Efficacy, safety, and feasibility of Apixaban for postoperative venous thromboembolism prophylaxis following open gynecologic cancer surgery at a comprehensive cancer center.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate safety, efficacy, and feasibility of apixaban for postoperative venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis following open gynecologic cancer surgery at a comprehensive cancer center. METHODS: This retrospective, cohort study included patients with gynecologic cancer who underwent open surgery between 3/2021 and 3/2023 and received 28-day postoperative VTE prophylaxis. Patients on therapeutic anticoagulation preoperatively were excluded. Predictors of 90- and 30-day VTE and 30-day bleeding events were determined using multivariable logistic regression, adjusting for known confounders. RESULTS: 452 patients were included in the cohort: 348 received apixaban and 104 received enoxaparin. Those who received enoxaparin were more likely to be American Society of Anesthesiologists class III/IV (compared to I/II) (p = 0.033), current or former smokers (p = 0.012) and have a higher BMI (p < 0.001), Charlson Comorbidity Index (p = 0.005), and age (p = 0.046). 30-day VTE rate was significantly lower in the apixaban group (0.6%) compared to the enoxaparin group (6.2%) (adjusted OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.03-0.56; p = 0.006). 90-day VTE rate was 2.7% and 6.2% in the apixaban and enoxaparin groups, respectively (adjusted OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.38-1.92; p = 0.704). Major bleeding complications (2.4% vs. 2.0%) and minor bleeding complications (0.9% vs. 3.0%) were similar in the apixaban and enoxaparin groups, respectively, on multivariate analyses. The median patient out of pocket cost was $10 (IQR 0.0-40.0) for apixaban and $20 (IQR 3.7-67.7) for enoxaparin (p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings along with previously published data suggest that apixaban should be considered the standard of care for VTE prophylaxis in patients undergoing open surgery for gynecologic malignancies.

Cancer Surgery Scheduling During and After the COVID-19 First Wave: The MD Anderson Cancer Center Experience.

OBJECTIVE: To summarize the multi-specialty strategy and initial guidelines of a Case Review Committee in triaging oncologic surgery procedures in a large Comprehensive Cancer Center and to outline current steps moving forward after the initial wave. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The impetus for strategic rescheduling of operations is multifactorial and includes our societal responsibility to minimize COVID-19 exposure risk and propagation among patients, the healthcare workforce, and our community at large. Strategic rescheduling is also driven by the need to preserve limited resources. As many states have already or are considering to re-open and relax stay-at-home orders, there remains a continued need for careful surgical scheduling because we must face the reality that we will need to co-exist with COVID-19 for months, if not years. METHODS: The quality officers, chairs, and leadership of the 9 surgical departments in our Division of Surgery provide specialty-specific approaches to appropriately triage patients. RESULTS: We present the strategic approach for surgical rescheduling during and immediately after the COVID-19 first wave for the 9 departments in the Division of Surgery at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, Texas. CONCLUSIONS: Cancer surgeons should continue to use their oncologic knowledge to determine the window of opportunity for each surgical procedure, based on tumor biology, preoperative treatment sequencing, and response to systemic therapy, to safely guide patients through this cautious recovery phase.

Activity of bevacizumab-containing regimens in recurrent low-grade serous ovarian or peritoneal cancer: A single institution experience.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the activity of bevacizumab in a cohort of women with recurrent low-grade serous carcinoma of the ovary or peritoneum. METHODS: This single-institution retrospective study assessed all patients at MD Anderson Cancer Center with recurrent low-grade serous ovarian or peritoneal cancer who received bevacizumab from 2007 to 2016. Study endpoints included best response, median progression-free survival, median overall survival, and toxicity. RESULTS: Forty patients received 45 separate "patient-regimens." Most received bevacizumab in combination with chemotherapy. Complete response (CR) was seen in 7.5%, while 40% had partial responses (PR) and 30% achieved stable disease (SD). Disease progression occurred in nine patients (22.5%). Overall response rate (CR+PR) to bevacizumab-containing regimens was 47.5%. Clinical benefit (CR+PR+SD) was seen in 77.5% of patients. Median progression free survival was 10.2months (95% CI 7.9, 12.4). Median overall survival was 34.6months (95% CI 29.5, 39.7). Fifteen patients discontinued bevacizumab related to toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: Bevacizumab, most often in combination with chemotherapy, has activity in recurrent low-grade ovarian cancer and should be considered a treatment option for these patients. Further investigation into the most effective chemotherapeutic agent in combination with bevacizumab is warranted.

Quality of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy in developing countries: a comparison of surgical and oncologic outcomes between a comprehensive cancer center in the United States and a cancer center in Colombia.

OBJECTIVE: To help determine whether global collaborations for prospective gynecologic surgery trials should include hospitals in developing countries, we compared surgical and oncologic outcomes of patients undergoing laparoscopic radical hysterectomy at a large comprehensive cancer center in the United States and a cancer center in Colombia. METHODS: Records of the first 50 consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic radical hysterectomy at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston (between April 2004 and July 2007) and the first 50 consecutive patients who underwent the same procedure at the Instituto de Cancerología-Clínica las Américas in Medellín (between December 2008 and October 2010) were retrospectively reviewed. Surgical and oncologic outcomes were compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in median patient age (US 41.9 years [range 23-73] vs. Colombia 44.5 years [range 24-75], P=0.09). Patients in Colombia had a lower median body mass index than patients in the US (24.4 kg/m(2) vs. 28.7 kg/m(2), P=0.002). Compared to patients treated in Colombia, patients who underwent surgery in the US had a greater median estimated blood loss (200 mL vs. 79 mL, P<0.001), longer median operative time (328.5 min vs. 235 min, P<0.001), and longer postoperative hospital stay (2 days vs. 1 day, P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Surgical and oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy were not worse at a cancer center in a developing country than at a large comprehensive cancer center in the United States. These results support consideration of developing countries for inclusion in collaborations for prospective surgical studies.

Evaluating women with ovarian cancer for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations: missed opportunities.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the incidence of genetic counseling referral for ovarian cancer patients who are at substantial risk for a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. METHODS: An analysis was performed of new ovarian cancer patients who were seen at a comprehensive cancer center from January 1, 1999, through December 31, 2007. Patients at substantial (more than 20-25%) risk for a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation were identified and records reviewed for referral to genetic counseling. Time to referral was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: A total of 3,765 epithelial ovarian cancer patients were seen during the 9-year period. On average, 23.8% of patients met substantial-risk criteria for BRCA mutations. In 1999, only 12% of patients at substantial-risk were referred. Referral improved over time with 48% referred in 2007 (P<.001). Newly diagnosed patients were more often referred for genetic counseling than new patients with recurrent disease or those seen as second opinions. African-American women meeting substantial-risk criteria were less likely to be referred than were white or Hispanic women (P=.009). CONCLUSION: Although dictated family history was accurate, interpretation of risk for BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations and subsequent referral to genetic counseling was poor. Although there was significant improvement over time, 50% of substantial-risk patients still were missed. Systematic efforts to identify those ovarian cancer patients at substantial risk for a BRCA1 or BRCA2 are necessary.