Comparisons of short-term outcomes between robot-assisted, video-assisted, and open esophagectomy for resectable esophageal cancer after neoadjuvant treatment: a retrospective study.

Background: Robot-assisted esophagectomy (RAE), video-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (VAMIE), and open esophagectomy (OE) all have significant roles in the management of esophageal cancer (EC). Few studies have compared efficacy and safety between RAE, VAMIE, and OE for resectable EC after neoadjuvant treatment. Therefore, this study aimed to explore the short-term outcomes between RAE, VAMIE, and OE for resectable EC after neoadjuvant treatment. Methods: Ninety-eight patients were consecutively enrolled who underwent esophagectomy. A retrospective study was performed including 98 consecutive patients treated from January 2021 to August 2022 who received neoadjuvant treatment (including immunochemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy) followed by RAE, VAMIE or OE. Evaluated endpoints in the present study consisted of pathological outcomes, intraoperative and postoperative outcomes, as well as postoperative complications. Results: No significant differences were seen in the operating time, blood loss, length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay, R0 resection, and number of dissected lymph nodes between the three RAE, VAMIE, or OE groups. The achievement rate of right recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) lymph node removal (P=0.01) and the total cost (P<0.001) were higher in RAE. The postoperative hospital stay of OE was longer than the other two groups (P<0.05). There were no significant differences in postoperative complications. Conclusions: Compared to VAMIE, no clear benefit exists for RAE in the treatment of resectable EC after neoadjuvant therapy. OE resulted in a longer hospital stay. Although the rate of successful right RLN node removal was higher with RAE, the clinical relevance for this is yet unclear.

Consideration of Metastasis-Directed Therapy for Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Expert Survey and Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: A survey of medical oncologists (MOs), radiation oncologists (ROs), and surgical oncologists (SOs) who are experts in the management of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) was conducted to identify factors used to consider metastasis-directed therapy (MDT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: An online survey to assess clinical factors when weighing MDT in patients with mCRC was developed based on systematic review of the literature and integrated with clinical vignettes. Supporting evidence from the systematic review was included to aid in answering questions. RESULTS: Among 75 experts on mCRC invited, 47 (response rate 62.7%) chose to participate including 16 MOs, 16 ROs, and 15 SOs. Most experts would not consider MDT in patients with 3 lesions in both the liver and lung regardless of distribution or timing of metastatic disease diagnosis (6 vs. 36 months after definitive treatment). Similarly, for patients with retroperitoneal lymph node and lung and liver involvement, most experts would not offer MDT regardless of timing of metastatic disease diagnosis. In general, SOs were willing to consider MDT in patients with more advanced disease, ROs were more willing to offer treatment regardless of metastatic site location, and MOs were the least likely to consider MDT. CONCLUSIONS: Among experts caring for patients with mCRC, significant variation was noted among MOs, ROs, and SOs in the distribution and volume of metastatic disease for which MDT would be considered. This variability highlights differing opinions on management of these patients and underscores the need for well-designed prospective randomized trials to characterize the risks and potential benefits of MDT.

Executive Summary of the American Radium Society Appropriate Use Criteria for Neoadjuvant Therapy for Nonmetastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: Systematic Review and Guidelines.

For patients with locoregionally confined pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), margin-negative surgical resection is the only known curative treatment; however, the majority of patients are not operable candidates at initial diagnosis. Among patients with resectable disease who undergo surgery alone, the 5-year survival remains poor. Adjuvant therapies, including systemic therapy or chemoradiation, are utilized as they improve locoregional control and overall survival. There has been increasing interest in the use of neoadjuvant therapy to obtain early control of occult metastatic disease, allow local tumor response to facilitate margin-negative resection, and provide a test of time and biology to assist with the selection of candidates most likely to benefit from radical surgical resection. However, limited guidance exists regarding the relative effectiveness of treatment options. In this systematic review, the American Radium Society multidisciplinary gastrointestinal expert panel convened to develop Appropriate Use Criteria evaluating the evidence regarding neoadjuvant treatment for patients with PDAC, including surgery, systemic therapy, and radiotherapy, in terms of oncologic outcomes and quality of life. The evidence was assessed using the Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome, and Study (PICOS) design framework and "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses" 2020 methodology. Eligible studies included phases 2 to 3 trials, meta-analyses, and retrospective analyses published between January 1, 2012 and December 30, 2022 in the Ovid Medline database. A summary of recommendations based on the available literature is outlined to guide practitioners in the management of patients with PDAC.

'CROSS'-ing into the 'Real World': a retrospective cohort study of patients receiving trimodality and bimodality therapy for esophageal cancer.

Background: A standard of care for nonmetastatic esophageal cancer is trimodality therapy consisting of neoadjuvant chemoradiation and esophagectomy, with evidence for improved overall survival versus surgery alone in the ChemoRadiotherapy for Oesophageal cancer followed by Surgery Study (CROSS) trial. Patients who receive treatment with curative intent but are poor candidates for or decline surgery receive definitive bimodality therapy. Literature characterizing patients who receive bimodality therapy compared to trimodality therapy, and their relative outcomes, is sparse, especially among patients who are too old or too frail to qualify for clinical trials. In this study, we assess a single-institution real-world dataset of patients receiving bimodality and trimodality management. Methods: Patients treated for clinically resectable, nonmetastatic esophageal cancer between 2009 and 2019 who received bimodality or trimodality therapy were reviewed, generating a dataset of 95 patients. Clinical variables and patient characteristics were assessed for association with modality on multivariable logistic regression. Overall, relapse-free, and disease-free survival were assessed with Kaplan-Meier analyses and Cox proportional modeling. For patients nonadherent to planned esophagectomy, reasons for nonadherence were recorded. Results: Bimodality therapy was associated with greater age-adjusted comorbidity index, worse performance status, higher N-stage, presenting symptom other than dysphagia, and held chemotherapy cycles on multivariable analysis. Compared to bimodality therapy, trimodality therapy was associated with higher overall (3-year: 62% vs. 18%, P<0.001), relapse-free (3-year: 71% vs. 18%, P<0.001), and disease-free (3-year: 58% vs. 12%, P<0.001) survival. Similar results were observed among patients who did not meet CROSS trial qualifying criteria. Only treatment modality was associated with overall survival after adjusting for covariates (HR 0.37, P<0.001, reference group: bimodality). Patient choice accounted for 40% of surgery nonadherence in our population. Conclusions: Patients receiving trimodality therapy were observed to have superior overall survival compared to bimodality therapy. Patient preference for organ-preserving therapies appears to impact resection rate; further characterization of patient decision-making may be helpful. Our results suggest patients who wish to prioritize overall survival should be encouraged to pursue trimodality therapy and obtain early consultation with surgery. Development of evidence-based interventions to physiologically prepare patients before and during neoadjuvant therapy as well as efforts to optimize the tolerability of the chemoradiation plan are warranted.

Trends and Outcomes of Salvage Lobectomy for Early-stage Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

OBJECTIVES: There is little data describing the outcomes for patients who develop local recurrences after stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), a standard-of-care treatment for patients with early-stage non-small cell lung cancer. One emerging option is salvage lobectomy. We investigated trends in the use of salvage lobectomy after SBRT and described patient outcomes using a nationally representative sample. METHODS: This is a retrospective study using the National Cancer Database of patients with non-small cell lung cancer diagnosed from 2004 to 2017. We used descriptive statistics to describe patients who underwent salvage lobectomy. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to estimate overall survival (OS). Cox proportional modeling was used to identify factors associated with OS. RESULTS: We identified 276 patients who underwent salvage lobectomy. Ninety-day mortality was 0%. The median survival time for the cohort was 50 months (95% CI, 44 to 58). Median follow-up was 65 months (Interquartile Range: 39 to 96). The factors associated with decreased OS include squamous cell histology (hazard ratio (HR)=1.72, P =0.005) and high grade (1.50, P =0.038). Increased OS was associated with lobectomy performed between 3 and 6 months after SBRT (HR=0.53, P =0.021), lobectomy performed >6 months after SBRT (HR=0.59, P =0.015), and female sex (HR=0.56, P =0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Salvage lobectomy after local failures of SBRT was associated with no perioperative mortality and favorable long-term outcomes. Our data suggest that lobectomy performed within 3 months of SBRT is associated with worse OS.

American Radium Society (ARS) Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC) for Extrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma.

Although uncommon, extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (EHCC) is a deadly malignancy, and the treatment approaches remain controversial. While surgery remains the only cure, few patients are candidates for resection up front, and there are high rates of both local and distant failure following resection. Herein, we systematically review the available evidence regarding treatment approaches for patients with EHCC, including surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy. The evidence regarding treatment outcomes was assessed using the Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome, and Study design (PICOS) framework. A summary of recommendations based on the available literature is outlined for specific clinical scenarios encountered by providers in the clinic to guide the management of these patients.

Multiagent Chemotherapy Followed by Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy Versus Conventional Radiotherapy for Resected Pancreas Cancer.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Chemotherapy followed by margin-negative resection (R0) is the treatment of choice for patients with localized pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Neoadjuvant multiagent chemotherapy (MAC) or MAC then radiotherapy (RT) may optimize surgical candidacy. The purpose of this study was to compare pathologic outcomes of MAC followed by conventionally fractionated radiotherapy (CRT) versus stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for patients with resected PDAC. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with nonmetastatic PDAC between 2012 and 2017 and who received preoperative MAC or MAC+RT were identified in the National Cancer Database. Variables associated with R0 and overall survival were identified with logistic regression and Cox analysis (P<0.05). RESULTS: A total of 5273 patients were identified (MAC: 3900, MAC+CRT: 955, MAC+SBRT: 418). The median RT dose/fraction (fx) in the MAC+CRT and MAC+SBRT cohorts was 50.4 Gy/28 fx and 33 Gy/5 fx. Patients receiving MAC+CRT versus MAC+SBRT had similar rates of ypT3-T4 disease (54% vs. 58%, P=0.187), R0 (87% vs. 84%, P=0.168), and pathologic complete response (pathologic complete response; 6% vs. 4%, P=0.052), however, MAC+CRT was associated with less regional lymphatic disease (ypN+: 28% vs. 41%, P<0.001). The median overall survival of patients receiving MAC+CRT versus MAC+SBRT was 24.6 versus 29.5 months (P=0.045). CONCLUSIONS: For patients with resected PDAC, MAC+CRT, and MAC+SBRT had similar rates of R0 and pathologic complete response, although MAC+CRT was associated with lower ypN+. Prospective evaluation of neoadjuvant RT regimens with attention to radiation therapy design is warranted.

Impact of and Response to Cyberattacks in Radiation Oncology.

Cyberattacks on health care facilities are increasing and significantly affecting health care delivery throughout the world. The recent cyberattack on our hospital-based radiation facility exposed vulnerabilities of radiation oncology systems and highlighted the dependence of radiation treatment on integrated and complex radiation planning, delivery and verification systems. After the cyberattack on our health care facility, radiation oncology staff reconstructed patient information, schedules, and radiation plans from existing paper records and physicians developed a system to triage patients requiring immediate transfer of radiation treatment to nearby facilities. Medical physics and hospital information technology collaborated to restore services without access to the system backup or network connectivity. Ultimately, radiation treatments resumed incrementally as systems were restored and rebuilt. The experiences and lessons learned from this response were reviewed. The successes and shortcomings were incorporated into recommendations to provide guidance to other radiation facilities in preparation for a possible cyberattack. Our response and recommendations are intended to serve as a starting point to assist other facilities in cybersecurity preparedness planning. Because there is no one-size-fits-all response, each department should determine its specific vulnerabilities, risks, and available resources to create an individualized plan.

American Radium Society (ARS) Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC) for Locoregional Gastric Adenocarcinoma: Systematic Review and Guidelines.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to systematically evaluate the data regarding the use of neoadjuvant, perioperative, surgical, and adjuvant treatment options in localized gastric cancer patients and to develop Appropriate Use Criteria recommended by a panel of experts convened by the American Radium Society. METHODS: Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses methodology was used to develop an extensive analysis of peer-reviewed phase 2/2R/3 trials, as well as meta-analyses found within the Ovid Medline database between 2010 and 2020. The expert panel then rated the appropriateness of various treatments in 5 representative clinical scenarios through a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi). RESULTS: For patients with medically operable locally advanced gastric cancer, the strongest recommendation was for perioperative chemotherapy based on high-quality data. Acceptable alternatives included surgery followed by either chemotherapy or concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CRT). For patients with upfront resection of stages I to III gastric cancer (no neoadjuvant therapy), the group strongly recommended adjuvant therapy with either chemotherapy alone or CRT, based on high-quality data. For patients with locally advanced disease who received preoperative chemotherapy without tumor regression, the group strongly recommended postoperative chemotherapy or postoperative CRT. Finally, for medically inoperable gastric cancer patients, there was moderate consensus recommending definitive concurrent CRT. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of chemotherapy and/or radiation, either in the neoadjuvant, adjuvant, or perioperative setting, results in improved survival rates for patients compared with surgery alone. For inoperable patients, definitive CRT is a reasonable treatment option, though largely palliative.

Clinical Reasoning: A 67-Year-Old Woman With Abdominal Pain, Constipation, and Urinary Retention.

Meningeal melanocytomas are an extremely rare, pigmented tumors of the central nervous system (CNS). They generally carry a favorable prognosis, although recurrence and transformation into the more aggressive malignant melanoma has been reported. We present a case of a patient who reported constipation and abdominal pain around the umbilicus, which progressed into cord compression with lower extremity weakness and gait instability. Spinal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) revealed a tumor at the level of T11, and she underwent gross total resection of the mass. Pathology demonstrated a meningeal melanocytoma with intermediate features. She received post-operative radiation therapy and had stable disease for three years, at which time she developed new weakness and drop metastases. This case represents a rare presentation of a rare disease, in which a spinal cord tumor presented with constipation and abdominal distress. Intradural-extramedullary tumors of the thoracic spine are most commonly nerve sheath tumors or meningiomas, but rare entities such as melanocytomas can present in this location; even more rarely, these tumors can have an aggressive course with delayed recurrence.

Active Surveillance for Early Stage Lung Cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Data describing outcomes for patients with early stage lung cancer who undergo expectant management is lacking, despite evidence of a sub-population with indolent malignancies. We used the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB) to identify factors associated with active surveillance for early stage lung cancer. Additionally, we sought to describe outcomes of three different care plans: active surveillance, no treatment, and Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT). METHODS: Patients diagnosed in 2010 to 2017 with early stage lung cancer who underwent active surveillance, no treatment, and SBRT were retrospectively identified in the NCDB. Multinomial logistic regression was used to assess care plan selection. Kaplan Meier analysis was used to assess overall survival (OS). RESULTS: We identified 30,107 patients that met our inclusion criteria: 838 (3%) underwent active surveillance, 6388 patients (21%) received no treatment, and 22,881 (76%) underwent SBRT. Black race (relative risk ratio (RRR): 1.66) and older age (RRR: 1.02) were significant positive predictors of active surveillance selection. Conversely, higher tumor stage (RRR: 0.26) and squamous cell carcinoma (RRR: 0.35) were significant negative predictors of active surveillance selection. Kaplan Meier analysis revealed a longer median OS associated with active surveillance compared to no treatment at 49.3 months versus 26.5 months, respectively. SBRT OS was 43.1 months. CONCLUSIONS: We identified a population of lung cancer patients who underwent expectant management with favorable outcomes. Additionally, we identified factors associated with active surveillance selection. The selection of active surveillance over no treatment was associated with significantly longer OS.

The Potential for Overtreatment With Total Neoadjuvant Therapy (TNT): Consider One Local Therapy Instead.

With increased therapeutic options in rectal cancer, a central question has become how to tailor therapy to patient preferences to avoid both over and under treatment. Total Neoadjuvant Therapy (TNT), defined as delivering all planned chemotherapy and radiation therapy (RT) before surgery, was developed with the primary goal of improving overall survival through early elimination of micrometastatic disease. In this narrative review assessing patients with operable adenocarcinoma of the rectum, we sought to evaluate TNT versus alternative options with regard to both quality of life (QoL) and oncologic outcomes. Survey data of patient preferences reveal that an increased focus on QoL when discussing options is essential. While evidence favors TNT improving distant metastases-free survival, this has not yet translated to a clear OS benefit. The improved pathologic complete response rate with TNT compared to short course RT or chemoradiation alone suggests proceeding to surgery might result in overtreatment, lending support to a watch-and-wait option for patients with a goal for nonoperative management if a clinical complete response is achieved. Similarly, for select low-risk patients, surgery may be the only local therapy required allowing for safe omission of RT. In the treatment of rectal cancer, the future appears to be moving toward one local therapy. As an alternative to TNT, there is growing support for the concept we define herein as total definitive therapy instead: chemoradiation followed by consolidation chemotherapy, saving surgery only for incomplete responders rather than as part of the initial treatment plan. Also, selective use of RT should be considered for low-risk patients. By thoroughly assessing how these treatment de-escalation options compare to more traditional treatment algorithms, this narrative review provides guidance on how to honor patient preferences for QoL by avoiding treatments that might offer negligible benefits in oncologic outcomes.

Metastatic Malignant Paraganglioma Presenting as a Neck Mass Treated with Radiolabeled Somatostatin Analog.

Paragangliomas are rare neuroendocrine tumors that arise from chromaffin-containing tissue. Surgical resection and/or radiation are used for locoregional disease, and reduction of tumor burden with systemic therapy is reserved for metastatic disease. Iobenguane I-131, somatostatin analog (octreotide), and Sunitinib are noncytotoxic options for treatment, while cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and dacarbazine (CVD) and temozolomide are often used as initial chemotherapy options as studies have shown that they offer some tumor response. However, there are no randomized clinical trials demonstrating prolonged survival with the use of chemotherapeutics in metastatic cases. Investigation of alternative therapies that provide survival benefit is thus necessary. We present a case of a 69-year-old female with metastatic malignant paraganglioma presenting as a left parapharyngeal neck mass, which metastasized after surgery, requiring radiation therapy for bony metastasis who was treated with a radioisotope somatostatin analog for disease progression.

Executive Summary of the American Radium Society Appropriate Use Criteria for Operable Esophageal and Gastroesophageal Junction Adenocarcinoma: Systematic Review and Guidelines.

PURPOSE: Limited guidance exists regarding the relative effectiveness of treatment options for nonmetastatic, operable patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagus or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ). In this systematic review, the American Radium Society (ARS) gastrointestinal expert panel convened to develop Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC) evaluating how neoadjuvant and/or adjuvant treatment regimens compared with each other, surgery alone, or definitive chemoradiation in terms of response to therapy, quality of life, and oncologic outcomes. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) methodology was used to develop an extensive analysis of peer-reviewed phase 2R and phase 3 randomized controlled trials as well as meta-analyses found within the Ovid Medline, Cochrane Central, and Embase databases between 2009 to 2019. These studies were used to inform the expert panel, which then rated the appropriateness of various treatments in 4 broadly representative clinical scenarios through a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi). RESULTS: For a medically operable nonmetastatic patient with a cT3 and/or cN+ adenocarcinoma of the esophagus or GEJ (Siewert I-II), the panel most strongly recommends neoadjuvant chemoradiation. For a cT2N0M0 patient with high-risk features, the panel recommends neoadjuvant chemoradiation as usually appropriate. For patients found to have pathologically involved nodes (pN+) who did not receive any neoadjuvant therapy, the panel recommends adjuvant chemoradiation as usually appropriate. These guidelines assess the appropriateness of various dose-fractionating schemes and target volumes. CONCLUSIONS: Chemotherapy and/or radiation regimens for esophageal cancer are still evolving with many areas of active investigation. These guidelines are intended for the use of practitioners and patients who desire information about the management of operable esophageal adenocarcinoma.