Association Between Racial and Socioeconomic Disparities and Hospital Performance in Treatment and Outcomes for Patients with Colon Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Disparities in colon cancer care and outcomes by race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status (SES), and insurance are well recognized; however, the extent to which inequalities are driven by patient factors versus variation in hospital performance remains unclear. We sought to compare disparities in care delivery and outcomes at low- and high-performing hospitals. METHODS: We identified patients with stage I-III colon adenocarcinoma from the 2012-2017 National Cancer Database. Adequate lymphadenectomy and timely adjuvant chemotherapy administration defined hospital performance. Multilevel regression models evaluated disparities by race/ethnicity, SES, and insurance at the lowest- and highest-performance quartile hospitals. RESULTS: Of 92,573 patients from 704 hospitals, 45,982 (49.7%) were treated at 404 low-performing hospitals and 46,591 (50.3%) were treated at 300 high-performing hospitals. Low-performing hospitals treated more non-Hispanic (NH) Black, Hispanic, low SES, and Medicaid patients (all p < 0.01). Among low-performing hospitals, patients with low versus high SES (odds ratio [OR] 0.87, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.82-0.92), and Medicare (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.85-0.96) and Medicaid (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.80-0.96) versus private insurance, had decreased odds of receiving high-quality care. At high-performing hospitals, NH Black versus NH White patients (OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.72-0.95) had decreased odds of receiving high-quality care. Low SES, Medicare, Medicaid, and uninsured patients had worse overall survival at low- and high-performing hospitals (all p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Disparities in receipt of high-quality colon cancer care occurred by SES and insurance at low-performing hospitals, and by race at high-performing hospitals. However, survival disparities by SES and insurance exist irrespective of hospital performance. Future steps include improving low-performing hospitals and identifying mechanisms affecting survival disparities.

Assessment of Social Vulnerabilities of Care and Prognosis in Adult Ocular Melanomas in the US.

BACKGROUND: Prior works have studied the impact of social determinants on various cancers but there is limited analysis on eye-orbit cancers. Current literature tends to focus on socioeconomic status and race, with sparse analysis of interdisciplinary contributions. We examined social determinants as measured by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Social Vulnerability Index (SVI), quantifying eye and orbit melanoma disparities across the United States. METHODS: A retrospective review of 15,157 patients diagnosed with eye-orbit cancers in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database from 1975 to 2017 was performed, extracting 6139 ocular melanomas. SVI scores were abstracted and matched to SEER patient data, with scores generated by weighted averages per population density of county's census tracts. Primary outcome was months survived, while secondary outcomes were advanced staging, high grading, and primary surgery receipt. RESULTS: With increased total SVI score, indicating more vulnerability, we observed significant decreases of 23.1% in months survival for melanoma histology (p < 0.001) and 19.6-39.7% by primary site. Increasing total SVI showed increased odds of higher grading (odds ratio [OR] 1.20, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.02-1.43) and decreased odds of surgical intervention (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.92-0.96). Of the four themes, higher magnitude contributions were observed with socioeconomic status (26.0%) and housing transportation (14.4%), while lesser magnitude contributions were observed with minority language status (13.5%) and household composition (9.0%). CONCLUSIONS: Increasing social vulnerability, as measured by the CDC SVI and its subscores, displayed significant detrimental trends in prognostic and treatment factors for adult eye-orbit melanoma. Subscores quantified which social determinants contributed most to disparities. This lays groundwork for providers to target the highest-impact social determinant for non-clinical factors in patient care.

Access, Outcomes, and Costs Associated with Surgery for Malignancy Among People Experiencing Homelessness.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about surgery for malignancy among people experiencing homelessness (PEH). Poor healthcare access may lead to delayed diagnosis and need for unplanned surgery. This study aimed to (1) characterize access to care among PEH, (2) evaluate postoperative outcomes, and (3) assess costs associated with surgery for malignancy among PEH. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of patients in the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) who underwent surgery in Florida, New York, or Massachusetts for gastrointestinal or lung cancer from 2016 to 2017. PEH were identified using HCUP's "Homeless" variable and ICD-10 code Z59. Multivariable regression models controlling patient and hospital variables evaluated associations between homelessness and postoperative morbidity, length of stay (LOS), 30-day readmission, and hospitalization costs. RESULTS: Of 67,034 patients at 566 hospitals, 98 (0.2%) were PEH. Most PEH (44.9%) underwent surgery for colorectal cancer. PEH more frequently underwent unplanned surgery than housed patients (65.3% vs 23.7%, odds ratio (OR) 5.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.00-8.92) and less often were treated at cancer centers (66.0% vs 76.2%, p=0.02). Morbidity rates were similar between groups (20.4% vs 14.5%, p=0.10). However, PEH demonstrated higher odds of facility discharge (OR 5.89, 95% CI 3.50-9.78) and readmission (OR 1.81, 95% CI 1.07-3.05) as well as 67.7% longer adjusted LOS (95% CI 42.0-98.2%). Adjusted costs were 32.7% higher (95% CI 14.5-53.9%) among PEH. CONCLUSIONS: PEH demonstrated increased odds of unplanned surgery, longer LOS, and increased costs. These results underscore a need for improved access to oncologic care for PEH.

Associations of social vulnerability with truncal and extremity melanomas in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Prior studies in social determinants (SDoH) of truncal-extremity melanomas (TEM) have analyzed race, income, and environmental factors relative to their effect on health disparities. However, they are limited by the narrow scopes of SDoH and study population, while lacking analyses of interrelational contribution of SDoH on TEM disparities. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study of adult TEM patients (1975-2017) assessed linear regression trends in months of survival, as well as logistic regression trends in advanced presenting stage, surgery, and chemotherapy receipt across TEM subtypes with increasing overall social vulnerability and vulnerability in 15 SDoH variables grouped into socioeconomic status (SES), minority-language status (ML), household composition (HH), and housing-transportation (HT) themes measured by the SVI. SVI measures are ranked/compared across all US counties for relative vulnerability in a specific SDH and their total composite while accounting for sociodemographic-regional differences. RESULTS: Across 325 760 TEM patients, increasing overall social vulnerability demonstrated significant decreases in the survival period for 7/13 TEM histology types (p < 0.001), with relative decreases in the survival period as high as 44.0% (67.0-37.5 months) for epithelioid cell. SES and HH were the highest-magnitude contributors to these overall trends. For many patients with TEM, increased odds of advanced presenting stage (highest with acral-lentiginous: odds ratio [OR], -1.18; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02-1.36), decreased odds of indicated surgery receipt (lowest with amelanotic, 0.79; 0.71-0.87), and increased odds of indicated chemotherapy (highest with melanoma in giant nevi: 1.50; 1.01-2.44) were observed; SES and ML followed by HH and HT contributed to these trends. CONCLUSIONS: There were detriments in TEM care & prognosis in the United States with increasing social vulnerability. Identifying which SDH quantifiably are associated more with disparities in interrelational, real-world contexts is important to provide nuance to inform future research and initiatives to address TEM disparity.

The associations of food environment with gastrointestinal cancer outcomes in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Social conditions and dietary behaviors have been implicated in the rising burden of gastrointestinal cancers (GIC). The "food environment" reflects influences on a community level relative to food availability, nutritional assistance, and social determinants of health. Using the US Department of Agriculture-Food Environment Atlas (FEA), we sought to characterize the association of food environment on GIC presenting stage and long-term survival. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with GIC between 2013 and 2017 were identified using the SEER database. FEA-scores were based on 282 county-level food security variables, store-restaurant availability, SNAP/WIC enrollment, pricing/taxes, and producer vicinity adjusted-for factors of socioeconomic status, race-ethnicity, transportation access, and comorbidities. Relative FEA rankings across US counties were averaged into a composite score and assigned to patients by county-of-residence. The association of FEA, cancer stage, and survival were analyzed using multiple logistic regression and cox-proportional hazard models relative to White/non-White race/ethnicity. RESULTS: Among 287,148 patients, the most common GIC-sites were colon (n = 97,942, 34%), pancreas (n = 49,785, 17.3%), liver (n = 31,098, 11.0%) and esophagus (n = 16,271, 5.7%). A worse food environment was independently associated with increased odds of late-stage diagnosis (esophageal odds ratio [OR]: 1.03, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01-1.05; hepatic OR: 1.06, 95% CI: 1.03-1.08; pancreatic OR: 1.04, 95% CI: 1.01-1.06) among all patients; in contrast, food environment was associated with colorectal cancer stage among non-White patients only (OR: 1.04, 95% CI: 1.03-1.06). Worse food environment was associated with worse 3-year survival (colon OR: 1.03, 95% CI: 1.01-1.04; hepatic OR: 1.12, 95% CI: 1.08-1.17; gastric OR: 1.07, 95% CI: 1.01-1.13). Similar associations were noted relative to overall survival among the entire cohort (biliary tract hazard ratio [HR]: 1.03, 95% CI: 1.01-1.05; esophageal HR: 1.02, 95% CI: 1.01-1.04; hepatic HR: 1.07, 95% CI: 1.06-1.09; pancreatic HR: 1.04, 95% CI: 1.02-1.05; rectum HR: 1.03, 95% CI: 1.01-1.04; gastric HR: 1.05, 95% CI: 1.03-1.07), as well as among non-White patients (biliary HR: 1.04, 95% CI: 1.01-1.07; colon HR: 1.03, 95% CI: 1.01-1.05; esophageal HR: 1.05, 95% CI: 1.02-1.08; hepatic HR: 1.08, 95% CI: 1.06-1.10) (all p < 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Food environment was independently associated with late-stage tumor presentation and worse 3-year and overall survival among GIC patients. Interventions to address inequities across communities relative to food environments are needed to alleviate disparities in cancer care.

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.

Establishing the clinical relevance of grade A post-hepatectomy liver failure.

INTRODUCTION: The International Study Group of Liver Surgery's criteria stratifies post-hepatectomy liver failure (PHLF) into grades A, B, and C. The clinical significance of these grades has not been fully established. METHODS: The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) hepatectomy-targeted database was analyzed. Outcomes between patients without PHLF, with grade A PHLF, and grade B or C PHLF were compared. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression were performed. RESULTS: Six thousand two hundred seventy-four adults undergoing elective major hepatectomy were included in the analysis. The incidence of grade A PHLF was 4.3% and grade B or C was 5.3%. Mortality was similar between patients without PHLF (1.2%) and with grade A PHLF (1.1%), but higher in those with grades B or C PHLF (25.4%). Overall morbidities rates were 19.3%, 41.7%, and 72.8% in patients without PHLF, with grade A PHLF, and with grade B or C PHLF, respectively (p < 0.001). Grade A PHLF was associated with increased morbidity (grade A: odds ratios [OR] 2.7 [95% CI: 2.0-3.5]), unplanned reoperation (grade A: OR 3.4 [95% CI: 2.2-5.1]), nonoperative intervention (grade A: OR 2.6 [95% CI: 1.9-3.6]), length of stay (grade A: OR 3.1 [95% CI: 2.3-4.1]), and readmission (grade A: OR 1.8 [95% CI: 1.3-2.5]) compared to patients without PHLF. CONCLUSIONS: Although mortality was similar between patients without PHLF and with grade A PHLF, other postoperative outcomes were notably inferior. Grade A PHLF is a clinically distinct entity with relevant associated postoperative morbidity.

Utilization and survival outcomes of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for early-stage gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Given increased utilization of neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) for gastric adenocarcinoma, practice patterns deviating from standard of care (upfront resection) remain unknown. We sought to identify factors associated with NAT use and survival outcomes among early-stage gastric cancers. METHODS: The National Cancer Database identified patients with early-stage (T1N0M0) gastric cancer (2010-2020). Multivariable logistic regression assessed characteristics associated with NAT utilization compared to upfront surgery. After 1:1 propensity score matching, Kaplan-Meier methods and Cox regression assessed overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Of 6452 patients with early-stage gastric cancer, 626 (9.7%) received NAT. Patients who received NAT were more likely treated at community hospitals, had moderate to poorly differentiated disease, and tumors located in the cardia (all p < 0.05). After propensity score matching, 1,248 patients remained. Median OS for NAT was 37.1 months (IQR 20.2-64.0) versus 45.6 months (IQR 22.5-72.8) for resection (p < 0.001). Treatment with NAT remained independently predictive of worse OS on Cox regression (hazard ratio 1.19; 95% confidence interval 1.05-1.34). CONCLUSIONS: Although patients who received NAT had more aggressive prognostic features, NAT was associated with worse OS despite accounting for this selection bias. These results highlight the importance of adhering to guidelines, regardless of differing disease characteristics, which has significant implications on outcomes.

Safety and feasibility of establishing an adjuvant hepatic artery infusion program.

BACKGROUND: Hepatic artery infusion (HAI) is less frequently used in the adjuvant setting for resectable colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM) due to concerns regarding toxicity. Our objective was to evaluate the safety and feasibility of establishing an adjuvant HAI program. METHODS: Patients who underwent HAI pump placement between January 2019 and February 2023 for CRLM were identified. Complications and HAI delivery were compared between patients who received HAI in the unresectable and adjuvant settings. RESULTS: Of 51 patients, 23 received HAI for unresectable CRLM and 28 in the adjuvant setting. Patients with unresectable CRLM more commonly had bilobar disease (n = 23/23 vs n = 18/28, p < 0.01) and more preoperative liver metastases (median 10 [IQR 6-15] vs 4 [IQR 3-7], p < 0.01). Biliary sclerosis was the most common complication (n = 2/23 vs n = 4/28); however, there were no differences in postoperative or HAI-specific complications. In the most recent two years, 0 patients in the unresectable group vs 2 patients in the adjuvant group developed biliary sclerosis. All patients were initiated on HAI with no difference in treatment times or dose reductions. CONCLUSION: Adjuvant HAI is safe and feasible for patients with resectable CRLM. HAI programs can carefully consider including patients with resectable CRLM if managed by an experienced multidisciplinary team with quality assurance controls in place.

Esophageal and Esophagogastric Junction Cancers, Version 2.2023, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

Cancers originating in the esophagus or esophagogastric junction constitute a major global health problem. Esophageal cancers are histologically classified as squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) or adenocarcinoma, which differ in their etiology, pathology, tumor location, therapeutics, and prognosis. In contrast to esophageal adenocarcinoma, which usually affects the lower esophagus, esophageal SCC is more likely to localize at or higher than the tracheal bifurcation. Systemic therapy can provide palliation, improved survival, and enhanced quality of life in patients with locally advanced or metastatic disease. The implementation of biomarker testing, especially analysis of HER2 status, microsatellite instability status, and the expression of programmed death-ligand 1, has had a significant impact on clinical practice and patient care. Targeted therapies including trastuzumab, nivolumab, ipilimumab, and pembrolizumab have produced encouraging results in clinical trials for the treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic disease. Palliative management, which may include systemic therapy, chemoradiation, and/or best supportive care, is recommended for all patients with unresectable or metastatic cancer. Multidisciplinary team management is essential for all patients with locally advanced esophageal or esophagogastric junction cancers. This selection from the NCCN Guidelines for Esophageal and Esophagogastric Junction Cancers focuses on the management of recurrent or metastatic disease.

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.

The inaccuracies of gastric adenocarcinoma clinical staging and its predictive factors.

INTRODUCTION: Accurate clinical staging (CS) of gastric adenocarcinoma is important to guide treatment planning. Our objectives were to (1) assess clinical to pathologic stage migration patterns for patients with gastric adenocarcinoma, (2) identify factors associated with inaccurate CS, and (3) evaluate the association of understaging with survival. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was queried for patients who underwent upfront resection for stage I-III gastric adenocarcinoma. Multivariable logistic regression was used to detect factors associated with inaccurate understaging. Kaplan-Meier analyses and cox proportional hazards regression were performed to assess overall survival (OS) for patients with inaccurate CS. RESULTS: Of 14 425 analyzed patients, 5781 (40.1%) patients were inaccurately staged. Factors associated with understaging included treatment at a Comprehensive Community Cancer Program, presence of lymphovascular invasion, moderate to poor differentiation, large tumor size, and T2 disease. Based on overall CS, median OS was 51.0 months for accurately staged patients and 29.5 months for understaged patients (<0.001). CONCLUSION: Clinical T-category, large tumor size, and worse histologic features lead to inaccurate CS for gastric adenocarcinoma, impacting OS. Improvements to staging parameters and diagnostic modalities focusing on these factors may improve prognostication.

The impact of digital inequities on gastrointestinal cancer disparities in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Modern-day internet access and technology usage substantially impacts aspects of surgical care but remain ill-defined for their associations with gastrointestinal-cancer (GIC) outcomes. We sought to develop the Digital Inequity Index (DII), a novel, a self-adapted tool to quantify access to digital resources, to assess the impact of "digital inequity" on GIC care and prognosis. METHODS: Adult (20+) patients with gastrointestinal malignancies between 2013 and 2017 were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program database. DII was calculated based on 17 census-tract level variables derived from the American Community Survey and Federal Communications Commission. Variables were categorized as infrastructure-access (i.e., electronic device ownership, broadband type, internet provider availability, income-broadband subscription ratio) or sociodemographic (i.e., education, income, disability status), ranked relative across all US counties, and then averaged into a composite score. The association between DII and surgery receipt, staging, surveillance period, and survival time were assessed with multiple logistic and linear regressions. RESULTS: Among 287 228 patients, increasing DII was associated with increased odds of late-stage disease (highest odds ratio [OR]: 1.08, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.05-1.10 for hepatic) and decreased odds of receiving surgery (lowest OR: 0.94, 95% CI: 0.93-0.96 for hepatic). Higher DII was associated with shorter postoperative surveillance length (largest decrease -20.4% for hepatic) and overall survival length (largest decrease -16.0% for pancreatic). Sociodemographic and infrastructure-access factors contributed equivalently to surveillance time disparities, while infrastructure-access factors contributed more to survival disparities across GIC types. CONCLUSIONS: As technology dependence has increased, inequities in digital access should be targeted as a contributor to surgical oncologic disparities.

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.

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.

Evaluation of emergency department treat-and-release encounters after major gastrointestinal surgery.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Emergency department (ED) utilization after gastrointestinal cancer operations is poorly characterized. Our study objectives were to determine the incidence of, reasons for, and predictors of ED treat-and-release encounters after gastrointestinal cancer operations. METHODS: Patients who underwent elective esophageal, hepatobiliary, gastric, pancreatic, small intestinal, or colorectal operations for cancer were identified in the 2015-2017 Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project State Inpatient and State Emergency Department Databases for New York, Maryland, and Florida. The primary outcomes were the incidence of ED treat-and-release encounters and readmissions within 30 days of discharge. RESULTS: Among 51 527 patients at 406 hospitals, 4047 (7.9%) had an ED treat-and-release encounter, and 5573 (10.8%) had an ED encounter with readmission. In total, 40.7% of ED encounters were treat-and-release encounters. ED treat-and-release encounters were most frequently for pain (12.0%), device/ostomy complaints (11.7%), or wound complaints (11.4%). ED treat-and-release encounters predictors included non-Hispanic Black race/ethnicity (odds ratio [OR] 1.24, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.12-1.37) and Medicare (OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.16-1.40) or Medicaid (OR 1.82, 95% CI 1.62-2.40) coverage. CONCLUSIONS: ED treat-and-release encounters are common after major gastrointestinal operations, making up nearly half of postdischarge ED encounters. The reasons for ED treat-and-release encounters differ from those for ED encounters with readmissions.

Piperacillin-Tazobactam Compared With Cefoxitin as Antimicrobial Prophylaxis for Pancreatoduodenectomy: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Despite improvements in perioperative mortality, the incidence of postoperative surgical site infection (SSI) remains high after pancreatoduodenectomy. The effect of broad-spectrum antimicrobial surgical prophylaxis in reducing SSI is poorly understood. Objective: To define the effect of broad-spectrum perioperative antimicrobial prophylaxis on postoperative SSI incidence compared with standard care antibiotics. Design, Setting, and Participants: Pragmatic, open-label, multicenter, randomized phase 3 clinical trial at 26 hospitals across the US and Canada. Participants were enrolled between November 2017 and August 2021, with follow-up through December 2021. Adults undergoing open pancreatoduodenectomy for any indication were eligible. Individuals were excluded if they had allergies to study medications, active infections, chronic steroid use, significant kidney dysfunction, or were pregnant or breastfeeding. Participants were block randomized in a 1:1 ratio and stratified by the presence of a preoperative biliary stent. Participants, investigators, and statisticians analyzing trial data were unblinded to treatment assignment. Intervention: The intervention group received piperacillin-tazobactam (3.375 or 4 g intravenously) as perioperative antimicrobial prophylaxis, while the control group received cefoxitin (2 g intravenously; standard care). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was development of postoperative SSI within 30 days. Secondary end points included 30-day mortality, development of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula, and sepsis. All data were collected as part of the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. Results: The trial was terminated at an interim analysis on the basis of a predefined stopping rule. Of 778 participants (378 in the piperacillin-tazobactam group [median age, 66.8 y; 233 {61.6%} men] and 400 in the cefoxitin group [median age, 68.0 y; 223 {55.8%} men]), the percentage with SSI at 30 days was lower in the perioperative piperacillin-tazobactam vs cefoxitin group (19.8% vs 32.8%; absolute difference, -13.0% [95% CI, -19.1% to -6.9%]; P < .001). Participants treated with piperacillin-tazobactam, vs cefoxitin, had lower rates of postoperative sepsis (4.2% vs 7.5%; difference, -3.3% [95% CI, -6.6% to 0.0%]; P = .02) and clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (12.7% vs 19.0%; difference, -6.3% [95% CI, -11.4% to -1.2%]; P = .03). Mortality rates at 30 days were 1.3% (5/378) among participants treated with piperacillin-tazobactam and 2.5% (10/400) among those receiving cefoxitin (difference, -1.2% [95% CI, -3.1% to 0.7%]; P = .32). Conclusions and Relevance: In participants undergoing open pancreatoduodenectomy, use of piperacillin-tazobactam as perioperative prophylaxis reduced postoperative SSI, pancreatic fistula, and multiple downstream sequelae of SSI. The findings support the use of piperacillin-tazobactam as standard care for open pancreatoduodenectomy. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03269994.

Gastric Cancer, Version 2.2022, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

Gastric cancer is the third leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide. Over 95% of gastric cancers are adenocarcinomas, which are typically classified based on anatomic location and histologic type. Gastric cancer generally carries a poor prognosis because it is often diagnosed at an advanced stage. Systemic therapy can provide palliation, improved survival, and enhanced quality of life in patients with locally advanced or metastatic disease. The implementation of biomarker testing, especially analysis of HER2 status, microsatellite instability (MSI) status, and the expression of programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1), has had a significant impact on clinical practice and patient care. Targeted therapies including trastuzumab, nivolumab, and pembrolizumab have produced encouraging results in clinical trials for the treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic disease. Palliative management, which may include systemic therapy, chemoradiation, and/or best supportive care, is recommended for all patients with unresectable or metastatic cancer. Multidisciplinary team management is essential for all patients with localized gastric cancer. This selection from the NCCN Guidelines for Gastric Cancer focuses on the management of unresectable locally advanced, recurrent, or metastatic disease.