Primary Tumor Resection in Leiomyosarcoma Patients With Synchronous Isolated Lung Metastases: A National Cancer Database Study.

INTRODUCTION: Up to half of patients with leiomyosarcoma (LMS) present with distant metastases, most commonly in the lungs. Despite guidelines around managing metachronous oligometastatic disease, limited evidence exists for synchronous isolated lung metastases (SILMs). Our histology-specific study describes management patterns and outcomes for patients with LMS and SILM across disease sites. METHODS: We used the National Cancer Database to analyze patients with LMS of the retroperitoneum, extremity, trunk/chest/abdominal wall, and pelvis with SILM. Patients with extra-pulmonary metastases were excluded. We identified factors associated with primary tumor resection and receipt of metastasectomy. Outcomes included median, 1-year, and 5-year overall survival (OS) across treatment approaches using log-rank tests, Kaplan-Meier curves, and Cox proportional hazard models. RESULTS: We identified 629 LMS patients with SILM from 2004 to 2017. Patients were more likely to have resection of their primary tumor or lung metastases if treated at an academic center compared to a community cancer center. Five year OS for patients undergoing both primary tumor resection and metastasectomy was 20.9% versus 9.2% for primary tumor resection alone, and 2.6% for nonsurgical patients. Median OS for all-comers was 15.5 mo. Community treatment site, comorbidity score, and larger primary tumors were associated with worse survival. Chemotherapy, primary resection, and curative intent surgery predicted improved survival on multivariate Cox regression. CONCLUSIONS: An aggressive surgical approach to primary LMS with SILM was undertaken for select patients in our population and found to be associated with improved OS. This approach should be considered for suitable patients at high-volume centers.

Facilities that service economically advantaged neighborhoods perform surgical metastasectomy more often for patients with colorectal liver metastases.

BACKGROUND: Metastasectomy of isolated colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) requires significant clinical expertise and may not be readily available or offered. The authors hypothesized that hospitals that treat a greater percentage of patients from higher income catchment areas are more likely to perform metastasectomies regardless of patient or tumor characteristics. METHODS: Using the National Cancer Data Base, the authors classified facilities into facility income quartiles (FIQs) based on the percentage of patients from the wealthiest neighborhoods (by zip code). Quartile 1 included facilities with <2.1% of the patients residing within the highest income zip codes, quartile 2 included facilities with 2.2% to 15.6% of patients residing within the highest income zip codes, quartile 3 included facilities with 15.7% to 40.2% of patients residing within the highest income zip codes, and quartile 4 included facilities with 40.3% to 90.5% of patients residing within the highest income ZIP codes. Patient, tumor, and facility characteristics were analyzed using a multivariate logistic regression to identify associations between metastasectomy and FIQ. RESULTS: Patients with CRLM were more likely to undergo metastasectomy at facilities in the highest FIQ compared with the lowest FIQ (18% vs 11% in FIQ4; P = .001). This trend was not observed in the resection of primary tumors for nonmetastatic CRLM (rates of 95% vs 93%; P = .94). After adjusting for individual insurance status, distance traveled, zip code-level individual income, tumor, and host, patients who were treated at the highest FIQ facilities were found to be more likely to undergo metastasectomy (odds ratio, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.02-1.72 [P = .03]). CONCLUSIONS: Metastasectomy for CRLM is more likely to occur at facilities that serve a greater percentage of patients from high-income catchment areas, regardless of individual patient characteristics. This disparity uniquely affects those patients with advanced cancers for which specialized expertise for therapy is necessary.

Metastasis directed treatment of brain metastases from colorectal cancer - a Danish population-based cohort study.

Background: Brain metastases (BMs) are an uncommon presentation of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) with reported incidence of about 2-4%. Today, there is an increased awareness towards a metastasis directed treatment approach with either surgical resection, stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) or both. We examined patient characteristics and survival for patients treated with a localized modality for BM from CRC in a nationwide population-based study.Methods: A registry-based cohort study of all patients with a resected primary colorectal cancer and localized treatment of BM during 2000-2013. We computed descriptive statistics and analysed overall survival by the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression.Results: A total of 38131 patients had surgery for a primary CRC and 235 patients were recorded with a metastasis directed treatment for BM, comprising resection alone (n = 158), SRT alone (n = 51) and combined resection and SRT (n = 26). Rectal primary tumor (48.9% vs. 36.2%, p < .001) and lung metastasectomy (11.9 vs 2.8%, p < .001) were more frequent in the BM group. The median survival of patients receiving localized treatment for BM was 9.6 months (95% confidence interval (CI) 7.2-10.8). The 1- and 5-year overall survival were 41.7% (95% CI 35-48%) and 11.2% (95% CI 6.9-16.3%). In multivariate analysis, nodal stage was associated with increased mortality with a hazard ratio of 1.63 (95% CI 1.07-2.60, p = .03) for N2 stage with reference to N0.Conclusion: We report a median overall survival of 9.6 months for patients receiving localized treatment for BM from CRC. Lung metastases and rectal primary tumor are more common in the population treated for BM.

Racial and Socioeconomic Disparities in Access and Utilization of Adrenal Metastasectomy.

BACKGROUND: There is substantial evidence that resecting adrenal metastases can be safely accomplished and extend overall survival in select patients. However, patient access to this operation has not been studied at the population level. The purpose of this study was to determine differences in utilization rates of adrenal metastasectomy (ADMX) across patient populations. METHODS: The Healthcare Utilization Project National Inpatient Sample was used to identify patients who had adrenal metastases (ADM) and who underwent ADMX from 2007 to 2011. Patients were identified by ICD-9-CM diagnosis and procedure codes. Predictor variables included sex, race, median household income, and primary insurance payer. Primary outcomes included receiving an ADMX and same hospitalization mortality. Secondary outcomes included length of stay, infection, cardiac, pulmonary, and renal complications. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression models were used to identify statistical associations. RESULTS: 32,331 ADM and 1070 ADMX patients identified in the database. Despite similar comorbidities, Black patients had 0.30 (95% CI 0.21-0.41) lower odds to receive an ADMX compared to White patients. Medicaid patients had 0.38 (0.28-0.52) less odds and Private Insurance patients 1.18 (1.00-1.39) more odds to receive an ADMX compared to Medicare patients. Women had a 1.39 (1.22-1.58) higher odds ratio of undergoing ADMX compared to men. Of the ADMX cohort, there was no difference in same hospitalization mortality or surgical complications. CONCLUSIONS: Black and Medicaid patients underwent fewer adrenal metastasectomies despite similar comorbidities and postoperative outcomes. This suggests a potential disparity in access to this treatment that disproportionately affects Black and low-income patients, and prompts further study, outreach attempts, as well as, research into improving access.

Long-term outcomes and prognostic factors of pulmonary metastasectomy for osteosarcoma and soft tissue sarcoma.

BACKGROUND: The prognostic factors of pulmonary metastasectomy in patients with osteosarcoma and soft tissue sarcoma remain controversial. The purpose of our analysis was to explore the prognostic factors and outcomes of patients with osteosarcoma and soft tissue sarcoma who underwent pulmonary metastasectomy at our institution. METHODS: We reviewed the data of 44 patients who underwent resection of pulmonary metastases from 1996 to 2016 at our institution. The Kaplan-Meier method, log-rank test and multivariate Cox hazard model were used for comparison and survival analyses. RESULTS: There was no perioperative mortality. The median post-metastasectomy overall survival was 24.8 months, and the 5-year overall survival rate of all patients was 43.5%. The 5-year survival rate of the patients who underwent repeat thoracotomies was 60.0%. Incomplete resection, a largest tumor size > 2 cm and a disease-free interval < 12 months were associated with poor survival in multivariate analyses. Among eight patients, who underwent repeat pulmonary resection, two remain alive with no evidence of disease. These patients had the longest DFI and DFI-2 (time from first pulmonary metastasectomy to the diagnosis of recurrent pulmonary metastasis), respectively. CONCLUSION: The survival of patients with a relatively long disease-free interval, small tumor size and complete resection was favorable following the treatment of osteosarcoma and soft tissue sarcoma with pulmonary metastasectomy. Repeat pulmonary metastasectomies also provide favorable prognosis in select patients.

Role of metastasis-directed treatment in kidney cancer.

Despite the rapid elaboration of multiple, novel systemic agents introduced for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) in recent years, a durable complete response remains elusive with systemic therapy alone. Definitive treatment of the metastatic deposit remains the sole potentially curative option and is a cornerstone of mRCC therapy, offering potential for both local control and palliation of tumor-related symptoms. In this review, the evidence supporting the definitive treatment of mRCC is examined and summarized, including the use of surgical metastasectomy, thermal ablation, radiotherapy, and other minimally invasive options. Multimodal approaches, including the combination of metastasectomy with novel systemic agents, are discussed. Finally, the authors review considerations for patient selection for this type of therapy and summarize available risk-stratification tools that may help guide shared decision making.

Pancreaticoduodenectomy and metastasectomy for metastatic pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Various treatment options exist for patients with metastatic pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PNETs). Surgical resection with pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) typically reserved for patients with limited disease. Definitive data are lacking to support either the resection of primary PNET in the metastatic setting or for surgical debulking of metastatic lesions. METHODS: We conducted an analysis of the National Cancer Database (NCDB) using the pancreatic cancer Participant User File. Thirty- and 90-day mortality rates and survival rates were determined for patients undergoing PD for primary tumor resection and compared with patients who had no surgery or metastasectomy. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to compare survival time. Cox regression models were used to assess factors independently associated with overall survival time. RESULTS: Resection of the primary tumor or metastatic disease each significantly improved overall survival time compared with no resection. Adding metastasectomy to PD resulted in an incremental increase in overall survival time. Both PD and metastasectomy are independently associated with overall survival time. CONCLUSIONS: Our report highlights the potential for survival time benefit in appropriately selected patients who undergo PD in the setting of metastatic PNET.

The rise in metastasectomy across cancer types over the past decade.

BACKGROUND: Although studies of metastasectomy have been limited primarily to institutional experiences, reports of favorable long-term outcomes have generated increasing interest. In the current study, the authors attempted to define the national practice patterns in metastasectomy for 4 common malignancies with varying responsiveness to systemic therapy. METHODS: The National (Nationwide) Inpatient Sample was used to estimate the national incidence of metastasectomy for colorectal cancer, lung cancer, breast cancer, and melanoma from 2000 through 2011. Incidence-adjusted rates were determined for liver, lung, brain, small bowel, and adrenal metastasectomies. The average annual percentage change (AAPC) in metastasectomy by cancer type was calculated using joinpoint regression. RESULTS: Colorectal cancer was the most common indication for metastasectomy (87,407 cases; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 86,307-88,507 cases) followed by lung cancer (58,245 cases; 95% CI, 57,453-59,036 cases), breast cancer (26,271 cases; 95% CI, 25,672-26,870 cases), and melanoma (20,298 cases; 95% CI, 19,897-20,699 cases). Metastasectomy increased significantly for all cancer types over the study period: colorectal cancer (AAPC, 6.83; 95% CI, 5.7-7.9), lung cancer (AAPC, 5.8; 95% CI, 5.1-6.4), breast cancer (AAPC, 5.5; 95% CI, 3.7-7.3), and melanoma (AAPC, 4.03; 95% CI, 2.1-6.0). Despite an increasing number of comorbidities in patients undergoing metastasectomy (P<.05 for each cancer type), inpatient mortality rates after metastasectomy fell for all cancer types, most significantly for colorectal (AAPC, -5.49; 95% CI, -8.2 to -2.7) and lung (AAPC, -6.2; 95% CI, -11.7 to -0.3) cancers. The increasing performance of metastasectomy was largely driven by high-volume institutions, in which patients had a lower mean number of comorbidities (P<.01 for all cancer types) and lower inpatient mortality (P<.01 for all cancers except melanoma). CONCLUSIONS: From 2000 through 2011, the performance of metastasectomy increased substantially across common cancer types, notwithstanding various advances in systemic therapies. Metastasectomy was performed more safely, despite increasing patient comorbidity. High-volume institutions appeared to drive practice patterns.

Diagnosis, treatment and outcome of adrenocortical cancer.

BACKGROUND: Adrenocortical cancer (ACC) is a rare disease with a dismal prognosis. The majority of patients are diagnosed with advanced disease and raise difficult management challenges. METHODS: All references identified in PubMed, published between 2004 and 2014, using the keywords 'adrenocortical cancer' or 'adrenal surgery' or both, were uploaded into a database. The database was interrogated using keywords specific for each field studied. RESULTS: In all, 2049 publications were identified. There is ongoing debate about the feasibility and oncological outcomes of laparoscopic adrenalectomy for small ACCs, and data derived from institutional case series have failed to provide an evidence level above expert opinion. The use of mitotane (1-(2-chlorophenyl)-1-(4-chlorophenyl)-2,2-dichloroethane) in combination with chemotherapy in the treatment of metastatic disease has been assessed in an international randomized trial (FIRM-ACT trial) involving patients with ACC. Based on this trial, mitotane plus etoposide, doxorubicin and cisplatin is now the established first-line cytotoxic therapy owing to a higher response rate and longer median progression-free survival than achieved with streptozocin-mitotane. For patients with tumours smaller than 5 cm and with no signs of lymph node or distant metastases, survival is favourable with a median exceeding 10 years. However, the overall 5-year survival rate for all patients with ACC is only 30 per cent. CONCLUSION: Open and potentially laparoscopic adrenalectomy for selected patients is the main treatment for non-metastatic ACC, but the overall 5-year survival rate remains low.

Pulmonary metastasectomy: a call for better data collection, presentation and analysis.

A systematic review of the literature for outcomes in pulmonary metastasectomy has revealed the variability in reporting and the paucity of data that would allow a clear understanding of the effectiveness of this operation. The authors, a surgeon and a mathematician, start from the experience of assessing the evidence on which the practice of pulmonary metastasectomy is based and give some simple examples on a more adequate approach to the collection and analysis of surgical data and the importance of its correct interpretation. Retrospective data analysis is constrained by the availability of data. While this can give insight on certain aspects, it is important to discern what data are necessary to give a complete understanding of the effectiveness of a practice. Typically well designed prospective studies and randomised controlled trials with a pre-specified data collection plan give more complete, consistent and reliable data than follow-up or retrospective studies. Pulmonary metastasectomy lends itself well as an example of practice based on uncertain evidence and biased reporting. All the available published studies are follow-up studies, there is no randomised controlled trial, so no control data to estimate its treatment effect on patient's survival. The pool of colorectal or sarcoma patients from which patients are selected to have a pulmonary metastasectomy is never reported on, thus it is hard to estimate the degree of selection and the influence of the surgeon's decision.

Surgical resection of recurrent colonic cancer.

BACKGROUND: Locoregional recurrence of colonic cancer includes anastomotic recurrence, associated nodal masses, masses that involve the abdominal wall and pelvic masses. The aim of this study was to report the outcome of resection of such recurrences and to provide guidance on the management of this disease. METHODS: Patients were identified from a prospectively maintained database. Data were obtained on demographics, surgical procedure, morbidity, histopathology and outcome. Univariable and multivariable analyses of factors influencing survival were performed using stepwise Cox logistic regression. RESULTS: Forty-two patients (21 men; median age 61 (range 41-82) years) underwent resection of recurrent colonic cancer between 2003 and 2011. The median interval between resection of the primary and recurrent colonic tumour was 37·5 (interquartile range 7-91) months. The recurrences developed at the previous anastomosis (9 patients), elsewhere within the abdominal cavity or wall (8) and as discrete masses within the pelvic cavity (25). Eighteen of 42 patients underwent resection of hepatic or pulmonary metastases at some stage after resection of the primary tumour. Median survival was 29 months after R0 resection and 26 months after R1 resection of the recurrent tumour (P = 0·226). The survival benefit depended on the location of the recurrence (median survival after resection of recurrent disease: anastomotic 33 months, pelvic 26 months, abdominal 19 months; P = 0·010). CONCLUSION: This study described a classification system, management algorithm and prognostic factors for recurrent colonic cancer. The distribution of disease influenced survival. Long-term survival was achieved, including a subset of patients with drop metastases and/or previous metastasectomy.

Repeat liver resection for colorectal metastases.

BACKGROUND: Following resection of colorectal liver metastases (CLMs) up to 75 per cent of patients develop recurrent liver metastases. Although repeat resection remains the only curative therapy, data evaluating the outcome are deficient. This study analysed postoperative morbidity, mortality and independent predictors of survival following repeat resection of CLMs. METHODS: Data on surgical treatment of primary and recurrent CLMs between 1994 and 2010 were collected retrospectively, and compared with those for single hepatic resections carried out during the same period. Independent predictors of survival were evaluated by means of univariable and multivariable Cox regression models. RESULTS: In this interval 1026 primary resections of CLMs were performed and 94 patients underwent repeat CLM excision. Overall postoperative morbidity and mortality rates were low (15·8 and 1·3 per cent respectively), with no statistical difference in patients undergoing repeat surgery (P = 0·072). Compared with single liver resections, overall survival was improved in repeat resections (P = 0·003). Multivariable analysis revealed that size of primary CLM over 50 mm was an independent predictor of survival (hazard ratio (HR) 2·61; P = 0·008). Only major hepatic resection was associated with poorer outcome following repeat surgery (HR 2·62; P = 0·009). International Union Against Cancer stage, number of CLMs, age at surgery and need for intraoperative transfusion had no impact on survival after repeat resection. CONCLUSION: Recurrent CLM surgery is feasible with similar morbidity and mortality rates to those of initial or single CLM resections.

[Management pulmonary metastases: when operate?]. / Métastases pulmonaires: quelle place pour la chirurgie?

Thirty percent of patients suffering from malignant disease will develop pulmonary metastases. Effective chemotherapy is lacking for many of these tumors. Many studies suggest survival benefit in selected patients when pulmonary metastasectomy allows complete resection. Several operative approach may be offered in order to achieve complete resection and maximal lung sparring. Pre-operative workup must assess the control of the primary tumor and the possibility of performing complete resection. Minimally invasive approaches may offer better quality life and equivalent oncologic outcomes than open approach.

Surgical resection and survival outcomes in metastatic young adult colorectal cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of colorectal cancer in adults younger than age 50 has increased with rates expected to continue to increase over the next decade. The objective of this study is to examine the survival benefit of surgical resection (primary and/or metastatic) versus palliative therapy in this patient population. METHODS: We identified 6708 young adults aged 18-45 years diagnosed with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) from 2004 to 2015 from the SEER database. Overall survival (OS) was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier estimation, log rank test, and multivariate Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: Sixty-three percent of patients in our study underwent primary tumor resection (PTR), with 40% undergoing PTR alone and 23% undergoing both resection of primary disease and metastasectomy. The median OS for patients who underwent both PTR and metastasectomy was 36 months, compared to 13 months for those who did not receive any surgical intervention. The multivariate analysis showed significant OS benefit of receiving both PTR and metastasectomy (HR 0.34, 95% CI: 0.31-0.37, p < 0.001) compared to palliative therapy. Undergoing PTR only and metastasectomy only were also associated with improved OS (HR 0.46, 95% CI: 0.43-0.49, p < 0.001 and HR 0.64, 95% CI: 0.55-0.76, p < 0.001, respectively). CONCLUSION: This is the largest observational study to evaluate survival outcomes in young-onset mCRC patients and the role of surgical intervention of the primary and/or metastatic site. Our study provides evidence of statistically significant increase in OS for young mCRC patients who undergo surgical intervention of the primary and/or metastatic site.

Metastasectomy and BRAF mutation; an analysis of survival outcome in metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Resection of oligometastases improves survival in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). It is unclear whether the benefit is consistent for BRAF V600E mutant (MT) and wild type (WT) mCRC. This retrospective analysis explores the influence of BRAF MT on survival after metastasectomy. METHODS: Overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) for BRAF MT and WT mCRC were evaluated. Survival was also analyzed in the cohort of BRAF MT with or without metastasectomy. RESULTS: Five hundred and thirteen patients who had undergone metastasectomy were identified, 6% were BRAF-MT. Median age 63. Median OS in BRAF MT vs WT: 25.7 vs 48.5 months (hazard ratio [HR] 1.95; 1.18-3.22). However, difference was not significant in a multivariate model. Right primary tumor, intact primary, >1 metastatic site, non-R0 resection, peritoneal metastasis, and synchronous metastasis were independent predictors of worse OS. Among 364 patients with RFS data there was no difference between BRAF MT and WT (16 vs 19 months, p=0.09). In another cohort of 158 BRAF-MT patients, OS was significantly better after metastasectomy compared to "no metastasectomy" (HR 0.34; 0.18-0.65, P= 0.001). Proficient mismatch repair status showed a trend toward worse survival after metastasectomy in BRAF MT (HR 1.71, P = 0.08). CONCLUSION: OS did not differ after metastasectomy between BRAF MT and WT in a multivariate model. Median OS was >2 years in this study after metastasectomy among BRAFV600E MT patients suggesting a survival benefit of metastasectomy in this group where systemic therapeutic options are limited. Metastasectomy may be considered in carefully selected BRAF-MT patients.

FOLFOXIRI Versus Doublet Regimens in Right-Sided Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Focus on Subsequent Therapies and Impact on Overall Survival.

INTRODUCTION: It has been determined that right-sided metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) has a worse prognosis for overall survival (OS). Currently, there is no consensus on the best systemic regimen for treatment-naive right-sided tumors. We compared the impact of subsequent therapies on OS of patients treated with FOLFOXIRI (leucovorin, 5-fluorouracil, oxaliplatin, irinotecan) versus doublet regimens. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data of patients with treatment-naive right-sided mCRC who received FOLFOXIRI or doublet regimens between January 2001 to December 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. OS was compared between the two groups, and prognostic factors were assessed by multivariate analysis. RESULTS: A total of 196 patients were selected; 33 patients received FOLFOXIRI and 163 patients doublet therapy. Median follow-up was 82.3 months. The FOLFOXIRI cohort received fewer subsequent lines of therapies (61% vs. 78%, P = .043). The greater the number of subsequent lines of therapy, the lower the risk of death (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval] 0.67 [0.46-0.99], 0.62 [0.45-0.86], and 0.56 [0.39-0.81] for > 1, > 2, and > 3 lines, respectively). By multivariate analysis, metastasectomy and bevacizumab with subsequent lines of therapy were the variables with greatest positive impact on OS (respectively, hazard ratio [95% confidence interval] 0.54 [0.38-0.78] and 0.61 [0.44-0.84]). CONCLUSION: Patients with treatment-naive right-sided mCRC who received front-line FOLFOXIRI had a lower number of subsequent therapies than patients who received doublet regimens. Our findings highlight the relevance of the continuum of care in mCRC, regardless of the first-line regimen, and the importance of careful selection of patients for the FOLFOXIRI regimen.

Lung Metastasectomy Improves Survival in Patients Affected by Grade 2 and 3 Chondrosarcoma.

AIMS: The aim of this retrospective study is to evaluate the role of pulmonary metastasectomy (PM) in patients affected by lung metastasis (LM) of grade 2 and 3 chondrosarcoma (CS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study included 61 patients affected by LM. Patients unfit for PM were treated with chemotherapy and radiotherapy. RESULTS: The patients' mean age was 51 years, ranging from 17 to 84 years; 44 (66.7%) patients had grade 2 CS, while 17 (25.8%) patients had grade 3 CS. Fifty-one patients presented multiple nodules: 44 of those cases were bilateral LM (72.1%). Twenty-nine (47.5%) patients underwent PM, whereas 32 (52.5%) patients underwent chemotherapy and stereotactic radiotherapy alone. At the final follow-up (average of 83 months, range 13-298), 47 (77.0%) patients had died of the disease. A better post-relapse survival rate was observed in patients who underwent PM (55.1 vs. 13.1% at 5-year follow-up, p < 0.001) and in patients with unilateral LM (60.4 vs. 25.6% at 5-year follow-up, p = 0.016). The number of LM also played a prognostic role. CONCLUSIONS: Until significant improvements in chemotherapy can be made, PM can be a valid option in the attempt to improve post-metastatic survival.

Curative-intent pancreas resection for pancreatic metastases: surgical and oncological results.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic metastasis is a rare cause for pancreas surgery and often a sign of advanced disease no chance of curative-intent treatment. However, surgery for metastasis might be a promising approach to improve patients' survival. The aim of this study was to analyze the surgical and oncological outcome after pancreatic resection of pancreatic metastasis. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort analysis of a prospectively-managed database of patients undergoing pancreatic resection at the University of Freiburg Pancreatic Center from 2005 to 2017. RESULTS: In total, 29 of 1297 (2%) patients underwent pancreatic resection due to pancreatic metastasis. 20 (69%) patients showed metastasis of renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), followed by metastasis of melanoma (n = 5, 17%), colon cancer (n = 2, 7%), ovarian cancer (n = 1, 3%) and neuroendocrine tumor of small intestine (n = 1, 3%). Two (7%) patients died perioperatively. Median follow-up was 76.4 (range 21-132) months. 5-year and overall survival rates were 82% (mRCC 89% vs. non-mRCC 67%) and 70% (mRCC 78% vs. non-mRCC 57%), respectively. Patients with mRCC had shorter disease-free survival (14 vs. 22 months) than patients with other primary tumor entities. CONCLUSION: Despite malignant disease, overall survival of patients after metastasectomy for pancreatic metastasis is acceptable. Better survival appears to be associated with the primary tumor entity. Further research should focus on molecular markers to elucidate the mechanisms of pancreatic metastasis to choose the suitable therapeutic approach for the individual patient.

Outcomes of complete metastasectomy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients: The Canadian Kidney Cancer information system experience.

BACKGROUND: Surgical resection of metastasis can be integrated in the management of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) as it can contribute to delay disease progression and improve survival. OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the impact of complete metastasectomy in mRCC patients using real-world pan-Canadian data. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: The Canadian Kidney Cancer information system (CKCis) database was used to select patients who were diagnosed with mRCC between January 2011 and April 2019. To minimize selection bias, each patient having received a complete metastasectomy was matched with up to 4 patients not treated with metastasectomy. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Overall survival (OS) was calculated from the date of metastasectomy or selection, to death from any cause. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to assess the impact of the metastasectomy while adjusting for potential confounding variables. RESULTS: A total of 229 patients undergoing complete metastasectomy were matched with 803 patients not treated with metastasectomy. After matching, baseline characteristics were well balanced between groups. After 12 months, the proportion of patients that were still alive was 96.0% and 89.8% in the complete metastasectomy and its matched group, respectively; the 5-year OS were 63.2% and 51.4%, respectively. Multivariate analysis performed in the matched cohort revealed that patients who underwent complete metastasectomy had a lower risk of mortality compared to patients who did not undergo metastasectomy (hazard ratio: 0.41, 95% confidence interval:0.27-0.63). CONCLUSION: Our study found that patients who underwent complete metastasectomy have a longer overall survival and a longer time to initiation of targeted therapy compared to patients not receiving metastasectomy. These findings should support aggressive resection of metastasis in selected patients.