Influence of biliary and vascular resection types on morbidity in hepatectomies with vascular involvement.

INTRODUCTION: Hepatectomies associated with vascular resections pose a technical challenge for surgeons, involving multiple reconstruction techniques. Moreover, adding clinical and surgical risks in the postoperative setting of these complex procedures are mainly due to prolonged surgical periods and potential complications inherent to vascular manipulation. Leveraging the expertise of a Cancer Center, we propose an institutional assessment utilizing the case series from A. C. Camargo Cancer Center in hepatectomies associated with vascular resection, evaluating postoperative complications and outcomes while highlighting clinical, laboratory, pathological, and surgical factors that may influence results. OBJECTIVE: To assess mortality and morbidity associated with hepatectomies involving vascular resection. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From a prospective database, a study was performed evaluating postoperative survival and morbidity using scoring systems such as Clavien-Dindo through a cohort analysis. RESULTS: From a total of 1021 liver resections for a period of 10 years, 31 cases were evaluated from a unique cancer center in Brazil! Factors such as the performance of major hepatectomies, the need for blood transfusion, and the administration of neoadjuvant or adjuvant systemic therapy did not appear to influence the outcome of morbidity or mortality. However, the resection of the associated bile duct and the type of vascular resection seemed to influence morbidity outcomes with statistical significance (p = 0.006+ …). CONCLUSION: Hepatectomies associated with vascular resections are safe in selected cases and when performed in referral centers. Factors such as associated bile duct resection and type of vascular resection should be considered for procedure indication.

Patterns of disease relapse and posttreatment follow-up of patients with resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma: A single-center analysis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: To describe the patterns of disease relapse and follow-up of patients with resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Additionally, we looked at patients' characteristics at relapse and survival. METHODS: We included patients with potentially resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma diagnosed from 2008 to 2018 who were submitted to resection with clear macroscopic margins and started posttreatment surveillance. RESULTS: The study population consists of 73 patients. The median interval between imaging studies was 3.2 months during the first 2 years of follow-up and 5.1 months thereafter. Forty-eight patients (65.8%) experienced disease relapse. The most frequent single site of relapse was locoregional (N = 21; 43.8%). At relapse, 31 patients (64.6%) were symptomatic and forty-two patients (87.6%) had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 or 1. Most patients were able to undergo additional anticancer therapy (N = 41; 85.4%). Patients with asymptomatic relapses experienced longer median postrelapse survival (25.4 vs. 11.3 months; p = 0.015). CONCLUSIONS: A follow-up protocol that included imaging studies every 3 months in the first 2 years and every 6 months thereafter is able to diagnose disease relapse when patients have adequate performance status and are still able to undergo additional anticancer treatment.

Surgery or active surveillance for pNETs < 2 cm: Preliminary results from a single center Brazilian cohort.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Incidence of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNETS) seems to be rising over the years, with many cases incidentally diagnosed. Surgery and active surveillance are current treatment modalities for small pNETS. We review our institutional series and compare outcomes for small asymptomatic and nonfunctioning tumors. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included patients with 2 cm or less and well differentiated pNETS at a single Brazilian Cancer Center. From 2002 to 2020, patients received active surveillance or surgery as a treatment strategy. Short and long-term results were compared. RESULTS: Sixty-four patients were included, 41 in surgical strategy and 23 in the active surveillance approach. Baseline group characteristics were comparable. More patients on active surveillance underwent abdominal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and had tumors located in the pancreatic head (41% vs. 17%, p = 0.038). Minimally invasive procedure was chosen in 80.1% of the surgical patients. No patient died after surgery. Median follow-up period was 38.6 and 46.4 months for active surveillance and surgery cohorts, respectively. No difference in disease progression rate was observed. CONCLUSION: Both approaches seem to be safe for small pNETs. Long-term outcome and quality of life should be considered when discussing such options with patients.

PD-L1 expression in gastric and gastroesophageal junction cancer patients treated with perioperative chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The incidence, predictive, and prognostic impact of programmed cell death (PD-L1) expression in gastric (GC) and gastroesophageal junction tumors (GEJC) treated with perioperative chemotherapy is poorly understood. We aimed to assess PD-L1 expression by immunohistochemistry (IHC) in both pre and posttreatment specimens evaluating its impact on pathological response and survival outcomes. METHODS: Retrospective cohort of patients with GC and GEJ tumors treated in a single western cancer center between 2007 and 2017. PD-L1 expression was assessed by IHC before and after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, in surgical samples, and reported as combined positive score (CPS). CPS > 1% was tested for its association with pathological response and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: We were able to assess PD-L1 expression in at least one tissue sample from 155 subjects. PD-L1 positivity rate was 20%. In 74 paired samples, a 21% discordance between PD-L1 expression in biopsy sample and surgical specimen was observed. With a median follow-up period of 60.3 months, 5-years disease-free survival was 60.5% with a median OS not reached. PD-L1 expression was neither associated with pathological response or survival outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: PD-L1 expression in the setting of locally advanced GC tumors was relatively low and can vary considering the tissue sample analyzed. This expression had no association with survival or pathological response in this population.

Predictors of long-term survival in patients with hepatic resection of colorectal metastases: Analysis of a Brazilian Cancer Center Cohort.

BACKGROUND: Hepatic metastases are a major cause of death in patients with colorectal cancer. A comprehensive assessment of the prognostic factors associated with long-term survival could improve patient selection for surgical approaches and decrease morbidity and futile locoregional treatments. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of patients who underwent hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastases at a single center from 2000 to 2012. RESULTS: To identify factors associated with 5- and 10-year overall (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS), we analyzed 280 patients and 150 patients in the 5- and 10-year cohorts, respectively. Only seven relapses occurred after 5 years of follow-up, and no relapses occurred after 10 years. Multivariable analysis indicated that bilobar disease and extra-hepatic disease before hepatectomy were independent 5- and 10-year predictors of OS, and major postoperative complications predicted OS in the 5-year survival cohort only. Our analysis indicated that prognostic factors associated with DFS included some confounders and was therefore inconclusive. CONCLUSIONS: Taken together, our results suggest that the predictors of 5- and 10-year OS rates of colorectal cancer patients with hepatic metastases are similar, differing only by postoperative complications that influenced exclusively 5-year survival. Since no relapse occurred 10 years after hepatic resection, oncological remission is likely.