Lung Surveillance Strategy for High-Grade Soft Tissue Sarcomas: Chest X-Ray or CT Scan?

BACKGROUND: Given the propensity for lung metastases, National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines recommend lung surveillance with either chest x-ray (CXR) or CT in high-grade soft tissue sarcoma. Considering survival, diagnostic sensitivity, and cost, the optimal modality is unknown. METHODS: The US Sarcoma Collaborative database (2000 to 2016) was reviewed for patients who underwent resection of a primary high-grade soft tissue sarcoma. Primary end point was overall survival (OS). Cost analysis was performed. RESULTS: Among 909 patients, 83% had truncal/extremity and 17% had retroperitoneal tumors. Recurrence occurred in 48%, of which 54% were lung metastases. Lung surveillance was performed with CT in 80% and CXR in 20%. Both groups were clinically similar, although CT patients had more retroperitoneal tumors and recurrences. Regardless of modality, 85% to 90% of lung metastases were detected within the first 2 years with a similar re-intervention rate. When considering age, tumor size, location, margin status, and receipt of radiation, lung metastasis was independently associated with worse OS (hazard ratio 4.26; p < 0.01) and imaging modality was not (hazard ratio 1.01; p = 0.97). Chest x-ray patients did not have an inferior 5-year OS rate compared with CT (71% vs 60%; p < 0.01). When analyzing patients in whom no lung metastases were detected, both cohorts had a similar 5-year OS rate (73% vs 74%; p = 0.42), suggesting CXR was not missing clinically relevant lung nodules. When adhering to a guideline-specified protocol for 2018 projected 4,406 cases, surveillance with CXR for 5 years results in savings of $5 million to $8 million/year to the US healthcare system. CONCLUSIONS: In this large multicenter study, lung surveillance with CXR did not result in worse overall survival compared with CT. With considerable savings, a CXR-based protocol can optimize resource use for lung surveillance in high-grade soft tissue sarcoma; prospective trials are needed.

Interferon-based chemoradiation followed by gemcitabine for resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma: long-term follow-up.

To report long-term follow up of a phase II, single-arm trial of resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) treated with adjuvant interferon-based chemoradiation followed by gemcitabine to determine survival, recurrence, and complications. METHODS: From 2002 to 2005, 53 patients with PDAC underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy and received adjuvant interferon-based chemoradiation consisting of external-beam irradiation and simultaneous 3-drug chemotherapy of continuous daily 5-fluorouracil infusion, weekly intravenous bolus cisplatin, and subcutaneous interferon-α, followed by two months of weekly intravenous gemcitabine. RESULTS: Actual overall survival for the 5- and 10-year periods were 26% and 10%, respectively, with a median overall survival of 25 months (95% CI: 16.4-38.5). Adverse prognostic factors on multivariate analysis were positive tumor margin (p < 0.035), lymphovascular invasion (p < 0.015), and perineural invasion (p < 0.026). Median time to recurrence was 11 months. Positive tumor margin was associated with lymph node involvement (p < 0.005), portal vein resection (p < 0.038), and metastases (p < 0.018). Late complications were frequent and predominated by gastrointestinal and infectious complications. CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant interferon-based chemoradiation for PDAC improves long-term survival compared to standard therapy. However, recurrence rates and long-term complications remain high, thus further studies are indicated to assess patient characteristics that indicate a favorable treatment profile.

Utility of a multidisciplinary tumor board in the management of pancreatic and upper gastrointestinal diseases: an observational study.

BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVES: Multidisciplinary tumor boards (MDTBs) are frequently employed in cancer centers but their value has been debated. We reviewed the decision-making process and resource utilization of our MDTB to assess its utility in the management of pancreatic and upper gastrointestinal tract conditions. METHODS: A prospectively-collected database was reviewed over a 12-month period. The primary outcome was change in management plan as a result of case discussion. Secondary outcomes included resources required to hold MDTB, survival, and adherence to treatment guidelines. RESULTS: Four hundred seventy cases were reviewed. MDTB resulted in a change in the proposed plan of management in 101 of 402 evaluable cases (25.1%). New plans favored obtaining additional diagnostic workup. No recorded variables were associated with a change in plan. For newly-diagnosed cases of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (n = 33), survival time was not impacted by MDTB (p = .154) and adherence to National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines was 100%. The estimated cost of physician time per case reviewed was $190. CONCLUSIONS: Our MDTB influences treatment decisions in a sizeable number of cases with excellent adherence to national guidelines. However, this requires significant time expenditure and may not impact outcomes. Regular assessments of the effectiveness of MDTBs should be undertaken.

Sublobar resections for lung cancer.

Sublobar resection has been utilized as an alternative to lobectomy for the treatment of early-stage lung cancer in patients with compromised preoperative pulmonary function. Early data have suggested higher rates of local recurrence and increased late mortality for sublobar resection as compared with lobectomy. Subsequent studies have been mixed with respect to outcomes. Here we review the existing literature comparing sublobar resection to lobectomy with respect to oncologic and pulmonary outcomes. We also discuss the effect of adjuvant intraoperative brachytherapy to sublobar resection and summarize ongoing clinical trials that compare sublobar resection to sublobar resection plus adjuvant brachytherapy in the treatment of early-stage lung cancer. Finally, based on the current evidence, we provide recommendations as to when sublobar resection might be considered in the treatment of lung cancer.