 (66%) had a breast pathologic complete response. TAD patients were more likely to receive nodal radiation therapy (85% vs 78%; P = .01). The clipped node was successfully retrieved in 97% of TAD cases and 86% of SLNB cases (without localization). The mean (SD) number of sentinel lymph nodes retrieved was 3 (2) vs 4 (2) (P < .001), and the mean (SD) number of total lymph nodes removed was 3.95 (1.97) vs 4.44 (2.04) (P < .001) in the TAD and SLNB groups, respectively. The 5-year rates of any axillary, locoregional, and any invasive recurrence in the entire cohort were 1.0% (95% CI, 0.49%-2.0%), 2.7% (95% CI, 1.6%-4.1%), and 10% (95% CI, 8.3%-13%), respectively. The 3-year cumulative incidence of axillary recurrence did not differ between TAD and SLNB (0.5% vs 0.8%; P = .55). Conclusions and Relevance: The results of this cohort study showed that axillary recurrence was rare in this setting and was not significantly lower after TAD vs SLNB. These results support omission of ALND in this population.

Barriers to Bariatric Surgery: a Mixed Methods Study Investigating Obstacles Between Clinic Contact and Surgery.

PURPOSE: Populations most affected by obesity are not reflected in the patients who undergo bariatric surgery. Gaps in the referral system have been studied, but there is a lack of literature investigating obstacles patients encounter after first contact with bariatric surgery clinics. We aim to identify patient populations at risk for attrition during bariatric surgery evaluation and determine patient reported barriers to bariatric surgical care. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was a single institution, retrospective, mixed methods study from 2012 to 2021 comparing patients who underwent bariatric surgery to those that withdrew. Surveys were performed of patients who withdrew, collecting information on patient knowledge, expectations, and barriers. RESULTS: This study included 5982 patients evaluated in bariatric surgery clinic. Those who attained bariatric surgery (38.8%) were more likely to be White (81.2 vs. 75.6%, p<0.001), married (48.5 vs. 44.1%, p=0.004), and employed full time (48.2 vs. 43.8%, p=0.01). They were less likely to live in an area with low income (37.1 vs. 40.7%, p=0.01) or poverty (poverty rate 15.8 vs. 17.4, p<0.001). Of the 280 survey respondents, fear of complications, length of insurance approval process, and wait time between evaluation and surgery were the most reported barriers. CONCLUSION: Patients who undergo bariatric surgery were more likely to be White, married, employed full time, and reside in more resourced environments which is not reflective of communities most affected by obesity. The complexity of insurance coverage requirements was a major barrier to bariatric surgery and should be a focus of future healthcare reform.

Clinical Outcomes and Hospital Utilization Among Patients Undergoing Bariatric Surgery With Telemedicine Preoperative Care.

Importance: Bariatric surgery is the mainstay of treatment for medically refractory obesity; however, it is underutilized. Telemedicine affords patient cost and time savings and may increase availability and accessibility of bariatric surgery. Objective: To determine clinical outcomes and postoperative hospital utilization for patients undergoing bariatric surgery who receive fully remote vs in-person preoperative care. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study comparing postoperative clinical outcomes and hospital utilization after telemedicine or in-person preoperative surgical evaluation included patients treated at a US academic hospital. Participants underwent laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass or laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy after telemedicine or in-person preoperative surgical evaluation between July 1, 2020, to December 22, 2021, or January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2019, respectively. Follow-up was 60 days from date of surgery. Exposures: Telemedicine-based preoperative care. Main Outcomes and Measures: Clinical outcomes, including operating room delay, procedure duration, length of hospital stay (LOS), and major adverse events (MAE), and postoperative hospital resource utilization, including emergency department (ED) visit or hospital readmission within 30 days of the surgical procedure. Results: A total of 1182 patients were included; patients in the telemedicine group were younger (mean [SD] age, 40.8 [12.5] years vs 43.0 [12.2] years; P = .01) and more likely to be female (230 of 257 [89.5%] vs 766 of 925 [82.8%]; P = .01) compared with the control group. The control group had a higher frequency of comorbidity (887 of 925 [95.9%] vs 208 of 257 [80.9%]; P < .001). The telemedicine group was found to be noninferior to the control group with respect to operating room delay (mean [SD] minutes, 7.8 [25.1]; 95% CI, 5.1-10.5 vs 4.2 [11.1]; 95% CI, 1.0-7.4; P = .002), procedure duration (mean [SD] minutes, 134.4 [52.8]; 95% CI, 130.9-137.8 vs 105.3 [41.5]; 95% CI, 100.2-110.4; P < .001), LOS (mean [SD] days, 1.9 [1.1]; 95% CI, 1.8-1.9 vs 2.1 [1.0]; 95% CI, 1.9-2.2; P < .001), MAE within 30 days (3.8%; 95% CI, 3.0%-5.7% vs 1.6%; 95% CI, 0.4%-3.9%; P = .001), MAE between 31 and 60 days (2.2%; 95% CI, 1.3%-3.3% vs 1.6%; 95% CI, 0.4%-3.9%; P < .001), frequency of ER visits (18.8%; 95% CI, 16.3%-21.4% vs 17.9%; 95% CI, 13.2%-22.6%; P = .03), and hospital readmission (10.1%; 95% CI, 8.1%-12.0% vs 6.6%; 95% CI, 3.9%-10.4%; P = .02). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, clinical outcomes in the telemedicine group were not inferior to the control group. This observation suggests that telemedicine can be used safely and effectively for bariatric surgical preoperative care.

A Program to Reduce Post-Operative Opioid Prescribing at a Veteran's Affairs Hospital.

Variability in surgeon prescribing patterns is common in the post-operative period and can be the nidus for dependence and addiction. This project aims to reduce opioid overprescribing at the Veteran's Affairs Pittsburgh Healthcare System (VAPHS). The VAPHS Opioid Stewardship Committee collaborated to create prescribing guidelines for inpatient and outpatient general, thoracic, and vascular surgery procedures. We incorporated bundled order sets into the provider workflow in the electronic medical system and performed a retrospective cohort study comparing opioid prescription patterns for Veterans who underwent any surgical procedure for a three-month period pre- and post- guideline implementation. After implementation of opioid prescribing guidelines, morphine milligram equivalents (MME), quantity of pills prescribed, and days prescribed were statistically significantly reduced for procedures with associated guidelines, including cholecystectomy (MME 140.8 vs. 57.5, p = 0.002; quantity 18.8 vs. 8, p = 0.002; days 5.1 vs. 2.8, p = 0.021), inguinal hernia repair (MME 129.9 vs. 45.3, p = 0.002; quantity 17.3 vs. 6.1, p = 0.002; days 5.0 vs. 2.4, p = 0.002), and umbilical hernia repair (MME 128.8 vs. 53.8, p = 0.002; quantity 17.1 vs. 7.8, p = 0.002; days 5.1 vs. 2.5, p = 0.022). Procedures without associated recommendations also preceded a decrease in overall opioid prescribing. Post-operative opioid prescribing guidelines can steer clinicians toward more conscientious opioid disbursement. There may also be reductions in prescribing opioids for procedures without guidelines as an indirect effect of practice change.

The Epidemiology of Extremity Threat and Amputation after Vasopressor-Dependent Sepsis.

Rationale: Extremity threat and amputation after sepsis is a well-publicized and devastating event. However, there is a paucity of data about the epidemiology of extremity threat after sepsis onset. Objectives: To estimate the incidence of extremity threat with or without surgical amputation in community sepsis. Methods: Retrospective cohort study of adults with Sepsis-3 hospitalized at 14 academic and community sites from 2013 to 2017. Vasopressor-dependent sepsis was identified by administration of epinephrine, norepinephrine, phenylephrine, vasopressin, or dopamine for more than 1 hour during the 48 hours before to 24 hours after sepsis onset. Outcomes included the incidence of extremity threat, defined as acute onset ischemia, with or without amputation, in the 90 days after sepsis onset. The association between extremity threat, demographics, comorbid conditions, and time-varying sepsis treatments was evaluated using a Cox proportional hazards model. Results: Among 24,365 adults with sepsis, 12,060 (54%) were vasopressor dependent (mean ± standard deviation age, 64 ± 16 years; male, 6,548 [54%]; sequential organ failure assessment [SOFA], 10 ± 4). Of these, 231 (2%) patients had a threatened extremity with 26 undergoing 37 amputations, a risk of 2.2 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.4-3.2) per 1,000, and 205 not undergoing amputation, a risk of 17.0 (95% CI, 14.8-19.5) per 1,000. Most amputations occurred in lower extremities (95%), a median (interquartile range) of 16 (6-40) days after sepsis onset. Compared with patients with no extremity threat, patients with threat had a higher SOFA score (11 ± 4 vs. 10 ± 4; P < 0.001), serum lactate (4.6 mmol/L [2.4-8.7] vs. 3.1 [1.7-6.0]; P < 0.001), and more bacteremia (n = 37 [37%] vs. n = 2,087 [26%]; P < 0.001) at sepsis onset. Peripheral vascular disease, congestive heart failure, SOFA score, and norepinephrine equivalents were significantly associated with extremity threat. Conclusions: The evaluation of a threatened extremity resulting in surgical amputation occurred in 2 per 1,000 patients with vasopressor-dependent sepsis.

Comparative Safety and Effectiveness of Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass and Sleeve Gastrectomy for Weight Loss and Type 2 Diabetes Across Race and Ethnicity in the PCORnet Bariatric Study Cohort.

Importance: Bariatric surgery is the most effective treatment for severe obesity; yet it is unclear whether the long-term safety and comparative effectiveness of these operations differ across racial and ethnic groups. Objective: To compare outcomes of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and sleeve gastrectomy (SG) across racial and ethnic groups in the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network (PCORnet) Bariatric Study. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a retrospective, observational, comparative effectiveness cohort study that comprised 25 health care systems in the PCORnet Bariatric Study. Patients were adults and adolescents aged 12 to 79 years who underwent a primary (first nonrevisional) RYGB or SG operation between January 1, 2005, and September 30, 2015, at participating health systems. Patient race and ethnicity included Black, Hispanic, White, other, and unrecorded. Data were analyzed from July 1, 2021, to January 17, 2022. Exposure: RYGB or SG. Outcomes: Percentage total weight loss (%TWL); type 2 diabetes remission, relapse, and change in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) level; and postsurgical safety and utilization outcomes (operations, interventions, revisions/conversions, endoscopy, hospitalizations, mortality, 30-day major adverse events) at 1, 3, and 5 years after surgery. Results: A total of 36 871 patients (mean [SE] age, 45.0 [11.7] years; 29 746 female patients [81%]) were included in the weight analysis. Patients identified with the following race and ethnic categories: 6891 Black (19%), 8756 Hispanic (24%), 19 645 White (53%), 826 other (2%), and 783 unrecorded (2%). Weight loss and mean reductions in HbA1c level were larger for RYGB than SG in all years for Black, Hispanic, and White patients (difference in 5-year weight loss: Black, -7.6%; 95% CI, -8.0 to -7.1; P < .001; Hispanic, -6.2%; 95% CI, -6.6 to -5.9; P < .001; White, -5.9%; 95% CI, -6.3 to -5.7; P < .001; difference in change in year 5 HbA1c level: Black, -0.29; 95% CI, -0.51 to -0.08; P = .009; Hispanic, -0.45; 95% CI, -0.61 to -0.29; P < .001; and White, -0.25; 95% CI, -0.40 to -0.11; P = .001.) The magnitude of these differences was small among racial and ethnic groups (1%-3% of %TWL). Black and Hispanic patients had higher risk of hospitalization when they had RYGB compared with SG (hazard ratio [HR], 1.45; 95% CI, 1.17-1.79; P = .001 and 1.48; 95% CI, 1.22-1.79; P < .001, respectively). Hispanic patients had greater risk of all-cause mortality (HR, 2.41; 95% CI, 1.24-4.70; P = .01) and higher odds of a 30-day major adverse event (odds ratio, 1.92; 95% CI, 1.38-2.68; P < .001) for RYGB compared with SG. There was no interaction between race and ethnicity and operation type for diabetes remission and relapse. Conclusions and Relevance: Variability of the comparative effectiveness of operations for %TWL and HbA1c level across race and ethnicity was clinically small; however, differences in safety and utilization outcomes were clinically and statistically significant for Black and Hispanic patients who had RYGB compared with SG. These findings can inform shared decision-making regarding bariatric operation choice for different racial and ethnic groups of patients.