National guideline concordance and outcomes for pathologic N2 disease in non-small cell lung cancer.

Background: Real-world treatment practices for positive mediastinal nodal disease in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) continues to vary despite guidelines. We aim to assess national trends in the treatment of pathologic-N2 disease, and evaluate the association with clinical nodal staging and timing of systemic therapy. Methods: The National Cancer Database was queried for patients with NSCLC who underwent lobectomy and had pathologic-N2 disease from 2010-2017. National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guideline concordance was evaluated. cN2 patients were analyzed based on timing of systemic therapy and response. Multivariable logistic regression evaluated outcomes by type of systemic therapy. Survival analysis utilized Cox proportional hazards regression and Kaplan-Meier methods. Results: 10,225 patients met inclusion criteria. Fifty-four percent of patients were understaged prior to surgery as either cN0 or cN1. Of clinically staged N2 patients, 56% received NCCN recommended neoadjuvant therapy. Annual guideline concordance increased until 2016 to a max of 62.9%. Neoadjuvant and adjuvant systemic therapy showed an overall survival benefit compared with no systemic therapy (HR 0.54 & 0.57), but no difference when compared against each other. Complete response after neoadjuvant therapy was associated with improved survival (5-year OS 56.1%, P<0.001), while partial response, no-response, and adjuvant therapy were similar. All systemic treatment strategies improved survival compared with no systemic therapy (5-year OS 24.5%). Conclusions: Guideline concordance for treatment of cN2 disease has been increasing, but still not followed in over 1/3 of patients. Responsiveness to neoadjuvant therapy appears to be a predictor of survival, and may become a prognostic adjunct for determining which patients would benefit from additional systemic therapy.

COVID-19 guidance for triage of operations for thoracic malignancies: A consensus statement from Thoracic Surgery Outcomes Research Network.

The extraordinary demands of managing the COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted the world's ability to care for patients with thoracic malignancies. As a hospital's COVID-19 population increases and hospital resources are depleted, the ability to provide surgical care is progressively restricted, forcing surgeons to prioritize among their cancer populations. Representatives from multiple cancer, surgical, and research organizations have come together to provide a guide for triaging patients with thoracic malignancies as the impact of COVID-19 evolves as each hospital.

Clinically Integrated Physical Therapist Practice in Cancer Care: A New Comprehensive Approach.

Best practice recommendations in cancer care increasingly call for integrated rehabilitation services to address physical impairments and disability. These recommendations have languished primarily due to a lack of pragmatic, generalizable intervention models. This perspective paper proposes a clinically integrated physical therapist (CI-PT) model that enables flexible and scalable services for screening, triage, and intervention addressing functional mobility. The model is based on (1) a CI-PT embedded in cancer care provider clinics, and (2) rehabilitation across the care continuum determined by the patient's level of functional mobility. The CI-PT model includes regular screening of functional mobility in provider clinics via a patient-reported mobility measure-the Activity Measure for Post-Acute Care, a brief physical therapy evaluation tailored to the specific functional needs of the individual-and a tailored, skilled physical therapist intervention based on functional level. The CI-PT model provides a pragmatic, barrier-free, patient-centric, data-driven approach to integrating rehabilitation as part of standard care for survivors of cancer. The model standardizes CI-PT practice and may be sufficiently agile to provide targeted interventions in widely varying cancer settings and populations. Therefore, it may be ideal for wide implementation among outpatient oncological settings. Implementation of this model requires a shared approach to care that includes physical therapists, rehabilitation administrators, cancer care providers, and cancer center administrators.

Preoperative Immunonutrition and Elective Colorectal Resection Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Randomized controlled trials demonstrate the efficacy of arginine-enriched nutritional supplements (immunonutrition) in reducing complications after surgery. The effectiveness of preoperative immunonutrition has not been evaluated in a community setting. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to determine whether immunonutrition before elective colorectal surgery improves outcomes in the community at large. DESIGN: This is a prospective cohort study with a propensity score-matched comparative effectiveness evaluation. SETTINGS: This study was conducted in Washington State hospitals in the Surgical Care Outcomes Assessment Program from 2012 to 2015. PATIENTS: Adults undergoing elective colorectal surgery were selected. INTERVENTIONS: Surgeons used a preoperative checklist that recommended that patients take oral immunonutrition (237 mL, 3 times daily) for 5 days before elective colorectal resection. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Serious adverse events (infection, anastomotic leak, reoperation, and death) and prolonged length of stay were the primary outcomes measured. RESULTS: Three thousand three hundred seventy-five patients (mean age 59.9 ± 15.2 years, 56% female) underwent elective colorectal surgery. Patients receiving immunonutrition more commonly were in a higher ASA class (III-V, 44% vs 38%; p = 0.01) or required an ostomy (18% vs 14%; p = 0.02). The rate of serious adverse events was 6.8% vs 8.3% (p = 0.25) and the rate of prolonged length of stay was 13.8% vs 17.3% (p = 0.04) in those who did and did not receive immunonutrition. After propensity score matching, covariates were similar among 960 patients. Although differences in serious adverse events were nonsignificant (relative risk, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.49-1.16), prolonged length of stay (relative risk, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.58-1.01 p = 0.05) was lower in those receiving immunonutrition. LIMITATIONS: Patient compliance with the intervention was not measured. Residual confounding, including surgeon-level heterogeneity, may influence estimates of the effect of immunonutrition. CONCLUSIONS: Reductions in prolonged length of stay, likely related to fewer complications, support the use of immunonutrition in quality improvement initiatives related to elective colorectal surgery. This population-based study supports previous trials of immunonutrition, but shows a lower magnitude of benefit, perhaps related to compliance or a lower rate of adverse events, highlighting the value of community-based assessments of comparative effectiveness.

Predictors of imaging surveillance for surgically treated early-stage lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines recommend routine imaging surveillance for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after treatment. Little is known about surveillance patterns for patients with surgically resected early-stage lung cancer in the community at large. We sought to characterize surveillance patterns in a national cohort. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End-Results (SEER)-Medicare database (1995-2010). Patients with stage I/II NSCLC treated with surgical resection were included. Our primary outcome was receipt of imaging between 4 and 8 months after the surgical procedure. Covariates included demographics and comorbidities. RESULTS: Chest radiography (CXR) was the most frequent initial modality (60%), followed by chest computed tomography (CT) (25%). Positron emission tomography (PET) was least frequent as an initial imaging modality (3%). A total of 13% of patients received no imaging within the initial surveillance period. Adherence to National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines for imaging by overall prevalence was 47% for receipt of CT; however, rates of CT increased over time from 28% to 61% (p < 0.01). Reduced rates of CT were associated with stage I disease and surgical resection as the sole treatment modality. CONCLUSIONS: Imaging after definitive surgical treatment for NSCLC predominantly used CXR rather than CT. Most of this imaging is likely for surveillance, and in that context CXR has inferior detection rates for recurrence and new cancers. Adherence to guideline-recommended CT surveillance after surgical treatment is poor, but the reasons are multifactorial. Efforts to improve adherence to imaging surveillance must be coupled with greater evidence demonstrating improved long-term outcomes.

Appropriateness of imaging for lung cancer staging in a national cohort.

PURPOSE: Optimizing evidence-based care to improve quality is a critical priority in the United States. We sought to examine adherence to imaging guideline recommendations for staging in patients with locally advanced lung cancer in a national cohort. METHODS: We identified 3,808 patients with stage IIB, IIIA, or IIIB lung cancer by using the national Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Central Cancer Registry (2004-2007) and linked these patients to VA and Medicare databases to examine receipt of guideline-recommended imaging based on National Comprehensive Cancer Network and American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria. Our primary outcomes were receipt of guideline-recommended brain imaging and positron emission tomography (PET) imaging. We also examined rates of overuse defined as combined use of bone scintigraphy (BS) and PET, which current guidelines recommend against. All imaging was assessed during the period 180 days before and 180 days after diagnosis. RESULTS: Nearly 75% of patients received recommended brain imaging, and 60% received recommended PET imaging. Overuse of BS and PET occurred in 25% of patients. More advanced clinical stage and later year of diagnosis were the only clinical or demographic factors associated with higher rates of guideline-recommended imaging after adjusting for covariates. We observed considerable regional variation in recommended PET imaging and overuse of combined BS and PET. CONCLUSION: Receipt of guideline-recommended imaging is not universal. PET appears to be underused overall, whereas BS demonstrates continued overuse. Wide regional variation suggests that these findings could be the result of local practice patterns, which may be amenable to provider education efforts such as Choosing Wisely.