Impact of Cancer Care Regionalization on Patient Volume.

BACKGROUND: Cancer centers are regionalizing care to expand patient access, but the effects on patient volume are unknown. This study aimed to compare patient volumes before and after the establishment of head and neck regional care centers (HNRCCs). METHODS: This study analyzed 35,394 unique new patient visits at MD Anderson Cancer Center (MDACC) before and after the creation of HNRCCs. Univariate regression estimated the rate of increase in new patient appointments. Geospatial analysis evaluated patient origin and distribution. RESULTS: The mean new patients per year in 2006-2011 versus 2012-2017 was 2735 ± 156 patients versus 3155 ± 207 patients, including 464 ± 78 patients at HNRCCs, reflecting a 38.4 % increase in overall patient volumes. The rate of increase in new patient appointments did not differ significantly before and after HNRCCs (121.9 vs 95.8 patients/year; P = 0.519). The patients from counties near HNRCCs, showed a 210.8 % increase in appointments overall, 33.8 % of which were at an HNRCC. At the main campus exclusively, the shift in regional patients to HNRCCs coincided with a lower rate of increase in patients from the MDACC service area (33.7 vs. 11.0 patients/year; P = 0.035), but the trend was toward a greater increase in out-of-state patients (25.7 vs. 40.3 patients/year; P = 0.299). CONCLUSIONS: The creation of HNRCCs coincided with stable increases in new patient volume, and a sizeable minority of patients sought care at regional centers. Regional patients shifted to the HNRCCs, and out-of-state patient volume increased at the main campus, optimizing access for both local and out-of-state patients.

A flexible-hazards cure model with application to patients with soft tissue sarcoma.

In medical research, it is often of great interest to have an accurate estimation of cure rates by different treatment options and for different patient groups. If the follow-up time is sufficiently long and the sample size is large, the proportion of cured patients will make the Kaplan-Meier estimator of survival function have a flat plateau at its tail, whose value indicates the overall cure rate. However, it may be difficult to estimate and compare the cure rates for all the subsets of interest in this way, due to the limit of sample sizes and curse of dimensionality. In the current literature, most regression models for estimating cure rates assume proportional hazards (PH) between different subgroups. It turns out that the estimation of cure rates for subgroups is highly sensitive to this assumption, so more flexible models are needed, especially when this PH assumption is clearly violated. We propose a new cure model to simultaneously incorporate both PH and non-PH scenarios for different covariates. We develop a stable and easily implementable iterative procedure for parameter estimation through maximization of the nonparametric likelihood function. The covariance matrix is estimated by adding perturbation weights to the estimation procedure. In simulation studies, the proposed method provides unbiased estimation for the regression coefficients, survival curves, and cure rates given covariates, while existing models are biased. Our model is applied to a study of stage III soft tissue sarcoma and provides trustworthy estimation of cure rates for different treatment and demographic groups.

Disease-free Survival and Local Recurrence for Laparoscopic Resection Compared With Open Resection of Stage II to III Rectal Cancer: Follow-up Results of the ACOSOG Z6051 Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the disease-free survival (DFS) and recurrence after the treatment of patients with rectal cancer with open (OPEN) or laparoscopic (LAP) resection. BACKGROUND: This randomized clinical trial (ACOSOG [Alliance] Z6051), performed between 2008 and 2013, compared LAP and OPEN resection of stage II/III rectal cancer, within 12 cm of the anal verge (T1-3, N0-2, M0) in patients who received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. The rectum and mesorectum were resected using open instruments for rectal dissection (included hybrid hand-assisted laparoscopic) or with laparoscopic instruments under pneumoperitoneum. The 2-year DFS and recurrence were secondary endpoints of Z6051. METHODS: The DFS and recurrence were not powered, and are being assessed for superiority. Recurrence was determined at 3, 6, 9, 12, and every 6 months thereafter, using carcinoembryonic antigen, physical examination, computed tomography, and colonoscopy. In all, 486 patients were randomized to LAP (243) or OPEN (243), with 462 eligible for analysis (LAP = 240 and OPEN = 222). Median follow-up is 47.9 months. RESULTS: The 2-year DFS was LAP 79.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] 74.4-84.9) and OPEN 83.2% (95% CI 78.3-88.3). Local and regional recurrence was 4.6% LAP and 4.5% OPEN. Distant recurrence was 14.6% LAP and 16.7% OPEN.Disease-free survival was impacted by unsuccessful resection (hazard ratio [HR] 1.87, 95% CI 1.21-2.91): composite of incomplete specimen (HR 1.65, 95% CI 0.85-3.18); positive circumferential resection margins (HR 2.31, 95% CI 1.40-3.79); positive distal margin (HR 2.53, 95% CI 1.30-3.77). CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic assisted resection of rectal cancer was not found to be significantly different to OPEN resection of rectal cancer based on the outcomes of DFS and recurrence.

Comparative Age-Based Prospective Multi-Institutional Observations of 12,367 Patients Enrolled to the American College of Surgeons Oncology Group (ACOSOG) Z901101 Trials (Alliance).

BACKGROUND: The risk of surgery, particularly for older cancer patients with serious, extensive comorbidities, can make this otherwise curative modality precarious. Leveraging data from the American College of Surgeons Oncology Group, this study sought to characterize age-based comparative demographics, adverse event rates, and study completion rates to define how best to conduct research in older cancer patients. METHODS: This study relied on clinical data from 21 completed studies to assess whether older patients experienced more grade 3 or worse adverse events and were more likely to discontinue study participation prematurely than their younger counterparts. RESULTS: The study enrolled 12,367 patients. The median age was 60 years, and 36% of the patients were 65 years of age or older. Among 4008 patients with adverse event data, 1067 (27%) had experienced a grade 3 or worse event. The patients 65 years or older had higher rates of grade 3 or worse adverse events compared to younger patients [32% vs. 24%; odds ratio (OR), 1.5; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.3-1.7; p < 0.0001]. This association was not observed in multivariate analyses. The study protocol was completed by 97% of the patients. No association was observed between age and trial completion (OR 0.8; 95% CI 0.7-1.1; p = 0.14). Only the older gastrointestinal cancer trial patients were less likely to complete their studies compared to younger patients (OR 0.50; 95% CI 0.30-0.70; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Despite higher rates of adverse events, the older patients typically completed the study protocol, thereby contributing relevant data on how best to render care to older cancer patients and affirming the important role of enrolling these patients to surgical trials.

Phase 1 adaptive dose-finding study of neoadjuvant gemcitabine combined with radiation therapy for patients with high-risk extremity and trunk soft tissue sarcoma.

BACKGROUND: This study was performed to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of gemcitabine given concurrently with preoperative, fixed-dose external-beam radiation therapy (EBRT) for patients with resectable, high-risk extremity and trunk soft tissue sarcoma (STS). METHODS: Gemcitabine was administered on days 1, 8, 22, 29, 43, and 50 with EBRT (50 Gy in 25 fractions over 5 weeks). The gemcitabine MTD was determined with a toxicity severity weight method (TSWM) incorporating 6 toxicity types. The TSWM is a Bayesian procedure that choses each cohort's dose to have a posterior mean total toxicity burden closest to a predetermined clinician-defined target. Clinicopathologic and outcome data were also collected. RESULTS: Thirty-six patients completed the study. According to the TSWM, the gemcitabine MTD was 700 mg/m(2). At this dose level, 4 patients (24%) experienced grade 4 toxicity; no toxicity-related deaths occurred. All tumors were resected with microscopically negative margins. Pathologic responses of >90% tumor necrosis were achieved in 17 patients (47%); 14 (39%) had complete responses. With a median follow-up of 6.2 years, the 5-year locoregional recurrence-free survival, distant metastasis-free survival, and overall survival rates were 85%, 80%, and 86%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The TSWM combines data from qualitatively different toxicities and can be used to determine the MTD for a drug given as part of a multimodality treatment. Neoadjuvant gemcitabine plus radiation therapy is feasible and safe in patients with high-risk extremity and trunk STS. Major pathologic responses can be achieved, and after complete resection, long-term clinical outcomes are encouraging.

Effect of Laparoscopic-Assisted Resection vs Open Resection of Stage II or III Rectal Cancer on Pathologic Outcomes: The ACOSOG Z6051 Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Evidence about the efficacy of laparoscopic resection of rectal cancer is incomplete, particularly for patients with more advanced-stage disease. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether laparoscopic resection is noninferior to open resection, as determined by gross pathologic and histologic evaluation of the resected proctectomy specimen. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A multicenter, balanced, noninferiority, randomized trial enrolled patients between October 2008 and September 2013. The trial was conducted by credentialed surgeons from 35 institutions in the United States and Canada. A total of 486 patients with clinical stage II or III rectal cancer within 12 cm of the anal verge were randomized after completion of neoadjuvant therapy to laparoscopic or open resection. INTERVENTIONS: Standard laparoscopic and open approaches were performed by the credentialed surgeons. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome assessing efficacy was a composite of circumferential radial margin greater than 1 mm, distal margin without tumor, and completeness of total mesorectal excision. A 6% noninferiority margin was chosen according to clinical relevance estimation. RESULTS: Two hundred forty patients with laparoscopic resection and 222 with open resection were evaluable for analysis of the 486 enrolled. Successful resection occurred in 81.7% of laparoscopic resection cases (95% CI, 76.8%-86.6%) and 86.9% of open resection cases (95% CI, 82.5%-91.4%) and did not support noninferiority (difference, -5.3%; 1-sided 95% CI, -10.8% to ∞; P for noninferiority = .41). Patients underwent low anterior resection (76.7%) or abdominoperineal resection (23.3%). Conversion to open resection occurred in 11.3% of patients. Operative time was significantly longer for laparoscopic resection (mean, 266.2 vs 220.6 minutes; mean difference, 45.5 minutes; 95% CI, 27.7-63.4; P < .001). Length of stay (7.3 vs 7.0 days; mean difference, 0.3 days; 95% CI, -0.6 to 1.1), readmission within 30 days (3.3% vs 4.1%; difference, -0.7%; 95% CI, -4.2% to 2.7%), and severe complications (22.5% vs 22.1%; difference, 0.4%; 95% CI, -4.2% to 2.7%) did not differ significantly. Quality of the total mesorectal excision specimen in 462 operated and analyzed surgeries was complete (77%) and nearly complete (16.5%) in 93.5% of the cases. Negative circumferential radial margin was observed in 90% of the overall group (87.9% laparoscopic resection and 92.3% open resection; P = .11). Distal margin result was negative in more than 98% of patients irrespective of type of surgery (P = .91). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among patients with stage II or III rectal cancer, the use of laparoscopic resection compared with open resection failed to meet the criterion for noninferiority for pathologic outcomes. Pending clinical oncologic outcomes, the findings do not support the use of laparoscopic resection in these patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00726622.

Analysis of prognostic factors impacting oncologic outcomes after neoadjuvant tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy for gastrointestinal stromal tumors.

BACKGROUND: Management of gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) has been transformed with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). While data on optimal duration of adjuvant imatinib remains elusive, guidelines for administration of neoadjuvant TKIs remain unknown. METHODS: Under an institutional review board-approved protocol, patients at our institution with a diagnosis of GIST treated with neoadjuvant TKIs and surgical resection were identified. Clinical and pathologic characteristics were obtained from medical records. RESULTS: Ninety-three patients underwent surgical resection after neoadjuvant TKI therapy; 41 had primary and 52 had recurrent/metastatic GIST. Median follow-up was 2.4 years. Median duration of neoadjuvant therapy was 315 (range 3-1,611) days for primary and 537 (range 4-3,257) days for recurrent/metastatic GIST (p = 0.001). Two-year, recurrence-free survival (RFS) was 85 and 44 % for primary and recurrent/metastatic disease, respectively, whereas 2-year overall survival (OS) was 97 % for primary and 73 % for recurrent/metastatic GIST. For primary GIST, duration of neoadjuvant therapy >365 days (p = 0.02) was associated with higher risk of recurrence on univariate analysis, whereas none of the clinicopathologic factors impacted OS. For recurrent/metastatic disease, disease progression was associated with a shorter OS (p = 0.001), but no factors were found to impact RFS. Lastly, when examining all patients, KIT mutations (p = 0.03) and multivisceral resection (p = 0.011) predicted shorter RFS. CONCLUSIONS: Neoadjuvant TKIs can be effectively used for the treatment of primary and recurrent/metastatic GIST. While duration of neoadjuvant therapy, KIT mutation status, and the need for multivisceral resection can help to predict higher risk for recurrence, progression on neoadjuvant TKIs can aid in selection of patients with recurrent/metastatic disease for surgical resection.

Locoregional disease patterns in well-differentiated and dedifferentiated retroperitoneal liposarcoma: implications for the extent of resection?

BACKGROUND: Well-differentiated (WD)/dedifferentiated (DD) liposarcoma is the most common soft tissue sarcoma of the retroperitoneum. The frequency of distant metastasis is low and the major burden of disease is locoregional. We sought to define the patterns of locoregional disease to help guide surgical decision making. METHODS: Data were collected from 247 patients with de novo or recurrent tumors treated at our institution from 1993 to early 2012. The number and location of tumors at both initial presentation and subsequent locoregional recurrence were determined by combined analysis of operative dictations and radiologic imaging. RESULTS: Thirty-four percent of patients had multifocal locoregional disease (two or more tumors) at initial presentation to our institution, including 9 % who had tumors at synchronous remote retroperitoneal sites. The impact of multifocal disease on overall survival was dependent on histologic subtype (WD vs. DD) and disease presentation (de novo vs. recurrence) at the time of resection. Among patients with initial unifocal disease, 57 % progressed to multifocal locoregional disease with subsequent recurrence, including 11 % with new tumors outside of the original resection field. No clinicopathologic or treatment-related variable, including the type or extent of resection, was predictive of either multifocal or 'outside field' progression. CONCLUSIONS: Multifocal disease is common in patients with WD/DD retroperitoneal liposarcoma, and tumors can also develop at remote, locoregional sites. Surgical resection remains the primary method of locoregional control in this disease; however, the aggressiveness of resection should be individualized, with consideration of both tumor and patient-related factors.

Predicting the risks of venous thromboembolism versus post-pancreatectomy haemorrhage: analysis of 13,771 NSQIP patients.

BACKGROUND: The fear of an early post-pancreatectomy haemorrhage (PPH) may prevent surgeons from prescribing post-operative venous thromboembolism (VTE) chemoprophylaxis. The primary hypothesis of this study was that the national post-pancreatectomy early PPH rate was lower than the rate of VTE. The secondary hypothesis was that patients at high risk for post-discharge VTE could be identified, potentially facilitating the selective use of extended chemoprophylaxis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All elective pancreatectomies were identified in the 2005 to 2010 American College of Surgeons-National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database. Factors associated with 30-day rates of (pre- versus post-discharge) VTE, early PPH (transfusions > 4 units within 72 h) and return to the operating room (ROR) with PPH were analysed. RESULTS: Pancreaticoduodenectomies (PD) and distal pancreatectomies (DP) numbered 9140 (66.4%) and 4631 (33.6%) out of 13 771 pancreatectomies, respectively. Event rates included: VTE (3.1%), PPH (1.1%) and ROR+PPH (0.7%). PD and DP had similar VTE rates (P > 0.05) with 31.9% of VTE occurring post-discharge. Independent risk factors for late VTE included obesity [odds ratio (OR), 1.5], age ≥ 75 years (OR, 1.8), DP (OR, 2.4) and organ space infection (OR, 2.1) (all P < 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Within current practice patterns, post-pancreatectomy VTE outnumber early haemorrhagic complications, which are rare. The fear of PPH should not prevent routine and timely post-pancreatectomy VTE chemoprophylaxis. Because one-third of VTE occur post-discharge, high-risk patients may benefit from post-discharge chemoprophylaxis.

Serum carbohydrate antigen 19-9 represents a marker of response to neoadjuvant therapy in patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to determine the relationship between carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19-9 levels and outcome in patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer treated with neoadjuvant therapy (NT). METHODS: This study included all patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer, a serum CA 19-9 level of ≥40 U/ml and bilirubin of ≤2 mg/dl, in whom NT was initiated at one institution between 2001 and 2010. The study evaluated the associations between pre- and post-NT CA 19-9, resection and overall survival. RESULTS: Among 141 eligible patients, CA 19-9 declined during NT in 116. Following NT, 84 of 141 (60%) patients underwent resection. For post-NT resection, the positive predictive value of a decline and the negative predictive value of an increase in CA 19-9 were 70% and 88%, respectively. The normalization of CA 19-9 (post-NT <40 U/ml) was associated with longer median overall survival among both non-resected (15 months versus 11 months; P = 0.022) and resected (38 months versus 26 months; P = 0.020) patients. Factors independently associated with shorter overall survival were no resection [hazard ratio (HR) 3.86, P < 0.001] and failure to normalize CA 19-9 (HR 2.13, P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The serum CA 19-9 level represents a dynamic preoperative marker of tumour biology and response to NT, and provides prognostic information in both non-resected and resected patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer.

Long-term results of adjuvant imatinib mesylate in localized, high-risk, primary gastrointestinal stromal tumor: ACOSOG Z9000 (Alliance) intergroup phase 2 trial.

OBJECTIVE: To conduct the first adjuvant trial of imatinib mesylate for treatment of gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST). BACKGROUND: GIST is the most common sarcoma. Although surgical resection has been the mainstay of therapy for localized, primary GIST, postoperative tumor recurrence is common. The KIT protooncogene or, less frequently, platelet-derived growth factor receptor alpha is mutated in GIST; the gene products of both are inhibited by imatinib mesylate. METHODS: This was a phase II, intergroup trial led by the American College of Surgeons Oncology Group, registered at ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT00025246. From September 2001 to September 2003, we accrued 106 patients who had undergone complete gross tumor removal but were deemed at high risk for recurrence. Patients were prescribed imatinib 400 mg per day for 1 year and followed with serial radiologic evaluation. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 7.7 years, the 1-, 3-, and 5-year OS rates were 99%, 97%, and 83%, which compared favorably with a historical 5-year OS rate of 35%. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) rates were 96%, 60%, and 40%. On univariable analysis, age and mitotic rate were associated with OS. On multivariable analysis, the RFS rate was lower with increasing tumor size, small bowel site, KIT exon 9 mutation, high mitotic rate, and older age. CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant imatinib in patients with primary GIST who are at high risk of recurrence prolongs OS compared with that of historical controls. Optimal duration of adjuvant therapy remains undefined. (NCT00025246).

Frequency and intensity of postoperative surveillance after curative treatment of pancreatic cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: Few data exist to guide oncologic surveillance following curative treatment of pancreatic cancer. We sought to identify a rational, cost-effective postoperative surveillance strategy. METHODS: We constructed a Markov model to compare the cost-effectiveness of 5 postoperative surveillance strategies. No scheduled surveillance served as the baseline strategy. Clinical evaluation and carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19-9 testing without/with routine computed tomography and chest X-ray at either 6- or 3-month intervals served as the 4 comparison strategies of increasing intensity. We populated the model with symptom, recurrence, treatment, and survival data from patients who had received intensive surveillance after multimodality treatment at our institution between 1998 and 2008. Costs were based on Medicare payments (2011 US dollars). RESULTS: The baseline strategy of no scheduled surveillance was associated with a postoperative overall survival (OS) of 24.6 months and a cost of $3837/patient. Clinical evaluation and CA 19-9 assay every 6 months until recurrence was associated with a 32.8-month OS and a cost of $7496/patient, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $5364/life-year (LY). Additional routine imaging every 6 months incrementally increased total cost by $3465 without increasing OS. ICERs associated with clinic visits every 3 months without/with routine imaging were $127,680 and $294,696/LY, respectively. Sensitivity analyses changed the strategies' absolute costs but not the relative ranks of their ICERs. CONCLUSIONS: Increasing the frequency and intensity of postoperative surveillance of patients after curative therapy for pancreatic cancer beyond clinical evaluation and CA 19-9 testing every 6 months increases cost but confers no clinically significant survival benefit.

Borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: need for standardization and methods for optimal clinical trial design.

BACKGROUND: Methodological limitations of prior studies have prevented progress in the treatment of patients with borderline resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Shortcomings have included an absence of staging and treatment standards and pre-existing biases with regard to the use of neoadjuvant therapy and the role of vascular resection at pancreatectomy. METHODS: In this manuscript, we review limitations of studies of borderline resectable PDAC reported to date, highlight important controversies related to this disease stage, emphasize the research infrastructure necessary for its future study, and present a recently-approved Intergroup pilot study (Alliance A021101) that will provide a foundation upon which subsequent well-designed clinical trials can be performed. RESULTS: We identified twenty-three studies published since 2001 which report outcomes of patients with tumors labeled as borderline resectable and who were treated with neoadjuvant therapy prior to planned pancreatectomy. These studies were heterogeneous in terms of the populations studied, the metrics used to characterize therapeutic response, and the indications used to select patients for surgery. Mechanisms used to standardize these and other issues that are incorporated into Alliance A021101 are reviewed. CONCLUSIONS: Rigorous standards of clinical trial design incorporated into trials of other disease stages must be adopted in all future studies of borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. The Intergroup trial should serve as a paradigm for such investigations.

Response of borderline resectable pancreatic cancer to neoadjuvant therapy is not reflected by radiographic indicators.

BACKGROUND: Experience with preoperative therapy for other cancers has led to an assumption that borderline resectable pancreatic cancers can be converted to resectable cancers with preoperative therapy. In this study, the authors sought to determine the rate at which neoadjuvant therapy is associated with a reduction in the size or stage of borderline resectable tumors. METHODS: Patients who had borderline resectable pancreatic cancer and received neoadjuvant therapy before potentially undergoing surgery at the authors' institution between 2005 and 2010 were identified. The patients' pretreatment and post-treatment pancreatic protocol computed tomography images were rereviewed to determine changes in tumor size or stage using modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) (version 1.1) and standardized anatomic criteria. RESULTS: The authors identified 129 patients who met inclusion criteria. Of the 122 patients who had their disease restaged after receiving preoperative therapy, 84 patients (69%) had stable disease, 15 patients (12%) had a partial response to therapy, and 23 patients (19%) had progressive disease. Although only 1 patient (0.8%) had their disease downstaged to resectable status after receiving neoadjuvant therapy, 85 patients (66%) underwent pancreatectomy. The median overall survival duration for all 129 patients was 22 months (95% confidence interval, 14-30 months). The median overall survival duration for the patients who underwent pancreatectomy was 33 months (95% confidence interval, 25-41 months) and was not associated with RECIST response (P = .78). CONCLUSIONS: Radiographic downstaging was rare after neoadjuvant therapy, and RECIST response was not an effective treatment endpoint for patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. The authors concluded that these patients should undergo pancreatectomy after initial therapy in the absence of metastases.

Histologic tumor involvement of superior mesenteric vein/portal vein predicts poor prognosis in patients with stage II pancreatic adenocarcinoma treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiation.

BACKGROUND: Studies have shown that superior mesenteric vein (SMV)/portal vein (PV) resection with pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is safe and feasible for patient with pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PAC). However, the prognostic significance of tumor involvement of the resected vein in patients who received neoadjuvant therapy is unclear. METHODS: The authors evaluated 225 consecutive patients with stage II PAC who received neoadjuvant therapy and PD with or without SMV/PV resection. The resected SMV/PV was entirely submitted for histologic assessment and reviewed in all cases. Tumor involvement of the SMV/PV was correlated with clinicopathologic features and survival. RESULTS: Among the 225 patients, SMV/PV resection was performed in 85 patients. Histologic tumor involvement of the resected SMV/PV was identified in 57 patients. Histologic tumor involvement of the SMV/PV was associated with larger tumor size, higher rates of positive margin, and local/distant recurrence. By multivariate analysis, tumor involvement of the SMV/PV was an independent predictor of both disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). However, addition of venous resection to PD itself had no impact on either DFS or OS compared with those with PD alone. CONCLUSIONS: Histologic tumor involvement of the SMV/PV is an independent predictor of both DFS and OS in patients with stage II PAC treated with neoadjuvant therapy and PD. Complete histologic evaluation of the resected SMV/PV is important for the prognosis in patients with PAC who received neoadjuvant therapy and PD.

Post-therapy pathologic stage and survival in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiation.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant chemoradiation before surgery is an emerging treatment modality for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). However, analysis of prognostic factors is limited for patients with PDAC treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiation and pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). METHODS: The study population was comprised of 240 consecutive patients with PDAC who received neoadjuvant chemoradiation and PD and was compared with 60 patients who had no neoadjuvant therapy between 1999 and 2007. Clinicopathologic features were correlated with disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Among the 240 treated patients, the 1-year and 3-year DFS rates were 52% and 32%, with a median DFS of 15.1 months. The 1-year and 3-year OS rates were 95% and 47%, with a median OS of 33.5 months. By univariate analysis, DFS was associated with age, post-therapy tumor stage (ypT), lymph node status (ypN), number of positive lymph nodes, and American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stage, whereas OS was associated with intraoperative blood loss, margin status, ypT, ypN, number of positive lymph nodes, and AJCC stage. By multivariate analysis, DFS was independently associated with age, number of positive lymph nodes, and AJCC stage, and OS was independently associated with differentiation, margin status, number of positive lymph nodes, and AJCC stage. In addition, the treated patients had better OS and lower frequency of lymph node metastasis than those who had no neoadjuvant therapy. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with PDAC who received neoadjuvant chemoradiation and subsequent PD, post-therapy pathologic AJCC stage and number of positive lymph nodes are independent prognostic factors.

Histologic grading of the extent of residual carcinoma following neoadjuvant chemoradiation in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a predictor for patient outcome.

BACKGROUND: Several grading schemes for the extent of residual tumor in posttreatment pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) specimens have been proposed. However, the prognostic significance of these grading schemes is unknown. METHODS: Histopathologic slides of 223 cases who received neoadjuvant chemoradiation and PD were reviewed. The extent of residual tumor was graded using both the College of American Pathologists (CAP) and the Evans grading systems. The grading results were correlated with clinicopathological parameters and survival. RESULTS: Among the 223 patients, 6 patients (2.7%) showed pathologic complete response (pCR; CAP grade 0 or Evans grade IV), 36 cases (16.1%) had minimal residual tumor (CAP grade 1 or Evans grade III), 124 cases (55.6%) had moderate response (CAP grade 2 or Evans grade IIb), and 57 cases (25.6%) had poor response (CAP grade 3, where 18 had Evans grade I and 39 had Evans grade IIa response). Patients with pCR or minimal residual tumor (response group 1) had better survival rates than those with moderate and poor response (response group 2). Response group 1 patients had lower posttherapy tumor and American Joint Committee on Cancer stages and lower rates of lymph node metastasis, positive resection margin, and recurrence and/or metastasis. Grading the extent of residual tumor is an independent prognostic factor for overall survival in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: pCR or minimal residual tumor in posttreatment PD specimens correlate with better survival in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma who received neoadjuvant therapy and PD. Histologic grading of the extent of residual tumor in PD specimen is an important prognostic factor in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma who received neoadjuvant therapies.

Incorporation of adjuvant therapy into the multimodality management of gastrointestinal stromal tumors of the stomach in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) treatment changed considerably with introduction of imatinib in 2001 and reports of early successes. However, little is known about imatinib incorporation into practice. Our objective was to examine the integration of adjuvant systemic therapy into GIST management. METHODS: Patients with gastric GIST were identified (n = 4508) from the National Cancer Data Base (2001-2007). Separate regression models were developed to examine factors associated with adjuvant and neoadjuvant therapy use. RESULTS: A total of 3050 patients underwent surgical resection. From 2001-2003 to 2006-2007, use of adjuvant therapy increased from 29 to 47% (P < 0.001). Patients were less likely to receive adjuvant therapy if tumors were <3 cm, low grade, had negative margins, were treated at low-volume centers, or were diagnosed during 2001-2003 (P < 0.01). Adjuvant systemic therapy for lesions <3 cm also increased (17 to 25%, P = 0.001). For high-risk GISTs, adjuvant therapy use increased from 41 to 58% overall, with increases of 46 to 70% at high-volume centers and 40 to 48% at low-volume centers (P < 0.001). Neoadjuvant therapy increased from 0 to 8%; patients were more likely to receive neoadjuvant treatment if their tumor was >6 cm, treated at high-volume centers, or were diagnosed during 2006-2007 (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant systemic therapy use for GISTs was increasing and widespread prior to FDA approval of adjuvant imatinib, suggesting that contemporaneous advances in management of advanced GIST were being simultaneously and rapidly translated into the adjuvant setting. As relatively costly therapies are integrated into practice, more robust tracking systems are needed to monitor the incorporation of new treatments.