Defining Pathologic Upstaging in cT1b Esophageal Cancer: Should We Consider Neoadjuvant Therapy?

INTRODUCTION: Neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy (NCRT) for cT1b esophageal cancer is not recommended despite the risk of pathologic upstaging with increased depth of penetration. We aimed to (1) define the rate of and factors associated with pathologic upstaging, (2) describe current trends in treatments, and (3) compare overall survival (OS) with and without NCRT for surgically resected cT1b lesions. METHODS: We used the 2020 National Cancer Database to identify patients with cT1b N0 esophageal cancer with or without pathologic upstaging who underwent removal of their tumor. We built multivariable logistic regression models to assess factors associated with pathologic upstaging. Survival was compared using log-rank analysis and modeled using multivariable Cox proportional hazards regressions. RESULTS: Out of 1106 patients with cT1b esophageal cancer, 17.3% (N = 191) had pathologic upstaging. A higher tumor grade (P = 0.002), greater tumor size (P < 0.001), and presence of lympho-vascular invasion (P < 0.001) were associated with pathologic upstaging. 8.0% (N = 114) of patients were treated with NCRT. Five-y OS was 49.4% for patients who received NCRT compared to 67.2% for upfront esophagectomy (P < 0.05). Pathologic upstaging was associated with decreased OS (pathologic upstaging 43.7% versus no pathologic upstaging 67.7%) (hazard ratio 2.12 [95% confidence interval, 1.70-2.65; P < 0.001]). Compared to esophagectomy, endoscopic local tumor excision was associated with a decreased OS (hazard ratio 1.50 [95% confidence interval, 1.19-1.89; P = 0.001]). CONCLUSIONS: Pathologic upstaging of cT1b lesions is associated with decreased OS. Esophagectomy is associated with a survival benefit over endoscopic local tumor excision for these lesions. NCRT is not associated with an increase in OS in cT1b lesions compared to upfront esophagectomy.

Challenges in Predicting Discharge Disposition for Trauma and Emergency General Surgery Patients.

BACKGROUND: Changes in discharge disposition and delays in discharge negatively impact the patient and hospital system. Our objectives were1 to determine the accuracy with which trauma and emergency general surgery (TEGS) providers could predict the discharge disposition for patients and2 determine the factors associated with incorrect predictions. METHODS: Discharge dispositions and barriers to discharge for 200 TEGS patients were predicted individually by members of the multidisciplinary TEGS team within 24 h of patient admission. Univariate analyses and multivariable logistic least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regressions determined the associations between patient characteristics and correct predictions. RESULTS: A total of 1,498 predictions of discharge disposition were made by the multidisciplinary TEGS team for 200 TEGS patients. Providers correctly predicted 74% of discharge dispositions. Prediction accuracy was not associated with clinical experience or job title. Incorrect predictions were independently associated with older age (OR 0.98; P < 0.001), trauma admission as compared to emergency general surgery (OR 0.33; P < 0.001), higher Injury Severity Scores (OR 0.96; P < 0.001), longer lengths of stay (OR 0.90; P < 0.001), frailty (OR 0.43; P = 0.001), ICU admission (OR 0.54; P < 0.001), and higher Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II scores (OR 0.94; P = 0.006). CONCLUSION: The TEGS team can accurately predict the majority of discharge dispositions. Patients with risk factors for unpredictable dispositions should be flagged to better allocate appropriate resources and more intensively plan their discharges.

Electronic Medical Record Versus Bedside Assessment: How to Evaluate Frailty in Trauma and Emergency General Surgery Patients?

BACKGROUND: Screening patients for frailty is traditionally done at the bedside. However, recent electronic medical record (EMR)-based, comorbidity-focused frailty assessments have been developed. Our objective was to determine how a common bedside frailty assessment, the trauma and emergency surgery (TEGS) frailty index (FI), compares to an EMR-based frailty assessment in predicting geriatric TEGS outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed our quality improvement project database consisting of TEGS patients ≥ 65 y old. Patients were screened with the TEGS FI, a 15-question bedside assessment, including comorbidities, physical activity, emotional health, and nutrition. Six of 15 items were retrievable from the enterprise data warehouse (EDW), storing all EMR data from Northwestern Memorial Hospital, and use to calculate the EDW frailty score. Patient characteristics and outcomes were compared between different groups. RESULTS: Two hundred thirty-six geriatric TEGS patients were included, of which 75 (31.8%) were TEGS FI frail and 60 (25.4%) were EDW frail. TEGS FI frail patients had increased length of stay (LOS), loss of independence (LOI), and complications compared to TEGS FI nonfrail patients. EDW frail patients had higher LOS and complications than EDW nonfrail patients but similar LOI. TEGS FI and EDW frail patients had similar outcomes except TEGS FI-only patients more often have LOI. CONCLUSIONS: Bedside frailty assessments and EMR-based assessments are both effective in identifying geriatric TEGS patients at risk for increased LOS and complications. However, bedside frailty screening was better at identifying patients who have LOI and may be a more appropriate choice when screening for frailty.

High Mitotic Rate Predicts Sentinel Lymph Node Involvement in Thin Melanomas.

BACKGROUND: Indications for sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy in the population with thin melanoma have frequently changed over time. The objective of our study was to evaluate T1 melanoma pathologic features predictive of SLN positivity with a primary focus on identifying a specific mitotic value that is most predictive of lymph node disease. Further detailed predictive features would help physicians select patients with thin melanoma for SLN biopsy. METHODS: The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database was queried for all patients diagnosed with trunk or extremity cutaneous melanoma with ≤1 mm depth who underwent SLN biopsy between the years of 2010 and 2013. Patient demographics and tumor characteristics including depth, mitotic rate (MR), ulceration, and tumor location were evaluated. MR was dichotomized at multiple cut points to identify the ideal number of mitosis for MR as a predictor of SLN status. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to identify the factors affecting nodal positivity and the impact of MR threshold. Kaplan-Meir curves were used for overall survival (OS) analysis. RESULTS: Factors significantly associated with SLN positivity in the entire cohort included MR (P < 0.001, OR 1.24, 95% CI 1.18-1.31), tumor location (P = 0.017, OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.07-2.05), and ulceration (P < 0.001, OR 2.01, 95% CI 1.39-2.93,). An MR ≥ 4 was significant for SLN positivity (P = 0.049, OR 1.08, 95% CI 1.01-1.38). Mean OS was 46.7 mo for MR < 4 compared with 43.2 mo for MR ≥ 4 (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: MR ≥ 4 was significant and associated with SLN positivity in thin melanomas and asulceration. Thus, MR ≥ 4 should be considered as an indication for SLN biopsy in thin melanoma.

Gender Differences in Utilization of Duty-hour Regulations, Aspects of Burnout, and Psychological Well-being Among General Surgery Residents in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to (1) assess differences in how male and female general surgery residents utilize duty-hour regulations and experience aspects of burnout and psychological well-being, and (2) to explore reasons why these differing experiences exist. BACKGROUND: There may be differences in how women and men enter, experience, and leave residency programs. METHODS: A total of 7395 residents completed a survey (response rate = 99%). Logistic regression models were developed to examine the association between gender and resident outcomes. Semistructured interviews were conducted with 42 faculty and 56 residents. Transcripts were analyzed thematically using a constant comparative approach. RESULTS: Female residents reported more frequently staying in the hospital >28 hours or working >80 hours in a week (≥3 times in a month, P < 0.001) and more frequently feeling fatigued and burned out from their work (P < 0.001), but less frequently "treating patients as impersonal objects" or "not caring what happens" to them (P < 0.001). Women reported more often having experienced many aspects of poor psychological well-being such as feeling unhappy and depressed or thinking of themselves as worthless (P < 0.01). In adjusted analyses, associations remained significant. Themes identified in the qualitative analysis as possible contributory factors to gender differences include a lack of female mentorship/leadership, dual-role responsibilities, gender blindness, and differing pressures and approaches to patient care. CONCLUSIONS: Female residents report working more, experiencing certain aspects of burnout more frequently, and having poorer psychological well-being. Qualitative themes provide insights into possible cultural and programmatic shifts to address the concerns for female residents.

Developing an Educational and Decision Support Tool for Stage I Lung Cancer Using Decision Science.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines recommend shared decision-making about treatment options for high-risk, operable stage I lung cancer. Patient decision aids can facilitate shared decision-making; however, their development, implementation, and evaluation in routine clinical practice presents numerous challenges and opportunities. METHODS: The purpose of this review is to reflect on the process of tool development; identify the challenges associated with meeting the needs of patients, clinicians from multiple disciplines, and institutional workflow during implementation; and propose recommendations for future clinicians who wish to develop, refine, or implement similar tools into routine care. RESULTS: In this review, we: (1) discuss guidelines for decision aid development; (2) describe how we applied those to create an education and decision support tool for patients with clinical stage I lung cancer deciding between radiation therapy and surgical resection; and (3) highlight challenges in implementing and evaluating the tool. CONCLUSIONS: We provide recommendations for those seeking to develop, refine, or implement similar tools into routine care.

Pilot Study of Patient-Reported Outcomes in Patients With Esophageal Cancer After Esophagectomy.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are critical measures of patient well-being after esophagectomy. In this pilot study, we assessed PROs before and after esophagectomy using the Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) to assess patient recovery after surgery. METHODS: We prospectively collected PROMIS dyspnea severity, physical function, and pain interference measures from patients with esophageal cancer undergoing esophagectomy (2017-2020). We merged these data with our institutional Society of Thoracic Surgery esophagectomy database. We used linear mixed-effect multivariable models to assess changes in PROMIS scores (least square mean [LSM] differences) preoperatively and postoperatively at 1 and 6 months. RESULTS: The study included 112 patients undergoing esophagectomy. Pain interference, physical function, and dyspnea severity scores were significantly worse 1 month after surgery. While physical function and dyspnea severity scores returned to baseline 6 months after surgery, pain interference scores remained persistently worse (LSM difference, 2.7 ± 2.5; P = .036). PROMIS scores were further assessed among patients undergoing transhiatal esophagectomy compared with transthoracic esophagectomy. Physical function and dyspnea severity scores were similar between the groups at each assessment. However, pain interference scores were persistently better among patients undergoing THE at both 1 month (LSM difference, 6.5 ± 5.1; P = .013) and 6 months after surgery (LSM difference, 5.2 ± 3.9; P = .008). CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study assessing PROMIS scores after esophagectomy for cancer reveals that pain is a persistently reported symptom up to 6 months after surgery, particularly among patients receiving transthoracic esophagectomy.

Prevalence of cigarette and e-cigarette use among U.S. adults eligible for lung cancer screening based on updated USPSTF guidelines.

BACKGROUND: The United States Preventative Services Taskforce recently updated lung cancer screening guidelines for U.S. adults with high-risk smoking histories. This has generated a previously undescribed patient population in which the prevalence of cigarette and e-cigarette use has not been described. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional study using population-based data from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (2017-2018). We defined lung cancer screening eligibility as adults 50-80 years old with ≥ 20 pack-year smoking history who were currently smoking or quit within the last 15 years. We assessed several smoking-related outcomes including current cigarette use, ever e-cigarette use, and current e-cigarette use among respondents. RESULTS: Among 7541 screening-eligible adults, current cigarette use was reported by 3604 (47.8%) participants. Ever and current e-cigarette use were reported by 3003 (39.8%) and 670 (8.9%) participants, respectively. Compared to individuals who were previously eligible for screening, individuals newly eligible for screening (i.e., between 50 and 55 years old with a 20-30 pack-year smoking history) were more likely to currently smoke (aOR 1.828, 95% CI 1.649-2.026, p < 0.001). While newly eligible respondents were more likely to report a history of ever using an e-cigarette (aOR 1.144, 95% CI 1.034-1.266, p = 0.009), current e-cigarette use was similar in this group compared to those individuals who were previously screening-eligible (aOR 1.014, 95% CI 0.844-1.219, p = 0.88). CONCLUSIONS: Cigarette and e-cigarette exposure are common among U.S. adults who are eligible for lung cancer screening. Expanded USPSTF criteria will capture a patient population with greater exposure to both of these products.

Association between lung cancer screening and smoking cessation.

INTRODUCTION: Adults with high-risk smoking histories benefit from annual lung cancer screening. It is unclear if there is an association between lung cancer screening and smoking cessation among U.S. adults who receive screening. METHODS: We performed this population-based cross-sectional study using data from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (2017-2020). We defined individuals eligible for lung cancer screening as adults 55-80 years old with ≥ 30 pack-year smoking history who were currently smoking or quit within the last 15 years. We assessed the association between lung cancer screening and current smoking status. RESULTS: Between 2017 and 2020, 12,382 participants met screening criteria. Current smoking was reported by 5685 (45.9 %) participants, of whom 40.4 % (2298) reported a cessation attempt in the prior year. Lung cancer screening was reported by only 2022 (16.3 %) eligible participants. Lung cancer screening was associated with lower likelihood of currently smoking (odds ratio [OR] 0.705, 95 % CI 0.626-0.793) compared to individuals who did not receive screening. Screening was also associated with higher likelihood of reporting a cessation attempt in the prior year (OR 1.562, 95 % CI 1.345-1.815) compared to individuals who did not receive screening. CONCLUSIONS: Receipt of lung cancer screening was associated with lower smoking rates and more frequent cessation attempts among U.S. adults. Better implementation of lung cancer screening programs is critical and may profoundly increase smoking cessation in this population at risk of developing lung cancer.

Long-term patient-reported outcomes after non-small cell lung cancer resection.

OBJECTIVES: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are critical tools for evaluating patients before and after lung cancer resection. In this study, we assessed patient-reported pain, dyspnea, and functional status up to 1 year postoperatively. METHODS: This study included patients who underwent surgery for non-small cell lung cancer at a single institution (2017-2020). We collected PROs using the National Institutes of Health Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS). Data were prospectively collected and merged with our institutional Society of Thoracic Surgeons data. Using multivariable linear mixed effect models, we compared PROMIS scores for preoperative and several postoperative visits. RESULTS: From 2017 until 2020, 334 patients underwent lung cancer resection with completed PROMIS assessments. Pain interference, physical function, and dyspnea severity scores were worse 1 month after surgery (P < .001). Pain interference and physical function scores returned to baseline by 6 months after surgery. However, dyspnea severity scores remained persistently worse up to 1 year after surgery (1-month difference, 8.8 ± 1.9; 6-month difference, 3.6 ± 2.2; 1-year difference, 4.9 ± 2.8; P < .001). Patients who received a thoracotomy had worse physical function and pain interference scores 1 month after surgery compared with patients who received a minimally invasive operation; however, there were no differences in PROs by 6 months after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: PROs are important metrics for assessing patients before and after lung cancer resection. Patients may report persistent dyspnea up to 1 year after resection. Additionally, patients undergoing thoracotomy initially report worse pain and physical function but these impairments improve by 6 months after surgery.

Travel distance and its interaction with patient and hospital factors in pancreas cancer care.

BACKGROUND: Although volume-outcome literature supports regionalization for complex procedures, travel may be burdensome. We assessed the relationship between overall survival and travel distance for patients undergoing pancreatic resection for adenocarcinoma. METHODS: We analyzed the Fall 2018 National Cancer Database Public Use File. We defined distance traveled as a categorical variable (<12.5 miles, 12.5-50mi, and >50mi). We analyzed overall survival (OS) as a function of distance traveled using the log rank test and Cox proportional hazards models; we estimated stratified models to assess for interaction between distance and other relevant covariates. RESULTS: In adjusted analysis of 39,089 patients, greater distance was associated with decreased OS (p = 0.0029). We found interactions between distance and center type, comorbidities, and age. Distance traveled was a negative factor for patients treated at low-volume academic centers (but not high-volume academic or non-academic centers). Additionally, distance traveled was a negative factor for OS in young, healthy patients but not geriatric, ill patients. CONCLUSION: Traveling more than 12.5 miles for pancreatic resection was associated with worse OS. Prior to regionalization, evaluation of local resources may be necessary.

Travel distance and overall survival in hepatocellular cancer care.

BACKGROUND: Our objective was to assess the relationship between overall survival (OS) and distance travelled to the treating facility for patients undergoing liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma and to determine whether this relationship was dependent upon the structural factors of the treating facility. METHODS: Using National Cancer Database, we focused on extremes of travel: Local (<12.5 miles to treating facility) and Travel (≥50 miles). We analyzed OS with Cox models; we estimated stratified models to assess interaction between distance and facility characteristics (volume, academic status). RESULTS: We included 6860 patients. After correction for confounding, distance travelled was not associated with OS (p = 0.444). However, Travel patients treated at high-volume, academic centers had worse OS compared to Local patients (HR 1.54, 95%CI 1.07-2.21); this association was not seen for patients treated at low volume, academic centers (p = 0.708) high volume non-academic centers (p = 0.174) or low volume non-academic centers (p = 515). CONCLUSION: For those patients treated at high-volume, academic centers, living far from the facility was associated with worse OS. The reasons for this association should be investigated further.

Analysis of Delayed Surgical Treatment and Oncologic Outcomes in Clinical Stage I Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

Importance: The association between delayed surgical treatment and oncologic outcomes in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is poorly understood given that prior studies have used imprecise definitions for the date of cancer diagnosis. Objective: To use a uniform method to quantify surgical treatment delay and to examine its association with several oncologic outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study was conducted using a novel data set from the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) system. Included patients had clinical stage I NSCLC and were undergoing resection from 2006 to 2016 within the VHA system. Time to surgical treatment (TTS) was defined as the time between preoperative diagnostic computed tomography imaging and surgical treatment. We evaluated the association between TTS and several delay-associated outcomes using restricted cubic spline functions. Data analyses were performed in November 2021. Exposure: Wait time between cancer diagnosis and surgical treatment (ie, TTS). Main Outcomes and Measures: Several delay-associated oncologic outcomes, including pathologic upstaging, resection with positive margins, and recurrence, were assessed. We also assessed overall survival. Results: Among 9904 patients who underwent surgical treatment for clinical stage I NSCLC, 9539 (96.3%) were men, 4972 individuals (50.5%) were currently smoking, and the mean (SD) age was 67.7 (7.9) years. The mean (SD) TTS was 70.1 (38.6) days. TTS was not associated with increased risk of pathologic upstaging or positive margins. Recurrence was detected in 4158 patients (42.0%) with median (interquartile range) follow-up of 6.15 (2.51-11.51) years. Factors associated with increased risk of recurrence included younger age (hazard ratio [HR] for every 1-year increase in age, 0.992; 95% CI, 0.987-0.997; P = .003), higher Charlson Comorbidity Index score (HR for every 1-unit increase in composite score, 1.055; 95% CI, 1.037-1.073; P < .001), segmentectomy (HR vs lobectomy, 1.352; 95% CI, 1.179-1.551; P < .001) or wedge resection (HR vs lobectomy, 1.282; 95% CI, 1.179-1.394; P < .001), larger tumor size (eg, 31-40 mm vs <10 mm; HR, 1.209; 95% CI, 1.051-1.390; P = .008), higher tumor grade (eg, II vs I; HR, 1.210; 95% CI, 1.085-1.349; P < .001), lower number of lymph nodes examined (eg, ≥10 vs <10; HR, 0.866; 95% CI, 0.803-0.933; P < .001), higher pathologic stage (III vs I; HR, 1.571; 95% CI, 1.351-1.837; P < .001), and longer TTS, with increasing risk after 12 weeks. For each week of surgical delay beyond 12 weeks, the hazard for recurrence increased by 0.4% (HR, 1.004; 95% CI, 1.001-1.006; P = .002). Factors associated with delayed surgical treatment included African American race (odds ratio [OR] vs White race, 1.267; 95% CI, 1.112-1.444; P < .001), higher area deprivation index [ADI] score (OR for every 1 unit increase in ADI score, 1.005; 95% CI, 1.002-1.007; P = .002), lower hospital case load (OR for every 1-unit increase in case load, 0.998; 95% CI, 0.998-0.999; P = .001), and year of diagnosis, with less recent procedures more likely to have delay (OR for each additional year, 0.900; 95% CI, 0.884-0.915; P < .001). Patients with surgical treatment within 12 weeks of diagnosis had significantly better overall survival than those with procedures delayed more than 12 weeks (HR, 1.132; 95% CI, 1.064-1.204; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: Using a more precise definition for TTS, this study found that surgical procedures delayed more than 12 weeks were associated with increased risk of recurrence and worse survival. These findings suggest that patients with clinical stage I NSCLC should undergo expeditious treatment within that time frame.

A National Mixed-Methods Evaluation of Preparedness for General Surgery Residency and the Association With Resident Burnout.

Importance: Differences in medical school experiences may affect how prepared residents feel themselves to be as they enter general surgery residency and may contribute to resident burnout. Objectives: To assess preparedness for surgical residency, to identify factors associated with preparedness, to examine the association between preparedness and burnout, and to explore resident and faculty perspectives on resident preparedness. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used convergent mixed-methods analysis of data from a survey of US general surgery residents delivered at the time of the 2017 American Board of Surgery In-Training Examination (January 26 to 31, 2017) in conjunction with qualitative interviews of residents and program directors conducted as part of the Flexibility in Duty Hour Requirements for Surgical Trainees (FIRST) trial. A total of 262 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-approved US general surgery residency programs participated. Survey data were collected from 3693 postgraduate year (PGY) 1 and PGY2 surgical residents (response rate, 99%) and 98 interviews were conducted with residents and faculty from September 1 to December 15, 2018. Data were analyzed from June 1, 2017, to February 15, 2018. Main Outcomes and Measures: Hierarchical regression models were developed to examine factors associated with preparedness and to assess the association between preparedness and resident burnout. Qualitative interviews were conducted to identify themes associated with preparation for residency. Results: Of the 3693 PGY1 and PGY2 residents who participated (2258 male [61.1%]), 1775 (48.1%) reported feeling unprepared for residency. Approximately half of surgery residents took overnight call infrequently (≤2 per month) during their core medical student clerkship (1904 [51.6%]) or their subinternship (1600 [43.3%]); 524 (14.2%) took no call during their core clerkship. In multivariable analysis, residents were more likely to report feeling unprepared for residency if they were female (odds ratio [OR], 1.34; 95% CI, 1.15-1.57) or did not take call as a medical student (OR for 0 vs >4 calls, 2.72; 95% CI, 2.10-3.52). Residents who did not complete a subinternship were less likely to report feeling prepared for residency (OR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.48-0.96). Feeling adequately prepared for residency was associated with a nearly 2-fold lower risk of experiencing burnout symptoms (OR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.48-0.68). In interviews, the dominant themes associated with preparedness included the following: (1) various regulations limit the medical school experience, (2) overnight call facilitates preparation and selection of a specialty compatible with their preferences, and (3) adequate perceptions of residency improve expectations, resulting in improved preparedness, lower burnout rates, and lower risk of attrition. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study, the perception of feeling unprepared was associated with inadequate exposure to resident responsibilities while in medical school. These findings suggest that effective preparation of medical students for residency may result in lower rates of subsequent burnout.

A comprehensive national survey on thoughts of leaving residency, alternative career paths, and reasons for staying in general surgery training.

BACKGROUND: General surgery residencies continue to experience high levels of attrition. METHODS: Survey of general surgery residents administered with the 2018 American Board of Surgery In-Training Examination. Outcomes were consideration of leaving residency, potential alternative career paths, and reasons for staying in residency. RESULTS: Among 7,409 residents, 930 (12.6%) reported considering leaving residency over the last year. Residents were more likely to consider other general surgery programs (46.2%) if PGY 2/3 (OR: 1.93, 95%CI 1.34-2.77) or reporting frequent duty hour violations (OR: 1.58, 95%CI 1.12-2.24). Consideration of other specialties (47.0%) was more likely if dissatisfied with being a surgeon (OR 2.86, 95%CI 1.92-4.26). Residents were more likely to consider leaving medicine (49.7%) if female (OR: 1.54, 95%CI 1.16-2.06) or dissatisfied with a surgical career (OR: 2.81, 95%CI 1.85-4.27). Common reasons for remaining in residency included a sense of too much invested to leave (65.3%) and career satisfaction (55.5%). CONCLUSION: Profiles of trainees considering leaving residency exist based on factors associated with alternative careers. This may be a target for future interventions to reduce attrition.

Survival after adjuvant radiation therapy in localized small cell lung cancer treated with complete resection.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether there is an overall survival (OS) benefit to the addition of thoracic radiation therapy (RT) following R0 resection of pathologic (p) T1 or pT2 N0 M0 small cell lung cancer. METHODS: Using the National Cancer Database, we performed a retrospective cohort analysis. Patients who underwent R0 resection for pT1 or p2 N0 M0 small cell lung cancer, stratified by receipt of adjuvant thoracic RT, were compared on the basis of OS using hierarchical Cox Proportional hazards models. RESULTS: Of 4969 patients diagnosed with pT1or pT2 N0 M0 SCLC from 2004 to 2014, 1617 (33%) underwent R0 resection of their primary tumor; of these resected patients, 146 (9.0%) had adjuvant thoracic RT. In unadjusted analysis, there was no significant difference in OS between groups (median survival: surgery alone, 62.2 months vs surgery+RT, 43.8 months; P = .1436). In multivariable analysis, RT was not associated with improved survival (P = .099). There was no significant difference in unadjusted or adjusted survival associated with receipt of RT in both a young and healthy cohort (P = .647 for unadjusted and P = .858 for adjusted) and a matched cohort (P = .867 and P = .954). In the matched cohort, improved OS was associated with younger patient age (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.07; 95% confidence interval, 1.04-1.10; P < .001), female sex (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.68, 95% confidence interval, 0.47-0.97; P = .035), and smaller tumors (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.02; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.03; P = .005). Having 2 or more comorbidities was associated with worse OS (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.16; 95% confidence interval, 1.21-3.86; P = .009). CONCLUSIONS: Although complete resection was accomplished in a minority of patients, for these patients, survival was good. The addition of thoracic RT to complete resection does not appear to confer additional survival benefit.