The Role of Neoadjuvant Immunotherapy in the Management of Merkel Cell Carcinoma with Clinically Detected Regional Lymph Node Metastasis.

BACKGROUND: Immunotherapy is emerging as a promising option for certain locally advanced and metastatic cutaneous malignancies. However, the role of neoadjuvant immunotherapy (NIO) in Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) with clinically detected regional lymph node metastasis (CDRLNM) has not been fully elucidated. METHODS: For this study, MCC patients with CDRLNM who underwent surgical excision were selected from the National Cancer Database (NCDB). Those who received NIO were propensity-matched with those who did not, and Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to compare overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Of the 1809 selected patients, 356 (19.7%) received NIO followed by wide excision (n = 352, 98.9%) or amputation (n = 4, 1.1%). The rate of complete pathologic response for the primary tumor (ypT0) was 45.2%. Only 223 patents (63.4%) also underwent lymph node dissection (LND). The complete pathologic nodal response (ypN0) rate for these patients was 17.9%. A pathologic complete response of both the primary tumor and the nodal basin (ypT0 ypN0) was seen in 16 of the 223 patients who underwent both primary tumor surgery and LND. Subsequently, 151 pairs were matched between the NIO and no-NIO groups (including only patients with LND). Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated a significant OS improvement with NIO (median not reached vs. 35.0 ± 8.0 months; p = 0.025). The 5-year OS was 57% in the NIO group versus 44% in no-NIO group (p = 0.021). CONCLUSION: The study suggests that NIO in MCC with CDRLNM provides improved OS in addition to promising rates of primary complete response, which could change the profile of surgical resection. This supports ongoing clinical trials exploring the use of NIO in MCC.

Impact of neoadjuvant therapy on nodal harvest in clinical stage III rectal cancer: Establishing optimum cut-offs by disease response.

INTRODUCTION: A minimum lymph node harvest (LNH) of 12 is the current standard for appropriate nodal staging in resectable rectal cancer. However, the rise of neoadjuvant chemoradiation (NCRT) and total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) has been associated with decreasing number of LNH. We hypothesize that as tumor response to neoadjuvant therapy increases, the optimum for LNH to achieve appropriate nodal staging should decrease. METHODS: Patients with clinical stage III rectal adenocarcinoma who underwent NCRT/TNT followed by resection were identified from the National Cancer Database. A JoinPoint regression analysis was used to determine the LNH for each tumor regression grade (TRG) category beyond which the rate of positive nodes does not significantly change. RESULTS: Thirteen thousand four hundred and twenty-six patients met inclusion criteria. Of these, 2406 (17.9%) achieved TRG 0 or ypT0 and 8210 (61.2%) achieved ypN0. Collectively, 2043 patients (15.2%) were reported to have a pathologic complete response (ypT0 ypN0). Positive pathologic nodes were found in 15%, 23%, 31%, 54%, and 53% as ypT stage increased from ypT0 to ypT4, respectively. Similarly, ypN+ rates were 15%, 36%, 41%, and 55% in TRG 0-3. No JoinPoint was identified for TRG 0, whereas inflection points were found at 6-10 nodes for TRG1 (p = 0.002) and TRG 2 (p = 0.016), and at 11-15 nodes for TRG 3. CONCLUSION: The benchmark of retrieving 12 nodes in resectable stage III rectal cancer is not consistently achieved after NCRT/TNT. We demonstrate that the LNH requirement to establish accurate pathologic nodal staging can vary depending on the tumor response to neoadjuvant therapies.

Impact of autotransfusion on recurrence of colorectal cancer liver metastasis: Long-term follow-up of patients undergoing curative intent hepatectomy.

INTRODUCTION: Colorectal cancer liver metastasis (CRLM) occurs in upto 50% of cases and drives patient outcomes. Up-front liver resection is the treatment of choice in resectable cases. There is no consensus yet established as to the safety of intraoperative autotransfusion in liver resection for CRLM. METHODS: Patients undergoing curative-intent hepatectomy for CRLM at a single quaternary-care institution from 1999 to 2016 were included. Demographics, surgical variables, Fong Clinical Risk Score (FCRS), use of intraoperative auto and/or allotransfusion, and survival data were analyzed. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed accounting for allotransfusion, extent of hepatectomy, FCRS, and systemic treatment regimens. RESULTS: Three-hundred sixteen patients were included. The median follow-up was 10.4 years (7.8-14.1 years). The median recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) in all patients were 1.6 years (interquartile range: 0.63-6.6 years) and 4.4 years (2.1-8.7), respectively.  Before PSM, there was a significantly reduced RFS in the autotransfusion group (0.96 vs. 1.73 years, p = 0.20). There was no difference in OS (4.11 vs. 4.44 years, p = 0.118). Patients in groups of FCRS 0-2 and 3-5 both had reduced RFS when autotransfusion was used (p = 0.005). This reduction in RFS was further found when comparing autotransfusion versus no autotransfusion within the FCRS 0-2 group and within the FCRS 3-5 group (p = 0.027). On Cox-regression analysis, autotransfusion (hazard ratio = 1.423, 1.028-2.182, p = 0.015) remained predictive of RFS. After PSM, there were no differences in FCRS (p = 0.601), preoperative hemoglobin (p = 0.880), allotransfusion (p = 0.130), adjuvant chemotherapy (p = 1.000), immunotherapy (p = 0.172), tumor grade (p = 1.000), use of platinum-based chemotherapy (p = 0.548), or type of hepatic resection (p = 0.967). After matching, there was a higher rate of recurrence with autotransfusion (69.0% vs. 47.6%, p = 0.046). There was also a reduced time to recurrence in the autotransfusion group compared with the group without (p = 0.006). There was no difference in OS after PSM (p = 0.262). CONCLUSION: Autotransfusion may adversely affect recurrence in liver resection for CRLM. Until further studies clarify this risk profile, the use of intraoperative autotransfusion should be critically assessed on a case-by-case basis only when other resuscitation options are not available.

Comparing oncologic and surgical outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy in patients with pancreatic cancer: a propensity-matched analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Minimally invasive Pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD), or the Whipple procedure, is increasingly utilized. No study has compared laparoscopic (LPD) and robotic (RPD) approaches, and the impact of the learning curve on oncologic, technical, and post-operative outcomes remains relatively understudied. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was queried for patients undergoing LPD or RPD from 2010 to 2020 with a diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. Outcomes were compared between approaches using propensity-score matching (PSM); the impact of annual center-level volume of MIPD was also assessed by dividing volume into quartiles. RESULTS: A total of 3,342 patients were included. Most (n = 2,716, 81.3%) underwent LPD versus RPD (n = 626, 18.7%). There was a high rate (20.2%, n = 719) of positive margins. Mean length-of-stay (LOS) was 10.4 ± 8.9 days. Thirty-day mortality was 2.8% (n = 92) and ninety-day mortality was 5.7% (n = 189). PSM matched 625 pairs of patients receiving LPD or RPD. After PSM, there was no differences between groups based on age, sex, race, CCI, T-stage, neoadjuvant chemo/radiotherapy, or type of PD. After PSM, there was a higher rate of conversion to open (HR = 0.68, 95%CI = 0.50-0.92)., but there was no difference in LOS (HR = 1.00, 95%CI = 0.92-1.11), 30-day readmission (HR = 1.08, 95% CI = 0.68-1.71), 30-day (HR = 0.78, 95% CI = 0.39-1.56) or 90-day mortality (HR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.42-1.16), ability to receive adjuvant therapy (HR = 1.15, 95% CI = 0.92-1.44), nodal harvest (HR = 1.01, 95%CI = 0.94-1.09) or positive margins (HR = 1.19, 95% CI = 0.89-1.59). Centers in lower quartiles of annual volume of MIPD demonstrated reduced nodal harvest (p = 0.005) and a higher rate of conversion to open (p = 0.038). Higher-volume centers had a shorter LOS (p = 0.012), higher rate of initiation of adjuvant therapy (p = 0.042), and, most strikingly, a reduction in 90-day mortality (p = 0.033). CONCLUSION: LPD and RPD have similar surgical and oncologic outcomes, with a lower rate of conversion to open in the robotic cohort. The robotic technique does not appear to eliminate the "learning curve", with higher volume centers demonstrating improved outcomes, especially seen at minimum annual volume of 5 cases.

Comparing oncologic and surgical outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: a propensity-matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: The frequency of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy is gradually exceeding that of the open approach. Our study aims to compare short-term outcomes of robotic (RDP) and laparoscopic (LDP) distal pancreatectomies for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) using a national database. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was utilized to identify patients with PDAC who underwent distal pancreatectomy from 2010-2020. Short-term technical and oncologic outcomes such as margin status and nodal harvest were included. Propensity-score matching (PSM) was performed comparing LDP and RDP cohorts. Multivariate logistic-regression models were then used to assess the impact of institutional volume on the MIDP surgical and technical oncologic outcomes. RESULTS: 1537 patients underwent MIDP with curative intent. Most cases were laparoscopic (74.4%, n = 1144), with a gradual increase in robotic utilization, from 8.7% in 2010 to 32.0% of MIDP cases ten years later. For PSM, 698 LDP patients were matched with 349 RDP. The odds of conversion to an open case were 58% less in RDP (12.6%) compared to LDP (25.5%) with no statistically significant difference in technical oncologic results. There was no difference in length of stay (OR = 1.0[0.7-1.4]), 30-day mortality (OR = 0.5[0.2-2.0]) or 90-day mortality (OR = 1.1[0.5-2.4]) between RDP and LDP, although there was a higher 30-day readmission rate with RDP (OR = 1.71[1.1-2.7]). There were statistically significant differences in technical oncologic outcomes (nodal harvest, margin status, initiation of adjuvant therapy) based on MIDP volume quartiles. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic and robotic distal pancreatectomy have similar peri- and post-operative surgical and oncologic outcomes, with a higher rate of conversion to open in the laparoscopic cohort.

Surgical Management of the Axilla in HR+/HER2- Breast Cancer in the Z1071 Era: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis of the National Cancer Database.

BACKGROUND: Axillary management varies between sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) and axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) for patients with clinical N1 (cN1), hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)/neu-negative (HER2-), infiltrative ductal carcinoma (IDC) who achieve a complete clinical response (cCR) to neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NAST). This study sought to evaluate clinical practice patterns and survival outcomes of SLNB versus ALND in this patient subset. METHODS: Patients with cN1, HR+/HER2-, unilateral IDC demonstrating a cCR to NAST were identified from the 2012-2017 National Cancer Database (NCDB) and stratified based on final axillary surgery management (SLNB vs ALND). After propensity score-matching, overall survival (OS) was compared using a Kaplan-Meier analysis, and significant OS predictors were identified using Cox regression. RESULTS: Of the 1676 patients selected for this study, 593 (35.4%) underwent SLNB and 1083 (64.6%) underwent ALND. Use of SLNB increased by 28 % between 2012 and 2017. Among a total of 584 matched patients, 461 matched ypN0 patients, and 108 matched ypN+ patients, mean OS did not differ between SLNB and ALND (all patients [92.1 ± 0.8 vs 90.2 ± 1.0 months; p = 0.157], ypN0 patients [92.4 ± 0.8 vs 89.9 ± 0.9 months; p = 0.105], ypN+ patients [83.5 ± 2.3 vs 91.7 ± 2.7 months; p ± 0.963). Cox regression identified age, Charlson score, clinical T stage, and pathologic nodal status as significant predictors of OS. CONCLUSION: The final surgical management strategy used for cN1, HR+/HER2- IDC patients who achieved a cCR to NAST did not have a significant impact on survival outcomes in this analysis. Potential opportunities for de-escalation of axillary management among this patient subset exist, and validation studies are needed.

Neoadjuvant Gastric Score: How Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Affects Overall Survival and Adjuvant Benefit.

INTRODUCTION: The Neoadjuvant Rectal score (NAR) was developed as a short-term surrogate for 5-year overall survival (OS) prediction in locally advanced rectal cancer on the basis of response to neoadjuvant therapy. We aim to assess whether this score can be repurposed for locally advanced gastric adenocarcinoma treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgical resection. METHODS: Patients with gastric adenocarcinoma treated with neoadjuvant systemic therapy followed by surgical resection were extracted from the National Cancer Database. Neoadjuvant Gastric (NAG) scores were calculated, and patients were stratified into low-, intermediate-, and high-score categories, with low scores predicting longer survival. Patients were propensity-matched 1:1:1 between the groups for OS comparison. We also matched patients within each group 1:1 per receipt of adjuvant therapy and compared 5-year OS. RESULTS: There were 2,970 patients identified. NAG classified patients into low- (n = 396, 13.3%), intermediate-(n = 756, 25.5%), and high (n = 1818, 61.2%) groups. After propensity matching, 5-year OS was significantly different between the matched groups (low-NAG 82%, intermediate-NAG 73%, and high-NAG 39%; p < 0.001). NAG score grouping also predicted OS benefit of adjuvant therapy; low- and intermediate-NAG patients had no OS benefit with adjuvant therapy (86% vs. 84%; p = 0.492, and 77% vs. 74%; p = 0.382, respectively), whereas patients with high-NAG score had a 5-year OS benefit with adjuvant therapy (39% vs. 29%; p = 0.024). CONCLUSION: NAR score may be repurposed to generate a prognostic tool in gastric adenocarcinoma to predict 5-year OS and has the potential to guide decision-making regarding allocation of adjuvant therapy. Further studies should prospectively validate these findings to confirm clinical utility.

Return to intended oncologic therapy after colectomy for stage III colon adenocarcinoma: Does surgical approach matter?

AIM: Return to intended oncologic treatment (RIOT) is an important paradigm for surgically resected cancers requiring multimodal treatment. Benefits of minimally invasive colectomy (MIC) may allow earlier initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT) and have associated survival benefits. We sought to determine if operative approach affects RIOT timing in resected stage III colon cancer. METHODS: NCDB identified pathological stage III colon adenocarcinoma patients who underwent resection and received ACT. Propensity score matching and kernel density estimation compared operative approaches and conversion impact on intervals to RIOT. RESULTS: A total of 15,132 open colectomies (OC) versus 14,107 MIC were included. MIC patients had two-days shorter median length of stay (LOS) (4 vs. 6 days; p < 0.001), one-week shorter median time to RIOT (6 vs. 7 weeks; p = 0.015) comparing 12,867 matched pairs. There was no difference in time interval to RIOT between the LC versus RC, converted MIC vs. OC groups. MIC was a favourable predictor of earlier RIOT (HR 1.14 [1.07-1.22]; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: MIC in stage III colon cancer is associated with a shorter time to RIOT when compared to OC. Since timely initiation of ACT may influence cancer outcome, MIC may be oncologically preferable. Prospective studies are needed to assess RIOT and survival outcomes in stage III colon cancer.

Outcomes of 350 Robotic-assisted Esophagectomies at a High-volume Cancer Center: A Contemporary Propensity-score Matched Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate perioperative and oncologic outcomes in our RAMIE cohort and compare outcomes with contemporary OE controls. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: RAMIE has emerged as an alternative to traditional open or laparoscopic approaches. Described in all esophagectomy techniques, rapid adoption has been attributed to both enhanced visualization and technical dexterity. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent RAMIE for malignancy. Patient characteristics, perioperative outcomes, and survival were evaluated. For perioperative and oncologic outcome comparison, contemporary OE controls were propensity-score matched from NSQIP and NCDB databases. RESULTS: We identified 350 patients who underwent RAMIE between 2010 and 2019. Median body mass index was 27.4, 32% demonstrated a Charlson Comorbidity Index >4. Nodal disease was identified in 50% of patients and 74% received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Mean operative time and blood loss were 425 minutes and 232 mL, respectively. Anastomotic leak occurred in 16% of patients, 2% required reoperation. Median LOS was 9 days, and 30-day mortality was 3%. A median of 21 nodes were dissected with 96% achieving an R0 resection. Median survival was 67.4 months. 222 RAMIE were matched 1:1 to the NSQIP OE control. RAMIE demonstrated decreased LOS (9 vs 10 days, P = 0.010) and reoperative rates (2.3 vs 12.2%, P = 0.001), longer operative time (427 vs 311 minutes, P = 0.001), and increased rate of pulmonary embolism (5.4% vs 0.9%, P = 0.007) in comparison to NSQIP cohort. There was no difference in leak rate or mortality. Three hundred forty-three RAMIE were matched to OE cohort from NCDB with no difference in median overall survival (63 vs 53 months; P = 0.130). CONCLUSION: In this largest reported institutional series, we demonstrate that RAMIE can be performed safely with excellent oncologic outcomes and decreased hospital stay when compared to the open approach.

Neoadjuvant systemic therapy in geriatric breast cancer patients: a National Cancer Database (NCDB) analysis.

PURPOSE: Neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NAST) can be an effective treatment option for patients with HER2 + or triple negative breast cancer (TNBC). However, its use in geriatric patients is largely understudied. Our aim is to investigate the effect of NAST in both septuagenarians and octogenarians with HER2 + or TNBC to better understand its role in the geriatric patient population. METHODS: We utilized the National Cancer Database (NCDB) to analyze female patients with HER2 + or TNBC between 70 and 89 years. We compared the baseline demographic and clinical characteristics of septuagenarians and octogenarians using mixed-effect modeling for continuous variables and conditional logistic regressions for categorical variables. Overall survival (OS) between several subgroups was compared based on a propensity score model. Kaplan-Meier method was used to calculate OS between the subgroups, and log-rank test was used to compare OS results. RESULTS: A total of 16,443 patients met inclusion/exclusion criteria, of which 92.9% had infiltrative ductal carcinoma and 73.5% were TNBC. Most patients received NAST as a first course of therapy (58.8%). Septuagenarians were more likely to receive NAST (65.9%), whereas octogenarians were more likely to receive upfront surgical resection (67.7%). Our analysis demonstrated OS benefit with NAST among patients who received surgical resection. However, in patients who received NAST, decline during therapy was associated with a significantly poorer OS outcomes in general. CONCLUSION: When combined with surgical resection, NAST is an effective treatment option in both septuagenarians and octogenarians. Nonetheless, careful selection of NAST recipients in this population remains critical to optimize patient outcome.

Surgical Management of Axilla of Triple-Negative Breast Cancer in the Z1071 Era: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis of the National Cancer Database.

BACKGROUND: The role of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) patients who present with clinical N1 (cN1) disease and undergo complete clinical response (cCR) to neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NAST) remains unclear. We aimed to study the outcomes of SLNB versus axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) in this setting. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with cN1 TNBC who showed cCR to NAST were selected from the National Cancer Database (NCDB), and propensity score matched 1:1 between SLNB and ALND in all-comers, ypN0, and ypN1 subgroups. Overall survival (OS) was compared using the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox regression was used to identify predictors of OS. RESULTS: Of the 2953 patients selected. 1062 (36.0%) underwent SLNB and 1891 (64.0%) underwent ALND. There was a chronological increase in national SLNB utilization (from 20% in 2012 to 46% in 2017). One thousand three patients were propensity matched between SLNB and ALND, and no OS difference was noted (81.73 ± 1.04 vs. 80.07 ± 0.70 months; p = 0.127). In the ypN0 subgroup, 884 pairs were matched and no significant OS difference was found (85.29 ± 0.84 vs. 82.60 ± 0.68 months; p = 0.638). In ypN+ patients, 129 pairs were matched and demonstrated a trend toward decreased OS with SLNB (64.37 ± 3.12 vs. 72.45 ± 72.45; p = 0.085). Cox regression identified age, inner tumors, advanced T stage, partial/no in-breast response, and nodal status as unfavorable predictors of OS. Definitive axillary surgical procedure was not a predictor in the final model. CONCLUSION: SLNB and ALND appear to yield comparable OS in cN1 TNBC patients who demonstrate cCR to NAST. Caution should be exercised in ypN1 patients as worse OS could be associated with SLNB.

Surgical Approach does not Affect Return to Intended Oncologic Therapy Following Pancreaticoduodenectomy for Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: A Propensity-Matched Study.

BACKGROUND: The effect of minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD), including laparoscopic and robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD and RPD, respectively), on compliance and time to return to intended oncologic therapy (RIOT) for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains unknown. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with nonmetastatic PDAC were analyzed in the National Cancer Database (NCDB). Three groups were matched per propensity score: open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) and MIPD, LPD and RPD, and converted and nonconverted patients. RIOT rates and time to RIOT were examined. RESULTS: A total of 14,135 patients were included: 11,834 (83.7%) underwent OPD and 2301 (16.3%) underwent MIPD. After score matching, RIOT rates (67.2 vs. 65.3%; p = 0.112) and RIOT within 8 weeks (57.7 vs. 56.4%; p = 0.276) were similar among MIPD and OPD groups, and approach was not a significant predictor of RIOT on multivariable regression. Neither RIOT nor time to RIOT were different among LPD and RPD groups (63.9 vs. 67.0%, and 58.4 vs. 56.9%, respectively). Compared with LPD, RPD was associated with lower conversion rates (HR 0.519; p < 0.001), and conversion was associated with longer median time to RIOT (10 vs. 8 weeks; p = 0.041). CONCLUSION: In this national cohort, approach did not impact RIOT rates or time to RIOT for patients with PDAC. While conversion was associated with longer median time to RIOT, readiness to commence adjuvant therapy was similar for LPD and RPD.

Prophylactic Perioperative Antibiotics in Open Pancreaticoduodenectomy: When Less Is More and When It Is Not. A National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Propensity-Matched Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: We hypothesized that first-generation cephalosporins (G1CEP) provide adequate antimicrobial coverage for pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) when no biliary stent is present but might be inferior to second-generation cephalosporins or broad-spectrum antibiotics (G2CEP/BS) in decreasing surgical-site infection (SSI) rates when a biliary stent is present. METHODS: The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program 2014-2019 was used to select patients who underwent elective open PD. We divided the population into no-stent versus stent groups based on the status of biliary drainage and then divided each group into G1CEP versus G2CEP/BS subgroups based on the choice of perioperative antibiotics. We matched the subgroups per a propensity score match and analyzed postoperative outcomes. RESULTS: Six thousand two hundred forty five cases of 39,779 were selected; 2821 in the no-stent (45.2%) versus 3424 (54.8%) in the stent group. G1CEP were the antibiotics of choice in 2653 (42.5%) versus G2CEP/BS in 3592 (57.5%) cases. In the no-stent group, we matched 1129 patients between G1CEP and G2CEP/BS. There was no difference in SSI-specific complications (20.3% versus 21.0%; P = 0.677), general infectious complications (25.7% versus 26.9%; P = 0.503), PD-specific complications, overall morbidity, length of stay, or mortality. In the stent group, we matched 1244 pairs. G2CEP/BS had fewer SSI-specific complications (19.9% versus 26.6%; P < 0.001), collections requiring drainage (9.6% versus 12.9%; P = 0.011), and general infectious complications (28.5% versus 34.1%; P = 0.002) but no difference in overall morbidity, mortality, length of stay, and readmission rates. CONCLUSIONS: G2CEP/BS are associated with reduced rates of SSI-specific and infectious complications in stented patients undergoing open elective PD. In patients without prior biliary drainage, G1CEP seems to provide adequate antimicrobial coverage.

Neoadjuvant rectal score is prognostic for survival: A population-based propensity-matched analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Neoadjuvant rectal (NAR) score may serve as a surrogate short-term endpoint for overall survival (OS) in clinical trials. This study aims to test the NAR score using a large, national cancer registry. METHODS: National Cancer Database patients with clinical stage II/III rectal adenocarcinoma (RAC) treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiation (CRT) followed by surgery were selected and divided into low-, intermediate-, and high-NAR subgroups. OS outcomes were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier and logistic regression models. RESULTS: A total of 12 452 patients were selected, of which 5071 (40.7%) were in clinical stage II and 7381 (59.3%) were in clinical stage III; 15.2% had pathologic complete response. The mean NAR score was 10.01 ± 10.61. Six thousand nine hundred and forty-one (55.7%) did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) and were propensity-matched across NAR subgroups (966 in each group). A significant difference in 5-year OS between low-, intermediate-, and high-NAR groups was observed (85% vs. 76% vs. 68%; p < 0.001). Five thousand five hundred and eleven (44.3%) received AC and 1045 triplets were propensity-matched per NAR groups. A significant difference was again observed for 5-year OS (93% vs. 88% vs. 75%; p < 0.001). Logistic regression confirmed NAR strata as a significant predictor of 5-year OS. CONCLUSION: NAR score, as a neoadjuvant response measure, is a strong predictor of 5-year OS, regardless of AC receipt in a heterogenous population of locally advanced RAC patients.

The effect of histologic grade on neoadjuvant treatment outcomes in esophageal cancer.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The gold standard for locoregional esophageal cancer (LEC) treatment includes preoperative chemoradiation and surgical resection, with possible perioperative or adjuvant systemic therapy. With few data associating histologic grade and prognosis in LEC patients receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by resection, we seek to evaluate this association. METHODS: Our institutional esophagectomy database between 1999 and 2019 was queried, selecting esophageal adenocarcinoma patients who completed neoadjuvant therapy (NAT), followed by esophagectomy. Propensity-score matching of low- and high-histologic grade groups was performed to assess survival metrics using initial clinical grade (cG) and final pathologic grade (pG). We performed a multivariable logistic regression to study predictors of pathologic complete response as a secondary objective. RESULTS: A total of 518 patients met the inclusion criteria. Kaplan-Meier analysis of the matched dataset showed no difference in initial or 5-year recurrence-free survival or overall survival (OS) between cG1 and cG2 versus cG3 based on original grade. When matched according to pG, cG1-2 had improved median survival parameters compared to cG3, with 5-year OS for cG1-2 of 45% versus 27% (p = 0.001). Higher pG, pathologic N stage, and poor response to NAT are predictors of poor survival. CONCLUSION: Patients with post-NAT pG1-2 demonstrated improved survival. Integrating histologic grade into postneoadjuvant staging may be warranted.

Adjuvant chemotherapy after neoadjuvant chemoradiation and proctectomy improves survival irrespective of pathologic response in rectal adenocarcinoma: a population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: This study sought to determine whether adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) compared to no AC (noAC) after neoadjuvant chemoradiation (CRT) and resection for rectal adenocarcinoma prolongs survival. Current guidelines from expert groups are conflicting, and data to support administering AC to patients who received neoadjuvant CRT are lacking. METHODS: A total of 19,867 patients met inclusion/exclusion criteria. Mean age was 58.6 ± 12.0 years, and 12,396 (62.4%) were males. Complete response (CR) was documented in 3801 (19.1%) patients and 8167 (41.1%) received AC. The cohort was stratified into pathological complete (pCR, N = 3801) and incomplete (pIR, N = 16,066) subgroups, and pIR further subcategorized into ypN0 (N = 10,191) and ypN + (N = 5875) subgroups. After propensity score matching, AC was associated with improved OS in the pCR subgroups (mean 139.1 ± 1.9 vs. 134.0 ± 2.2 months; p < 0.001), in pIR ypN0 subgroup (141.6 ± 1.5 vs. 129.9 ± 1.2 months, p < 0.001), and in pIR ypN + subgroup (155.9 ± 5.4 vs. 126.5 ± 7.6 months; p < 0.001). RESULTS: AC was associated with improved OS in patients who received neoadjuvant CRT followed by proctectomy for clinical stages II and III rectal adenocarcinoma. This effect persisted irrespective of pathological response status. CONCLUSIONS: AC following neoadjuvant CRT and surgery is associated with improved OS in patients with rectal adenocarcinoma. These findings warrant adoption of AC after neoadjuvant CRT and surgery for clinical stage II and III rectal adenocarcinoma.

Malignant colon polyps: predicting lymph node metastasis following endoscopic excision.

AIM: The risk of lymph node metastasis (LNM) of malignant colon polyps (MCPs) is partly estimated by histologic features of the sampled polyp. However, the routinely available histologic data is limited to tumor grade and status of lymphovascular invasion (LVI). METHODS: The NCDB for colon cancer 2004-2018 was utilized. Patients with pT1Nx adenocarcinoma arising in a polyp and undergoing partial colectomy with ≥ 12 retrieved nodes were selected. NCDB 2004-2017 was used as a training cohort to develop two scoring systems based on a multivariable regression for predictors of LNM including clinical characteristics, grade, and LVI: a nomogram scoring system (NSS) and a simplified scoring system (SSS). These models were internally validated using NCDB 2018 to calculate precision metrics for each model. RESULTS: Six thousand sixty-nine patients were selected in the training cohort. 64.5% of MCPs were in the sigmoid, and LNM rate was 11.2%. Multivariable regression identified younger age, females, hindgut location, higher grade, and LVI as significant predictors of LNM. LNM risk was 1.2% when all unfavorable predictors were absent and exceeded 10% when NSS > 70 or SSS ≥ 3. In the 2018 validation cohort, 723 patients were scored per NSS and SSS, and the negative predictive value for both was 96%. CONCLUSION: Estimating LNM risk in MCPs by applying clinical characteristics along with limited histologic data can help inform decision-making when considering formal oncologic resection. The NSS and SSS demonstrated comparable predictability of LNM among pT1Nx MCPs. The models require external validation and may be strengthened by incorporating additional endoscopic and pathologic characteristics.

Surgical approach to pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma: uncomplicated ends justify the means.

BACKGROUND: Pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) remains the cornerstone of managing pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) of the pancreas head/neck, but it is associated with high morbidity. We hypothesize that, in absence of pancreatectomy-specific morbidity (PSM), minimally invasive PD (MIPD) provides improved short-term outcomes compared to open PD (OPD). METHODS: NSQIP pancreatectomy-targeted database 2014-2019 was utilized. PSM was defined as the occurrence of delayed gastric emptying (DGE) and/or post-operative pancreatic fistula (POPF). The cohort was divided into No-PSM and PSM groups. Propensity score match was applied in each group to compare outcomes of MIPD vs. OPD. RESULTS: 8,121 patients were selected. Patients were divided into No-PSM (N = 6267) and PSM (N = 1854) groups. In No-PSM group, we matched 1656 OPD to 552 MIPD patients. MIPD had longer operations (423 vs. 359 min; p < 0.001) but less overall morbidity (22.1% vs. 29.1%; p = 0.001) mostly attributed to less bleeding and sepsis. MIPD patients also had a one-day shorter median LOS (6 vs. 7 days; p = 0.005) and higher rates of home discharge (92.8% vs. 89.6%; p = 0.027). No difference was noted in mortality and 30-day readmission. In PSM group, 441 OPD were matched to 147 MIPD peers. MIPD had longer operations but without short-term benefits. General morbidity (61.2% vs. 61.9%), median LOS (12 vs. 12 days), mortality (2.7% vs. 1.8%), and readmission rates (32.7% vs. 26.5%) were similar. Same conclusions were drawn in the per-protocol analysis. CONCLUSION: PSM is common following PD for PDAC. In the absence of PSM, MIPD is associated with less postoperative morbidity and shorter LOS.

Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma is Associated with Lower Post-Pancreatectomy Readmission Rates: A Population-Based Cohort Study.

INTRODUCTION: Despite neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) being increasingly utilized and possibly associated with improved oncological outcomes, the impact of NAC on textbook outcomes following pancreatectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains debated. METHODS: A retrospective review of the National Cancer Database of patients undergoing resection of non-metastatic PDAC from 2004 to 2016 was performed. Propensity score matching was used to account for treatment selection bias in patients with and without NAC (noNAC). A multivariable binary logistic regression model was used to analyze the association of NAC with length of stay (LOS), 30-day readmission, and 30- and 90-day mortality. RESULTS: Of 7975 (11%) NAC patients and 65,338 (89%) noNAC patients, 2911 NAC and 2911 noNAC patients remained in the cohort after matching. Clinicopathologic and demographic variables were well-balanced after matching. After matching, NAC was associated with significantly lower rates of 30-day readmission (5.5% vs. 7.4%; p = 0.006), which remained after multivariable adjustment (odds ratio [OR] 0.74, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.60-0.92; p = 0.006). There were no significant differences in LOS and 30- and 90-day mortality in patients receiving NAC and noNAC. Stratified analyses by surgery type (i.e. pancreaticoduodenectomy [PD] and distal pancreatectomy [DP]) demonstrated consistent results. CONCLUSION: Receipt of NAC in PDAC patients undergoing DP or PD is associated with lower readmission rates and does not otherwise compromise short-term outcomes. These data reaffirm the safety of strategies incorporating NAC and is important to consider when devising policies aimed at quality improvement in achieving textbook outcomes.

Adjuvant Chemotherapy Associated with Survival Benefit Following Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Pancreatectomy for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: A Population-Based Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Data supporting the routine use of adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) compared with no AC (noAC) following neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) and resection for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) are lacking. This study aimed to determine whether AC improves long-term survival in patients receiving NAC and resection. METHODS: Patients receiving resection for PDAC following NAC from 2004 to 2016 were identified from the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB). Patients with a survival rate of < 6 months were excluded to account for immortal time bias. Propensity score matching (PSM) and Cox regression analysis were performed to account for selection bias and analyze the impact of AC on overall survival. RESULTS: Of 4449 (68%) noAC patients and 2111 (32%) AC patients, 2016 noAC patients and 2016 AC patients remained after PSM. After matching, AC was associated with improved survival (median 29.4 vs. 24.9 months; p < 0.001), which remained after multivariable adjustment (HR 0.81, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.75-0.88; p < 0.001). On multivariable interaction analyses, this benefit persisted irrespective of nodal status: N0 (hazard ratio [HR] 0.80, 95% CI 0.72-0.90; p < 0.001), N1 (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.67-0.86; p < 0.001), R0 margin status (HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.75-0.89; p < 0.001), R1 margin status (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.64-0.93; p = 0.007), no neoadjuvant radiotherapy (NART; HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.74-0.96; p = 0.009), and use of NART (HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.73-0.88; p < 0.001). Stratified analysis by nodal, margin, and NART status demonstrated consistent results. CONCLUSION: AC following NAC and resection is associated with improved survival, even in margin-negative and node-negative disease. These findings suggest completing planned systemic treatment should be considered in all resected PDACs previously treated with NAC.