Evolution of Initial Treatment for Desmoid Tumors.

INTRODUCTION: Desmoid tumors (DTs) are rare, fibroblastic cell proliferations that can exhibit locally aggressive behavior but lack metastatic potential. Initial management has traditionally involved upfront resection; however, contemporary guidelines and expert panels have increasingly advocated for prioritizing active surveillance strategies. METHODS: A single-institution, retrospective chart review identified all patients diagnosed with a primary DT at any site from 2007 to 2020. The primary outcome was the initial management strategy over time. Secondary outcomes included treatment-free survival (TFS) and time to treatment (TTT) for those undergoing active surveillance, as well as recurrence-free survival (RFS) and time to recurrence for those undergoing resection. RESULTS: Overall, 103 patients were included, with 68% female and a median follow-up of 44 months [24-74]. The most common tumor locations included the abdominal wall (27%), intra-abdominal/mesenteric (25%), chest wall (19%), and extremity (10%). Initial management included resection (60%), systemic therapy (20%), active surveillance (18%), and cryoablation (2%). Rates of surgical resection significantly decreased (p < 0.001) over time, from 69.6% prior to 2018 to 29.2% after 2018. For those treated with upfront resection, 5-year RFS was 41.2%, and for patients undergoing initial active surveillance, TFS was 66.7% at 2 years, with a median TTT of 4 months [4-10]. CONCLUSIONS: This single-institution cohort at a tertiary medical center spanning over a decade demonstrates the transition to active surveillance for initial management of DTs, and highlights salient metrics in the era of surveillance. This trend mirrors recommended treatment strategies by expert panels and consensus guidelines.

The Surgical Clerkship in the COVID Era: A Natural Language Processing and Thematic Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Responses to COVID-19 within medical education prompted significant changes to the surgical clerkship. We analyzed the changes in medical student end of course feedback before and after the COVID-19 outbreak. METHODS: Postclerkship surveys from 2017 to 2022 were analyzed including both Likert scale data and free text, excluding the COVID outbreak year 2019-2020. Likert scale questions were compared between pre-COVID (2017-2019) and COVID-era cohorts (2020-2022) with the Mann-Whitney U-test. Free-text comments were analyzed using both thematic analysis and natural language processing including sentiment, word and phrase frequency, and topic modeling. RESULTS: Of the 483 medical students surveyed from 2017 to 2022, 297 responded (61% response rate) to the included end of clerkship surveys. Most medical students rated the clerkship above average or excellent with no significant difference between the pre-COVID and COVID-era cohorts (70.4% Versus 64.8%, P = 0.35). Perception of grading expectations did significantly differ, 51% of pre-COVID students reported clerkship grading standards were almost always clear compared to 27.5% of COVID-era students (P = 0.01). Pre-COVID cohorts more frequently mentioned learning and feedback while COVID-era cohorts more frequently mentioned case, attending, and expectation. Natural language processing topic modeling and formal thematic analysis identified similar themes: team, time, autonomy, and expectations. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 presented many challenges to undergraduate medical education. Despite many changes, there was no significant difference in clerkship satisfaction ratings. Unexpectedly, the greater freedom and autonomy of asynchronous lectures and choice of cases became a highlight of the new curriculum. Future research should investigate if there are similar associations nationally with a multi-institutional study.

Prior Teaching Experience and Barriers to Effective Resident Teaching: A Cross-Sectional Study.

INTRODUCTION: Resident physicians play an important role in teaching the next generation of health-care providers, yet limited research has explored factors influencing effective teaching, such as preresidency experiences or barriers within residency. This study examines residents' prior teaching experience, its correlation with teaching attitudes, and identifies potential barriers to sustained teaching engagement. METHODS: This cross-sectional study surveyed residents across multiple specialties at a single academic center. The survey assessed preresidency teaching experience, perceived barriers, and attitudes toward teaching. Univariate and multivariate analyses identified differences in teaching attitudes based on prior teaching experience and gender. RESULTS: Ninety-two residents across 11 specialties participated (52.2% female). Internal Medicine (28.3%) and General Surgery (26.1%) had the highest representation. Two-thirds of respondents (69.6%) had formal teaching experience before residency. After adjustment, prior teaching experience and male gender were associated with feeling prepared to teach medical students (P = 0.014 and P = 0.001). Male gender was also linked to confidence in teaching material on the wards (P = 0.015). Barriers identified included time constraints (73.9%), lack of content clarity (28.3%), and uncertainty about teaching methods (33.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Residents with prior teaching experience exhibit higher levels of preparedness, content clarity, and confidence in their teaching abilities, underscoring the importance of teaching experience before residency. This study also identified significant barriers to effective teaching, including time constraints, lack of content clarity, uncertainty about teaching methods, and perceived disinterest from medical students. Addressing these barriers is essential for optimizing medical student education.

Development and internal validation of individualized prediction models of overall survival and 6-month mortality among patients with synchronous early-onset colorectal liver metastases.

BACKGROUND: Early-onset colorectal cancer with synchronous liver metastasis (EO-CRLM) is a growing concern with a grim prognosis. METHODS: EO-CRLM patients were identified from the National Cancer Database. Random survival forest model and random forest (RF) model were developed for the prediction of overall survival (OS) and 6-month mortality, respectively. RESULTS: The variables with top contributions for random survival forest model of OS included primary tumor resection, chemotherapy and bone metastases. The AUCs of 1-, 3- and 5-year OS were 0.787, 0.763 and 0.761, respectively. The individualized risk profile predicted by the models closely aligned with the actual survival outcomes observed for the patients. The variables with top contributions for RF model for 6-month mortality included chemotherapy, Charlson-Deyo comorbidity score and presence of tumor deposits. RF model for 6-month mortality resulted in an AUC of 0.821 in training set, 0.828 in cross-validation and 0.852 in testing cohort. RF models for OS and 6-month mortality exhibited great net benefit with favorable clinical utility. CONCLUSION: The models generated in this study accurately identified EO-CRLM patients at risk of worse OS and short-term mortality, which may complement standard clinical assessment and aid in creation of advanced care planning.

Impact of primary tumor resection and metastasectomy among gastroentero-pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors with liver metastases only on survival.

BACKGROUND: Despite recommendations for primary tumor resection (PTR) with or without liver resection (LR) in the patients with gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs) and isolated liver metastases, there are conflicting data for their impact on overall survival (OS). METHODS: 2320 patients with GEP-NETs and isolated liver metastases were identified from NCDB. Multiple imputations were used to accommodate missing data, and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was conducted to minimize bias. RESULTS: Patients with PTR had a greater OS than those without PTR (3-year rate of 88.6% vs. 69.9%, P < 0.001), which was preserved in the adjusted analysis (IPTW-adjusted HR = 0.387, 95% CI: 0.264-0.567; P < 0.001). Patients with LR had a greater OS than those without LR (3-year rate 87.7% vs. 75.2%, P = 0.003), which was also preserved in adjusted analysis (IPTW-adjusted HR = 0.450, 95% CI: 0.229-0.885; P = 0.021). Patients undergoing both PTR and LR had the greatest survival advantage than those with other surgical interventions (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Either PTR or LR is associated with improved survival for GEP-NET patients with isolated liver metastases. However, there remains significant selection bias in the current study, and caution should be exercised when selecting patients for resection.

Simple versus radical cholecystectomy and survival for pathologic stage T1B gallbladder cancer.

BACKGROUND: Radical cholecystectomy is recommended for T1B and greater gallbladder cancer, however, there are conflicting reports on the utility of extended resection for T1B disease. Herein, we characterize outcomes following simple and radical cholecystectomy for pathologic stage T1B gallbladder cancer. METHODS: The National Cancer Database (NCDB) was queried for patients with pathologic T1B gallbladder cancer diagnosed from 2004 to 2018. Patients were stratified by surgical management. Overall survival (OS) was compared with Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox proportional hazards methods. RESULTS: Altogether, 950 patients were identified with pathologic T1B gallbladder cancer: 187 (19.7 %) receiving simple and 763 (80.3 %) radical cholecystectomy. Median OS was 89.5 (95 % CI 62.5-137) and 91.4 (95 % CI 75.9-112) months for simple and radical cholecystectomy, respectively (log-rank p = 0.55). Receipt of simple cholecystectomy was not associated with greater hazard of mortality compared to radical cholecystectomy (HR 1.23, 95 % CI 0.95-1.59, p = 0.12). DISCUSSION: In this analysis, we report comparable outcomes with simple cholecystectomy among patients with pathologic T1B gallbladder cancer. These findings suggest that highly selected patients, such as those with R0 resection and imaging at low risk for residual disease and/or nodal metastasis, may not benefit from extended resection; however, radical cholecystectomy remains standard of care until prospective validation can be achieved.

The Effect of Center Esophagectomy Volume on Outcomes in Clinical Stage I to III Esophageal Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the threshold annualized esophagectomy volume that is associated with improved survival, oncologic resection, and postoperative outcomes. BACKGROUND: Esophagectomy at high-volume centers is associated with improved outcomes; however, the definition of high-volume remains debated. METHODS: The 2004 to 2016 National Cancer Database was queried for patients with clinical stage I to III esophageal cancer undergoing esophagectomy. Center esophagectomy volume was modeled as a continuous variable using restricted cubic splines. Maximally selected ranks were used to identify an inflection point of center volume and survival. Survival was compared using multivariable Cox proportional hazards methods. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Overall, 13,493 patients met study criteria. Median center esophagectomy volume was 8.2 (interquartile range: 3.2-17.2) cases per year. On restricted cubic splines, inflection points were identified at 9 and 30 cases per year. A multivariable Cox model was constructed modeling annualized center surgical volume as a continuous variable using 3 linear splines and inflection points at 9 and 30 cases per year. On multivariable analysis, increasing center volume up to 9 cases per year was associated with a substantial survival benefit (hazard ratio: 0.97, 95% confidence interval, 0.95-0.98, P ≤0.001). On multivariable logistic regression, factors associated with undergoing surgery at a high-volume center (>9 cases per year) included private insurance, care at an academic center, completion of high school education, and greater travel distance. CONCLUSIONS: This National Cancer Database study utilizing multivariable analysis and restricted cubic splines suggests the threshold definition of a high-volume esophagectomy center as one that performs at least 10 operations a year.

Multicenter Experience with Neoadjuvant Therapy in Melanoma Highlights Heterogeneity in Contemporary Practice.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the feasibility and impact of neoadjuvant therapy (NT) in patients who present with advanced melanoma amenable to surgical resection. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Given current effective systemic therapy for melanoma, the use of NT is being explored in patients with advanced melanoma with disease amenable to surgical resection. METHODS: Prospective data from 3 institutions was obtained in patients with clinically evident Stage III/IV melanoma who underwent NT. The primary objective was to compare recurrence-free survival between patients who had pathologic complete response (pCR) to those with persistent disease. RESULTS: NT was offered to 45 patients, with 43 patients initiating various NT regimens including PD-1 antagonist (PD-1) therapy (N = 16), PD-1 plus ipilimumab (N = 10), BRAF/MEK inhibitor therapy (N = 14), a combination of those three (N = 1), and talimogene laherparepvec (TVEC) (N = 2). Thirty-two (74.1%) patients underwent surgery whereas 11 patients did not undergo surgery for these reasons: clinical CR (N = 7), progressive disease not amenable to resection (N = 3), and ongoing therapy (N = 1). 12 of 32 patients (37.5%) had pCR with these therapies: PD-1 (N = 4), PD-1 plus ipilimumab (N = 2), BRAF/MEK (N = 4), combination (N = 1), and TVEC (N = 1). At median follow-up of 16.4 months there was only 1 recurrence in the pCR group and patients with a pCR had significantly improved recurrence-free survival compared to patients without pCR (p = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Despite variability in NT regimens across institutions, NT for melanoma is feasible and associated with improved prognosis in patients who achieve a pCR. Maximizing rates of pCR could improve prognosis for patients with advanced melanoma.

The Impact of Adjuvant Hemithoracic Radiation on Outcomes in Patients With Stage I-III Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma: A Dual Registry Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The outcomes associated with receipt of adjuvant radiation in patients after surgery for MPM are poorly understood. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to use 2 registries to compare the outcomes of patients receiving adjuvant radiation or no radiation after definitive surgery for pathologic stage I-III MPM. METHODS: Patients with resected pathologic stage I-III MPM were identified from the Duke University registry (1996-2016) and National Cancer Database (NCDB) (2004-2015). The primary outcome was overall survival. Propensity score-matched and landmark subgroup analyses were performed. RESULTS: A total of 212 institutional and 1615 NCDB patients met criteria. In both cohorts, patients who underwent radiation were more likely to have margin-negative resection and more advanced pathologic stage. At a landmark time of 4.4 and 4.7 months from surgery, Duke [hazard ratio (HR) 1.14; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62-2.11] and NCDB patients (HR 0.97; 95% CI 0.81-1.17) who received adjuvant radiation did not experience improved survival compared to those who did not receive radiation in multivariable analysis. Duke patients who received radiation had similar incidence of recurrence and time to both overall recurrence and ipsilateral recurrence (HR 0.87; 95% CI 0.43-1.77) compared to those who did not. Duke patients experienced 100 grade 1/2, 21 grade 3/4, and one grade 5 toxicity events during radiation. CONCLUSIONS: In this dual registry analysis of patients with resected stage I-III MPM, the receipt of adjuvant hemithoracic radiation was not associated with improved survival compared to no radiation.

Comparing Survival After Resection, Ablation, and Radiation in Small Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Hepatectomy is the cornerstone of curative-intent treatment for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC). However, in patients unable to be resected, data comparing efficacy of alternatives including thermal ablation and radiation therapy (RT) remain limited. Herein, we compared survival between resection and other liver-directed therapies for small ICC within a national cancer registry. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with clinical stage I-III ICC < 3 cm diagnosed 2010-2018 who underwent resection, ablation, or RT were identified in the National Cancer Database. Overall survival (OS) was compared using Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox proportional hazards methods. RESULTS: Of 545 patients, 297 (54.5%) underwent resection, 114 (20.9%) ablation, and 134 (24.6%) RT. Median OS was similar between resection and ablation [50.5 months, 95% confidence interval (CI) 37.5-73.9; 39.5 months, 95% CI 28.7-58.4, p = 0.14], both exceeding that of RT (20.9 months, 95% CI 14.1-28.3). RT patients had high rates of stage III disease (10.4% RT vs. 1.8% ablation vs. 11.8% resection, p < 0.001), but the lowest rates of chemotherapy utilization (9.0% RT vs. 15.8% ablation vs. 38.7% resection, p < 0.001). In multivariable analysis, resection and ablation were associated with reduced mortality compared with RT [hazard ratio (HR) 0.44, 95% CI 0.33-0.58 and HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.38-0.75, p < 0.001, respectively]. CONCLUSION: Resection and ablation were associated with improved survival in patients with ICC < 3 cm compared with RT. Acknowledging confounders, anatomic constraints of ablation, limitations of available data, and need for prospective study, these results favor ablation in small ICC where resection is not feasible.

Timing of Adjuvant Immunotherapy in Stage III Melanoma, Does it Matter?

BACKGROUND: The optimal time to initiate adjuvant immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) following resection remains undefined. Herein, we investigated the impact of time to adjuvant ICI on survival in patients with stage III melanoma. METHODS: Patients with resected stage III melanoma receiving adjuvant immune therapy were identified within a multi-institutional retrospective cohort. Patients were stratified by time to adjuvant ICI: within 6 weeks, 6-12 weeks, and greater than 12 weeks from surgery. Recurrence-free survival (RFS) was compared among time strata with Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards methods in the multi-institutional cohort. RESULTS: Altogether, 626 patients were identified within the multi-institutional cohort: 39% of patients initiated adjuvant ICI within 6 weeks, 42.2% within 6-12 weeks, and 18.8% greater than 12 weeks from surgery. In a multivariate Cox model, adjusting for histology, nodal tumor burden, and pathologic stage, we found that increased time to adjuvant ICI was associated with improved RFS. Patients who initiated adjuvant ICI within 6 weeks of surgery had worse RFS. These findings were preserved in a conditional landmark analysis and separate subgroups of patients with (1) new melanoma diagnoses, (2) occult stage III disease, and (3) those receiving anti-PD-1 monotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Outcomes for patients with stage III melanoma are not compromised when adjuvant ICI is initiated beyond 6 weeks from resection. Additional work is needed to better understand the underlying mechanisms and implications of timing of adjuvant ICI on long-term outcomes.

Trends in Receipt of Adjuvant Chemotherapy and its Impact on Survival in Resected Biliary Tract Cancers.

BACKGROUND: Resection remains the cornerstone of curative-intent treatment for biliary tract cancers (BTCs). However, recent randomized data also support a role for adjuvant chemotherapy (AC). This study aimed to characterize trends in the use of AC and subsequent outcomes in gallbladder cancer and cholangiocarcinoma (CCA). METHODS: The National Cancer Database (NCDB) was queried for patients with resected, localized BTC from 2010 to 2018. Trends in AC were compared among BTC subtypes and stages of disease. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with receipt of AC. Survival analysis was performed with Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox proportional hazards methods. RESULTS: The study identified 7039 patients: 4657 (66%) with gallbladder cancer, 1159 (17%) with intrahepatic CCA (iCCA), and 1223 (17%) with extrahepatic CCA (eCCA). Adjuvant chemotherapy was administered to 2172 (31%) patients, increasing from 23% in 2010 to 41% in 2018. Factors associated with AC included female sex, year of diagnosis, private insurance, care at an academic center, higher education, eCCA (vs iCCA), positive margins, and stage II or III disease (vs stage I). Alternatively, increasing age, higher comorbidity score, gallbladder cancer (vs iCCA), and farther travel distance for treatment were associated with reduced odds of AC. Overall, AC was not associated with a survival advantage. However, subgroup analysis showed that AC was associated with a significant reduction in mortality among patients with eCCA. CONCLUSIONS: Among the patients with resected BTC, those who received AC were in the minority. In the context of recent randomized data and evolving recommendations, emphasis on guideline concordance with a focus on at-risk populations may improve outcomes.

Primary tumor resection improves survival of gastrointestinal neuroendocrine carcinoma patients with nonresected liver metastases.

BACKGROUND: The role of primary tumor resection (PTR) in the survival of gastrointestinal neuroendocrine carcinoma (GI-NEC) patients with liver metastases only remains poorly defined. Therefore, we investigated the impact of PTR on the survival of GI-NEC patients with nonresected liver metastases. METHODS: GI-NEC patients with a liver-confined metastatic disease diagnosed between 2016 and 2018 were identified in the National Cancer Database. Multiple imputations by chained equations were used to account for missing data, and the inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) method was used to eliminate selection bias. Overall survival (OS) was compared by adjusted Kaplan-Meier curves and log-rank test with IPTW. RESULTS: A total of 767 GI-NEC patients with nonresected liver metastases were identified. Among all patients, 177 (23.1%) received PTR and had a significantly favorable OS before (median: 43.6 months [interquartile range, IQR, 10.3-64.4] vs. 8.8 months [IQR, 2.1-23.1], p < 0.001 in log-rank test) and after (median: 25.7 months [IQR, 10.0-64.4] vs. 9.3 months [IQR, 2.2-26.4], p < 0.001 in IPTW-adjusted log-rank test) the IPTW adjustment. Additionally, this survival advantage persisted in an adjusted Cox model (IPTW adjusted hazard ratio = 0.431, 95% confidence interval: 0.332-0.560; p < 0.001). The improved survival persisted in subgroups stratified by primary tumor site, tumor grade, and N stage, even in the complete cohort (excluding patients with missing data). CONCLUSIONS: PTR led to improved survival for GI-NEC patients with nonresected liver metastases regardless of primary tumor site, tumor grade, and N stage. However, the decision for PTR should be made on an individualized basis following multidisciplinary evaluation.

Tumor size and survival in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma treated with surgical resection or ablation.

OBJECTIVES: We performed a retrospective analysis within a national cancer registry on outcomes following resection or ablation for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA). METHODS: The National Cancer Database was queried for patients with clinical stage I-III iCCA diagnosed during 2010-2018, who underwent resection or ablation. Overall survival (OS) was compared with Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox proportional hazards methods. RESULTS: Of 2140 patients, 1877 (87.7%) underwent resection and 263 (12.3%) underwent ablation, with median tumor sizes of 5.5 and 3 cm, respectively. Overall, resection was associated with greater median OS (41.2 months (95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 37.6-46.2) vs. 28 months (95% CI: 15.9-28.6) on univariable analysis (p < 0.0001). There was no significant difference on multivariable analysis (p = 0.42); however, there was a significant interaction between tumor size and management. On subgroup analysis of patients with tumors <3 cm, there was no difference in OS between resection versus ablation. However, ablation was associated with increased mortality for tumors ≥3 cm. CONCLUSION: Although resection is associated with improved OS for tumors ≥3 cm, we observed no difference in survival between management strategies for tumors < 3 cm. Ablation may be an alternative therapeutic strategy for small iCCA, particularly in patients at risk for high surgical morbidity.

Impact of surgical approach on short- and long-term outcomes in gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine carcinomas.

BACKGROUND: Literature is lacking on the impact of advancements in minimally invasive surgery (MIS) on outcomes for patients with gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine carcinomas (GEP-NECs). Herein, we compared perioperative and oncologic outcomes among patients with GEP-NECs undergoing open, laparoscopic, and robotic resection. METHODS: Patients with GEP-NECs diagnosed 2010-2019 were identified from the National Cancer Database (NCDB). We used the inverse probability of treatment weighting method to account for selection bias. Patients were stratified by surgical approach; and pairwise comparisons were conducted by analyzing short- and long-term outcomes. RESULTS: Receipt of MIS increased from 34.2% in 2010 to 67.5 % in 2019. Altogether, 6560 patients met study criteria: 3444 (52.5%) underwent open resection, 2783 (42.4%) underwent laparoscopic resection and 333 (5.1%) underwent robotic resection. Compared with open resection, laparoscopic or robotic resection were associated with shorter post-operative length of stay, reduced 30-day and 90-day post-operative mortality, and prolonged overall survival (OS). Compared with laparoscopic resection, robotic resection was associated with reduced 90-day post-operative mortality, however, there was no significant difference in OS. CONCLUSION: This NCDB analysis demonstrates that MIS approaches for treating GEP-NECs have become more common, with improved perioperative mortality, shorter post-operative length of stay and favorable OS, compared with open resection.

Tumor Size, Histology, and Survival After Stereotactic Ablative Radiotherapy and Sublobar Resection in Node-negative Non-small Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Although SABR is increasingly emerging as an alternative to surgery for node-negative non-small cell lung cancer, there is poor understanding of patients who may most benefit SABR compared to surgery. OBJECTIVE: This study examined the relationship between tumor size and the comparative outcomes of SABR and sublobar resection in patients with node-negative non-small cell lung cancer. RESULTS: A total of 59,949 patients met study criteria: 19,888 (33%) underwent SABR, 33,052 (55%) wedge resection, and 7009 (12%) segmental resection. In multivariable regression, a significant 3-way interaction was found between histology, tumor size, and type of treatment. After stratification by histology, a significant interaction between tumor size and treatment was preserved for patients with adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma. Sublobar resection was associated with greater survival compared to SABR for tumor sizes greater than 6 and 8 mm for patients with adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma, respectively. SABR was associated with similar survival compared to sublobar resection for patients with papillary and large cell histology. CONCLUSIONS: In this National Cancer Database analysis, sublobar resection was associated with greater survival compared to SABR for lesions >6or 8 mm in patients with adenocarcinoma or squamous cell carcinoma; however, SABR was associated with similar survival compared to sublobar resection in patients with aggressive tumors including papillary and large cell histology. Histologic diagnosis in patients with even small tumors may enable better treatment selection in those who cannot tolerate lobectomy.

The Relationship Between Lymph Node Ratio and Survival Benefit With Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Node-positive Esophageal Adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: We hypothesized that the ratio of positive lymph nodes to total assessed lymph nodes (LNR) is an indicator of cancer burden in esophageal adenocarcinoma and may identify patients who may most benefit from AC. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to discern whether there is a threshold LNR above which AC is associated with a survival benefit in this population. METHODS: The 2004-2015 National Cancer Database was queried for patients who underwent upfront, complete resection of pT1-4N1-3M0 esophageal adenocarcinoma. The primary outcome, overall survival, was examined using multivariable Cox proportional hazards models employing an interaction term between LNR and AC. RESULTS: A total of 1733 patients were included: 811 (47%) did not receive AC whereas 922 (53%) did. The median LNR was 20% (interquartile range 9-40). In a multivariable Cox model, the interaction term between LNR and receipt of AC was significant (P = 0.01). A plot of the interaction demonstrated that AC was associated with improved survival beyond a LNR of about 10%-12%. In a sensitivity analysis, the receipt of AC was not associated with improved survival in patients with LNR <12% (hazard ratio 1.02; 95% confidence interval 0.72-1.44) but was associated with improved survival in those with LNR ≥12% (hazard ratio 0.65; 95% confidence interval 0.50-0.79). CONCLUSIONS: In this study of patients with upfront, complete resection of node-positive esophageal adenocarcinoma, AC was associated with improved survival for LNR ≥12%. LNR may be used as an adjunct in multidisciplinary decision-making about adjuvant therapies in this patient population.

Patterns and Impact of Fragmented Care in Stage II and III Gastric Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Optimal management of stage II/III gastric cancer requires multidisciplinary care, often necessitating treatment at more than one facility. We aimed to determine patterns of "fragmented" care and its impact on outcomes, including concordance with National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines and overall survival. METHODS: The 2006-2016 National Cancer Database was queried for patients with clinical stage II/III gastric adenocarcinoma who received preoperative therapy in addition to surgery. Patients were stratified based on whether surgery and chemotherapy/chemoradiation were performed at one versus multiple facilities (termed "coordinated" and "fragmented" care, respectively). Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify factors associated with fragmented care. Survival was compared using Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards methods. RESULTS: Overall, 2033 patients met study criteria: 1043 (51.3%) received coordinated care and 990 (48.7%) fragmented care. There was no significant difference in time to surgery or pathologic upstaging by care structure. On adjusted analysis, factors associated with receipt of fragmented care included increasing age and distance traveled to the treating facility. Factors associated with coordinated care included metropolitan residence and treatment at academic and high-volume centers. Fragmented care was associated with a reduction in guideline-preferred perioperative chemotherapy (odds ratio [OR] 0.78, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.63-0.97, p = 0.02) and increased mortality (HR 1.16, 95% CI 1.00-1.34, p = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: For patients with stage II/III gastric cancer, fragmented care is associated with inferior outcomes, including a reduction in preferred perioperative treatment and survival. Further work is needed to ensure equitable outcomes among patients as complex cancer care becomes more regionalized.

Adjuvant Radiation Therapy for Clinical Stage III Melanoma in the Modern Therapeutic Era.

BACKGROUND: Adjuvant radiation therapy (RT) can decrease lymph node basin (LNB) recurrences in patients with clinically evident melanoma lymph node (LN) metastases following lymphadenectomy, but its role in the era of modern systemic therapies (ST), immune checkpoint or BRAF/MEK inhibitors, is unclear. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients at four institutions who underwent lymphadenectomy (1/1/2010-12/31/2019) for clinically evident melanoma LN metastases and received neoadjuvant and/or adjuvant ST with RT, or ST alone, but met indications for RT, were identified. Comparisons were made between ST alone and ST/RT groups. The primary outcome was 3-year cumulative incidence (CI) of LNB recurrence. Secondary outcomes included 3-year incidences of in-transit/distant recurrence and survival estimates. RESULTS: Of 98 patients, 76 received ST alone and 22 received ST/RT. Median follow-up time for patients alive at last follow-up was 44.6 months. The ST/RT group had fewer inguinal node metastases (ST 36.8% versus ST/RT 9.1%; P = 0.04), and more extranodal extension (ST 50% versus ST/RT 77.3%; P = 0.02) and positive lymphadenectomy margins (ST 2.6% versus ST/RT 13.6%; P = 0.04). The 3-year CI of LNB recurrences was lower for the ST/RT group compared with the ST group (13.9% versus 25.2%), but this reduction was not statistically significant (P = 0.36). Groups did not differ significantly in in-transit/distant recurrences (P = 0.24), disease-free survival (P = 0.14), or melanoma-specific survival (P = 0.20). CONCLUSIONS: In the era of modern ST, RT may still have value in reducing LNB recurrences in melanoma with clinical LN metastases. Further research should focus on whether select patient populations derive benefit from combination therapy, and optimizing indications for RT following neoadjuvant ST.

Implementation of a Surgical Oncology Disparities Curriculum for Preclinical Medical Students.

BACKGROUND: Underinsured and uninsured surgical-oncology patients are at higher risk of perioperative morbidity and mortality. Curricular innovation is needed to train medical students to work with this vulnerable population. We describe the implementation of and early educational outcomes from a student-initiated pilot program aimed at improving medical student insight into health disparities in surgery. MATERIALS/METHODS: First-year medical students participated in a dual didactic and perioperative-liaison experience over a 10-month period. Didactic sessions included surgical-skills training and faculty-led lectures on financial toxicity and management of surgical-oncology patients. Students were partnered with uninsured and Medicaid patients receiving surgical-oncology care and worked with these patients by providing appointment reminders, clarifying perioperative instructions, and accompanying patients to surgery and clinic appointments. Students' interest in surgery and self-reported comfort in 15 Association of American Medical Colleges core competencies were assessed with preparticipation and postparticipation surveys using a 5-point Likert scale. RESULTS: Twenty-four first-year students were paired with 14 surgical-oncology patients during the 2017-2018 academic year. Sixteen students (66.7%) completed both preprogram and postprogram surveys. Five students (31.3%) became "More Interested" in surgery, whereas 11 (68.8%) reported "Similar Interest or No Change." Half of the students (n = 8) felt more prepared for their surgery clerkship after participating. Median self-reported comfort improved in 7/15 competencies including Oral Communication and Ethical Responsibility. All students reported being "Somewhat" or "Extremely Satisfied" with the program. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate that an innovative program to expose preclinical medical students to challenges faced by financially and socially vulnerable surgical-oncology patients is feasible and may increase students' clinical preparedness and interest in surgery.