Comparison of perioperative and histopathologic outcomes among neoadjuvant treatment strategies for locoregional gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) and chemoradiation (NCRT) have demonstrated improved survival for gastric cancer. However, the optimal neoadjuvant treatment remains unclear. We sought to evaluate perioperative and histopathologic outcomes among neoadjuvant treatments for locoregional gastric cancer. METHODS: The National Cancer Database queried patients who received NAC or NCRT followed by resection for T2-T4 and/or node-positive gastric cancer (2006-2018). Logistic and Poisson regression assessed perioperative (30-day readmission, 30- and 90-day mortality, length of stay [LOS]) and histopathologic outcomes (pathologic complete response [PCR], margin status, and negative pathologic lymph nodes [ypN0]). Kaplan-Meier methods and Cox regression assessed overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Of 9831 patients, 4221 (42.9%) received NAC and 5610 (57.1%) NCRT. There were no differences in perioperative outcomes, apart from patients treated with NCRT exhibiting increased LOS (incidence rate ratio 1.09, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.03-1.16). Patients who received NCRT were more likely to achieve PCR, margin-negative resection, and ypN0 (all p < 0.05). Median OS was 36.8 months for NAC and 33.6 months for NCRT (p < 0.001). NCRT independently predicted worse OS (vs. NAC, hazard ratio 1.10, 95% CI 1.03-1.18). CONCLUSION: NCRT was associated with better histologic tumor response although NAC was associated with improved OS. Better understanding prognostication through histologic assessment following neoadjuvant therapy is needed.

Comparison of a risk calculator with frailty indices in patients undergoing lung cancer resection.

INTRODUCTION: Perioperative risk stratification is an essential component of preoperative planning for cancer surgery. While frailty has gained attention for its utility in risk stratification, no studies have directly compared it to existing risk calculators. Therefore, the objective of this study was to compare the risk stratification of the American College of Surgeons Surgical Risk Calculator (ACS-SRC), the Revised Risk Analysis Index (RAI-rev), and the Modified Frailty Index (5-mFI). The primary outcomes were 30-day postoperative morbidity, 30-day postoperative mortality, unplanned readmission, unplanned reoperation, and discharge disposition other-than-home. METHODS: Patients undergoing anatomic lung resection for primary, non-small cell lung cancer were identified within the American College of Surgeons National Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) database. The ACS-SRC, RAI-rev, and 5-mFI tools were used to predict adverse postoperative events. Tools were compared for discrimination in the primary outcomes. RESULTS: 9663 patients undergoing anatomic lung resection for cancer between 2012 and 2014 were included. The cohort was 53.1% female. Median age at diagnosis was 67 (interquartile range = 59-74) years. Cardiothoracic surgeons performed 89% and general surgeons performed 11.0% of the operations. Perioperative morbidity and mortality rates were 10.9% (n = 1048) and 1.6% (n = 158). Rates of 30-day postoperative unplanned readmission and reoperation were 7.5% (n = 725) and 4.8% (n = 468). The ACS-SRC had the highest discrimination for all measured outcomes, as measured by the area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) and corresponding confidence interval (95% confidence interval [CI]). This included perioperative mortality (AUC = 0.74, 95% CI = 0.71-0.78), compared to RAI-rev (AUC = 0.66, 95% CI = 0.62-0.69) and 5-mFI (AUC = 0.61, 95% CI = 0.57-0.65; p < 0.001). The RAI-rev and 5-mFI had similar discrimination for all measured outcomes. CONCLUSION: ACS-SRC was the perioperative risk stratification tool with the highest predictive discrimination for adverse, 30-day, postoperative events for patients with cancer treated with anatomic lung resection.

Comparison of a Risk Calculator With Frailty Indices in Patients Undergoing Lung Cancer Resection.

INTRODUCTION: While frailty has gained attention for its utility in risk stratification, no studies have directly compared them to existing risk calculators. The objective of this study was to compare the risk stratification of the American College of Surgeons Surgical Risk Calculator (ACS-SRC), the Revised Risk Analysis Index (RAI-rev), and the Modified Frailty Index (5-mFI). The primary outcomes were 30-day postoperative morbidity, 30-day postoperative mortality, unplanned readmission, unplanned reoperation, and discharge disposition other than home. METHODS: Patients undergoing anatomic lung resection for primary, nonsmall cell lung cancer were identified within the ACS National Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) database. Tools were compared for discrimination in the primary outcomes. RESULTS: 9663 patients undergoing anatomic lung resection for cancer between 2012 and 2014 were included. The cohort was 53.1% female. Median age at diagnosis was 67 (IQR 59-74) years. Perioperative morbidity and mortality rates were 10.9% (n = 1048) and 1.6% (n = 158). Rates of 30-day postoperative unplanned readmission and reoperation were 7.5% (n = 725) and 4.8% (n = 468). The ACS-SRC had the highest discrimination for all measured outcomes, as measured by the area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) and corresponding confidence interval (95% CI). This included perioperative mortality (AUC 0.74, 95% CI 0.71-0.78), compared to RAI-rev (AUC 0.66, 95% CI 0.62-0.69) and 5-mFI (AUC 0.61, 95% CI 0.57-0.65; p < 0.001). The RAI-rev and 5-mFI had similar discrimination for all measured outcomes. CONCLUSION: ACS-SRC was the perioperative risk stratification tool with the highest predictive discrimination for adverse, 30-day, postoperative events for patients with cancer treated with anatomic lung resection.

Evaluation of Nationwide Trends in Nodal Sampling Guideline Adherence for Gastric Cancer: 2005-2017.

INTRODUCTION: Surgical resection is the primary curative treatment for localized gastric cancer. A multitude of research supports surgical nodal sampling guidelines. Though there are known disparities in adherence to nodal sampling, it is unclear how hospital program-level disparities have changed over time. The purpose of this study is to evaluate trends in program-level disparities in adherence to gastric cancer nodal sampling guidelines. METHODS: Patients who underwent resection of gastric cancer from 2005 to 2017 were identified in the National Cancer Database. Patients treated at academic programs were compared to those treated at nonacademic programs, and rates and trends of adherence to nodal sampling guidelines (defined as ≥15 lymph nodes) were determined. Adjusted multivariable analysis was used to determine likelihood of nodal sampling adherence while controlling for sociodemographic, clinical, hospital, and travel distance characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 55,421 patients were included with 27,201 (49.1%) of patients meeting adherence criteria for lymph node sampling. Academic programs treated 44.4% of the total cohort. Overall, lymph node sampling criteria were met in 59.2% of patients treated at high-volume academic programs and 37.0% of patients treated at low-volume nonacademic programs (incidence rate ratios 0.67, 95% confidence interval 0.63-0.72 versus high-volume academic programs). Adherence rates improved from 2005 to 2017 for both low-volume nonacademic programs (27.8% in 2005 to 50.1% in 2017) and high-volume academic programs (46.0% in 2005 to 69.8% in 2017, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Though adherence rates have improved from 2005 to 2017, high-volume academic programs were more likely to adhere to lymph node sampling guidelines for gastric cancer.

Rural-Urban Disparities in Receipt of Surgery for Potentially Resectable Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Access to cancer care, especially surgery, is limited in rural areas. However, the specific reasons rural patient populations do not receive surgery for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is unknown. We investigated geographic disparities in reasons for failure to receive guideline-indicated surgical treatment for patients with potentially resectable NSCLC. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was used to identify patients with clinical stage I-IIIA (N0-N1) NSCLC between 2004 and 2018. Patients from rural areas were compared to urban areas, and the reason for nonreceipt of surgery was evaluated. Adjusted odds of (1) primary nonsurgical management, (2) surgery being deemed contraindicated due to risk, (3) surgery being recommended but not performed, and (4) overall failure to receive surgery were determined. RESULTS: The study included 324,785 patients with NSCLC with 42,361 (13.0%) from rural areas. Overall, 62.4% of patients from urban areas and 58.8% of patients from rural areas underwent surgery (P < 0.001). Patients from rural areas had increased odds of (1) being recommended primary nonsurgical management (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 1.14, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.05-1.23), (2) surgery being deemed contraindicated due to risk (aOR: 1.19, 95% CI: 1.07-1.33), (3) surgery being recommended but not performed (aOR: 1.13, 95% CI: 1.01-1.26), and (4) overall failure to receive surgery (aOR: 1.21, 95% CI: 1.13-1.29; all P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: There are geographic disparities in the management of NSCLC. Rural patient populations are more likely to fail to undergo surgery for potentially resectable disease for every reason examined.

Disparities in access to robotic technology and perioperative outcomes among patients treated with radical prostatectomy.

BACKGROUND: Most radical prostatectomies are completed with robotic assistance. While studies have previously evaluated perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP), this study investigates disparities in access and clinical outcomes of RARP. STUDY DESIGN: The National Cancer Database (NCDB) was used to identify patients who received radical prostatectomy for cancer between 2010 and 2017 with outcomes through 2018. RARP was compared to open radical prostatectomy (ORP). Odds of receiving RARP were evaluated while adjusting for covariates. Overall survival was evaluated using a propensity-score matched cohort. RESULTS: Overall, 354 752 patients were included with 297 676 (83.9%) receiving RARP. Patients who were non-Hispanic Black (82.8%) or Hispanic (81.3%) had lower rates of RARP than non-Hispanic White (84.0%) or Asian patients (87.7%, p < 0.001). Medicaid or uninsured patients were less likely to receive RARP (75.5%) compared to patients with Medicare or private insurance (84.4%, p < 0.001). Medicaid or uninsured status was associated with decreased odds of RARP in adjusted multivariable analysis (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.49-0.76). RARP was associated with decreased perioperative mortality and improved overall survival compared to ORP. CONCLUSION: Patients who were underinsured were less likely to receive RARP. Improved access to RARP may lead to decreased disparities in perioperative outcomes for prostate cancer.

Association between travel distance and overall survival among patients with adrenocortical carcinoma.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Regionalization of care is associated with improved perioperative outcomes after adrenalectomy. However, the relationship between travel distance and treatment of adrenocortical carcinoma (ACC) is unknown. We investigated the association between travel distance, treatment, and overall survival (OS) among patients with ACC. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with ACC between 2004 and 2017 were identified with the National Cancer Database. Long distance was defined as the highest quintile of travel (≥42.2 miles). The likelihood of surgical management and adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) were determined. The association between travel distance, treatment, and OS was evaluated. RESULTS: Of 3492 patients with ACC included, 2337 (66.9%) received surgery. Rural residents were more likely to travel long distances for surgery than metropolitan residents (65.8% vs. 15.5%, p < 0.001), and surgery was associated with improved OS (HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.34-0.54). Overall, 807 (23.1%) patients received AC with rates decreasing approximately 1% per 4-mile travel distance increase. Also, long distance travel was associated with worse OS among surgically treated patients (HR 1.21, 95% CI 1.05-1.40). CONCLUSIONS: Surgery was associated with improved overall survival for patients with ACC. However, increased travel distance was associated with lower likelihood to receive adjuvant chemotherapy and decreased overall survival.

Neoadjuvant therapy use and association with postoperative outcomes and overall survival in patients with extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Evidence for neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) in extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (eCCA) is limited. Our objectives were to: (1) characterize treatment trends, (2) identify factors associated with receipt of NAT, and (3) evaluate associations between NAT and postoperative outcomes. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of the National Cancer Database (2004-2017). Multivariable logistic regression assessed associations between NAT and postoperative outcomes. Stratified analysis evaluated differences between surgery first, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and neoadjuvant chemoradiation (CRT). RESULTS: Among 8040 patients, 417 (5.2%) received NAT. NAT increased during the study period 2.9%-8.4% (p < 0.001). Factors associated with receipt of NAT included age <50 (vs. >75, odds ratio [OR] 4.32, p < 0.001) and stage 3 disease (vs. 1, OR 1.68, p = 0.01). Compared with surgery first, patients who received NAT had higher odds of R0 resection (OR 1.49, p = 0.01) and lower 30-day mortality (OR 0.51, p = 0.04). On stratified analysis, neoadjuvant chemotherapy was not associated with differences in any outcomes. However, neoadjuvant CRT was associated with improvement in R0 resection (OR 3.52, <0.001) and median survival (47.8 vs. 25.3 months, log-rank < 0.001) compared to surgery first. CONCLUSIONS: NAT, particularly neoadjuvant CRT, was associated with improved postoperative outcomes. These data suggest expanding the use of neoadjuvant CRT for eCCA.

Rural-urban survival disparities for patients with surgically treated lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Nonsmall-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is a common diagnosis among patients living in rural areas and small towns who face unique challenges accessing care. We examined differences in survival for surgically treated rural and small-town patients compared to those from urban and metropolitan areas. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was used to identify surgically treated NSCLC patients from 2004 to 2016. Patients from rural/small-town counties were compared to urban/metro counties. Differences in patient clinical, sociodemographic, hospital, and travel characteristics were described. Survival differences were examined with Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: The study included 366 373 surgically treated NSCLC patients with 12.4% (n = 45 304) categorized as rural/small-town. Rural/small-town patients traveled farther for treatment and were from areas characterized by lower income and education(all p < 0.001). Survival probabilities for rural/small-town patients were worse at 1 year (85% vs. 87%), 5 years (48% vs. 54%), and 10 years (26% vs. 31%) (p < 0.001). Travel distance >100 miles (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.11, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.07-1.16, vs. <25 miles) and living in a rural/small-town county (HR = 1.04, 95% CI: 1.01-1.07) were associated with increased risk for death. CONCLUSIONS: Rural and small-town patients with surgically treated NSCLC had worse survival outcomes compared to urban and metropolitan patients.

Association of operative time and approach on postoperative complications for esophagectomy.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive esophagectomy is associated with decreased postoperative complications compared with open esophagectomy. However, the risks of complications for minimally invasive esophagectomy compared with open esophagectomy may be affected by operative time. The objectives of this study are to (1) compare the incidence of postoperative complications for minimally invasive esophagectomy and open esophagectomy and (2) evaluate the association of postoperative complications on operative approach and operative time. METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis of patients who underwent an esophagectomy in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Procedure-Targeted Data File was performed from 2016 to 2020. For analysis, minimally invasive esophagectomy and open esophagectomy were stratified into tertiles of operative time. A bivariate analysis of postoperative complications comparing minimally invasive esophagectomy with open esophagectomy was performed. Multivariable Poisson regression models were estimated evaluating the association of the likelihood of postoperative complications with operative approach and operative time. RESULTS: In total, 8,574 patients who underwent esophagectomy were included: 5,369 patients underwent minimally invasive esophagectomy, and 3,205 patients underwent open esophagectomy. Median operative time was 402 minutes for minimally invasive esophagectomy and 321 minutes for open esophagectomy. The incidence of postoperative complications and 30-day mortality was lower in the minimally invasive esophagectomy group than the open esophagectomy group within the same tertiles of operative time. When we compared patients who underwent short open esophagectomy with those who underwent long minimally invasive esophagectomy, there were no significant differences in complications. CONCLUSION: There is no significant association of postoperative complications for short open esophagectomy compared with long minimally invasive esophagectomy. Patients should be selected for minimally invasive esophagectomy when there is appropriate surgeon experience and hospital resources.

Prospective derivation and validation of a NECROtizing Soft tissue InfectionS (NECROSIS) score: An EAST multicenter trial.

BACKGROUND: Although several risk indices have been developed to aid in the diagnosis of NSTIs, these instruments suffer from varying levels of reproducibility and failure to incorporate key clinical variables in model development. The objective of this study was to derive and validate a clinical risk index score - NECROSIS - for identifying NSTIs in emergency general surgery (EGS) patients being evaluated for severe skin and soft tissue infections. METHODS: We performed a prospective study across 16 sites in the US of adult EGS patients with suspected NSTIs over a 30-month period. Variables analyzed included demographics, admission vitals and labs, physical exam, radiographic, and operative findings. The main outcome measure was the presence of NSTI diagnosed clinically at the time of surgery. Multivariate analysis was performed to identify independent predictors for the presence of NSTI using the Hosmer-Lemeshow test and the Akaike information criteria. RESULTS: Of 362 patients, 297 (82%) were diagnosed with a NSTI. Overall mortality was 12.3%. Multivariate analysis identified 3 independent predictors for NSTI: systolic blood pressure ≤ 120 mmHg, violaceous skin, and WBC ≥15 (x103/uL). Multivariate modelling demonstrated Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness of fit (p = 0.9) with a c-statistic for the prediction curve of 0.75. Test characteristics of the NECROSIS score were similar between the derivation and validation cohorts. CONCLUSION: NECROSIS is a simple and potentially useful clinical index score for identifying at-risk EGS patients with NSTIs. Future validation studies are warranted. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic Tests or Criteria, Level III.

National trends in the quality of segmentectomy for lung cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Segmentectomy has become an accepted procedure for the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer. Adequate lymph node sampling, sufficient margins, and proper tumor size selection are factors vital for achieving outcomes comparable to lobectomy. Previous studies have demonstrated poor adherence to lymph node sampling guidelines. However, national trends in the quality of segmentectomy and implications on survival are unknown. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was used to identify patients with clinical stage I to IIA non-small cell lung cancer surgically treated between 2004 and 2018. Facility-level trends in extent of resection and segmentectomy odds of adherence to (1) 2014 Commission on Cancer guidelines of sampling 10 or more lymph nodes, (2) negative (R0) resection margins, and (3) tumor size 2 cm or less were determined. Propensity score matching was based on segmentectomy adherence to (4) a composite of all measures, and survival was evaluated with Cox models and Kaplan-Meier survival estimates. RESULTS: The study included 249,391 patients with 4.4% (n = 11,006) treated with segmentectomy. The proportion of segmentectomies performed annually increased from 3.3% in 2004 to 6.1% in 2018 (P < .001). Overall, 12.6% (n = 1385) of patients who underwent segmentectomy between 2004 and 2018 were adherent to all measures, and adherence was more likely at academic programs (odds ratio, 1.56; 95% confidence interval, 1.14-2.15) than nonacademic programs (P < .001, reference). Adherence to all measures was associated with improved survival (hazard ratio, 0.67; 95% confidence interval, 0.56-0.79). CONCLUSIONS: As segmentectomy is increasingly established as a valid oncological option for the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer, it is important that quality remains high. This study demonstrates that continued improvement is needed.

Venous Thromboembolism Chemoprophylaxis Adherence Rates After Major Cancer Surgery.

Importance: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) represents a major source of preventable morbidity and mortality and is a leading cause of death in the US after cancer surgery. Previous research demonstrated variability in VTE chemoprophylaxis prescribing, although it is unknown how these rates compare with performance in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA). Objective: To determine VTE rates after cancer surgery, as well as rates of inpatient and outpatient (posthospital discharge) chemoprophylaxis adherence within the VHA. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study within 101 hospitals of the VHA health system included patients aged 41 years or older without preexisting bleeding disorders or anticoagulation usage who underwent surgical treatment for cancer with general surgery, thoracic surgery, or urology between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2022. The VHA Corporate Data Warehouse, Pharmacy Benefits Management database, and the Veterans Affairs Surgical Quality Improvement Program database were used to identify eligible patients. Data analysis was conducted between January 2022 and July 2023. Exposures: Inpatient surgery for cancer with general surgery, thoracic surgery, or urology. Main Outcomes and Measures: Rates of postoperative VTE events within 30 days of surgery and VTE chemoprophylaxis adherence were determined. Multivariable Poisson regression was used to determine incidence-rate ratios of inpatient and postdischarge chemoprophylaxis adherence by surgical specialty. Results: Overall, 30 039 veterans (median [IQR] age, 67 [62-71] years; 29 386 men [97.8%]; 7771 African American or Black patients [25.9%]) who underwent surgery for cancer and were at highest risk for VTE were included. The overall postoperative VTE rate was 1.3% (385 patients) with 199 patients (0.7%) receiving a diagnosis during inpatient hospitalization and 186 patients (0.6%) receiving a diagnosis postdischarge. Inpatient chemoprophylaxis was ordered for 24 139 patients (80.4%). Inpatient chemoprophylaxis ordering rates were highest for patients who underwent procedures with general surgery (10 102 of 10 301 patients [98.1%]) and lowest for patients who underwent procedures with urology (11 471 of 17 089 patients [67.1%]). Overall, 3142 patients (10.5%) received postdischarge chemoprophylaxis, with notable variation by specialty. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings indicate the overall VTE rate after cancer surgery within the VHA is low, VHA inpatient chemoprophylaxis rates are high, and postdischarge VTE chemoprophylaxis prescribing is similar to that of non-VHA health systems. Specialty and procedure variation exists for chemoprophylaxis and may be justified given the low risks of overall and postdischarge VTE.

Association of travel distance, surgical volume, and receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy with survival among patients with resectable lung cancer.

Objective: Regionalization of surgery for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) to high-volume centers (HVCs) improves perioperative outcomes but frequently increases patient travel distance. Travel might decrease rates of adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) use, however, the relationship of distance, volume, and receipt of AC with outcomes is unknown. Our objective was to evaluate the association of distance, volume, and receipt of AC with overall survival among patients with NSCLC. Methods: Patients with stage I to IIIA (N0-N1) NSCLC were identified between 2004 and 2018 using the National Cancer Database. Distance to surgical facility was categorized into quartiles (<5.1, 5.1 to <11.5, 11.5 to <28.1, and ≥28.1 miles), and HVCs were defined as those that perform ≥40 annual resections. Patient characteristics and likelihood of receiving AC anywhere were determined. Propensity score-matched survival analysis was performed using Cox models and Kaplan-Meier curves. Results: Of the 131,982 patients included, 35,658 (27.0%) were stage II to IIIA. Of the stage II to IIIA cohort, 49.6% received AC, 13.1% traveled <5.1 miles to low-volume centers (LVCs), and 18.1% traveled ≥28.1 miles to HVCs (P < .001). Among stage II to IIIA patients who traveled ≥28.1 miles to HVCs, 45% received AC versus 51.5% who traveled <5.1 miles to LVCs (incidence rate ratio, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.83-0.94; <5.1 miles to LVC reference). Patients with stage II to IIIA NSCLC who traveled ≥28.1 miles to HVCs and did not receive AC had higher mortality rates than those who traveled <5.1 miles to LVCs and received AC (median overall survival, 52.3 vs 36.7 months; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.26-1.57). Conclusions: Increasing travel distance to surgical treatment is associated with decreased likelihood of receiving AC for patients with stage II to IIIA (N0-N1) NSCLC.