Wedge resection, segmentectomy, and lobectomy: oncologic outcomes based on extent of surgical resection for ≤2 cm stage IA non-small cell lung cancer.

Background: Long-standing controversy has existed over whether sublobar resection is an adequate oncological procedure for clinical stage IA non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) ≤2 cm, despite the recent randomized trial reports of Japanese Clinical Oncology Group (JCOG) 0802 and Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) 140503 demonstrating non-inferior outcomes with sublobar resection compared to lobectomy. As practice patterns shift, we sought to compare oncologic outcomes in patients with these early-stage tumors after wedge resection, segmentectomy, or lobectomy in a contemporary, real-world, cohort. Methods: A retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database from a single institution was conducted from 2011 to 2020 to identify all patients with clinically staged IA1 or IA2 NSCLC (tumors ≤2 cm with no nodal involvement). The primary outcomes of interest were overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS), with secondary outcomes of lung cancer-specific survival (LCSS), recurrence patterns, and perioperative morbidity and mortality. Results: A total of 480 patients were identified; 93 (19.4%) patients underwent wedge resection, 90 (18.7%) received segmentectomy, and 297 (61.9%) underwent lobectomy. Patients who underwent wedge resection had worse Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (23.7% ECOG 1 or 2 vs. 5.6% among segmentectomy and 5.4% among lobectomy, P<0.05). Both wedge resection and segmentectomy patients had lower preoperative mean percentage of predicted forced expiratory volume in one second (%FEV1) compared to the lobectomy group (81.8% and 82.6% vs. 89.6%, P=0.002), a higher proportion of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and interstitial lung disease (ILD), and a higher Charlson Comorbidity Index. There were no statistically significant differences in 5-year OS, DFS, or LCSS between groups: 90%, 61%, 78% for wedge resections compared with 85%, 75%, 86% for segmentectomy, and 87%, 77%, 87% for lobectomy, respectively. Recurrence was observed in 17 patients who underwent wedge resection (18.3%, 8 local, 9 distant), 12 patients who received segmentectomy (13.4%, 6 local, 6 distant), and 38 patients who underwent lobectomy (12.8%, 11 local, 27 distant), which was not significantly different (P=0.36). Conclusions: Patients with inferior performance status or lower baseline pulmonary function are more likely to receive wedge resection for clinical stage IA NSCLC ≤2 cm in size. For these small tumors, lobectomy, segmentectomy, and wedge resection provide comparable oncologic outcomes.

Impact of Center Volume on Cardiopulmonary and Mortality Outcomes after Immune-Checkpoint Inhibitors for Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) were proven effective in inducing tumor regression. However, its toxicity tends to be fatal. We sought to investigate the hospital volume/outcomes relationship. Databases were searched for studies reporting immune-checkpoint inhibitors adverse events (AEs) in patients with solid-organ malignancies. The outcomes were A) the pooled events rate (PER) of grade 5, grade 3-4, cardiac-related, and pulmonary-related AEs, and B) the assessment of the volume/outcomes relationship. One hundred and forty-seven studies met our inclusion criteria. The PER of grade 5, grade 3-4, and any-grade AEs was 2.75% (95%CI: 2.18-3.47), 26.69% (95%CI: 21.60-32.48), and 77.80% (95%CI: 70.91-83.44), respectively. The PER of pulmonary-related AEs was 4.56% (95%CI: 3.76-5.53). A higher number of annual cases per center was significantly associated with reduced grade 5 (p = 0.019), grade 3-4 (p = 0.004), and cardiac-related AEs (p = 0.035) in the meta-regression. In the current era of cancer immunotherapy, knowledge regarding the early diagnosis and management of immunotherapy-related AEs is essential. Our meta-analysis demonstrates the importance of center volume in improving outcomes and reducing the incidence of severe AEs.

Survival difference among adult and pediatric mediastinal yolk sac tumors cases: A meta-analysis of case reports.

BACKGROUND: Mediastinal Yolk sac tumors (YST) are rare and highly malignant extragonadal germ cell tumors with rapid growth and early metastases. We sought to conduct a meta-analysis of published case reports/case series to compare differences in survival, demographics, and treatment modalities between adult and pediatric patients with YST. METHODS: Ovid Embase, Cochrane, and Ovid Medline databases were searched for primary mediastinal pure YST cases. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Log-rank and Cox regression were used. This study is registered on PROSPERO (CRD42022367586). RESULTS: Among 846 studies, 87 met our inclusion criteria including 130 patients (Adults: 90 and Pediatrics: 40). About 41.5% of the patients were from the United States. The median age was 23.0 (Q1-Q3: 17.0-30.0), 88.5% were males, and (32.3%) were Asian. Stage II represented almost 40%. AFP was elevated in 96.9%. Respiratory distress was the presenting symptom in 65.4%. Chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and surgery were utilized in 84.6, 23.1, and 64.7% respectively. Median OS was 24 months (Adults: 23 months, Pediatrics: 25 months, P = 0.89). 3- and 5-year OS were 34.4% and 22.9% in adults and 41.5% and 41.5% in pediatrics, respectively. On multivariate analysis, anterior location of tumors, receipt of chemotherapy, and undergoing surgery were associated with better OS. CONCLUSION: Primary mediastinal YSTs are rare, but lethal neoplasms. Our meta-analysis showed that mediastinal YSTs mimic other non-seminomatous mediastinal GCTs in terms of clinical characteristics and available treatment options. Early diagnosis, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and surgical resection are the key points for effective management and improved outcomes.

Should sampling of three N2 stations be a quality metric for curative resection of stage I lung cancer?

OBJECTIVE: In 2022, the American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer issued standard 5.8 quality metric for curative lung cancer resections requiring nodal resection from 3 N2 stations. In this report, we compare oncologic outcomes after resection of 3 N2 stations versus 2 N2 stations in stage I non-small cell lung cancer. METHODS: A retrospective review from a single institution database was conducted from 2011 to 2020 to identify patients with clinical stage I non-small cell lung cancer. Patients with a history of lung cancer, carcinoid tumors, and ground-glass lesions less than 50% solid component were excluded. The primary outcome was overall survival. Secondary outcomes included disease-free survival, recurrence patterns, and nodal upstaging. RESULTS: A total of 581 patients were identified and divided into 2 groups based on the number of N2 stations examined: Group A had 2 N2 stations examined (364 patients), and group B had 3 or more N2 stations examined (217 patients). Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics were similar between groups. In group A, N1 and N2 positive nodal stations were present in 8.2% (30/364) and 5.2% (19/364) of patients versus 7.4% (16/217) and 5.5% (12/217), respectively, in group B. Five-year overall survival and disease-free survival were 89% and 74% in group A versus 88% and 78% in group B, respectively. Recurrence occurred in 56 patients (15.4%) in group A (6.6% local and 8.8% distant) and 29 patients (13.4%) in group B (5.1% local and 8.3% distant; P = .73). CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference in oncological outcomes in stage I non-small cell lung cancer resections that included 2 N2 stations compared with at least 3 N2 stations examined.