Comprehensive germline profiling of patients with breast cancer: initial experience from a Familial Cancer Clinic.

Introduction: Breast cancer is the most common cancer among Indian females. There is limited data on germline profiling of breast cancer patients from India. Objective: The objective of the current study was to analyse the frequency and spectrum of germline variant profiles and clinicopathological characteristics of breast cancer patients referred to our Familial Cancer Clinic (FCC). Materials and methods: It is a single-centre audit of patients with a confirmed diagnosis of breast carcinoma referred to our FCC from January 2017 to 2020. All patients underwent pretest counselling. Genetic testing was done by multigene panel testing by next-generation sequencing along with reflex multiplication ligation-dependent probe amplification for BRCA1 and 2. The variants were classified based on American College of Medical Genetics guidelines. Demographic and clinicopathological details were extracted from the case record files. Results: One hundred and fifty-five patients were referred to the FCC and underwent pretest counselling. A total of 99 (63.9%) patients underwent genetic testing. Among them, 62 patients (62/99 = 62.6%) had a germline variant. A pathogenic/likely pathogenic (P/LP) germline variant was identified in 41 (41.4%) of the patients who underwent testing. Additional variants of unknown significance (VUS) were identified in seven patients who also carried a P/LP variant. VUS alone was detected in 21 patients (21/99 = 21.2%). Among the P/LP pathogenic variants (PV), BRCA 1 PV were seen in 27 patients (65.8%), BRCA 2 variants in 7 patients (17.1%), ATM variants in 3 patients (7.3%) and RAD51, TP53, CHEK2 and HMMR in 1 patient each. Variants were significantly more common in patients with a family history (FH) of malignancy than those without FH (58.5% versus 29.5%; p = 0.013). Age and triple-negative histology were not found to be significantly associated with the occurrence of P/LP PVs. Conclusion: We report a 41% P/LP variant rate in our selected cohort of breast cancer patients, with variants in BRCA constituting 83% and non-BRCA gene variants constituting 17%.

Re-operative surgery for differentiated thyroid cancer: A single institutional experience of 182 cases.

INTRODUCTION: Re-operative thyroid surgery (RTS) is performed in patients of differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC) with residual or recurrent disease. However, there is a paucity of literature discussing experience and technique of RTS. This study aims to address this gap by providing a comprehensive review of RTS for DTC, utilizing experiences from a dedicated complex thyroid surgical oncology program at the apex hospital in a developing country. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted using data from the Department of Surgical Oncology's thyroid cancer database. The study period spanned from 2006 to 2022. Clinical presentation, prior surgical history, operative details of RTS, and post-operative outcomes were assessed. Descriptive analysis was performed. RESULTS: During the study period, a total of 182 patients underwent re-operative thyroid surgery (RTS). The primary surgeries performed prior to RTS included near-total or total thyroidectomy in most cases (69.2%), and approximately half of the patients (48.4%) had prior neck node interventions. The RTS procedures consisted of completion total thyroidectomy in 30.8% of cases and surgery for thyroid bed recurrence in 9.9% of cases, while central node dissection was performed in 46.2% of patients and unilateral or bilateral template neck dissection was performed in 41.8% of cases. Extended resections were required in 9.3% of patients. Post-operative complications included permanent hypoparathyroidism (2.7%) and unilateral recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy (1.6%). CONCLUSIONS: RTS is a complex procedure with high rates of post-operative morbidity reported in literature. Optimal outcomes require a multidisciplinary approach, thorough assessment, and skilled surgeons.

Pattern of Care in Real-World Scenario on Advanced Epithelial Ovarian Cancer in a Tertiary Referral Oncology Centre in India - ISPSM Collaborative Study.

The treatment of advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) has evolved over time. With advent of platinum-based chemotherapy and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), there is a paradigm shift in the patterns of care with improved survival. In this study, we analysed our advanced EOC patients aiming to gain insights into the pattern of care. An ambispective study of 250 patients of advanced EOC was done from our prospectively maintained computerised database in the Department of Surgical Oncology, tertiary care referral centre from 2013 to 2020. We analysed the demographic profile, treatment patterns, and perioperative outcomes. In this study, there were 83.6% stage III and 16.4% stage IVA. There were 62 (24.8%) upfront and 112 (44.8%) in interval settings. There was a higher number of patients receiving neo-adjuvant chemotherapy. One hundred twenty-six (50.4%) underwent cytoreductive surgery (CRS) only and 124 (49.6%) underwent CRS and HIPEC. CC-0 was achieved in 84.4% and CC-1 in 15.6% patients. HIPEC programme was started in 2013. With advent of RCTs in HIPEC, there was a substantial increase in the number of patients receiving HIPEC from 2015 (n = 10), 2017 (n = 20) to 2019 (n = 41). We offer secondary CRS in a limited subset of patients, n = 76 (30.4%). There was 24.8% early and 8.4% late postop complications. We have median follow-up of 50 months with attrition rate of 4%. With practice changing updates, the treatment of advanced EOC has been evolving over time. Though the primary CRS followed by systemic therapy is the standard to date, there is change in pattern of care with neo-adjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval CRS and HIPEC because of various RCTs. The addition of HIPEC has acceptable morbidity and mortality. There is a definite learning curve and the team has to evolve as a whole. In a tertiary care referral centre from LMIC, good patient selection, logistics, and implementing recent advances will definitely add to improved survival.

Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Cancer Surgical Services-AIIMS, New Delhi Experience.

COVID pandemic has impacted cancer care delivery and cancer surgical services globally. There is an urgent need to study the extent of the impact of COVID on cancer surgery and individual institutional response and strategies adopted to counter the adverse impact. A review of administrative and clinical policy changes adopted at the tertiary cancer center to combat COVID pandemic and resume cancer surgical services were performed. A retrospective comparative analysis of cancer out-patient census during COVID pandemic affected year and the preceding normal year along with cancer surgery data audit for the same periods was performed to assess the impact of the pandemic on cancer surgery. In addition, COVID infection rates among cancer surgery patients and healthcare workers were evaluated. There was approximately a 50% reduction in cancer outpatient registrations during COVID pandemic affected year. A trend of increasing footfalls was noted with decreasing COVID intensity and opening of lockdowns. There was a 33% reduction in major elective surgery and a 41% reduction in emergency surgery performed during the COVID period. As far as cancer surgeries are concerned, there was a 12-50% reduction in volumes involving different subsites. Overall COVID positivity rates among cancer surgery patients was low (8.17%), and approximately 30% of healthcare workers involved in cancer surgery were tested positive for COVID during the study period. Results of the current study indicate a significant impact of COVID pandemic on cancer surgical services. There was a significant impact on outpatient visits and cancer surgery volumes. However, a multidisciplinary-coordinated team approach, effective administrative and policy implementation, adoption of revised surgical safety and anesthesia protocols, COVID screening, and testing protocols facilitated resumption of cancer surgical services without adverse impact on surgical outcomes.

Feasibility and outcomes of cytoreductive surgery and HIPEC for peritoneal surface malignancies in low- and middle-income countries: a single-center experience of 232 cases.

BACKGROUND: Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) has recently emerged as a viable management option for peritoneal surface malignancy (PSM). CRS and HIPEC is a complex, multidisciplinary and resource-intensive surgical procedure. It has a steep learning curve and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. The expertise is mostly limited to few dedicated high-volume centers located in developed countries. We present a single institutional experience of 232 cases of CRS and HIPEC performed at a tertiary care cancer center in a low- and middle-income country (LMIC). METHODS: A multidisciplinary PSM program was initiated in 2015 at a high-volume public-sector tertiary care cancer center in North India catering largely to patients belonging to low- and middle-income groups. Perioperative protocols were developed, and a prospective structured database was created to capture data. All patients undergoing CRS and HIPEC between January 2015 and December 2020 were identified, and the data was retrospectively analyzed for clinical spectrum, surgical details, and perioperative morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: Two hundred and thirty-two patients underwent CRS and HIPEC during the study period. Epithelial ovarian carcinoma (56.5%) was the most common malignancy treated, followed by pseudomyxoma peritonei (18.5%), colorectal carcinoma (13.4%), and malignant mesothelioma (5.6%). Optimal CRS could be achieved in 94.4% of patients. Cisplatin and mitomycin were the most common drugs used for HIPEC. A total of 28.0% of patients had morbidity including deep vein thrombosis, subacute intestinal obstruction, sepsis, burst abdomen, lymphocele, urinoma, acute renal failure, and enterocutaneous fistula. The overall treatment-related mortality was 3.5%. CONCLUSIONS: Results of the current study indicate that it is feasible to establish a successful CRS and HIPEC program for PSM in government-funded hospitals in LMIC facing resource constraints. The most common indication for CRS and HIPEC were carcinoma of the ovary followed by pseudomyxoma peritonei and colorectal carcinoma. Overall morbidity and mortality in the current series are comparable to global standards, reported from high-income countries. A protocol-based multidisciplinary team approach, optimal patient selection, and surgical expertise can help achieve optimal outcomes in government-funded hospitals in LMIC.

Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in locally advanced and recurrent ovarian carcinoma: surgical and oncological outcomes in the Indian public healthcare system.

This study analyzed the surgical outcomes after initial implementation of a cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) program in government settings in India. Methods: Ovarian cancer patients undergoing cytoreductive surgery and HIPEC from May 2015 to April 2019 were identified from a prospectively maintained database. Treatment characteristics and surgical outcomes were analyzed. Results: The study identified 101 patients. The mean peritoneal cancer index (PCI) was 7 ± 6, with higher PCI scores in primary and recurrent cases. Major morbidities were recorded in 24.7% of patients. High PCI score, completeness of cytoreduction and major morbidities were independent predictors of overall survival in multivariate analysis. Conclusion: The application of HIPEC in limited-resource settings is feasible with acceptable major morbidities. This program should receive similar priority in government systems.