Resident memory CD8+ T cells in regional lymph nodes mediate immunity to metastatic melanoma.

The nature of the anti-tumor immune response changes as primary tumors progress and metastasize. We investigated the role of resident memory (Trm) and circulating memory (Tcirm) cells in anti-tumor responses at metastatic locations using a mouse model of melanoma-associated vitiligo. We found that the transcriptional characteristics of tumor-specific CD8+ T cells were defined by the tissue of occupancy. Parabiosis revealed that tumor-specific Trm and Tcirm compartments persisted throughout visceral organs, but Trm cells dominated lymph nodes (LNs). Single-cell RNA-sequencing profiles of Trm cells in LN and skin were distinct, and T cell clonotypes that occupied both tissues were overwhelmingly maintained as Trm in LNs. Whereas Tcirm cells prevented melanoma growth in the lungs, Trm afforded long-lived protection against melanoma seeding in LNs. Expanded Trm populations were also present in melanoma-involved LNs from patients, and their transcriptional signature predicted better survival. Thus, tumor-specific Trm cells persist in LNs, restricting metastatic cancer.

Association of Surgeon Self-Reported Gender and Surgical Outcomes in Current U.S. Practice.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the association of surgeon self-reported gender on clinical outcomes in contemporary U.S. surgical practice. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Previous research has suggested that there are potentially improved surgical outcomes for female surgeons, yet the underlying causal path for this association remains unclear. METHODS: Using the Vizient® Clinical Database(2016-2021), 39 operations categorized by the CDC's National Healthcare Safety Network were analyzed. Surgeon self-reported gender was the primary exposure. The primary outcome was a composite of in-hospital death, complications, and/or 30-day readmission. Multivariable logistic regression and propensity score matching was used for risk adjustment. RESULTS: The analysis included 4,882,784 patients operated on by 11,955 female surgeons(33% of surgeons, performing 21% of procedures) and 23,799 male surgeons(67% of surgeons, performing 79% of procedures). Female surgeons were younger(45±9 vs. males-53±11 y;P<0.0001) and had lower operative volumes. Unadjusted incidence of the primary outcome was 13.6%(10.7%-female surgeons, 14.3%-male surgeons;P<0.0001). After propensity matching, the primary outcome occurred in 13.0% of patients(12.9%-female, 13.0%-male; OR[M vs. F]=1.02, 95%CI 1.01-1.03;P=.001), with female surgeons having small statistical associations with lower mortality and complication rates but not readmissions. Procedure-specific analyses revealed inconsistent or no surgeon-gender associations. CONCLUSIONS: In the largest analysis to date, surgeon self-reported gender had a small statistical, clinically marginal correlation with postoperative outcomes. The variation across surgical specialties and procedures suggests that the association with surgeon gender is unlikely causal for the observed differences in outcomes. Patients should be reassured that surgeon gender alone does not have a clinically meaningful impact on their outcome.

Performance of Artificial Intelligence Content Detectors Using Human and Artificial Intelligence-Generated Scientific Writing.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have examined the performance of artificial intelligence (AI) content detection in scientific writing. This study evaluates the performance of publicly available AI content detectors when applied to both human-written and AI-generated scientific articles. METHODS: Articles published in Annals of Surgical Oncology (ASO) during the year 2022, as well as AI-generated articles using OpenAI's ChatGPT, were analyzed by three AI content detectors to assess the probability of AI-generated content. Full manuscripts and their individual sections were evaluated. Group comparisons and trend analyses were conducted by using ANOVA and linear regression. Classification performance was determined using area under the curve (AUC). RESULTS: A total of 449 original articles met inclusion criteria and were evaluated to determine the likelihood of being generated by AI. Each detector also evaluated 47 AI-generated articles by using titles from ASO articles. Human-written articles had an average probability of being AI-generated of 9.4% with significant differences between the detectors. Only two (0.4%) human-written manuscripts were detected as having a 0% probability of being AI-generated by all three detectors. Completely AI-generated articles were evaluated to have a higher average probability of being AI-generated (43.5%) with a range from 12.0 to 99.9%. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates differences in the performance of various AI content detectors with the potential to label human-written articles as AI-generated. Any effort toward implementing AI detectors must include a strategy for continuous evaluation and validation as AI models and detectors rapidly evolve.

Systematic Review Assessing Quality of the Survey Literature in Surgery.

INTRODUCTION: The use of survey methodology in surgical research has proliferated in recent years, but the quality of these surveys and of their reporting is understudied. METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive review of surgical survey literature (January 2022-July 2023) via PubMed in July 2023. Articles which (1) reported data gleaned from a survey, (2) were published in an English language journal, (3) targeted survey respondents in the United States or Canada, and (4) pertained to general surgery specialties were included. We assessed quality of survey reports using the Checklist for Reporting Of Survey Studies (CROSS) guidelines. Articles were evaluated for concordance with CROSS using a dichotomous (yes or no) scale. RESULTS: Initial literature search yielded 481 articles; 57 articles were included in analysis based on the inclusion criteria. The mean response rate was 37% (range 0.62%-98%). The majority of surveys were administered electronically (n = 50, 87.8%). No publications adhered to all 40 CROSS items; on average, publications met 61.2% of items applicable to that study. Articles were most likely to adhere to reporting criteria for title and abstract (mean adherence 99.1%), introduction (99.1%), and discussion (92.4%). Articles were least adherent to items related to methodology (42.6%) and moderately adherent to items related to results (76.6%). Only five articles cited CROSS guidelines or another standardized survey reporting tool (10.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis demonstrates that CROSS reporting guidelines for survey research have not been adopted widely. Surveys reported in surgical literature may be of variable quality. Increased adherence to guidelines could improve development and dissemination of surveys done by surgeons.

Factors Contributing to Patient Satisfaction Among VA Medical Center and Non-VA Medical Center Hospitals.

INTRODUCTION: Veteran satisfaction of care within the Veterans Affairs is typically very high. Yet recommendation ratings of VA medical center (VA) hospitals as measured by Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems are generally lower than non-VA hospitals.Therefore, it was our objective to assess Veteran satisfaction and recommendation scores and then examine whether satisfaction correlates to recommendation. METHODS: We identified all acute care VAs as our primary analytic cohort. As a comparator group, we also included all acute care academic hospitals (non-VAs), as designated by the Centers for Medicare Services. Using data from Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems and Strategic Analytics for Improvement and Learning (SAIL) Value Model, we collated patient satisfaction scores, as well as markers of surgical safety from Hospital Compare. We then analyzed the correlation within VAs and non-VAs, primarily focusing the relationship between the "would you recommend Hospital Rating" and subdomains of the "Overall Hospital Rating," as well as a composite score of patient safety. RESULTS: A total of 133 VAs and 1116 non-VAs were identified. Among VAs, the "Would you Recommend" hospital rating was significantly and positively correlated with markers of patient satisfaction including care transitions (Pearson's r = 0.59, P = 0.03), Nursing communication (Pearson's R 0.79, P = 0.001), and percent of primary care provider wait times less than 30 min (Pearson's r = 0.25, P = 0.01). VA-recommended scores were negatively correlated with factors such as time to emergency department discharge, and the "leaving the emergency department before being evaluated." When looking at non-VAs, correlation directions were similar, albeit with stronger associations at almost every metric. While recommended scores correlated strongly to overall hospital ratings for both groups, VAs had no significant correlation between "would you recommend" and patient safety. However, there was a slight negative correlation between patient safety and "recommend" among non-VAs. CONCLUSIONS: Although satisfiers and dissatisfiers of care appear similar between VAs and non-VAs, "would you recommend" is a far weaker marker of patient perceptions of safety and quality. These seemingly empathetic markers such as "would you recommend" should be used with caution as they may not address the fundamental question being asked.

A Retrospective Analysis of Surgical Acuity & Procedure Volume Before & During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: In March 2020, the American College of Surgeons recommended postponing elective procedures amid the COVID-19 pandemic. We used Medicare claims to analyze changes in surgical and interventional procedure volumes from 2016 to 2021. METHODS: We studied 37 common surgical and interventional procedures using 5% Medicare claims files from January 1, 2016, through December 31, 2021. Procedures were classified according to American College of Surgeons guidelines as low, intermediate, or high acuity, and counts were analyzed per calendar year quarter (Q1-Q4), with stratification by sex and race/ethnicity. RESULTS: We observed 1,840,577 procedures and identified two periods of marked decline. In Q2 2020, overall procedure counts decreased by 32.2%, with larger declines in low (41.1%) and intermediate (30.8%) acuity procedures. High acuity procedures declined the least (18.2%). Overall volumes increased afterward but never returned to baseline. Another marked decline occurred in Q4 2021, with all acuity levels having declined to a similar extent (40.1%, 44.2%, and 46.9% for low, intermediate, and high acuity, respectively). High and intermediate acuity procedures declined more in Q4 2021 than Q2 2020 (P = 0.002). Similar patterns were observed across sex and race/ethnicity strata. CONCLUSIONS: Two major procedural volume declines occurred between 2020 and 2022 during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. High acuity (life or limb threatening) procedures were least affected in the first decline (Q2 2020) but not spared in second decline (Q4 2021). Future efforts should prioritize preserving high-acuity access during times of stress.

Electronic health record-integrated questionnaires in colorectal surgery patients as a new standard: Could preoperative bowel function be used to predict postoperative patient-reported outcomes?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Patient-reported bowel function has been previously shown to correlate with quality of life and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) after colorectal surgery. We examined the relationship between preoperative patient-reported bowel function and postoperative symptom reporting using an electronic health record-integrated symptom management (eSyM). METHODS: Patients who underwent major abdominal surgery for colorectal cancer at a single institution were included. Preoperative bowel function was assessed prospectively using the validated colorectal functional outcome (COREFO) questionnaire. Patients with electronic portal access received automated eSyM questionnaires after discharge. Logistic regression was used to analyze the association between COREFO scores and eSyM use. RESULTS: 169 patients underwent surgery between April 2020 and June 2022 (median age 64, 46.7% female). 148 completed COREFO questionnaires preoperatively; 54 (36.5%) had scores ≥15. Of the 108 patients with portal access, 67.6% used eSyM postoperatively. Among users, 72.3% (47/73) reported severe symptoms. Those with COREFO scores ≥15 were more likely to use eSyM (80.0% vs. 62.7%) though this difference was not significant (p = 0.079). CONCLUSIONS: We found that eSyM utilization regardless of preoperative baseline bowel function was high in this cohort of colorectal surgery patients. This suggests that electronically captured PROs is an effective way for patients to communicate symptoms to their care teams in a postsurgical setting.

Evaluating clinical practice guidelines for the management of rectal cancer: Did they get it RIGHT?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) are crucial tools for clinicians seeking to deliver evidence-based patient care. We utilized the Reporting Items for practice Guidelines in HealThcare (RIGHT) checklist to assess the reporting quality of CPGs addressing the management of rectal cancer. METHODS: Four multidisciplinary rectal cancer CPGs published 2017-2022 were evaluated: American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons (ASCRS), European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN), and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). We quantitatively assessed each CPG using the RIGHT checklist and qualitative analysis was performed to generate common themes. RESULTS: RIGHT checklist items fulfilled by each CPG ranged from 12 to 17 (out of 22). Each guideline demonstrated unique categories of weakness: ASCRS in Basic Information (1 of 4 items), ESMO in Evidence (1 of 3), NCCN in Recommendations (1 of 3), and NICE in Review and Quality Assurance (0 of 2). Common themes that emerged included sprase discussion on the financial aspects of rectal cancer management and lack of transparency in formulating recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: Despite their variability, each of the 22 checklist elements are present in contemporary CPGs. Utilizing the RIGHT checklist would allow experts to create guidelines adhering to high-quality reporting standards.

Reporting on Race and Racial Disparities in Breast Cancer: The Neglect of Racism as a Driver of Inequitable Care.

OBJECTIVE: This study reviews the surgical literature on racial disparities in breast cancer mortality, specifically evaluating the inclusion, justification, and discussion of race and ethnicity as a driver of disparities. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The volume of research on racial disparities has increased over the past 2 decades, but we hypothesize that there is considerable variation in how race is contextualized, defined, and captured in the disparities literature, leading to its questionable validity and relevance as a covariate. Recent guidelines for reporting have been suggested, but not yet applied. METHODS: A rubric was developed to evaluate the reporting of race and/or ethnicity. A systematic review (2010-2020) was performed to identify studies reporting on racial disparities in breast cancer surgery and mortality. We then evaluated these original articles based on key domains of race and/or ethnicity: justification for inclusion, formal definition, methodology used for classification, and type of racism contributing to disparity. RESULTS: Of the 52 studies assessed, none provided a formal definition for race and/or ethnicity. A justification for the inclusion of race and/or ethnicity was provided in 71% of the studies. Although 81% of studies discussed at least 1 potential driver of observed racial disparities, only 1 study explicitly named racism as a driver of racial disparities. CONCLUSIONS: Significant improvement in the reporting on racial disparities in breast cancer surgical literature is warranted. A more rigorous framework should be applied by both researchers and publishers in reporting on race, racial health disparities, and racism.

Rural Disparities in Lung Cancer-directed Surgery: A Medicare Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this study was to determine the influence of rural residence on access to and outcomes of lung cancer-directed surgery for Medicare beneficiaries. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancerrelated death in the United States and rural patients have 20% higher mortality. Drivers of rural disparities along the continuum of lung cancercare delivery are poorly understood. METHODS: Medicare claims (2015-2018) were used to identify 126,352 older adults with an incident diagnosis of nonmetastatic lung cancer. Rural Urban Commuting Area codes were used to define metropolitan, micropolitan, small town, and rural site of residence. Multivariable logistic regression models evaluated influence of place of residence on 1) receipt of cancer-directed surgery, 2) time from diagnosis to surgery, and 3) postoperative outcomes. RESULTS: Metropolitan beneficiaries had higher rate of cancer-directed surgery (22.1%) than micropolitan (18.7%), small town (17.5%), and isolated rural (17.8%) (P < 0.001). Compared to patients from metropolitan areas, there were longer times from diagnosis to surgery for patients living in micropolitan, small, and rural communities. Multivariable models found nonmetropolitan residence to be associated with lower odds of receiving cancer-directed surgery and MIS. Nonmetropolitan residence was associated with higher odds of having postoperative emergency department visits. CONCLUSIONS: Residence in nonmetropolitan areas is associated with lower probability of cancer-directed surgery, increased time to surgery, decreased use of MIS, and increased postoperative ED visits. Attention to timely access to surgery and coordination of postoperative care for nonmetropolitan patients could improve care delivery.

Increased Preoperative Stress Test Utilization is Not Associated With Reduced Adverse Cardiac Events in Current US Surgical Practice.

OBJECTIVE: To measure the frequency of preoperative stress testing and its association with perioperative cardiac events. BACKGROUND: There is persistent variation in preoperative stress testing across the United States. It remains unclear whether more testing is associated with reduced perioperative cardiac events. METHODS: We used the Vizient Clinical Data Base to study patients who underwent 1 of 8 elective major surgical procedures (general, vascular, or oncologic) from 2015 to 2019. We grouped centers into quintiles by frequency of stress test use. We computed a modified revised cardiac risk index (mRCRI) score for included patients. Outcomes included in-hospital major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), myocardial infarction (MI), and cost, which we compared across quintiles of stress test use. RESULTS: We identified 185,612 patients from 133 centers. The mean age was 61.7 (±14.2) years, 47.5% were female, and 79.4% were White. Stress testing was performed in 9.2% of patients undergoing surgery, and varied from 1.7% at lowest quintile centers, to 22.5% at highest quintile centers, despite similar mRCRI comorbidity scores (mRCRI>1: 15.0% vs 15.8%; P =0.068). In-hospital MACE was less frequent among lowest versus highest quintile centers (8.2% vs 9.4%; P <0.001) despite a 13-fold difference in stress test use. Event rates were similar for MI (0.5% vs 0.5%; P =0.737). Mean added cost for stress testing per 1000 patients who underwent surgery was $26,996 at lowest quintile centers versus $357,300 at highest quintile centers. CONCLUSIONS: There is substantial variation in preoperative stress testing across the United States despite similar patient risk profiles. Increased testing was not associated with reduced perioperative MACE or MI. These data suggest that more selective stress testing may be an opportunity for cost savings through a reduction of unnecessary tests.

Reasons for Long-term Opioid Prescriptions After Guideline-directed Opioid Prescribing and Excess Opioid Pill Disposal.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine the frequency and reasons for long-term opioid prescriptions (rxs) after surgery in the setting of guideline-directed prescribing and a high rate of excess opioid disposal. BACKGROUND: Although previous studies have demonstrated that 5% to 10% of opioid-naïve patients prescribed opioids after surgery will receive long-term (3-12 months after surgery) opioid rxs, little is known about the reasons why long-term opioids are prescribed. METHODS: We studied 221 opioid-naïve surgical patients enrolled in a previously reported prospective clinical trial which used a patient-centric guideline for discharge opioid prescribing and achieved a high rate of excess opioid disposal. Patients were treated on a wide variety of services; 88% of individuals underwent cancer-related surgery. Long-term opioid rxs were identified using a Prescription Drug Monitoring Program search and reasons for rxs and opioid adverse events were ascertained by medical record review. We used a consensus definition for persistent opioid use: opioid rx 3 to 12 months after surgery and >60day supply. RESULTS: 15.3% (34/221) filled an opioid rx 3 to 12 months after surgery, with 5.4% and 12.2% filling an rx 3 to 6 and 6 to 12 months after surgery, respectively. The median opioid rx days supply per patient was 7, interquartile range 5 to 27, range 1 to 447 days. The reasons for long-term opioid rxs were: 51% new painful medical condition, 40% new surgery, 6% related to the index operation; only 1 patient on 1 occasion was given an opioid rx for a nonspecific reason. Five patients (2.3%) developed persistent opioid use, 2 due to pain from recurrent cancer, 2 for new medical conditions, and 1 for a chronic abscess. CONCLUSIONS: In a group of prospectively studied opioid-naïve surgical patients discharged with guideline-directed opioid rxs and who achieved high rates of excess opioid disposal, no patients became persistent opioid users solely as a result of the opioid rx given after their index surgery. Long-term opioid use did occur for other, well-defined, medical or surgical reasons.

Patients are pragmatic and physicians are perfectionists? Comparing success after liver transplantation among patients and physicians.

Although both patients and physicians are key stakeholders in health care outcomes, patients and physicians often define success differently. The purpose of this study was to compare patient and physician perceptions of success 1 year after liver transplantation. This was a single-institution, qualitative study. We conducted in-person, semi-structured interviews with liver transplant recipients 1 year after transplantation and virtual interviews with transplant surgeons and hepatologists. Transcripts were coded and iteratively analyzed for themes using the principles of phenomenology. Twenty patients, 8 caregivers, 5 transplant surgeons, and 4 hepatologists were interviewed. Subject interviews averaged 57 (patient) and 27 (physician) minutes. Overall, patients and physicians had significant agreement in their definitions of success, which included avoidance of death, restoration of physical and mental function, return to society, acquisition of new health care knowledge, and open communication between the patient and the physician. Patients highlighted relief from worry about their future health status, and physicians highlighted decreased health care costs. Patients noted that a liver transplant did not have to be perfect, that is free from complications, to be successful. Physicians had a more stringent view and felt that any deviation from an ideal course reduced the relative success of a transplant. Detailed assessment of patient and physician responses reveals similar overall goals of regaining physical, mental, and emotional function. Complications are perceived differently by patients and physicians. Awareness of this discordance may serve to enhance relationships between transplant patients and their providers.

Assessing the Complex General Surgical Oncology Pipeline: Trends in Race and Ethnicity Among US Medical Students, General Surgery Residents, and Complex General Surgical Oncology Trainees.

BACKGROUND: Cancer incidence is expected to increase in coming decades, disproportionately so among minoritized communities. Racially and ethnically concordant care is essential to addressing disparities in cancer outcomes within at-risk groups. Here, we assess trends in racial and ethnic representation of medical students (MS), general surgery (GS) residents, and complex general surgical oncology (CGSO) fellows. METHODS: This is a retrospective review of data from the American Association of Medical Colleges and the Accreditation Council of Medical Education (ACGME) from 2015 to 2020. Self-reported race and ethnicity was obtained for MS, GS, and CGSO trainees. Race and ethnicity proportions were compared with respective representation in the 2020 US Census. Mann-Kendall, Wilcoxon rank sum, and linear regression were used to assess trends, as appropriate. RESULTS: A total of 316,448 MS applicants, 128,729 MS matriculants, 27,574 GS applicants, 46,927 active GS residents, 710 CGSO applicants, and 659 active CGSO fellows were included. With every progressive stage in training, there was a smaller proportion of URM active trainees than applicants. Further, URM, Hispanic/Latino, and Black/African American trainees were significantly underrepresented compared with 2020 Census data. While the proportion of White CGSO fellows increased over time (54.5-69.2%, p = 0.009), the proportion of Black/African American and Hispanic/Latino (URM) CGSO fellows did not significantly change over the study period, though URM representation was lower in 2020 as compared with 2015. DISCUSSION: From 2015 to 2020, minority representation decreased at every advancing stage in surgical oncology training. Efforts to address barriers for URM applicants to CGSO fellowships are needed.

Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy for Extremity and Truncal Soft Tissue Sarcomas: A Systematic Review of the Literature.

BACKGROUND: Regional lymph node metastasis (RLNM) occurs infrequently in patients with soft tissue sarcoma (STS), although certain STS subtypes have a higher propensity for RLNM. The identification of RLNM has significant implications for staging and prognosis; however, the precise impact of node-positive disease on patient survival remains a topic of controversy. Although the benefits of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) are well documented in patients with melanoma and breast cancer, whether this procedure offers a benefit in STS is controversial. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed and articles reviewed to determine if SLNB in patients with extremity/truncal STS impacts disease-free or overall survival. RESULTS: Six studies were included. Rates of sentinel lymph node positivity were heterogeneous (range 4.3-50%). The impact of SLNB on patient outcomes remains unclear. The overall quality of available evidence was low, as assessed by the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system. CONCLUSIONS: The literature addressing the impact of nodal basin evaluation on the staging and management of patients with extremity/truncal STS is confounded by heterogeneous patient cohorts and clinical practices. Multicenter prospective studies are warranted to determine the true incidence of RLNM and whether SLNB could benefit patients with clinically occult RLNM at diagnosis.

A Review and Assessment of Open Access Surgery Journals.

INTRODUCTION: Open access publishing has exhibited rapid growth in recent years. However, there is uncertainty surrounding the quality of open access journals and their ability to reach target audiences. This study reviews and characterizes open access surgical journals. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The directory of open access journals was used to search for open access surgical journals. PubMed indexing status, impact factor, article processing charge (APC), initial year of open access publishing, average weeks from manuscript submission to publication, publisher, and peer-review processes were evaluated. RESULTS: Ninety-two open access surgical journals were identified. Most (n = 49, 53.3%) were indexed in PubMed. Journals established >10 y were more likely to be indexed in PubMed compared to journals established <5 y (28 of 41 [68.3%] versus 4 of 20 [20%], P < 0.001). 44 journals (47.8%) used a double-blind review method. 49 (53.2%) journals received an impact factor for 2021, ranging from <0.1 to 10.2 (median 1.4). The median APC was $362 United States dollar [interquartile range $0 - 1802 United States dollar]. 35 journals (38%) did not charge a processing fee. There was a significant positive correlation between the APC and impact factor (r = 0.61, P < 0.001). If accepted, the median time from manuscript submission to publication was 12 wk. CONCLUSIONS: Open access surgical journals are largely indexed on PubMed, have transparent review processes, employ variable APCs (including no publication fees), and proceed efficiently from submission to publication. These results should increase readers' confidence in the quality of surgical literature published in open access journals.

Technical Standards for Cancer Surgery: Improving Patient Care through Synoptic Operative Reporting.

The Operative Standards for Cancer Surgery manuals define critical elements of optimal cancer surgery based on data and expert opinion. These key aspects of commonly performed cancer operations define technical standards that can be used as a quality assurance tool for practicing surgical oncologists and as an educational tool for trainees. This article provides background on these operative standards and their subsequent integration into synoptic operative report templates. With the goal of codifying the most important aspects of surgical oncology care to elevate and harmonize cancer care, the American College of Surgeons Cancer Programs has developed comprehensive synoptic operative reports. Synoptic operative reports are structured so that key data elements are recorded in a standardized format with prespecified terminology. In contrast to the narrative or structured operative reports frequently used by surgeons, these synoptic operative reports improve semantic clarity, provide uniform fields for abstraction, and facilitate passive data collection and real-time analytics while delivering key information for downstream multidisciplinary patient care. In this way, the synoptic operative report is a key component of a comprehensive effort to elevate the quality of cancer care nationally.

Gender Disparities in Presentations at the Society of Surgical Oncology (SSO) Meetings From 2014 to 2019.

BACKGROUND: Participation in surgical society meetings serves as a proxy for academic success and is important for career development. This study aimed to investigate and report the gender breakdown of presenters at recent Society of Surgical Oncology (SSO) meetings. METHODS: Genders of presenters for poster, parallel, plenary, and video sessions at SSO meetings from 2014 through 2019 were collected. These data were broken down to first-last authorship relationships including female-female, female-male, male-female, and male-male. The proportions of female-to-male presenters were compared for each session type. Statistical significance was set at p value lower than 0.05. RESULTS: From 2014 through 2019, the SSO had 2920 presenters, and 47% were female. Women were listed as first authors more often for the poster session (48%) than for other sessions (parallel, plenary, and video) (p = 0.003). Women also were listed more often as senior authors for the poster session (31%) than for other sessions (p = 0.004). Female senior authors were fewer than male senior authors across all session types. Female first authors had the highest representation in breast (75%), endocrine (48%), and cutaneous (46%) specialties (p < 0.001). The most common combination of first and senior authors was male-male (43%), followed by female-male (28%), female-female (19%), and male-female (10%). CONCLUSION: Overall, female presentation at SSO is comparable with society demographics, and female first authorship is relatively equal to male first authorship in poster sessions. Whereas female first authorship improved over time, female senior authorship remained relatively flat. Opportunities to improve gender equality in senior authorship positions should be explored.

Breast Cancer Risk and Screening in Transgender Persons: A Call for Inclusive Care.

The Society of Surgical Oncology is committed to reducing health disparities adversely affecting sexual and gender minorities. Transgender persons represent a socially disadvantaged group who frequently experience discrimination and receive disparate care, resulting in suboptimal cancer outcomes. The rate of breast cancer development in transgender individuals differs from rates observed in their cisgender counterparts, however there is little evidence to quantify these differences and guide evidence-based screening and prevention. There is no consensus for breast cancer screening guidelines in transgender patients. In this review, we discuss barriers to equitable breast cancer care, risk factors for breast cancer development, and existing data to support breast cancer screening in transgender men and women.

American Cancer Society Colorectal Cancer Survivorship Care Guidelines.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer and third leading cause of cancer death in both men and women and second leading cause of cancer death when men and women are combined in the United States (US). Almost two-thirds of CRC survivors are living 5 years after diagnosis. Considering the recent decline in both incidence and mortality, the prevalence of CRC survivors is likely to increase dramatically over the coming decades with the increase in rates of CRC screening, further advances in early detection and treatment and the aging and growth of the US population. Survivors are at risk for a CRC recurrence, a new primary CRC, other cancers, as well as both short-term and long-term adverse effects of the CRC and the modalities used to treat it. CRC survivors may also have psychological, reproductive, genetic, social, and employment concerns after treatment. Communication and coordination of care between the treating oncologist and the primary care clinician is critical to effectively and efficiently manage the long-term care of CRC survivors. The guidelines in this article are intended to assist primary care clinicians in delivering risk-based health care for CRC survivors who have completed active therapy.