Perceptions of Readiness for Practice After Complex General Surgical Oncology Fellowship: A Survey Study.

BACKGROUND: Surgical subspecialty training aims to meet the needs of practicing surgeons and their communities. This study investigates career preparedness of Complex General Surgical Oncology (CGSO) fellowship graduates, identifies factors associated with practice readiness, and explores potential opportunities to improve the current training model. METHODS: The Society of Surgical Oncology partnered with the National Cancer Institute to conduct a 36-question survey of CGSO fellowship graduates from 2012 to 2022. RESULTS: The overall survey response rate was 38% (221/582) with a slight male predominance (63%). Forty-six percent of respondents completed their fellowship after 2019. Factors influencing fellowship program selection include breadth of cancer case exposure (82%), mentor influence (66%), and research opportunities (38%). Overall, graduates reported preparedness for practice; however, some reported unpreparedness in research (18%) and in specific clinical areas: thoracic (43%), hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) (15%), and hepato-pancreato-biliary (15%) surgery. Regarding technical preparedness, 70% reported being "very prepared". Respondents indicated lack of preparedness in robotic (63%) and laparoscopic (33%) surgery approaches. Suggestions for training improvement included increased autonomy and case volumes, program development, and research infrastructure. Current practice patterns by graduates demonstrated discrepancies between ideal contracts and actual practice breakdowns, particularly related to the practice of general surgery. CONCLUSIONS: This study of CGSO fellowship graduates demonstrates potential gaps between trainee expectations and the realities of surgical oncology practice. Although CGSO fellowship appears to prepare surgeons for careers in surgical oncology, there may be opportunities to refine the training model to better align with the needs of practicing surgical oncologists.

Simple Preoperative Imaging Measurements Predict Postoperative Pancreatic Fistula After Pancreatoduodenectomy.

OBJECTIVE: Postoperative pancreatic fistula is a potentially devastating complication after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD). The purpose of this study was to identify features on preoperative computed tomography (CT) imaging that correlate with an increased risk of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF). METHODS: Patients who underwent PD at our high-volume pancreatic surgery center from 2019 to 2021 were included if CT imaging was available within 8 weeks of surgical intervention. Pancreatic neck thickness (PNT), abdominal wall thickness (AWT), and intra-abdominal distance from pancreas to peritoneum (PTP) were measured by two board-certified radiologists who were blinded to the clinical outcomes. Radiographic measurements, as well as preoperative patient characteristics and intraoperative data, were assessed with univariate and multivariable analysis (MVA) to determine risk for clinically relevant POPF (CR-POPF, grades B and C). RESULTS: A total of 204 patients met inclusion criteria. Median PTP was 5.8 cm, AWT 1.9 cm, and PNT 1.3 cm. CR-POPF occurred in 33 of 204 (16.2%) patients. MVA revealed PTP > 5.8 cm (odds ratio [OR] 2.86, p = 0.023), PNT > 1.3 cm (OR 2.43, p = 0.047), soft pancreas consistency (OR 3.47, p = 0.012), and pancreatic duct size ≤ 3.0 mm (OR 4.55, p = 0.01) as independent risk factors for CR-POPF after PD. AWT and obesity were not associated with increased risk of CR-POPF. Patients with PTP > 5.8 cm or PNT > 1.3 cm were significantly more likely to suffer a major complication after PD (39.6% vs. 22.3% and 40% vs. 22.1%, p < 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with a thick pancreatic neck and increased intra-abdominal girth have a heightened risk of CR-POPF after pancreatoduodenectomy, and they experience more serious postoperative complications. We defined a simple CT scan-based measurement tool to identify patients at increased risk of CR-POPF.

Early experience with robotic central pancreatectomy with patient-reported outcomes and comparison with open central pancreatectomy.

BACKGROUND: Robotic central pancreatectomy (CP) has emerged in recent years as a noninferior approach to open CP and may offer improved patient-reported outcomes and reduction in incisional hernias. METHODS: All patients who underwent open and robotic CP between (2013 and 2022) were selected, and perioperative outcomes were analyzed. Patients who underwent robotic CP were interviewed over the phone to assess patient-reported postoperative outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 18 CP operations (56%-open vs. 44%-robotic) were identified. The overall median age was 67 years (interquartile range: 60-72), and 50% (n = 9) of patients were female. Median length of surgery was statistically longer for robotic CP (411 vs. 138 min, p = 0.002); all other intraoperative variables were similar. Postoperatively, a similar number of patients in the open and robotic cohorts developed clinically significant postoperative pancreatic fistulas (37.5% vs. 30%, p = 1) and major complications (37.5% vs. 20%, p = 0.60), respectively. No patients in the robotic cohort developed an incisional hernia, compared to 40% (n = 4) in open (p = 0.08). All patients returned to a baseline level of activity and reported a high quality of life. CONCLUSION: With the exception of longer operative times, robotic CP is a noninferior, definitive resection technique for select lesions of the middle pancreas. Additionally, the robotic approach may result in a reduction in incisional hernia development.

Implementation of a Hepatocellular Carcinoma Screening Program for At-risk Patients Safety-Net Hospital: A Model for National Dissemination.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to enhance hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) screening to achieve earlier diagnosis of patients with hepatitis C (HCV) cirrhosis in our Safety-Net population. BACKGROUND: Adherence to HCC screening guidelines at Safety-Net hospitals is poor. Only 23% of patients with HCC at our health system had a screening exam within 1-year of diagnosis and 46% presented with stage IV disease. HCV-induced cirrhosis remains the most common etiology of HCC (75%) in our patients. METHODS: In the setting of an established HCV treatment clinic, an HCC screening quality improvement initiative was initiated for patients with stage 3 fibrosis or cirrhosis by transient elastography. The program consisted of semiannual imaging. Navigators scheduled imaging appointments and tracked compliance. RESULTS: From April 2018 to April 2021, 318 patients were enrolled (mean age 61 years, 81% Black race, 38% uninsured). Adherence to screening was higher than previously reported: 94%, 75%, and 74% of patients completed their first, second, and third imaging tests. Twenty-two patients (7%) were diagnosed with HCC; 55% stage I and 14% stage IV. All patients were referred and 13 (59%) received treatment. Median time to receipt of treatment was 77 days (range, 32-282). Median overall survival for treated patients was 32 months. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of an HCC screening program at a safety-net hospital is feasible and facilitated earlier diagnosis in this study. Patient navigation and tracking completion of imaging tests were key components of the program's success. Next steps include expanding the program to additional at-risk populations.

The aborted Whipple: Why, and what happens next?

BACKGROUND: For patients with periampullary adenocarcinoma (PAC), pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) provides the best survival. Surgery on a subset of patients is aborted during PD. We analyzed these patients. METHODS: Patients who underwent laparotomy for planned PD for PAC were identified (2006-2019). From operative notes, we identified the subset with intraoperative decision to abort. Patient, treatment, and outcome data were analyzed. The subset with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) was analyzed for survival. RESULTS: Only 6.7% (n = 55/819) of cases were aborted. Majority 78% (n = 43) had pathologically-confirmed diagnoses at time of surgery, and 18.2% (n = 10) received preoperative chemotherapy. Reasons for aborted PD included: distant metastases (65.5%, n = 36) and local invasion (34.5%, n = 19). Of patients with metastatic disease, 75% (n = 27) had liver metastases. Eighty-nine percent (n = 49) of patients underwent at least one palliative bypass procedure and 81.8% (n = 45) had both gastric and biliary bypass. Patients with computed tomography (CT) scans before surgery more commonly had missed metastatic disease (79.2% CT compared to 54.8% magnetic resonance imaging [MRI], χ2 = 3.54, p = 0.059). In PDAC, 61.4% (n = 27/44) were aborted for metastatic disease and 38.7% (n = 17/44) for local invasion. Median overall survival for all PDAC patients after aborted PD was 334 days. CONCLUSION: Majority of pancreatoduodenectomies for periampullary adenocarcinoma are done to completion. Liver metastases is the most common reason for aborting. Preoperative MRI may help identify hepatic metastases.

Diagnostic laparoscopy is underutilized in the staging of gastric adenocarcinoma regardless of hospital type: An US safety net collaborative analysis.

BACKGROUND: Diagnostic laparoscopy (DL) is a key component of staging for locally advanced gastric adenocarcinoma (GA). We hypothesized that utilization of DL varied between safety net (SNH) and affiliated tertiary referral centers (TRCs). METHODS: Patients diagnosed with primary GA eligible for DL were identified from the US Safety Net Collaborative database (2012-2014). Clinicopathologic factors were analyzed for association with use of DL and findings on DL. Overall survival (OS) was analyzed by Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Among 233 eligible patients, 69 (30%) received DL, of which 24 (35%) were positive for metastatic disease. Forty percent of eligible SNH patients underwent DL compared to 21.5% at TRCs. Lack of insurance was significantly associated with decreased use of DL (OR 0.48, p < 0.01), while African American (OR 6.87, p = 0.02) and Asian race (OR 3.12, p ≤ 0.01), signet ring cells on biopsy (OR 3.14, p < 0.01), and distal tumors (OR 1.62, p < 0.01) were associated with increased use. Median OS of patients with a negative DL was better than those without DL or a positive DL (not reached vs. 32 vs. 12 months, p < 0.005, Figure 1). CONCLUSIONS: Results from DL are a strong predictor of OS in GA; however, the procedure is underutilized. Patients from racial minority groups were more likely to undergo DL, which likely accounts for higher DL rates among SNH patients.

Should Signet Ring Cell Histology Alter the Treatment Approach for Clinical Stage I Gastric Cancer?

BACKGROUND: Surgery alone is standard-of-care for stage I gastric adenocarcinoma; however, clinicians can offer preoperative therapy for clinical stage I disease with signet ring cell histology, given its presumed aggressive biology. We aimed to assess the validity of this practice. METHODS: The National Cancer Database (2004-2015) was reviewed for patients with clinical stage I signet ring cell gastric adenocarcinoma who underwent treatment with surgery alone, perioperative chemotherapy, neoadjuvant therapy, or adjuvant therapy. Analysis was stratified by preoperative clinical/pathologic stage. Primary outcome was overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Of 1018 patients, median age was 60 years (±14); 53% received surgery alone (n = 542), 5% received perioperative chemotherapy (n = 47), 12% received neoadjuvant therapy (n = 125), and 30% received adjuvant therapy (n = 304). For clinical stage I disease, surgery alone was associated with an improved 5-year OS rate (71%) versus perioperative chemotherapy (58%), neoadjuvant therapy (38%), or adjuvant therapy (52%) [overall p < 0.01]. For pathologic stage I, surgery alone had equivalent or improved survival compared with perioperative, neoadjuvant, and adjuvant therapy (5-year OS: 78% vs. 89% [p = 0.77] vs. 64% [p = 0.04] vs. 84% [p = 0.99]). Adjuvant therapy was associated with improved 5-year OS compared with pretreatment for those patients upstaged (37%) to pathologic stage II/III (55% vs. 36% and 34% vs. 7%; all p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: This stage-specific study demonstrates improved survival with surgery alone for clinical stage I signet ring cell gastric adenocarcinoma. Despite 37% of clinical stage I patients being upstaged to pathologic stage II/III, adjuvant therapy offers a favorable rescue strategy, with improved outcomes compared with those treated preoperatively. Surgery alone also affords similar or improved survival for pathologic stage I disease versus multimodality therapy. This study challenges the bias to overtreat stage I signet ring cell gastric adenocarcinoma.

Disparities in Presentation at Time of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Diagnosis: A United States Safety-Net Collaborative Study.

BACKGROUND: While hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is ideally diagnosed outpatient by screening at-risk patients, many are diagnosed in Emergency Departments (ED) due to undiagnosed liver disease and/or limited access-to-healthcare. This study aims to identify sociodemographic/clinical factors associated with being diagnosed with HCC in the ED to identify patients who may benefit from improved access-to-care. METHODS: HCC patients diagnosed between 2012 and 2014 in the ED or an outpatient setting [Primary Care Physician (PCP) or hepatologist] were identified from the US Safety-Net Collaborative database and underwent retrospective chart-review. Multivariable regression identified predictors for an ED diagnosis. RESULTS: Among 1620 patients, median age was 60, 68% were diagnosed outpatient, and 32% were diagnosed in the ED. ED patients were more likely male, Black/Hispanic, uninsured, and presented with more decompensated liver disease, aggressive features, and advanced clinical stage. On multivariable regression, controlling for age, gender, race/ethnicity, poverty, insurance, and PCP/navigator access, predictors for ED diagnosis were male (odds ratio [OR] 1.6, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.1-2.2, p = 0.010), black (OR 1.7, 95% CI: 1.2-2.3, p = 0.002), Hispanic (OR 1.6, 95% CI: 1.1-2.6, p = 0.029), > 25% below poverty line (OR 1.4, 95% CI: 1.1-1.9, p = 0.019), uninsured (OR 3.9, 95% CI: 2.4-6.1, p < 0.001), and lack of PCP (OR 2.3, 95% CI: 1.5-3.6, p < 0.001) or navigator (OR 1.8, 95% CI: 1.3-2.5, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The sociodemographic/clinical profile of patients diagnosed with HCC in EDs differs significantly from those diagnosed outpatient. ED patients were more likely racial/ethnic minorities, uninsured, and had limited access to healthcare. This study highlights the importance of improved access-to-care in already vulnerable populations.

Relationship between Cancer Diagnosis and Complications Following Pancreatoduodenectomy for Duodenal Adenoma.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) for duodenal adenoma (DA) resection may be associated with excessive surgical risk for patients with potentially benign lesions, given the absence of pancreatic duct obstruction. We examined factors associated with final malignant pathology and evaluated the postoperative course of patients with DA versus pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed patients with DA who underwent PD from 2008 to 2018 and assessed the accuracy rate of preoperative biopsy and factors associated with final malignant pathology. Complications for DA patients were compared with those of matched PDAC patients. RESULTS: Forty-five consecutive patients who underwent PD for DA were identified, and the preoperative biopsy false negative rate was 29. Factors associated with final malignant pathology included age over 70 years, preoperative biliary obstruction, and common bile duct diameter > 8 mm (p < 0.05). Compared with patients with PDAC (n = 302), DA patients experienced more major complications (31% vs. 15%, p < 0.01), more grade C postoperative pancreatic fistulas (9% vs. 1%, p < 0.01), and greater mortality (7% vs. 2%, p < 0.05). Propensity score matched patients with DA had more major complications following PD (32% vs. 12%, p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative biopsy of duodenal adenomas is associated with a high false-negative rate for malignancy, and PD for DA is associated with higher complication rates than PD for PDAC. These results aid discussion among patients and surgeons who are considering observation versus PD for DA, especially in younger patients without biliary obstruction, who are less likely to harbor malignancy.

Clinical Presentation Patterns and Survival Outcomes of Hispanic Patients With Gastric Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Hispanic patients have a higher incidence of gastric cancer when compared to non-Hispanics. Outlining clinicodemographic characteristics and assessing the impact of ethnicity on stage-specific survival may identify opportunities to improve gastric cancer care for this population. METHODS: Patients with gastric cancer in the US Safety Net Collaborative (2012-2014) were retrospectively reviewed. Demographics, clinicopathologic characteristics, operative details, and outcomes were compared between Hispanic and non-Hispanic patients. Early onset gastric cancer was defined as age <50 years. Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional-hazards models were used to identify the impact of ethnicity on disease-specific survival (DSS). RESULTS: Seven hundred and ninety-seven patients were included, of which 219 (28%) were Hispanic. Hispanic patients were more likely to seek care at safety-net hospitals (66 vs 39%) and be uninsured (36 vs 17%), and less likely to have a primary care provider (PCP) (46 vs 75%; all P<0.05). Hispanic patients were twice as likely to present with early onset gastric cancer (28 vs 15%) and were more frequently diagnosed in the emergency room (54 vs 37%) with both abdominal pain and weight loss (44 vs 31%; all P <0.05). Treatment paradigms, operative outcomes, and DSS were similar between Hispanic and non-Hispanic patients when accounting for cancer stage. Cancer stage, pathologically positive nodes, and negative surgical margins were independently associated with DSS. CONCLUSIONS: A diagnosis of gastric cancer must be considered in previously healthy Hispanic patients who present to the emergency room with both abdominal pain and weight loss. Fewer than 50% of Hispanic patients have a PCP, indicating poor outpatient support. Efforts to improve outpatient support and screening may improve gastric cancer outcomes in this vulnerable population.

Surgical management of hepatocellular carcinoma patients with portal vein thrombosis: The United States Safety Net and Academic Center Collaborative Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Although consensus guidelines generally discourage any surgical management (ASM; i.e., resection and/or transplantation) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and portal vein thrombosis (PVT), recent series from Asia have challenged this paradigm. METHODS: Patients from the US Safety Net Collaborative database (2012-2014) with localized HCC and radiographically confirmed PVT were propensity-score matched based on demographic and clinicopathologic factors associated with receipt of ASM and overall survival (OS). OS was compared between patients undergoing ASM and those not selected for surgery. RESULTS: Of 1910 HCC patients, 207 (14.5%) had localized disease and PVT. The majority received either liver-directed therapies (LDTs; 34%) and/or targeted systemic therapies (36%). Twenty-one patients (10.1%) underwent ASM (resection [n = 11], transplantation [n = 10]); a third experienced any complication with no 30-day mortalities. Independent predictors of undergoing ASM were younger age, recent hepatology consultation, and lower model of end-stage liver disease (MELD) score. After matching for age, comorbidities, MELD, tumor size, receipt of LDT, or systemic therapy, OS was significantly longer for patients selected for ASM versus non-ASM patients (median not reached vs. 5.8 months, p < .001). CONCLUSION: In a large North American multi-institutional cohort, a minority of HCC patients with PVT were selected for ASM. Resection or transplantation was associated with improved survival and may have a role in the multimodality management in selected patients.

Surgical resection of early stage hepatocellular carcinoma improves patient survival at safety net hospitals.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Surgical resection is indicated for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients with Child A cirrhosis. We hypothesize that surgical intervention and survival are limited by advanced HCC presentation at safety net hospitals (SNHs) versus academic medical centers (AMCs). METHODS: Patients with HCC and Child A cirrhosis in the US Safety Net Collaborative (2012-2014) were evaluated. Demographics, clinicopathologic features, operative characteristics, and outcomes were compared between SNHs and AMCs. Liver transplantation was excluded. Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional-hazards models were used to identify the effect of surgery on overall (OS). RESULTS: A total of 689 Child A patients with HCC were identified. SNH patients frequently presented with T3/T4 stage (35% vs. 24%) and metastases (17% vs. 8%; p < .05). SNH patients were as likely to undergo surgery as AMC patients (17% vs. 18%); however, SNH patients were younger (56 vs. 64 years), underwent minor hepatectomy (65% vs. 38%), and frequently harbored well-differentiated tumors (23% vs. 2%; p < .05). On multivariate analysis, surgical resection and stage, but not hospital type, were associated with improved OS. CONCLUSIONS: Although SNH patients present with advanced HCC, survival outcomes for early stage HCC are similar at SNHs and AMCs. Identifying barriers to early diagnosis at SNH may increase surgical candidacy and improve outcomes.

Is there a difference in utilization of a perioperative treatment approach for gastric cancer between safety net hospitals and tertiary referral centers?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Perioperative therapy is a favored treatment strategy for gastric cancer. We sought to assess utilization of this approach at safety net hospitals (SNH) and tertiary referral centers (TRC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients in the US Safety Net Collaborative (2012-2014) with resectable gastric cancer across five SNH and their sister TRC were included. Primary outcomes were receipt of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) and perioperative therapy. RESULTS: Of 284 patients, 36% and 64% received care at SNH and TRC. The distribution of Stage II/III resectable disease was similar across facilities. Receipt of NAC at SNH and TRC was similar (56% vs. 46%, p = 0.27). Compared with overall clinical stage, 38% and 36% were pathologically downstaged at SNH and TRC, respectively. Among patients who received NAC, those who also received adjuvant chemotherapy at SNH and TRC were similar (66% vs. 60%, p = 0.50). Asian race and higher clinical stage were associated with receipt of perioperative therapy (both p < 0.05) while treatment facility type was not. CONCLUSIONS: There was no difference in utilization of a perioperative treatment strategy between facility types for patients with gastric cancer. Pathologic downstaging from NAC was similar across treatment facilities, suggesting similar quality and duration of therapy. Treatment at an SNH is not a barrier to receiving standard-of-care perioperative therapy for gastric cancer.

Attrition during neoadjuvant chemotherapy for gastric adenocarcinoma is associated with decreased survival: A United States Safety-Net Collaborative analysis.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is standard management for localized gastric cancer (GC). Attrition during NAC due to treatment-related toxicity or functional decline is considered a surrogate for worse biologic outcomes; however, data supporting this paradigm are lacking. We investigated factors predicting attrition and its association with overall survival (OS) in GC. METHODS: Patients with nonmetastatic GC initiating NAC were identified from the US Safety-Net Collaborative (2012-2014). Patient/treatment-related characteristics were compared between attrition/nonattrition cohorts. Cox models determined factors associated with OS. RESULTS: Of 116 patients initiating NAC, attrition during prescribed NAC occurred in 24%. No differences were observed in performance status, comorbidities, treatment at safety-net hospital, or clinicopathologic factors between cohorts. Despite absence of distinguishing factors, attrition was associated with worse OS (median: 11 vs. 37 months; p = 0.01) and was an independent predictor of mortality (hazard ratio [HR]: 4.7, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.5-15.2; p = 0.02). Fewer patients with attrition underwent curative-intent surgery (39% vs. 89%; p < 0.001). Even in patients undergoing surgical exploration (n = 89), NAC attrition remained an independent predictor of worse OS (HR: 50.8, 95% CI: 3.6-717.8; p = 0.004) despite similar receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy. CONCLUSION: Attrition during NAC for nonmetastatic GC is independently associated with worse OS, even in patients undergoing surgery. Attrition during NAC may reflect unfavorable tumor biology not captured by conventional staging metrics.

A novel preoperative risk score to optimize patient selection for performing concomitant liver resection with cytoreductive surgery/HIPEC.

BACKGROUND: While parenchymal hepatic metastases were previously considered a contraindication to cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), liver resection (LR) is increasingly performed with CRS/HIPEC. METHODS: Patients from the US HIPEC Collaborative (2000-2017) with invasive appendiceal or colorectal adenocarcinoma undergoing primary, curative intent CRS/HIPEC with CC0-1 resection were included. LR was defined as a formal parenchymal resection. Primary endpoints were postoperative complications and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: A total of 658 patients were included. About 83 (15%) underwent LR of colorectal (58%) or invasive appendiceal (42%) metastases. LR patients had more complications (81% vs. 60%; p = .001), greater number of complications (2.3 vs. 1.5; p < .001) per patient and required more reoperations (22% vs. 11%; p = .007) and readmissions (39% vs. 25%; p = .014) than non-LR patients. LR patients had decreased OS (2-year OS 62% vs. 79%, p < .001), even when accounting for peritoneal carcinomatosis index and histology type. Preoperative factors associated with decreased OS on multivariable analysis in LR patients included age < 60 years (HR, 3.61; 95% CI, 1.10-11.81), colorectal histology (HR, 3.84; 95% CI, 1.69-12.65), and multiple liver tumors (HR, 3.45; 95% CI, 1.21-9.85) (all p < .05). When assigning one point for each factor, there was an incremental decrease in 2-year survival as the risk score increased from 0 to 3 (0: 100%; 1: 91%; 2: 58%; 3: 0%). CONCLUSIONS: As CRS/HIPEC + LR has become more common, we created a simple risk score to stratify patients considered for CRS/HIPEC + LR. These data aid in striking the balance between an increased perioperative complication profile with the potential for improvement in OS.

Survival inequity in vulnerable populations with early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma: a United States safety-net collaborative analysis.

BACKGROUND: Access to health insurance and curative interventions [surgery/liver-directed-therapy (LDT)] affects survival for early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The aim of this multi-institutional study of high-volume safety-net hospitals (SNHs) and their tertiary-academic-centers (AC) was to identify the impact of type/lack of insurance on survival disparities across hospitals, particularly SNHs whose mission is to minimize insurance related access-to-care barriers for vulnerable populations. METHODS: Early-stage HCC patients (2012-2014) from the US Safety-Net Collaborative were propensity-score matched by treatment at SNH/AC. Overall survival (OS) was the primary outcome. Multivariable Cox proportional-hazard analysis was performed accounting for sociodemographic/clinical parameters. RESULTS: Among 925 patients, those with no insurance (NI) had decreased curative surgery, compared to those with government insurance (GI) and private insurance [PI, (PI-SNH:60.5% vs. GI-SNH:33.1% vs. NI-SNH:13.6%, p < 0.001)], and decreased median OS (PI-SNH:32.1 vs. GI-SNH:22.8 vs. NI-SNH:9.4 months, p = 0.002). On multivariable regression controlling for sociodemographic/clinical parameters, NI-SNH (HR:2.5, 95% CI:1.3-4.9, p = 0.007) was the only insurance type/hospital system combination with significantly worse OS. CONCLUSION: NI-SNH patients received less curative treatment than other insurance/hospitals types suggesting that treatment barriers, beyond access-to-care, need to be identified and addressed to achieve survival equity in early-stage HCC for vulnerable populations (NI-SNH).

Impact of hepatitis C treatment on long-term outcomes for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: a United States Safety Net Collaborative Study.

BACKGROUND: Widespread HCV treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients remains limited. Our aim was to evaluate the association of HCV treatment with survival and assess barriers to treatment. METHODS: Patients in the U.S. Safety Net Collaborative with HCV and HCC were included. Primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes were recurrence-free survival (RFS) and barriers to receiving HCV treatment. RESULTS: Of 941 patients, 57% received care at tertiary referral centers (n=533), 74% did not receive HCV treatment (n=696), 6% underwent resection (n=54), 17% liver transplant (n=163), 50% liver-directed therapy (n=473), and 7% chemotherapy (n=60). HCV treatment was associated with improved OS compared to no HCV treatment (70 vs 21 months, p<0.01), persisting across clinical stages, HCC treatment modalities, and treatment facilities (all p<0.01). Surgical patients who received HCV treatment had improved RFS compared to those who did not (91 vs 80 months, p=0.03). On MVA, HCV treated patients had improved OS and RFS. On MVA, factors associated with failure to receive HCV treatment included Black race, higher MELD, and advanced clinical stage (all p<0.05). CONCLUSION: HCV treatment for HCC patients portends improved survival, regardless of clinical stage, HCC treatment, or facility type. Efforts must address barriers to HCV treatment.

Optimal Surveillance Frequency After CRS/HIPEC for Appendiceal and Colorectal Neoplasms: A Multi-institutional Analysis of the US HIPEC Collaborative.

BACKGROUND: No guidelines exist for surveillance following cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS/HIPEC) for appendiceal and colorectal cancer. The primary objective was to define the optimal surveillance frequency after CRS/HIPEC. METHODS: The U.S. HIPEC Collaborative database (2000-2017) was reviewed for patients who underwent a CCR0/1 CRS/HIPEC for appendiceal or colorectal cancer. Radiologic surveillance frequency was divided into two categories: low-frequency surveillance (LFS) at q6-12mos or high-frequency surveillance (HFS) at q2-4mos. Primary outcome was overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Among 975 patients, the median age was 55 year, 41% were male: 31% had non-invasive appendiceal (n = 301), 45% invasive appendiceal (n = 435), and 24% colorectal cancer (CRC; n = 239). With a median follow-up time of 25 mos, the median time to recurrence was 12 mos. Despite less surveillance, LFS patients had no decrease in median OS (non-invasive appendiceal: 106 vs. 65 mos, p < 0.01; invasive appendiceal: 120 vs. 73 mos, p = 0.02; colorectal cancer [CRC]: 35 vs. 30 mos, p = 0.8). LFS patients had lower median PCI scores compared with HFS (non-invasive appendiceal: 10 vs. 19; invasive appendiceal: 10 vs. 14; CRC: 8 vs. 11; all p < 0.01). However, on multivariable analysis, accounting for PCI score, LFS was still not associated with decreased OS for any histologic type (non-invasive appendiceal: hazard ratio [HR]: 0.28, p = 0.1; invasive appendiceal: HR: 0.73, p = 0.42; CRC: HR: 1.14, p = 0.59). When estimating annual incident cases of CRS/HIPEC at 375 for non-invasive appendiceal, 375 invasive appendiceal and 4410 colorectal, LFS compared with HFS for the initial two post-operative years would potentially save $13-19 M/year to the U.S. healthcare system. CONCLUSIONS: Low-frequency surveillance after CRS/HIPEC for appendiceal or colorectal cancer is not associated with decreased survival, and when considering decreased costs, may optimize resource utilization.

Preoperative Risk Score for Predicting Incomplete Cytoreduction: A 12-Institution Study from the US HIPEC Collaborative.

BACKGROUND: For patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis undergoing cytoreductive surgery with heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS/HIPEC), incomplete cytoreduction (CCR2/3) confers morbidity without survival benefit. The aim of this study is to identify preoperative factors which predict CCR2/3. METHODS: All patients who underwent curative-intent CRS/HIPEC of low/high-grade appendiceal, colorectal, or peritoneal mesothelioma cancers in the 12-institution US HIPEC Collaborative from 2000 to 2017 were included (n = 2027). The primary aim is to create an incomplete-cytoreduction risk score (ICRS) to predict CCR2/3 CRS utilizing preoperative data. ICRS was created from a randomly selected cohort of 50% of patients (derivation cohort) and verified on the remaining patients (validation cohort). RESULTS: Within our derivation cohort (n = 998), histology was low-grade appendiceal neoplasms in 30%, high-grade appendiceal tumor in 41%, colorectal tumor in 22%, and peritoneal mesothelioma in 8%. CCR0/1 was achieved in 816 patients and CCR 2/3 in 116 patients. On multivariable analysis, preoperative factors associated with incomplete cytoreduction were male gender [odds ratio (OR) 3.4, p = 0.007], presence of ascites (OR 2.8, p = 0.028), cancer antigen (CA)-125 ≥ 40 U/mL (OR 3.4, p = 0.012), and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) ≥ 4.2 ng/mL (OR 3.2, p = 0.029). Each preoperative factor was assigned a score of 0 or 1 to form an ICRS from 0 to 4. Scores were grouped as zero (0), low (1-2), or high (3-4). Incidence of CCR2/3 progressively increased by risk group from 1.6% in zero to 13% in low and 39% in high. When ICRS was applied to the validation cohort (n = 1029), this relationship was maintained. CONCLUSION: The incomplete cytoreduction risk score incorporates preoperative factors to accurately stratify the risk of CCR2/3 resection in CRS/HIPEC. This score should not be used in isolation, however, to exclude patients from surgery.

Optimal timing and treatment strategy for pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: For pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC), no studies have established any association between earlier treatment initiation and long-term outcomes. In addition, an optimal type of initial treatment for the localized disease remains ill-defined. METHODS: Patients in the National Cancer Database (2004-2015) with clinical stage I (CS-I) and II (CS-II) PDAC who underwent curative-intent resection were included. Optimal time from diagnosis-to-treatment including neoadjuvant chemotherapy, neoadjuvant chemoradiation, or upfront surgery was assessed. An optimal type of treatment was evaluated. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Among 29 167 patients, starting any treatment within 0 to 6 weeks was associated with improved median OS compared with 7 to 12 weeks (21.0 vs 20.1 months; P = .004). This persisted when accounting for sex, race, and Charlson-Deyo score (hazard ratio [HR], 0.94; P = 0.02) and on subset analysis for CS-I (23.5 vs 21.8 months; P = .04) and CS-II (19.4 vs 18.3 months; P = .03). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was associated with improved OS compared with neoadjuvant chemoradiation (25.6 vs 22.7 months; P < .0001) or US (25.6 vs 20.1 months; P < .0001) even when accounting for sex, race, and Charlson-Deyo score (neoadjuvant chemoradiation: HR, 0.86; P < .001; US: HR, 0.79; P < .001). This improvement persisted in subset analysis with NC compared with neoadjuvant chemoradiation (CS-I: 28.6 vs 25.0 months; CS-II: 25.0 vs 22.9 months; both P < .0001) and to US (CS-I: 28.6 vs 22.9 months; CS-II: 24.7 vs 18.4 months; both P < .0001). On multivariable analysis for each CS-I/CS-II, NC remained associated with 20% improved survival compared with neoadjuvant chemoradiation or upfront surgery. CONCLUSIONS: For PDAC, initiation of therapy within 6 weeks from diagnosis is associated with improved survival, with neoadjuvant chemotherapy associated with the best survival compared with neoadjuvant chemoradiation or upfront surgery.