Nurse-Delivered Brief Behavioral Treatment for Insomnia in Lung Cancer Survivors: A Pilot RCT.

Objective/Background: Insomnia occurs in 50 to 80% of lung cancer survivors. Cognitive behavioral therapy is the standard treatment for insomnia (CBTI); however, treatment length and lack of psychologists trained in CBTI limits access. Brief Behavioral Treatment for Insomnia (BBTI), a nurse-delivered modified CBTI, is proposed. This feasibility pilot study sought to compare the BBTI intervention to attention control Healthy Eating Program (HEP) for insomnia in lung cancer survivors. Participants: The participants comprised adults, 21 years of age or older with insomnia and stage I/II non-small cell lung cancer, more than 6 weeks from surgery and living in Western NY. Methods: Participants (n = 40) were randomly assigned to an experimental (BBTI) or attention control condition (Healthy Eating Program). Thirty participants completed the study. Results: Participants were 66 years of age (± 7.6; range 53-82), 40% (n = 16) male, 87.5% (n = 35) Caucasian, 50% (n = 20) married, BMI 27.7 (± 5.8), and 12% (n = 5) never smokers. Baseline sleep diary sleep efficiency, ISI and other baseline covariates were balanced between the groups. Sleep efficiency improved ≥85% in BBTI group (p = .02), but not in HEP control group (p = 1.00). Mean ISI for BBTI and attention control were 6.40 ± 4.98 and 14.10 ± 4.48 (p = .001) respectively. In addition, BBTI group mean total FACT-L score improved by 6.66 points from baseline while HEP group score worsened (p = .049). Conclusions: BBTI is a practical, evidence-based, clinically relevant intervention that improved sleep and quality of life in lung cancer survivors with insomnia. Additional research to evaluate efficacy, duration, and implementation strategies are essential.

Patient Survey of Referral From One Surgeon to Another to Reduce Maximum Waiting Time for Elective Surgery and Hours of Overutilized Operating Room Time.

BACKGROUND: Studies of shared (patient-provider) decision making for elective surgical care have examined both the decision whether to have surgery and patients' understanding of treatment options. We consider shared decision making applied to case scheduling, since implementation would reduce labor costs. METHODS: Study questions were presented in sequence of waiting times, starting with 4 workdays. "Assume the consultant surgeon (ie, the surgeon in charge) you met in clinic did not have time available to do your surgery within the next 4 workdays, but his/her colleague would have had time to do your surgery within the next 4 workdays. Would you have wanted to discuss with a member of the surgical team (eg, the scheduler or the surgeon) the availability of surgery with a different, equally qualified surgeon at Mayo Clinic who had time available within the next 4 workdays, on a date of your choosing?" There were 980 invited patients who underwent lung resection or cholecystectomy between 2011 and 2016; 135 respondents completed the study and 6 respondents dropped out after the study questions were displayed. RESULTS: The percentages of patients whose response to the study questions was "4 days" were 58.8% (40/68) among lung resection patients and 58.2% (39/67) among cholecystectomy patients. The 97.5% 2-sided confidence interval for the median maximum wait was 4 days to 4 days. Patients' choices for the waiting time sufficient to discuss having another surgeon perform the procedure did not differ between procedures (P = .91). Results were insensitive to patients' sex, age, travel time to hospital, or number of office visits before surgery (all P ≥ .20). CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that bringing up the option with the patient of changing surgeons when a colleague is available and has the operating room time to perform the procedure sooner is being respectful of most patients' individual preferences (ie, patient-centered).

Monte Carlo Simulations Comparing Fisher Exact Test and Unequal Variances t Test for Analysis of Differences Between Groups in Brief Hospital Lengths of Stay.

BACKGROUND: We examined type I and II error rates for analysis of (1) mean hospital length of stay (LOS) versus (2) percentage of hospital LOS that are overnight. These 2 end points are suitable for when LOS is treated as a secondary economic end point. METHODS: We repeatedly resampled LOS for 5052 discharges of thoracoscopic wedge resections and lung lobectomy at 26 hospitals. RESULTS: Unequal variances t test (Welch method) and Fisher exact test both were conservative (ie, type I error rate less than nominal level). The Wilcoxon rank sum test was included as a comparator; the type I error rates did not differ from the nominal level of 0.05 or 0.01. Fisher exact test was more powerful than the unequal variances t test at detecting differences among hospitals; estimated odds ratio for obtaining P < .05 with Fisher exact test versus unequal variances t test = 1.94, with 95% confidence interval, 1.31-3.01. Fisher exact test and Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney had comparable statistical power in terms of differentiating LOS between hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: For studies with LOS to be used as a secondary end point of economic interest, there is currently considerable interest in the planned analysis being for the percentage of patients suitable for ambulatory surgery (ie, hospital LOS equals 0 or 1 midnight). Our results show that there need not be a loss of statistical power when groups are compared using this binary end point, as compared with either Welch method or Wilcoxon rank sum test.

Readmissions to Different Hospitals After Common Surgical Procedures and Consequences for Implementation of Perioperative Surgical Home Programs.

BACKGROUND: We consider whether there should be greater priority of information sharing about postacute surgical resources used: (1) at skilled nursing facilities or inpatient rehabilitation hospitals to which patients are transferred upon discharge (when applicable) versus (2) at different hospitals where readmissions occur. Obtaining and storing data electronically from these 2 sources for Perioperative Surgical Home initiatives are dissimilar; both can be challenging depending on the country and health system. METHODS: Using the 2013 US Nationwide Readmissions Database, we studied discharges of surgical diagnosis-related group (DRG) with US national median length of stay (LOS) ≥ 3 days and ≥ 10 hospitals each with ≥ 100 discharges for the Medicare Severity DRG. RESULTS: Nationwide, 16.15% (95% confidence interval [CI], 15.14%-17.22%) of discharges were with a disposition of "not to home" (ie, transfer to a skilled nursing facility or an inpatient rehabilitation hospital). Within 30 days, 0.88% of discharges (0.82%-0.95%) were followed by readmission and to a different hospital than the original hospital where the surgery was performed. Among all discharges, disposition "not to home" versus "to home" was associated with greater odds that the patient would have readmission within 30 days and to a different hospital than where the surgery was performed (2.11, 95% CI, 1.96-2.27; P < .0001). In part, this was because disposition "not to home" was associated with greater odds of readmission to any hospital (1.90, 95% CI, 1.82-1.98; P < .0001). In addition, among the subset of discharges with readmission within 30 days, disposition "not to home" versus "to home" was associated with greater odds that the readmission was to a different hospital than where the surgery was performed (1.20, 95% CI, 1.11-1.31; P < .0001). There was no association between the hospitals' median LOS for the DRG and the odds that readmission was to a different hospital (P = .82). The odds ratio per each 1 day decrease in the hospital median LOS was 1.01 (95% CI, 0.91-1.12). CONCLUSIONS: Departments and hospitals wishing to demonstrate the value of their Perioperative Surgical Home initiatives, or to calculate risk assumption contracts, should ensure that their informatics priorities include obtaining accurate data on resource use at postacute care facilities such as skilled nursing facilities. Although approximately a quarter of readmissions are to different hospitals than where surgery was performed, provided that is recognized, obtaining those missing data is of less importance.

Comparative effectiveness of stereotactic radiosurgery versus whole-brain radiation therapy for patients with brain metastases from breast or non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment for patients with brain metastases remains controversial as the use of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) alone, replacing whole-brain radiation therapy (WBRT), has increased. This study determined the patterns of care at multiple institutions before 2010 and examined whether or not survival was different between patients treated with SRS and patients treated with WBRT. METHODS: This study examined the overall survival of patients treated with radiation therapy for brain metastases from non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC; initially diagnosed in 2007-2009) or breast cancer (initially diagnosed in 1997-2009) at 5 centers. Propensity score analyses were performed to adjust for confounding factors such as the number of metastases, the extent of extracranial metastases, and the treatment center. RESULTS: Overall, 27.8% of 400 NSCLC patients and 13.4% of 387 breast cancer patients underwent SRS alone for the treatment of brain metastases. Few patients with more than 3 brain metastases or lesions ≥ 4 cm in size underwent SRS. Patients with fewer than 4 brain metastases less than 4 cm in size (n = 189 for NSCLC and n = 117 for breast cancer) who were treated with SRS had longer survival (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] for NSCLC, 0.58; 95% confidence Interval [CI], 0.38-0.87; P = .01; adjusted HR for breast cancer, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.33-0.91; P = .02) than those treated with WBRT. CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated for fewer than 4 brain metastases from NSCLC or breast cancer with SRS alone had longer survival than those treated with WBRT in this multi-institutional, retrospective study, even after adjustments for the propensity to undergo SRS. Cancer 2016;122:2091-100. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Advances in bronchoscopy for lung cancer.

Bronchoscopic techniques have seen significant advances in the last decade. The development and refinement of different types of endobronchial ultrasound and navigation systems have led to improved diagnostic yield and lung cancer staging capabilities. The complication rate of these minimally invasive procedures is extremely low as compared to traditional transthoracic needle biopsy and surgical sampling. These advances augment the safe array of methods utilized in the work up and management algorithms of lung cancer.

Impact of a Thoracic Multidisciplinary Conference on Lung Cancer Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: With the complexity of cancer treatment rising, the role of multidisciplinary conferences (MDCs) in making diagnostic and treatment decisions has become critical. This study evaluated the impact of a thoracic MDC (T-MDC) on lung cancer care quality and survival. METHODS: Lung cancer cases over 7 years were identified from the Roswell Park cancer registry system. The survival rates and treatment plans of 300 patients presented at the MDC were compared with 300 matched patients. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines were used to define the standard of care. The compliance of care plans with NCCN guidelines was summarized using counts and percentages, with comparisons made using the Fisher exact test. Survival outcomes were summarized using Kaplan-Meier methods. RESULTS: There was improvement in median overall survival (36.9 vs 19.3 months; P < .001) and cancer-specific survival (48 vs 28.1 months; P < .001) for lung cancer patients discussed at the T-MDC compared with controls. These differences were statistically significant in patients with stages III/IV disease but not in patients with stages I/II disease. The NCCN guidelines compliance rate of treatment plans improved from 80% to 94% (P < .001) after MDC discussion. MDC recommendations resulted in treatment plan changes in 123 of 300 patients (41%). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that lung cancer patients have a survival benefit from MDC discussion compared with controls. Patients with advanced disease (stages III and IV) benefited the most. Further research is necessary to understand the precise mechanisms that drive these results.

Statistical grand rounds: Importance of appropriately modeling procedure and duration in logistic regression studies of perioperative morbidity and mortality.

Multiple logistic regression studies frequently are performed with duration (e.g., operative time) included as an independent variable. We use narrative review of the statistical literature to highlight that when the association between duration and outcome is presumptively significant, the procedure itself (e.g., video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy or thoracotomy lobectomy) needs to be tested for inclusion in the logistic regression. If the procedure is a true covariate but excluded in lieu of category of procedure (e.g., lung resection), estimates of the odds ratios for other independent variables are biased. In addition, actual durations are sometimes used as the independent variable, rather than scheduled (forecasted) durations. Only the scheduled duration is known when a patient would be randomized in a trial of preoperative or intraoperative intervention and/or meets with the surgeon and anesthesiologist preoperatively. By reviewing the literature about logistic regression and about predicting case duration, we show that the use of actual instead of scheduled duration can result in biased logistic regression results.

Prior Treatment for Non-small Cell Lung Cancer Is Associated With Improved Survival in Patients who Undergo Definitive Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for a Subsequent Lung Malignancy: A Retrospective Multivariate and Matched Pair Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Despite occurring commonly, the prognoses of second early-stage non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC) are not well known. METHODS: The authors retrospectively reviewed the charts of inoperable patients who underwent thoracic stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) from February 2007 to April 2019. Those with previous small cell lung cancers or SBRT treatments for tumors other than NSCLC were excluded. Multivariate Cox regression and a matched pair cohort analyses evaluated the prognoses of patients undergoing definitive SBRT for a new second primary. RESULTS: Of 438 patients who underwent definitive SBRT for NSCLC, 84 had previously treated NSCLC. Univariate log-rank tests identified gender, Karnofksy performance status (KPS), prior lung cancer, anticoagulation use, and history of heart disease to correlate with overall survival (OS) (P<0.05). These factors were incorporated into a multivariate Cox regression model that demonstrated female sex (P=0.004, hazard ratio [HR]=0.68), KPS (P<0.001, HR=2.0), and prior lung cancer (P=0.049, HR=0.7) to be significantly associated with OS. A similar approach found only gender (P=0.017, HR=0.64) and tumor stage (P=0.02, HR=1.7) to correlate with relapse-free survival. To support the Cox regression analysis, propensity score matching was performed using gender, age, KPS, tumor stage, history of heart disease, and anticoagulation use. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis within the matched pairs found prior lung cancer to be associated with improved OS (P=0.011), but not relapse-free survival (P=0.44). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with initial lung cancer SBRT inoperable cases, ablative radiotherapy for new primaries was associated with improved OS. Physicians should not be dissuaded from offering SBRT to such patients.

Influence of procedure classification on process variability and parameter uncertainty of surgical case durations.

BACKGROUND: Predictive variability of operating room (OR) times influences decision making on the day of surgery including when to start add-on cases, whether to move a case from one OR to another, and where to assign relief staff. One contributor to predictive variability is process variability, which arises among cases of the same procedure(s). Another contributor is parameter uncertainty, which is caused by small sample sizes of historical data. METHODS: Process variability was quantified using absolute percentage errors of surgeons' bias-corrected estimates of OR time. The influence of procedure classification on process variability was studied using a dataset of 61,353 cases, each with 1 to 5 scheduled and actual Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes (i.e., a standardized vocabulary). Parameter uncertainty's sensitivity to sample size was quantified by studying ratios of 90% prediction bounds to medians. That studied dataset of 65,661 cases was used previously to validate a Bayesian method to calculate 90% prediction bounds using combinations of surgeons' scheduled estimates and historical OR times. RESULTS: (1) Process variability differed significantly among 11 groups of surgical specialty and case urgency (P < 0.0001). For example, absolute percentage errors exceeded the overall median of 22% for 57% of urgent spine surgery cases versus 42% of elective spine surgery cases. (2) Process variability was not increased when scheduled and actual CPTs differed (P = 0.23 without and P = 0.47 with stratification based on the 11 groups), because most differences represented known (planned) options inherent to procedures. (3) Process variability was not associated with incidence of procedures (P = 0.79), after excluding cataract surgery, a procedure with high relative variability. (4) Parameter uncertainty from uncommon procedures (0-2 historical cases) accounted for essentially all of the uncertainty in decisions dependent on estimates of OR times. The Bayesian method moderated the effect of small sample sizes on uncertainty in estimates of OR times. In contrast, from prior work, the use of broad categories of procedures reduces parameter uncertainty but at the expense of increased process variability. CONCLUSIONS: For procedures with few historic data, the Bayesian method allows for effective case duration prediction, permitting use of detailed procedure descriptions. Although fine resolution of scheduling procedures increases the chance of performed procedure(s) differing from scheduled procedure(s), this does not increase process variability. Future studies need both to address differences in process variability among specialties and accept the limitation that findings from one may not apply to others.

Prospective trial of thoracic and spine surgeons' updating of their estimated case durations at the start of cases.

BACKGROUND: Surgeon estimates of case durations are important for operating room (OR) management decision making because many cases are rare combinations of procedures with few or no historical data. Thoracic and spine surgeons updated their scheduled OR times on the day of surgery just before the "time out" in the OR. METHODS: All elective (scheduled) general thoracic (n = 39) and spine surgery (n = 48) cases at 1 hospital were studied over 3-month and 1.5-month periods, respectively. RESULTS: Among cases with a change in predicted duration, most changes were made based on updates to the surgical or anesthetic procedures (thoracic 85%, spine 86%). For thoracic surgery, there was overall no significant median reduction in absolute prediction error (median 0 minutes, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0-0 minutes). Among the 37% of cases with changed predicted durations, there was a significant reduction in absolute error (median 38 minutes, 95% CI >7.5 minutes). For spine surgery, there was overall no reduction in the absolute error (median 0 minutes, 95% CI 0-0 minutes). Among the 29% of cases with changed predicted durations, absolute error was no worse, but not significantly better (point estimate of median reduction 34 minutes, 95% CI >0 minutes). Secondary observations made were no effect of updates on bias, frequent rounding of scheduled durations to the nearest half hour, and increased predictive error caused by decisions that reduced expected overutilized OR time. CONCLUSIONS: A systematic program of routinely and/or always asking for updated case duration predictions will not substantively improve OR management decision making. However, when a change in surgical approach, surgical procedure, or anesthetic procedure is identified (e.g., at the intraoperative briefing before case start), the updated estimate of case duration should be used, because such updates are not worse and often better than original estimates.

Both bias and lack of knowledge influence organizational focus on first case of the day starts.

BACKGROUND: The economic costs of reducing first case delays are often high, because efforts need to be applied to multiple operating rooms (ORs) simultaneously. Nevertheless, delays in starting first cases of the day are a common topic in OR committee meetings. METHODS: We added three scientific questions to a 24 question online, anonymous survey performed before the implementation of a new OR information system. The 57 respondents cared sufficiently about OR management at the United States teaching hospital to complete all questions. RESULTS: The survey revealed reasons why personnel may focus on the small reductions in nonoperative time achievable by reducing tardiness in first cases of the day. (A) Respondents lacked knowledge about principles in reducing over-utilized OR time to increase OR efficiency, based on their answering the relevant question correctly at a rate no different from guessing at random. Those results differed from prior findings of responses at a rate worse than random, resulting from a bias on the day of surgery of making decisions that increase clinical work per unit time. (B) Most respondents falsely believed that a 10 min delay at the start of the day causes subsequent cases to start at least 10 min late (P < 0.0001 versus random chance). (C) Most respondents did not know that cases often take less time than scheduled (P = 0.008 versus chance). No one who demonstrated knowledge (C) about cases sometimes taking less time than scheduled applied that information to their response to (B) regarding cases starting late (P = 0.0002). CONCLUSIONS: Knowledge of OR efficiency was low among the respondents working in ORs. Nevertheless, the apparent absence of bias shows that education may influence behavior. In contrast, presence of bias on matters of tardiness of start times shows that education may be of no benefit. As the latter results match findings of previous studies of scheduling decisions, interventions to reduce patient and surgeon waiting from start times may depend principally on the application of automation to guide decision-making.

Systematic review of general thoracic surgery articles to identify predictors of operating room case durations.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies of operating room (OR) information systems data over the past two decades have shown how to predict case durations using the combination of scheduled procedure(s), individual surgeon and assistant(s), and type of anesthetic(s). We hypothesized that the accuracy of case duration prediction could be improved by the use of other electronic medical record data (e.g., patient weight or surgeon notes using standardized vocabularies). METHODS: General thoracic surgery was used as a model specialty because much of its workload is elective (scheduled) and many of its cases are long. PubMed was searched for thoracic surgery papers reporting operative time, surgical time, etc. The systematic literature review identified 48 papers reporting statistically significant differences in perioperative times. RESULTS: There were multiple reports of differences in OR times based on the procedure(s), perioperative team including primary surgeon, and type of anesthetic, in that sequence of importance. All such detail may not be known when the case is originally scheduled and thus may require an updated duration the day before surgery. Although the use of these categorical data from OR systems can result in few historical data for estimating each case's duration, bias and imprecision of case duration estimates are unlikely to be affected. There was a report of a difference in case duration based on additional information. However, the incidence of the procedure for the diagnosis was so uncommon as to be unlikely to affect OR management. CONCLUSIONS: Matching findings of prior studies using OR information system data, multiple case series show that it is important to rely on the precise procedure(s), surgical team, and type of anesthetic when estimating case durations. OR information systems need to incorporate the statistical methods designed for small numbers of prior surgical cases. Future research should focus on the most effective methods to update the prediction of each case's duration as these data become available. The case series did not reveal additional data which could be cost-effectively integrated with OR information systems data to improve the accuracy of predicted durations for general thoracic surgery cases.

Sarcopenia is a predictor of outcomes after lobectomy.

BACKGROUND: As screening for lung cancer rises, an increase in the diagnosis of early stage lung cancers is expected. Lobectomy remains the standard treatment, but there are alternatives, consideration of which requires an estimation of the risk of surgery. Sarcopenia, irrespective of body mass index, confers a worse prognosis in many groups of patients including those undergoing surgery. Here we examine the association of muscle mass with outcomes for patients undergoing lobectomy. METHODS: Consecutive patients undergoing lobectomy were retrospectively reviewed. Preoperative computed tomography scans were reviewed, and cross-sectional area of the erector spinae muscles and pectoralis muscles was determined and normalized for height. Univariate and multivariate analyses were then done to examine for an association of muscle mass with morbidity and short- and long-term mortality. RESULTS: During the study period, there were 299 lobectomies, 278 of which were done by video assisted thoracoscopic surgery. The average age of the patients was 67.5±10.6 years. Overall complication rate was 52.2%, pneumonia rate was 8.7%, and the 30-day mortality rate was 1.3%. Mean height adjusted-erector spinae muscle cross-sectional area was 10.6±2.6 cm2/m2, and mean height adjusted-pectoralis muscle cross sectional area was 13.3±3.8 cm2/m2. The height adjusted cross sectional areas of the erector spinae and pectoralis muscles were not associated with overall complication rate, rate of pneumonia, readmission, or intensive care unit length of stay. The height adjusted-erector spinae muscle cross sectional area was inversely correlated with 30-day mortality risk, odds ratio 0.77 (95% CI, 0.60-0.98, P=0.036). Mean length of stay was 7.0 days (95% CI, 5.5-8.4 days). Multivariate analysis demonstrated a significant inverse association of the height adjusted-erector spinae muscle cross sectional area with length of stay (P=0.019). CONCLUSIONS: The height adjusted-erector spinae muscle cross sectional area was significantly associated with 30-day mortality and length of stay in the hospital. Measurement of muscle mass on preoperative computed tomography imaging may have a role to help predict risk of morbidity and mortality prior to lobectomy.

Application of a similarity index to state discharge abstract data to identify opportunities for growth of surgical and anesthesia practices.

INTRODUCTION: Most surgical and anesthesia groups are interested in expanding their practices and recruiting more patients. Methods have been developed to help hospitals identify surgical specialties with the potential for growth by determining whether the hospital is performing fewer of certain types of procedures than expected in a given specialty. However, these methods are not appropriate for physicians who may practice at more than one hospital and want to determine the potential for growth in their regions. METHODS: We examined potential markets for growth of surgical and anesthesia practices in Iowa and New York State using state discharge abstract data. Several patient demographic groups and several surgical specialties were examined. Each state was divided into regions, and data were analyzed three ways: (1) A similarity index compared each region to the rest of the state. (2) The number of procedures performed on patients who left their home regions for care was determined. (3) A similarity index compared procedures performed on patients who left their home regions for care with procedures performed on patients who remained within their home regions. RESULTS: The methods successfully identified several geographic regions with previously unrecognized growth potential. Access to care was limited in these regions. The methods correctly showed few opportunities for growth in geographic regions where expansion was already known to be unlikely. CONCLUSIONS: A count of the number of procedures performed on patients who left their home regions, in combination with the similarity index, is a useful method for screening state discharge abstract data to identify geographic regions where surgical and anesthesia practices could grow.

A 51-Year-Old Woman With an Increasing Chest Wall Mass Years After Resection of an Early Stage Lung Cancer.

CASE PRESENTATION: A 51-year-old woman was found to have a new 14 × 6 mm soft tissue mass under the right serratus muscle on a CT scan of the chest performed for routine surveillance due to her history of stage I lung cancer. A follow-up CT scan performed 4 months later showed that the mass had increased in size to 22 × 8 mm. The patient presents to the oncology clinic to discuss the results of the CT scan. She has no pain or swelling on the right lateral chest and no cough, fever, or shortness of breath. She is at her baseline health with good appetite and functional status.

Transcervical Extended Mediastinal Lymphadenectomy: Experience From a North American Cancer Center.

BACKGROUND: Accurate staging of the mediastinum is a critical element of therapeutic decision making in non-small cell lung cancer. We sought to determine the utility of transcervical extended mediastinal lymphadenectomy (TEMLA) in staging non-small cell lung cancer for large central tumors and after induction therapy. METHODS: A retrospective record review was performed of all patients who underwent TEMLA at our institution from 2010 to 2015. Clinical stage as assessed by positron emission tomography integrated with computed tomography (PET-CT), stage as assessed by TEMLA, final pathologic stage, lymph node yield, and clinical characteristics of tumors were assessed along with TEMLA-related perioperative morbidity. Accuracy of staging by TEMLA for restaging the mediastinum after neoadjuvant therapy was compared with that of PET-CT. RESULTS: Of 164 patients who underwent TEMLA, 157 (95.7%) were completed successfully. Combined surgical resection along with TEMLA was performed in 138 of these patients, with 131 (94.2%) undergoing a video-assisted thoracoscopic resection. The recurrent laryngeal nerve injury rate was 6.7%. TEMLA was performed in 118 of 164 patients for restaging after neoadjuvant therapy, and 101 of these patients were also restaged by PET-CT. Based on TEMLA, 7 patients did not go on to have resection. Of the 101 patients who did have a resection, TEMLA was more accurate than PET-CT in staging the mediastinum (95% vs 73%, p < 0.0001). However, the pneumonia rate in this subgroup of patients was 13%. CONCLUSIONS: TEMLA is a safe procedure and superior to PET-CT for restaging of the mediastinum after neoadjuvant therapy for non-small cell lung cancer. However, this increased accuracy comes with a high postoperative pneumonia rate.

Patterns of Treatment and Outcomes for Definitive Therapy of Early Stage Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Definitive surgical and radiation therapy (RT) treatments are evolving rapidly for stage I non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We hypothesized that utilization of definitive therapies increased between 2000 and 2010 and that survival improved for stage I NSCLC patients over the same time period. Secondary objectives were determining trends in patterns of care and predictors of utilization. METHODS: Population-based, observational, comparative effectiveness study used Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-18 data from 2000 to 2010. The main outcome measure was 2-year risk of death for stage I NSCLC. RESULTS: Between 2000 and 2010, 40,589 patients (62%) underwent surgery, 10,048 (15%) received RT, 2,130 (3%) received both surgery and RT, and 11,537 (18%) received neither surgery nor RT. Annually, the odds of receiving either definitive RT or undergoing surgery increased relative to the odds of receiving no treatment (odds ratio [OR] radiation 1.04, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.03 to 1.05; OR surgery 1.05, 95% CI: 1.04 to 1.05). Among surgical patients, the proportion of sublobar resections steadily increased from 12.9% to 17.9%. For all patients, the 2-year risk of death decreased by 3.5% each year (hazard ratio [HR] 0.965, 95% CI: 0.962 to 0.969), driven primarily by improved survival for surgical (annualized HR 0.959, 95% CI: 0.954 to 0.964) and RT (annualized HR 0.942, 95% CI: 0.935 to 0.949) patients. CONCLUSIONS: Between 2000 and 2010, stage I NSCLC patients were more likely to receive definitive treatment with either surgery or RT, leading to a decline in the number of untreated patients. Survival also improved substantially for stage I NSCLC patients, with the largest survival improvements observed in patients undergoing definitive RT.

Variation in Definitive Therapy for Localized Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Among National Comprehensive Cancer Network Institutions.

PURPOSE: This study determined practice patterns in the staging and treatment of patients with stage I non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) among National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) member institutions. Secondary aims were to determine trends in the use of definitive therapy, predictors of treatment type, and acute adverse events associated with primary modalities of treatment. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Data from the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Oncology Outcomes Database from 2007 to 2011 for US patients with stage I NSCLC were used. Main outcome measures included patterns of care, predictors of treatment, acute morbidity, and acute mortality. RESULTS: Seventy-nine percent of patients received surgery, 16% received definitive radiation therapy (RT), and 3% were not treated. Seventy-four percent of the RT patients received stereotactic body RT (SBRT), and the remainder received nonstereotactic RT (NSRT). Among participating NCCN member institutions, the number of surgeries-to-RT course ratios varied between 1.6 and 34.7 (P<.01), and the SBRT-to-NSRT ratio varied between 0 and 13 (P=.01). Significant variations were also observed in staging practices, with brain imaging 0.33 (0.25-0.43) times as likely and mediastinoscopy 31.26 (21.84-44.76) times more likely for surgical patients than for RT patients. Toxicity rates for surgical and for SBRT patients were similar, although the rates were double for NSRT patients. CONCLUSIONS: The variations in treatment observed among NCCN institutions reflects the lack of level I evidence directing the use of surgery or SBRT for stage I NSCLC. In this setting, research of patient and physician preferences may help to guide future decision making.

Does Thoracoscopic Surgery Decrease the Morbidity of Combined Lung and Chest Wall Resection?

BACKGROUND: Because the traditional open lung approach with en bloc chest wall resection carries substantial risk for complications and death, we studied our thoracoscopic approach for this operation. METHODS: From 2007 to 2013, all consecutive video-assisted thoracoscopic (VATS) and open chest wall resections at a comprehensive cancer center were tabulated retrospectively. Data were analyzed by approach, type, and cause of early major morbidity and mortality. Lung cancer cases (the largest subset, T3) were analyzed separately. Statistical tests included the Kruskal-Wallis test for continuous variables and the χ(2) for categoric variables. Survival data were analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank tests. RESULTS: Of 47 chest wall resections performed, 17 (36%) were performed by VATS with no conversions. Resections were performed for primary non-small cell lung cancer (15 VATS and 16 thoracotomy), sarcoma (11), metastatic disease from a separate primary (2), and benign conditions (3). Patients undergoing a VATS approach were older (76 vs 56 years, p = 0.003), and the operative times, blood loss, and ribs resected were similar between groups. Patients undergoing VATS had shorter intensive care unit and hospital lengths of stay, but both groups had high hospital morbidity and mortality, largely resulting from postoperative pneumonia or respiratory systemic inflammatory response syndrome (n = 5), stroke (n = 2), and postoperative colon ischemia (n = 1). Groups had a 90-day mortality of 26.7% and 25% respectively. Stage-matched survival curves for both approaches were superimposable (p=0.88). CONCLUSIONS: Thoracoscopic chest wall resection was feasible, expanded our case selection, and reduced prosthetic reconstruction. It did not, however, protect frail, elderly patients reliably. Briefer, less traumatic operations may be needed for this cohort.