Exploring the landscape of AI-assisted decision-making in head and neck cancer treatment: a comparative analysis of NCCN guidelines and ChatGPT responses.

PURPOSE: Recent breakthroughs in natural language processing and machine learning, exemplified by ChatGPT, have spurred a paradigm shift in healthcare. Released by OpenAI in November 2022, ChatGPT rapidly gained global attention. Trained on massive text datasets, this large language model holds immense potential to revolutionize healthcare. However, existing literature often overlooks the need for rigorous validation and real-world applicability. METHODS: This head-to-head comparative study assesses ChatGPT's capabilities in providing therapeutic recommendations for head and neck cancers. Simulating every NCCN Guidelines scenarios. ChatGPT is queried on primary treatments, adjuvant treatment, and follow-up, with responses compared to the NCCN Guidelines. Performance metrics, including sensitivity, specificity, and F1 score, are employed for assessment. RESULTS: The study includes 68 hypothetical cases and 204 clinical scenarios. ChatGPT exhibits promising capabilities in addressing NCCN-related queries, achieving high sensitivity and overall accuracy across primary treatment, adjuvant treatment, and follow-up. The study's metrics showcase robustness in providing relevant suggestions. However, a few inaccuracies are noted, especially in primary treatment scenarios. CONCLUSION: Our study highlights the proficiency of ChatGPT in providing treatment suggestions. The model's alignment with the NCCN Guidelines sets the stage for a nuanced exploration of AI's evolving role in oncological decision support. However, challenges related to the interpretability of AI in clinical decision-making and the importance of clinicians understanding the underlying principles of AI models remain unexplored. As AI continues to advance, collaborative efforts between models and medical experts are deemed essential for unlocking new frontiers in personalized cancer care.

Treatment and Survival Among Patients With Colorectal Cancer in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Multicentric Population-Based Follow-Up Study.

BACKGROUND: The burden of colorectal cancer (CRC) is increasing in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). However, little is known about CRC treatment and survival in the region. METHODS: A random sample of 653 patients with CRC diagnosed from 2011 to 2015 was obtained from 11 population-based cancer registries in SSA. Information on clinical characteristics, treatment, and/or vital status was obtained from medical records in treating hospitals for 356 (54%) of the patients ("traced cohort"). Concordance of CRC treatment with NCCN Harmonized Guidelines for SSA was assessed. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to examine the association between survival and human development index (HDI). RESULTS: Of the 356 traced patients with CRC, 51.7% were male, 52.8% were from countries with a low HDI, 55.1% had colon cancer, and 73.6% were diagnosed with nonmetastatic (M0) disease. Among the patients with M0 disease, however, only 3.1% received guideline-concordant treatment, 20.6% received treatment with minor deviations, 31.7% received treatment with major deviations, and 35.1% received no treatment. The risk of death in patients who received no cancer-directed therapy was 3.49 (95% CI, 1.83-6.66) times higher than in patients who received standard treatment or treatment with minor deviations. Similarly, the risk of death in patients from countries with a low HDI was 1.67 (95% CI, 1.07-2.62) times higher than in those from countries with a medium HDI. Overall survival at 1 and 3 years was 70.9% (95% CI, 65.5%-76.3%) and 45.3% (95% CI, 38.9%-51.7%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Fewer than 1 in 20 patients diagnosed with potentially curable CRC received standard of care in SSA, reinforcing the need to improve healthcare infrastructure, including the oncology and surgical workforce.

An analysis of the impact of annual cancer genetic testing guideline updates on a past patient population.

Germline genetic testing for cancer predisposition genes has become an essential component of cancer treatment and risk reduction. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) releases annual genetic testing guidelines that identify characteristics of patients that could be affected by a hereditary cancer syndrome. These guidelines have broadened over time and the implications for past patients of cancer genetics clinics are not well understood. This study is a retrospective chart review aimed at determining the percentage and characteristics of past patients that meet updated NCCN guidelines (Breast, Ovarian, and Pancreas [BOP] v1.2022 and Colorectal [CRC] v1.2021), patients that attended a follow-up appointment, and patients who went on to receive genetic testing. Clinical data and characteristics were compared between the study population as a whole and the cohort of patients that met updated NCCN guidelines BOP v1.2022 and CRC v1.2021. The study population consisted of 280 patients with 76 (27.1%) patients meeting updated NCCN guidelines BOP v1.2022 and CRC v1.2021. The year of initial cancer genetic counseling appointment was statistically significant (p = 0.023) with patients more likely to meet NCCN guidelines BOP v1.2022 and CRC v1.2021 with earlier initial cancer genetic counseling appointments. In the cohort that met updated NCCN guidelines BOP v1.2022 and CRC v1.2021, the most common reason was a change in the NCCN guidelines (BOP or CRC) (54/76, 71.1%) with triple-negative breast cancer diagnosed at any age being the most impactful guideline change (19/54, 35.2%). Twenty-one patients attended a follow-up appointment (7.5%) and of those that received genetic testing (17/21, 81%) most received negative results (13/17, 61.9%), with one pathogenic, low penetrance result (1/17, 5.9%, CHEK2 p.I157T). Provider-initiated follow-up was attributed to most follow-up appointments (16/21, 76.2%) implying patients do not tend to follow-up on their own. Education to non-genetics providers as well as targeted implementation of follow-up protocols possibly managed by genetic counseling assistants and utilizing electronic medical record (EMR) patient messaging could lead to improved patient follow-up.

Compliance with sentinel lymph node biopsy guidelines for invasive melanomas treated with Mohs micrographic surgery.

BACKGROUND: Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) has not been studied for invasive melanomas treated with Mohs micrographic surgery using frozen-section MART-1 immunohistochemical stains (MMS-IHC). The primary objective of this study was to assess the accuracy and compliance with National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines for SLNB in a cohort of patients who had invasive melanoma treated with MMS-IHC. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included all patients who had primary, invasive, cutaneous melanomas treated with MMS-IHC at a single academic center between March 2006 and April 2018. The primary outcomes were the rates of documenting discussion and performing SLNB in patients who were eligible based on NCCN guidelines. Secondary outcomes were the rate of identifying the sentinel lymph node and the percentage of positive lymph nodes. RESULTS: In total, 667 primary, invasive, cutaneous melanomas (American Joint Committee on Cancer T1a-T4b) were treated with MMS-IHC. The median patient age was 69 years (range, 25-101 years). Ninety-two percent of tumors were located on specialty sites (head and/or neck, hands and/or feet, pretibial leg). Discussion of SLNB was documented for 162 of 176 (92%) SLNB-eligible patients, including 127 of 127 (100%) who had melanomas with a Breslow depth >1 mm. SLNB was performed in 109 of 176 (62%) SLNB-eligible patients, including 102 of 158 melanomas (65%) that met NCCN criteria to discuss and offer SLNB and 7 of 18 melanomas (39%) that met criteria to discuss and consider SLNB. The sentinel lymph node was successfully identified in 98 of 109 patients (90%) and was positive in 6 of those 98 patients (6%). CONCLUSIONS: Combining SLNB and MMS-IHC allows full pathologic staging and confirmation of clear microscopic margins before reconstruction of specialty site invasive melanomas. SLNB can be performed accurately and in compliance with consensus guidelines in patients with melanoma using MMS-IHC.

Germline genetic testing in breast cancer: Rationale for the testing of all women diagnosed by the age of 60 years and for risk-based testing of those older than 60 years.

Approximately 5% to 10% of women diagnosed with breast cancer will have a pathogenic variant (PV) in a hereditary cancer susceptibility gene, and this has significant implications for the management of these patients and their relatives. Despite the benefits of genetic testing, many eligible patients with breast cancer never undergo testing because of various barriers, including complicated testing criteria such as those from the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN). In 2019, the American Society of Breast Surgeons (ASBrS) proposed germline genetic testing for all patients with breast cancer to increase the identification of PV carriers. In 2020, a Mayo Clinic study highlighted the limitations of these 2 genetic testing guidelines (NCCN and ASBrS) and proposed a hybrid approach of testing all women diagnosed with breast cancer by the age of 65 years and using NCCN criteria for older patients. This commentary presents an updated analysis of the Mayo Clinic data and discusses the rationale for using the age of 60 years rather than 65 years as the cutoff for this hybrid approach. Using an age at diagnosis of ≤60 or ≤65 years for the universal testing of patients with breast cancer detected more PVs (11.9% [16 of 134] and 15.7% [21 of 134], respectively) in comparison with using the NCCN criteria. Lowering the age for universal testing from 65 to 60 years maintained the sensitivity of detecting a PV at >90% while sparing testing for an additional 10% of women. Compared with the testing of all patients, the hybrid approach would allow 31% of all women with breast cancer to forgo testing and result in fewer variants of uncertain significance identified and, therefore, would decrease the chance of harm from misinterpretation of these variants.

Trimodal therapy with high-dose-rate brachytherapy and hypofractionated external beam radiation combined with long-term androgen deprivation for unfavorable-risk prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: To assess the outcomes of high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy and hypofractionated external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) combined with long-term androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in very-high-risk (VHR) versus high-risk (HR) prostate cancer (PCa), as defined in the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) criteria. METHODS: Data from 338 consecutive HR or VHR PCa patients who had undergone this tri-modal therapy between 2005 and 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. Biochemical recurrence (BCR)-free, progression-free, overall, and cancer-specific survival (BCRFS/PFS/OS/CSS) rates were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method and Wilcoxon test. Cox regression models were used to evaluate candidate prognostic factors for survival. C­indexes were used to assess model discrimination. RESULTS: Within a median follow-up of 84 months, 68 patients experienced BCR, 58 had disease progression including only 3 with local progression, 27 died of any cause, and 2 died from PCa. The 5­year BCRFS, PFS, OS, and CSS rates were 82.2% (HR 86.5%; VHR 70.0%), 90.0% (HR 94.3%; VHR 77.6%), 95.7% (HR, 97.1%; VHR, 91.8%), and 99.6% (HR, 100%; VHR, 98.0%), respectively. In multivariable analyses that adjusted for standard clinicopathologic features, the risk subclassification was associated both PFS and OS (p = 0.0003 and 0.001, respectively). Adding the risk subclassification improved the accuracy of models in predicting BCRFS, PFS, and OS. CONCLUSION: While the outcome of this trimodal approach appears favorable, VHR PCa patients had significantly worse oncological outcomes than those with HR PCa. The NCCN risk subclassification should be integrated into prognostic tools to guide risk stratification, treatment, and follow-up for unfavorable PCa patients receiving this trimodal therapy.

Uptake and timing of risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy among patients with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations.

BACKGROUND: In women with BRCA mutations, risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy has been shown to decrease gynecologic cancer-specific and overall mortality. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network recommends that patients with BRCA mutations undergo risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy between the ages of 35 and 40 years for BRCA1 mutation carriers and between the ages of 40 and 45 years for BRCA2 mutation carriers or after childbearing is complete. Currently, uptake and timing of risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and reasons for delays in risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy are not well understood. OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate uptake and timing of risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy among women with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations concerning the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines and reasons for delays in risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. STUDY DESIGN: In this retrospective chart review, we identified women with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations who discussed risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy with a provider between 2012 and 2021. Uptake of risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy was documented, and patients were classified as having timely or delay in risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy based on the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. For those with delay in risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, reasons cited for delay were collected. Comparative statistical analyses were performed to evaluate characteristics of those with timely vs delayed risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to evaluate the associations among factors related to timing of risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. RESULTS: We identified 638 BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers seen between 2012 and 2021. Of these patients, 306 (48.0%) had undergone risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and 332 (52.0%) had not. When evaluating the timing of risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, 136 (21.3%) underwent timely risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, 239 (37.5%) had delays in risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, and 263 (41.2%) had not undergone risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy but were younger than the National Comprehensive Cancer Network age guidelines; therefore, they were neither timely nor delayed. Patients with delay in risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy were significantly older at the time of genetic testing than those with timely risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (mean, 49.8 vs 36.3 years; P<.001). Of the 306 patients who underwent risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, those with delayed risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy had a significantly shorter interval between BRCA identification and risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy than those with timely risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (median, 8.7 vs 17.6 months; P<.001). Patients with delay in risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy were more likely to have a personal history of cancer than those with timely risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (49.8% vs 37.5%; P=.028). Of the 239 women with delay in risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, 188 (78.7%) had delayed BRCA mutation identification, 29 (12.1%) had menopausal concerns, 17 (7.1%) had ongoing cancer treatment, 12 (5.0%) had coordination with breast surgery, 20 (8.4%) had miscellaneous reasons, and 19 (7.9%) had no reason documented. In the multivariate model, older age at BRCA diagnosis (odds ratio, 0.73; 95% confidence interval, 0.68-0.78; P<.001) was significantly associated with delayed risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy timing; those with BRCA2 mutation type were 7.54 times as likely to have timely risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy than BRCA1 mutation carriers (odds ratio, 7.54; 95% confidence, 3.70-16.42; P<.001). CONCLUSION: Nearly 38% of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers undergo or have yet to undergo risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy over the recommended National Comprehensive Cancer Network age. The most common reason for the delay in risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy was delayed identification of BRCA mutation, noted in 79% of patients with delayed risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. Timely genetic testing for eligible patients can increase appropriately timed risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy for the prevention of ovarian cancer and reduction of mortality in BRCA mutation carriers.

Financial conflicts of interest among National Comprehensive Cancer Network clinical practice guideline panelists in 2019.

BACKGROUND: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are evidence-based guidelines that serve as a standard of care in oncology practice, reimbursements, and quality improvement initiatives. To our knowledge, the extent of financial conflicts of interest (FCOIs) in National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines have not been systemically evaluated. The current study evaluated the extent of FCOIs in the NCCN CPGs for the most common malignancies in the United States. METHODS: The authors examined the latest 2019 versions of the NCCN CPGs for the 10 most common cancers by incidence in the United States. Using disclosure lists, they catalogued the FCOIs for the panelists under various categories outlined in the CPG. The authors also tabulated the companies and institutions involved in each panel disclosure. An "episode" describes 1 instance of participation of a panelist in 1 company in 1 category of each guideline. "Affiliation" describes an industrial, commercial, or institutional affiliation reported by a panelist in each episode. RESULTS: Of the 491 panelists on the CPG panel, 483 (98.3%) completed FCOI disclosures. A total of 224 (46.4%) reported at least 1 FCOI episode. A total of 1103 episodes were disclosed with an average of 4.9 episodes reported per panelist with FCOIs. Acting as part of scientific advisory boards, as a consultant, or as an expert witness was the most common FCOI category (19.9%). A total of 191 companies were associated with 1103 episodes of FCOI. The top companies were Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck, Genentech, and AstraZeneca. Among cancers, the prevalence of FCOIs was highest for lung cancer (56%), bladder cancer (52%), pancreatic cancer (52%), non-Hodgkin lymphoma (50%), kidney cancer (49%), colorectal cancer (43%), breast cancer (42%), melanoma (40%), prostate cancer (38%), and uterine cancer (32%). Among the panelists with FCOIs, 26%, 17%, and 57%, respectively, reported 1, 2, and >3 episodes. There were 127 episodes noted among the CPG chairs and/or vice chairs who reported FCOIs (mean, 6.4 episodes). The chairs and/or vice chairs of CPGs for uterine cancer, pancreatic cancer, melanoma, and prostate cancer were not found to have any FCOIs. CONCLUSIONS: FCOIs are very prevalent among NCCN CPG panelists. In nearly one-half of the CPGs, the majority of the panelists had at least 1 FCOI. Greater than one-half of the CPG chairs and/or vice chairs reported multiple FCOIs. Further research studies are necessary to determine the impact of these FCOIs.

Transitioning from conformal radiotherapy to intensity-modulated radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy: Clinical benefit, oncologic outcomes and incidence of gastrointestinal and urinary toxicities.

AIM: The purpose of this study was to review genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity associated with high-dose radiotherapy (RT) delivered with 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) or volumetric arc therapy (VMAT) following radical prostatectomy (RP). BACKGROUND: RP is a therapeutic option for the management of prostate cancer (PrCa). When assessing postoperative RT techniques for PrCa, the published literature focuses on patients treated with 2-dimensional conventional methods without reflecting the implementation of 3D-CRT, IMRT, or VMAT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 83 patients were included in this analysis; 30 patients received 3D-CRT, and 53 patients received IMRT/VMAT. Acute and late symptoms of the GU and lower GI tract were retrospectively graded according to the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer radiation toxicity grading systems. The relapse failure-free rate and overall survival were also evaluated. RESULTS: The rate of acute GU toxicity was 9.4% vs. 13.3% for the IMRT/VMAT and 3D-CRT groups (p = 0.583). The 5-year actuarial rates of late GI toxicity for IMRT/VMAT and 3D-CRT treatments were 1.9% and 6.7%, respectively. The rate of late GU toxicity for the IMRT/VMAT and 3D-CRT treatment groups was 7.5% and 16.6%, respectively (p = 0.199). We found no association between acute or late toxicity and the RT technique in univariate and multivariate analyses. CONCLUSION: Postprostatectomy IMRT/VMAT and 3D-CRT achieved similar morbidity and cancer control outcomes. The clinical benefit of highly conformal techniques in this setting is unclear although formal analysis is needed.

Evidence Underlying Recommendations and Payments from Industry to Authors of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guidelines.

BACKGROUND: The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines are among the most widely used guidance in oncology. It is critical to understand the extent to which the recommendations in these guidelines are supported by evidence and to investigate whether these recommendations have been influenced by payments from industry to authors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We examined the quality and consistency of evidence, as scored by guidelines authors, for systemic treatment incorporated in the NCCN guidelines. Payments data in 2015 were manually abstracted using the Open Payments database, which discloses all payments between the industry and American physicians. Correlations between the percentage of authors who received payments and the proportion of recommendations developed from low-level evidence per guideline were calculated using Spearman rank correlation. RESULTS: In total, 1,782 recommendations were identified in 29 guidelines, of which 1,282 (71.9%) were based on low-quality or low-consistency evidence (low-level evidence), including "case reports or clinical experience only" (18.9%). A substantial proportion (31/143, 21.7%) of category 1 (the highest level) recommendations were based on low-level evidence. The majority of authors (87.1%) received payments from industry. However, no association was found between the prevalence of payments among authors and the percentage of recommendations developed from low-level evidence per guideline. CONCLUSION: The majority of systemic treatment recommendations in the NCCN guidelines are based on low-level evidence, including more than one in five category 1 recommendations. Payments from industry were prevalent among authors. However, industrial payments among authors were not associated with inclusion of regimen/agent for which there is no conclusive evidence in the guidelines. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The authors found that the majority (71.9%) of systemic treatment recommendations issued in the current National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines were based on low-level evidence. Physicians should remain cautious when using current guidelines as the sole source guiding patient care decisions.

Inherited mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 in an unselected multiethnic cohort of Asian patients with breast cancer and healthy controls from Malaysia.

BACKGROUND: Genetic testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2 is offered typically to selected women based on age of onset and family history of cancer. However, current internationally accepted genetic testing referral guidelines are built mostly on data from cancer genetics clinics in women of European descent. To evaluate the appropriateness of such guidelines in Asians, we have determined the prevalence of germ line variants in an unselected cohort of Asian patients with breast cancer and healthy controls. METHODS: Germ line DNA from a hospital-based study of 2575 unselected patients with breast cancer and 2809 healthy controls were subjected to amplicon-based targeted sequencing of exonic and proximal splice site junction regions of BRCA1 and BRCA2 using the Fluidigm Access Array system, with sequencing conducted on a Illumina HiSeq2500 platform. Variant calling was performed with GATK UnifiedGenotyper and were validated by Sanger sequencing. RESULTS: Fifty-five (2.1%) BRCA1 and 66 (2.6%) BRCA2 deleterious mutations were identified among patients with breast cancer and five (0.18%) BRCA1 and six (0.21%) BRCA2 mutations among controls. One thousand one hundred and eighty-six (46%) patients and 97 (80%) carriers fulfilled the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines for genetic testing. CONCLUSION: Five per cent of unselected Asian patients with breast cancer carry deleterious variants in BRCA1 or BRCA2. While current referral guidelines identified the majority of carriers, one in two patients would be referred for genetic services. Given that such services are largely unavailable in majority of low-resource settings in Asia, our study highlights the need for more efficient guidelines to identify at-risk individuals in Asia.

Application of tumor treating fields for newly diagnosed glioblastoma: understanding of nationwide practice patterns.

BACKGROUND: Tumor treating fields (TTF) harness magnetic fields to induce apoptosis in targeted regions. A 2015 landmark randomized phase III trial of newly diagnosed glioblastoma (GBM) patients demonstrated TTF + temozolomide to be superior to temozolomide alone. Given these results, we sought to assess practice patterns of providers in TTF utilization for GBM. METHODS: A survey was administered to practices in the United States self-identifying as specializing in radiation oncology, medical oncology, neuro-oncology, neurosurgery, and/or neurology. Responses were collected anonymously; analysis was performed using Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: A total of 106 providers responded; a minority (36%) were in private practice. Regarding case volume, 82% treated at least six high-grade gliomas/year. The provider most commonly certified to offer TTF therapy to GBM patients was the neuro-oncologist (40%), followed by the radiation oncologist (34%); 31% reported no TTF-certified physician in their practice. TTF users were more likely to have high volume, and be aware of TTF inclusion in National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: More than 80% of TTF for GBM in the United States is performed by groups who treat at least six high-grade gliomas per year; unfortunately more than 30% were in practices bereft of anyone certified to offer TTF therapy. These results indicate that there remains fertile soil for TTF therapy nationwide to be introduced into practices for GBM treatment. Providers seeking to refer newly diagnosed GBM patients for TTF should seek out practices with TTF user-associated characteristics to ensure optimal access for their patients.

One in two cancer patients is significantly distressed: Prevalence and indicators of distress.

OBJECTIVE: Psychological distress is common in cancer patients, and awareness of its indicators is essential. We aimed to assess the prevalence of psychological distress and to identify problems indicative of high distress. METHODS: We used the distress thermometer (DT) and its 34-item problem list to measure psychological distress in 3724 cancer patients (mean age 58 years; 57% women) across major tumor entities, enrolled in an epidemiological multicenter study. To identify distress-related problems, we conducted monothetic analyses. RESULTS: We found high levels of psychological distress (DT ≥ 5) in 52% of patients. The most prevalent problems were fatigue (56%), sleep problems (51%), and problems getting around (47%). Sadness, fatigue, and sleep problems were most strongly associated with the presence of other problems. High distress was present in 81.4% of patients reporting all 3 of these problems (DT M = 6.4). When analyzing only the subset of physical problems, fatigue, problems getting around, and indigestion showed the strongest association with the remaining problems and 76.3% of patients with all 3 problems were highly distressed (DT M = 6.1). CONCLUSIONS: Our results show a high prevalence of psychological distress in cancer patients, as well as a set of problems that indicate the likely presence of other problems and high distress and can help clinicians identify distressed patients even if no routine distress screening is available.

Modified National Comprehensive Cancer Network Criteria for Assessing Resectability of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of our study was to assess the preoperative resectability of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) using the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guideline, the general rules of the Japan Pancreas Society (JPS), and both of them combined. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighty-six consecutive patients with PDAC (50 men and 36 women; mean age ± SD, 70.8 ± 9.0 years; age range, 49-86 years) underwent dynamic contrast-enhanced CT. Following the NCCN guideline, the degree of vascular invasion was evaluated to determine the NCCN score: 0 points for absence of vascular invasion, 1 point for tumor contact ≤ 180°, and 2 points for tumor contact > 180°. Direct invasion to adjacent structures was rated according to the general rules of JPS to determine the JPS score: 0 points for absence and 1 point for presence. The NCCN score, JPS score, and sum of the two scores, which we refer to as the "combined score," were compared with histopathologic or intraoperative findings as well as for the differentiation of R0 resection (negative resection margins) from R1 (microscopic tumor infiltration) and R2 (macroscopic residual tumor) using ROC curve analysis. RESULTS: The sensitivities, specificities, and areas under the ROC curves (AUCs) for the differentiation of R0 from R1 and R2 were 100.0%, 40.0%, and 0.725, respectively, with the NCCN score; 63.9%, 84.0%, and 0.824 with the JPS score; and 86.9%, 68.0%, and 0.874 with the combined score. The AUC of the combined score was significantly greater than that of the NCCN score (p = 0.0059). CONCLUSION: The assessment of resectability of PDAC based on the combined criteria of the NCCN guideline and general rules of JPS was superior to that based on either criterion alone.

Effect of postoperative radiotherapy on survival for surgically managed pT3N0 and pT4aN0 laryngeal cancer: Analysis of the National Cancer Data Base.

BACKGROUND: The current study was conducted to determine the effect of postoperative radiotherapy (PORT) on overall survival in patients with surgically managed pT3-T4aN0 laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC). METHODS: A review of the National Cancer Data Base from 2004 through 2013 was performed. Patients with surgically managed pT3-4aN0 laryngeal SCC with negative surgical margins were included. Univariable and multivariable Cox regression analyses were used to determine factors associated with survival. RESULTS: A total of 1460 patients were included, 46.2% of whom had pT3N0 disease (674 patients) and 53.8% of whom had pT4aN0 disease (786 patients). Approximately 72.0% of the patients with pT3N0 disease (485 patients) and 50.1% of the patients with pT4aN0 disease (394 patients) received PORT. PORT was not found to be associated with improved overall survival on univariable analysis for patients with pT3N0 disease (hazard ratio [HR], 0.84; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.62-1.14), but was for patients with pT4aN0 disease (HR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.45-0.71). For patients with pT3N0 SCC of the larynx, in a multivariable Cox regression analysis adjusting for age >65 years, severity of comorbidities, larynx subsite, extent of laryngectomy, and number of lymph nodes removed, PORT was not found to be associated with improved survival (adjusted HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.64-1.21). For patients with pT4aN0 disease, the administration of PORT was associated with improved survival on multivariable analysis adjusting for age >65 years, severity of comorbidities, larynx subsite, number of lymph nodes removed, and type of hospital (adjusted HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.46-0.73). CONCLUSIONS: For patients with surgically managed pT3N0 laryngeal SCC with negative margins, PORT does not appear to be associated with improved survival. Despite a survival benefit, nearly 50% of patients with pT4aN0 laryngeal SCC and negative surgical margins do not receive standard-of-care PORT. Cancer 2017;123:2248-2257. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Effect of time to initiation of postoperative radiation therapy on survival in surgically managed head and neck cancer.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to determine the effects of National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guideline-adherent initiation of postoperative radiation therapy (PORT) and different time-to-PORT intervals on the overall survival (OS) of patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). METHODS: The National Cancer Data Base was reviewed for the period of 2006-2014, and patients with HNSCC undergoing surgery and PORT were identified. Kaplan-Meier survival estimates, Cox regression analysis, and propensity score matching were used to determine the effects of initiating PORT within 6 weeks of surgery and different time-to-PORT intervals on survival. RESULTS: This study included 41,291 patients. After adjustments for covariates, starting PORT >6 weeks postoperatively was associated with decreased OS (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.13; 99% confidence interval [CI], 1.08-1.19). This finding remained in the propensity score-matched subset (hazard ratio, 1.21; 99% CI, 1.15-1.28). In comparison with starting PORT 5 to 6 weeks postoperatively, initiating PORT earlier was not associated with improved survival (aHR for ≤ 4 weeks, 0.93; 99% CI, 0.85-1.02; aHR for 4-5 weeks, 0.92; 99% CI, 0.84-1.01). Increasing durations of delay beyond 7 weeks were associated with small, progressive survival decrements (aHR, 1.09, 1.10, and 1.12 for 7-8, 8-10, and >10 weeks, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Nonadherence to NCCN guidelines for initiating PORT within 6 weeks of surgery was associated with decreased survival. There was no survival benefit to initiating PORT earlier within the recommended 6-week timeframe. Increasing durations of delay beyond 7 weeks were associated with small, progressive survival decrements. Cancer 2017;123:4841-50. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Adherence to National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines for time to initiation of postoperative radiation therapy for patients with head and neck cancer.

BACKGROUND: Adherence to evidence-based treatment guidelines has been proposed as a measure of cancer care quality. The objective of this study was to determine the rate and predictors of care that does not adhere to National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines regarding commencing postoperative radiation therapy (PORT) within 6 weeks of surgery for patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). METHODS: The National Cancer Data Base was reviewed from 2006 to 2014, and patients with HNSCC who underwent curative-intent surgery followed by PORT were identified. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to determine the factors associated with nonadherence to guidelines regarding the timing of initiating PORT. RESULTS: In total, 47,273 patients were included in the study. 55.7% of patients (26,340/47,273) failed to commence PORT within 6 week of surgery. The percentage of patients who failed to initiate PORT within 6 week of surgery increased over time. On multivariable analysis, the factors associated with failure to initiate timely, guideline-adherent PORT included black race, public insurance [Medicare, Medicaid] or uninsured status, lower levels of education, increased severity of comorbidity, increased postoperative length of stay, 30-day unplanned hospital readmission, treatment at an academic medical center, and the receipt of surgery and PORT at different facilities. CONCLUSIONS: Over 50% of patients with HNSCC who undergo surgery and PORT receive care that does not adhere to National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines with regard to initiating PORT within 6 weeks of surgery. Sociodemographic, oncologic, treatment, and hospital factors are all associated with failure to receive guideline-directed care and should be explored in future studies. Cancer 2017;123:2651-60. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Variation in use of postoperative chemoradiation following surgery for T1 and T2 oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma; National Cancer Database.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Primary surgical treatment of patients with early T-classification (T1-T2) oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) has increased. We sought to determine how often these patients receive postoperative chemoradiation (CRT). METHODS: Patients with T1-T2 OPSCC in the National Cancer Database who underwent primary surgery were evaluated for receipt of postoperative CRT. Postoperative CRT use was examined among patients with high risk factors (positive margins and/or extracapsular spread [ECS]), intermediate risk factors (negative margins, no ECS, and either pT3-4 and/or N2-N3), and no apparent risk factors. RESULTS: Of 4833 patients with T1-T2 OPSCC who underwent primary surgery, 43% had high risk pathologic factors, of whom only 63% received postoperative CRT. Another 31% had no apparent risk factors, of whom 16% nonetheless received postoperative CRT. On multivariable analysis, in addition to tumor and demographic factors, patients treated at community hospitals were more likely to receive postoperative CRT (O.R. 1.41 C.I. 1.18-1.87, P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Variation in postoperative CRT use indicates a lack of consensus and/or knowledge about its benefits and indications. Usage of postoperative CRT regardless of pathologic risk factors suggests an area where future efforts at implementation of best practices may be targeted.

Impact of access to NCI- and NCCN-designated cancer centers on outcomes for multiple myeloma patients: A SEER registry analysis.

BACKGROUND: National Cancer Institute (NCI)/National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN)-designated cancer centers (CCs) offer patients state-of-the-art treatment, but their impact on multiple myeloma (MM) patient outcomes has not been evaluated. METHODS: Adult MM patients diagnosed between 1973 and 2011 were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database and were stratified by the county of residence at the time of diagnosis and the year of CC designation. The influence of NCI/NCCN CC access, race, and the year of diagnosis on overall survival (OS) was evaluated with a Cox regression model. RESULTS: A statistically significant OS improvement was noted in patients diagnosed after 1995 with access to 2 or more NCI CCs overall (P = .002 for 1996-2002; P < .001 for 2003-2011) and by race for whites (hazard ratio [HR] for 1996-2002, 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.78-0.91; HR for 2003-2011, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.79-0.91) but not for nonwhites. For NCCN access, improvement was seen in 1996-2002 (P = .003), in 2003-2011 (P < .001), and by race for whites (HR, 0.917; 95% CI, 0.88-0.95) and nonwhites (0.94; 95% CI, 0.89-0.99), but within nonwhites, this was true only for African Americans (AAs; HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.81-0.97) and not for Asians, Hispanics, or Native Americans. CONCLUSIONS: Improvement in OS was seen in MM patients diagnosed after 1995 with access to 1 NCCN CC or 2 or more NCI CCs. NCI access benefited only whites, whereas NCCN access benefited only white and AA patients. No OS benefit was seen for any subgroup with access to only 1 NCI center. Eliminating racial disparities in health care access and utilization is needed to improve outcomes.