Reappraisal of tacrolimus levels after liver transplant for HCC: A multicenter study toward personalized immunosuppression regimen.

Post-liver transplant (LT) immunosuppression is necessary to prevent rejection; however, a major consequence of this is tumor recurrence. Although recurrence is a concern after LT for patients with HCC, the oncologically optimal tacrolimus (FK) regimen is still unknown. This retrospective study included 1406 patients with HCC who underwent LT (2002-2019) at 4 US institutions using variable post-LT immunosuppression regimens. Receiver operating characteristic analyses were performed to investigate the influences of post-LT time-weighted average FK (TWA-FK) level on HCC recurrence. A competing risk analysis was employed to evaluate the prognostic influence of TWA-FK while adjusting for patient and tumor characteristics. The AUC for TWA-FK was greatest at 2 weeks (0.68), followed by 1 week (0.64) after LT. Importantly, this was consistently observed across the institutions despite immunosuppression regimen variability. In addition, the TWA-FK at 2 weeks was not associated with rejection within 6 months of LT. A competing risk regression analysis showed that TWA-FK at 2 weeks after LT is significantly associated with recurrence (HR: 1.31, 95% CI: 1.21-1.41, p < 0.001). The TWA-FK effect on recurrence varied depending on the exposure level and the individual's risk of recurrence, including vascular invasion and tumor morphology. Although previous studies have explored the influence of FK levels at 1-3 months after LT on HCC recurrence, this current study suggests that earlier time points and exposure levels must be evaluated. Each patient's oncological risk must also be considered in developing an individualized immunosuppression regimen.

Robotic longitudinal pancreaticojejunostomy for chronic pancreatitis: Comparison of clinical outcomes and cost to the open approach.

BACKGROUND: This study compares clinical and cost outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic (RAL) and open longitudinal pancreaticojejunostomy (LPJ) for chronic pancreatitis. METHODS: Clinical and cost data were retrospectively compared between open and RAL LPJ performed at a single center from 2008-2015. RESULTS: Twenty-six patients underwent LPJ: 19 open and 7 RAL. Two robot-assisted cases converted to open were included in the open group for analysis. Patients undergoing RAL LPJ had less intraoperative blood loss, a shorter surgical length of stay, and lower medication costs. Operation supply cost was higher in the RAL group. No difference in hospitalization cost was found. CONCLUSIONS: Versus the open approach, RAL LPJ performed for chronic pancreatitis shortens hospitalization and reduces medication costs; hospitalization costs are equivalent. A higher operative cost for RAL LPJ is mitigated by a shorter hospitalization. Decreased morbidity and healthcare resource economy support use of the robotic approach for LPJ when appropriate.

Symptom Monitoring With Patient-Reported Outcomes During Routine Cancer Treatment: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

PURPOSE: There is growing interest to enhance symptom monitoring during routine cancer care using patient-reported outcomes, but evidence of impact on clinical outcomes is limited. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients receiving routine outpatient chemotherapy for advanced solid tumors at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center to report 12 common symptoms via tablet computers or to receive usual care consisting of symptom monitoring at the discretion of clinicians. Those with home computers received weekly e-mail prompts to report between visits. Treating physicians received symptom printouts at visits, and nurses received e-mail alerts when participants reported severe or worsening symptoms. The primary outcome was change in health-related quality of life (HRQL) at 6 months compared with baseline, measured by the EuroQol EQ-5D Index. Secondary endpoints included emergency room (ER) visits, hospitalizations, and survival. RESULTS: Among 766 patients allocated, HRQL improved among more participants in the intervention group than usual care (34% v 18%) and worsened among fewer (38% v 53%; P < .001). Overall, mean HRQL declined by less in the intervention group than usual care (1.4- v 7.1-point drop; P < .001). Patients receiving intervention were less frequently admitted to the ER (34% v 41%; P = .02) or hospitalized (45% v 49%; P = .08) and remained on chemotherapy longer (mean, 8.2 v 6.3 months; P = .002). Although 75% of the intervention group was alive at 1 year, 69% with usual care survived the year (P = .05), with differences also seen in quality-adjusted survival (mean of 8.7 v. 8.0 months; P = .004). Benefits were greater for participants lacking prior computer experience. Most patients receiving intervention (63%) reported severe symptoms during the study. Nurses frequently initiated clinical actions in response to e-mail alerts. CONCLUSION: Clinical benefits were associated with symptom self-reporting during cancer care.

Prevalence of pain and analgesic use in men with metastatic prostate cancer using a patient-reported outcome measure.

PURPOSE: Contemporary tumor-directed therapies for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) are approved to prolong life, but their effects on symptoms such as pain are less well understood as a result of the lack of analytically valid assessments of pain prevalence and severity, clinically meaningful definitions of therapeutic benefit, and methodologic standards of trial conduct. This study establishes pain characteristics in the mCRPC population using a PRO measure. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with prostate cancer participated in an anonymous survey at five US comprehensive cancer centers in the Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Consortium that incorporated the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), analgesic use, and interference with daily activities. Prevalence and severity of cancer-related pain and analgesic use were tabulated according to castration-resistant status and exposure to docetaxel chemotherapy. RESULTS: Four hundred sixty-one patients with prostate cancer participated, of whom 147 had mCRPC involving bone (61% [89 of 147] docetaxel exposed, 39% [58 of 147] docetaxel naive). Pain of any level was more common among docetaxel-exposed versus docetaxel-naive patients with mCRPC (70% [62 of 89] v 38% [22 of 58], respectively; P<.001). BPI score≥4 was reported by 38% (34 of 89) of docetaxel-pretreated and 24% (14 of 58) of docetaxel-naive patients with mCRPC; 40% of these patients with pain intensity≥4 reported no current narcotic analgesic. CONCLUSION: Pain prevalence and severity were higher in patients with prior docetaxel exposure. Analgesics were underutilized. These results provide a method for estimating accruals along the disease continuum, and for enabling design of trials appropriately powered to assess pain.

Adverse symptom event reporting by patients vs clinicians: relationships with clinical outcomes.

BACKGROUND: In cancer treatment trials, the standard source of adverse symptom data is clinician reporting by use of items from the National Cancer Institute's Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE). Patient self-reporting has been proposed as an additional data source, but the implications of such a shift are not understood. METHODS: Patients with lung cancer receiving chemotherapy and their clinicians independently reported six CTCAE symptoms and Karnofsky Performance Status longitudinally at sequential office visits. To compare how patient's vs clinician's reports relate to sentinel clinical events, a time-dependent Cox regression model was used to measure associations between reaching particular CTCAE grade severity thresholds with the risk of death and emergency room visits. To measure concordance of CTCAE reports with indices of daily health status, Kendall tau rank correlation coefficients were calculated for each symptom with EuroQoL EQ-5D questionnaire and global question scores. Statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: A total of 163 patients were enrolled for an average of 12 months (range = 1-28 months), with a mean of 11 visits and 67 (41%) deaths. CTCAE reports were submitted by clinicians at 95% of visits and by patients at 80% of visits. Patients generally reported symptoms earlier and more frequently than clinicians. Statistically significant associations with death and emergency room admissions were seen for clinician reports of fatigue (P < .001), nausea (P = .01), constipation (P = .038), and Karnofsky Performance Status (P < .001) but not for patient reports of these items. Higher concordance with EuroQoL EQ-5D questionnaire and global question scores was observed for patient-reported symptoms than for clinician-reported symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Longitudinally collected clinician CTCAE assessments better predict unfavorable clinical events, whereas patient reports better reflect daily health status. These perspectives are complementary, each providing clinically meaningful information. Inclusion of both types of data in treatment trial results and drug labels appears to be warranted.