Practice Pattern Variability in the Management of Regional Lymph Node Metastasis in Extremity and Trunk Soft Tissue Sarcoma: A Survey of the Society of Surgical Oncology and Musculoskeletal Tumor Society Membership.

BACKGROUND: Regional lymph node metastasis in extremity and trunk soft tissue sarcoma (ETSTS) is rare with no standardized management. We sought to determine management patterns for regional lymph node metastasis in ETSTS. METHODS: A survey regarding the management of ETSTS lymph node metastasis was distributed to the membership of the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) and the Society of Surgical Oncology (SSO) in January 2022. The survey queried the type of training (surgical oncology, orthopedic oncology), details of their practice setting, and management decisions of hypothetical ETSTS scenarios that involved potential or confirmed lymph node metastasis. RESULTS: The survey was distributed to 349 MSTS members (open rate of 63%, completion rate 21%) and 3026 SSO members (open rate of 55%, completion rate 4.7%) and was completed by 214 respondents, of whom 73 (34.1%) and 141 (65.9%) were orthopedic oncology and surgical oncology fellowship-trained, respectively. The majority of respondents practiced in an academic setting (n = 171, 79.9%) and treat >10 extremity sarcoma cases annually (n = 138, 62.2%). In scenarios with confirmed nodal disease for clear cell and epithelioid sarcoma, surgical oncologists were inclined to perform lymphadenectomy, while orthopedic oncologists were inclined to offer targeted lymph node excision with adjuvant radiation (p < 0.001). There was heterogeneity of responses regarding the management of nodal disease regardless of training background. CONCLUSION: Self-reported management of nodal disease in ETSTS was variable among respondent groups with differences and similarities based on training background. These data highlight the variability of practice for nodal disease management and the need for consensus-based guidelines.

Sarculator is a Good Model to Predict Survival in Resected Extremity and Trunk Sarcomas in US Patients.

BACKGROUND: Sarculator is an online validated nomogram that predicts overall survival of patients with resected, primary extremity sarcomas. However, its ability to accurately predict outcomes in US patients with sarcoma is unknown. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients from the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB) (2006-2016) with resected stage I-III primary extremity or trunk sarcoma were included. Predicted overall survival (pOS) was calculated using the Sarculator algorithm, which includes patient age, tumor size (cm), grade (1-3), and histology, and compared with actual overall survival (aOS). Harrell's C-index was calculated to determine the discriminatory ability of Sarculator (0.7 = good, 0.8 = strong, 1.0 = perfect model), and calibration plots were created. RESULTS: In total, 9738 patients were included. Five-year pOS was 73.7% compared with aOS of 68.9%. The C-index for the entire cohort was 0.726. By stage, the C-index was 0.730 for stage I, 0.708 for stage II, and 0.679 for stage III. By histology, C-indices were highest for leiomyosarcoma (0.745), myxofibrosarcoma (0.722), and other histologies (0.721). By sociodemographic variables, Sarculator performed better for patients < 50 years (C-index 0.722), of other/unknown race (C-index 0.781), with private insurance (C-index 0.715), treated at a center other than a community cancer programs (C-index > 0.7), and with no comorbidities (C-index 0.716). Outcomes by zip code educational attainment and income were not markedly different (all C-indices > 0.7). CONCLUSIONS: Sarculator is overall a good predictor of aOS and useful tool for clinicians to aid in survival prognostication. However, clinicians should be aware of populations for whom Sarculator's predictions may be less accurate. Future work could focus on enhancing the Sarculator algorithm specifically for US patients by including demographic variables.

Management of Locally Recurrent Retroperitoneal Sarcoma in the Adult: An Updated Consensus Approach from the Transatlantic Australasian Retroperitoneal Sarcoma Working Group.

BACKGROUND: Surgery is the mainstay of treatment for retroperitoneal sarcoma (RPS), but local recurrence is common. Biologic behavior and recurrence patterns differ significantly among histologic types of RPS, with implications for management. The Transatlantic Australasian RPS Working Group (TARPSWG) published a consensus approach to primary RPS, and to complement this, one for recurrent RPS in 2016. Since then, additional studies have been published, and collaborative discussion is ongoing to address the clinical challenges of local recurrence in RPS. METHODS: An extensive literature search was performed, and the previous consensus statements for recurrent RPS were updated after review by TARPSWG members. The search included the most common RPS histologic types: liposarcoma, leiomyosarcoma, solitary fibrous tumor, undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma, and malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor. RESULTS: Recurrent RPS management was evaluated from diagnosis to follow-up evaluation. For appropriately selected patients, resection is safe. Nomograms currently are available to help predict outcome after resection. These and other new findings have been combined with expert recommendations to provide 36 statements, each of which is attributed a level of evidence and grade of recommendation. In this updated document, more emphasis is placed on histologic type and clarification of the intent for surgical treatment, either curative or palliative. Overall, the fundamental tenet of optimal care for patients with recurrent RPS remains individualized treatment after multidisciplinary discussion by an experienced team with expertise in RPS. CONCLUSIONS: Updated consensus recommendations are provided to help guide decision-making for treatment of locally recurrent RPS and better selection of patients who would potentially benefit from surgery.

National Utilization of Imatinib in the Management of Resected Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors.

BACKGROUND: Imatinib decreases recurrence risk and improves overall survival (OS) in localized gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs); however, the extent to which patients receive appropriate treatment in the US has not been well characterized. METHODS: Patients with non-metastatic, resectable GIST were included in this study (National Cancer Database, 2010-2015). Those with a low-risk of recurrence were classified as receiving overtreatment or guideline-concordant treatment, while those with a high-risk of recurrence were classified as receiving undertreatment or guideline-concordant treatment. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine factors associated with non-concordant treatment. The association between non-concordant treatment and OS was evaluated using multivariable Cox regression and propensity score matching. RESULTS: Among 3088 patients with high-risk GIST, 41% were undertreated, and among 3908 patients with low-risk GIST, 18.8% were overtreated. For patients with high-risk GIST, age > 60 years, African American race, and treatment at a community or comprehensive cancer program were associated with undertreatment. Among low-risk patients, small bowel primary, tumor size > 2 cm, and tumors with > 1 mitotic figure per 50 high-power fields were more likely to be overtreated. After propensity score matching, guideline-concordant therapy was associated with an 8.8% improvement in 5-year OS (81.9% vs. 73.1%, p = 0.002) for those with high-risk GIST and decreased risk of death (hazard ratio 0.63, 95% confidence interval 0.47-0.84). There was no statistically significant difference in survival for patients with low-risk GIST with the addition of imatinib overtreatment (overtreatment 93.9% vs. 89.6%, p = 0.053). CONCLUSIONS: Nearly 30% of GIST patients do not receive guideline-concordant treatment and future work is needed to understand the factors driving non-concordant treatment.

Gender inclusivity through maize breeding in Africa: A review of the issues and options for future engagement.

With the prioritization of social inclusion in agricultural development, donors and research centers have shown growing interest in gender-intentional varietal development and delivery. Breeding maize varieties that respond to gender-based differences in trait preferences now represents a central objective of maize R&D in the CGIAR and elsewhere. Drawing on literature on gender and maize seed adoption, variety preferences, and seed system constraints, we take stock of knowns and unknowns related to gender-responsive and gender-intentional maize breeding. While recent research on farmers' variety preferences across crops has yielded insights into gender-based differences, we find that evidence of gender-differentiated preferences for maize varieties remains inconclusive. Ultimately, we identify several research priorities to support gender-intentional maize breeding, including a more nuanced understanding of gender relations in maize production and maize seed decision-making, new and more gender-responsive approaches to measuring farmer preferences and seed demand more broadly, and research to address operational challenges in gender-intentional breeding. We close by identifying some institutional constraints to achieving impact through gender-intentional maize breeding.

Adjuvant Chemotherapy Does Not Improve Recurrence-Free Survival in Patients With Stage 2 or Stage 3 Rectal Cancer After Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy and Total Mesorectal Excision.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines for locally advanced stage 2/3 rectal cancer recommend neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by total mesorectal excision and adjuvant chemotherapy. The oncologic benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy has not been consistently demonstrated. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate disease recurrence and survival in patients with rectal cancer who received adjuvant chemotherapy after chemoradiotherapy and total mesorectal excision. DESIGN: This was a retrospective review of patients with stage 2/3 rectal cancer after chemoradiotherapy and surgery, based on receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy. SETTINGS: The study was conducted at the Kaiser Permanente Southern California system of 14 hospitals and associated clinics. PATIENTS: A total of 862 patients with stage 2/3 rectal cancer diagnosed and treated between January 1, 2005, and December 31, 2016, were included in this study. INTERVENTIONS: The study involved neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by total mesorectal excision with or without adjuvant chemotherapy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary end point was recurrence-free survival. RESULTS: A total of 348 stage 2 and 514 stage 3 patients were included; 660 patients (76.6%) underwent adjuvant chemotherapy. Mean patient follow-up after surgery was 63.0 months (range, 3-160). Multivariable analysis showed that yp stage (HR for yp stage 2 = 4.74; yp stage 3 = 8.83) and en bloc resection (HR = 1.76) were the only variables that significantly predicted disease recurrence. Neither pretreatment tumor stage nor receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy was significantly associated with recurrence-free survival. Log-rank testing failed to demonstrate significant recurrence-free survival improvement after receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy in any patient subgroup. LIMITATIONS: The study was limited by selection bias attributed to the nature of a retrospective study without patient randomization or predefined treatment protocol. CONCLUSIONS: In stage 2/3 rectal cancer treated with chemoradiotherapy and surgery, the addition of adjuvant chemotherapy was not associated with decreased recurrence-free survival in the entire cohort or in any subgroup, whereas tumor response to chemoradiotherapy is closely associated with disease recurrence. These findings have important consequences for treatment and surveillance decisions for patients with rectal cancer. Presurgical efforts that maximize tumor downstaging, such as total neoadjuvant therapy, may produce better oncologic outcomes than traditional adjuvant chemotherapy. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B134. LA QUIMIOTERAPIA ADYUVANTE NO MEJORA LA SOBREVIDA LIBRE DE RECURRENCIA EN PACIENTES CON CÁNCER DE RECTO ESTADÍOS II O III DESPUÉS DE RADIO-QUIMIOTERAPIA NEOADYUVANTE Y ESCISIÓN TOTAL DEL MESORRECTO: Las guías actuales para el tratamiento de cáncer rectal en estadio II-III localmente avanzado, recomiendan la radio-quimioterapia neoadyuvante con escisión total del mesorrecto seguidas de quimioterapia adyuvante. El beneficio oncológico de la quimioterapia adyuvante no ha sido demostrado de manera fehaciente.Evaluar la recurrencia y sobrevida a la enfermedad en pacientes con cáncer rectal que recibieron quimioterapia adyuvante después de radio-quimioterapia y escisión total del mesorrecto.Revisión retrospectiva de pacientes con cáncer rectal en estadios II-III después de radio-quimioterapia y cirugía, basada en la recepción de quimioterapia adyuvante.Sistema Permanente de Kaiser Sur-Californiano de 14 hospitales y clínicas asociadas.862 pacientes con cáncer rectal en estadio II-III diagnosticados y tratados entre el 1 de Enero 2005 y el 31 de Diciembre 2016.Radio-quimioterapia neoadyuvante seguida de escisión total del mesorrecto +/- quimioterapia adyuvante.El objetivo primario fue la sobrevida libre de recurrencia.Fueron incluidos 348 pacientes en estadio II y 514 en estadio III. 660 pacientes (76,6%) se sometieron a quimioterapia adyuvante. El seguimiento medio de cada paciente después de la cirugía fué de 63.0 meses (rango, 3-160). El análisis multivariable mostró que la etapa yp (Cociente de riesgo para estadío yp II = 4.74 y estadío yp III = 8.83) y la resección en bloque (Cociente de riesgo = 1.76) fueron las únicas variables que predijeron significativamente la recurrencia de la enfermedad. Ni el estadío tumoral previo al tratamiento ni la recepción de quimioterapia adyuvante se asociaron significativamente con la sobrevida libre de recurrencia. Las pruebas de rango logarítmico no pudieron demostrar una mejoría significativa de la sobrevida libre de recurrencia después de recibir quimioterapia adyuvante en cualquier subgrupo de pacientes.Sesgo de selección, debido al estudio retrospectivo sin aleatorización de los pacientes o protocolo de tratamiento predefinido.En casos de cáncer de recto estadíos II-III tratados con radio-quimioterapia y cirugía, la adición de quimioterapia adyuvante no se asoció con una disminución de la sobrevida libre de recurrencia en toda la cohorte o en ningún subgrupo, mientras que la respuesta tumoral a la radio-quimioterapia está estrechamente asociada con la recurrencia de la enfermedad. Estos hallazgos tienen consecuencias importantes en la decisión del tratamiento y la vigilancia en pacientes con cáncer de recto. Los esfuerzos pre-quirúrgicos que maximizan la reducción del tamaño del tumor, como la terapia neoadyuvante total, pueden producir mejores resultados oncológicos que la quimioterapia adyuvante tradicional. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B134.

Determining the Safety and Efficacy of Enhanced Recovery Protocols in Major Oncologic Surgery: An Institutional NSQIP Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced-recovery (ER) protocols are increasingly being utilized in surgical practice. Outside of colorectal surgery, however, their feasibility, safety, and efficacy in major oncologic surgery have not been proven. This study compared patient outcomes before and after multispecialty implementation of ER protocols at a large, comprehensive cancer center. METHODS: Surgical cases performed from 2011 to 2016 and captured by an institutional NSQIP database were reviewed. Following exclusion of outpatient and emergent surgeries, 2747 cases were included in the analyses. Cases were stratified by presence or absence of ER compliance, defined by preoperative patient education and electronic medical record order set-driven opioid-sparing analgesia, goal-directed fluid therapy, and early postoperative diet advancement and ambulation. RESULTS: Approximately half of patients were treated on ER protocols (46%) and the remaining on traditional postoperative (TP) protocols (54%). Treatment on an ER protocol was associated with decreased overall complication rates (20% vs. 33%, p < 0.0001), severe complication rates (7.4% vs. 10%, p = 0.010), and median hospital length of stay (4 vs. 5 days, p < 0.0001). There was no change in readmission rates (ER vs. TP, 8.6% vs. 9.0%, p = 0.701). Subanalyses of high magnitude cases and specialty-specific outcomes consistently demonstrated improved outcomes with ER protocol adherence, including decreased opioid use. CONCLUSIONS: This assessment of a large-scale ER implementation in multispecialty major oncologic surgery indicates its feasibility, safety, and efficacy. Future efforts should be directed toward defining the long-term oncologic benefits of these protocols.

Doppler Ultrasound-Visible SignalMark Microspheres are Better Identified than HydroMARK® Clips in a Simulated Intraoperative Setting in Breast and Lung Tissue.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative breast and lung markers have significant drawbacks, including migration, patient discomfort, and scheduling difficulties. SignalMark is a novel localizer device with a unique signal on Doppler ultrasound. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate intraoperative identification of SignalMark microspheres compared with HydroMARK® clips. We also assessed the safety and efficacy of SignalMark in the lung. METHODS: Twelve breasts of lactating pigs were injected with SignalMark or HydroMARK® by a breast radiologist, and subsequently identified using a standard ultrasound machine by three surgeons blinded to marker location. Time to identification of each marker was recorded, with a maximum allotted time of 300 s. To further demonstrate efficacy in lung parenchyma, a second cohort of pigs underwent lung injections. RESULTS: A total of eight SignalMark markers and four HydroMARK® clips were placed in pig breasts. Overall, the surgeons correctly identified SignalMark 95.8% of the time (n = 23/24) and HydroMARK® clips 41.7% of the time (n = 5/12) within 300 s (p < 0.001). The mean time to identification was significantly faster for SignalMark, at 80.8 ± 20.1 s, than for HydroMARK®, at 209.4 ± 35.2 s (p < 0.002). For the lung injections, all 10 SignalMark markers were visible on Doppler ultrasound at the time of placement, and at the 7- and 21-day time points. CONCLUSIONS: Surgeons identified SignalMark in significantly less time than HydroMARK® clips in a simulated intraoperative setting, and SignalMark was easily viewed in the lung. These results suggest that SignalMark is a feasible option for efficient intraoperative localization of non-palpable breast and lung tumors using ultrasound guidance.