Integrative Approaches in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Management: The Role of Radiotherapy.

Treatment guidelines for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) vary by several factors including pathological stage, patient candidacy, and goal of treatment. With many therapeutics and even more combinations available in the NSCLC clinician's toolkit, a multitude of questions remain unanswered vis-a-vis treatment optimization. While some studies have begun exploring the interplay among the many pillars of NSCLC treatment-surgical resection, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and immunotherapy-the vast number of combinations and permutations of different therapy modalities in addition to the modulation of each constituent therapy leaves much to be desired in a field that is otherwise rapidly evolving. Given NSCLC's high incidence and lethality, the experimentation of synergistic benefits that combinatorial treatment may confer presents a ripe target for advancement and increased understanding without the cost and burden of novel drug development. This review introduces, synthesizes, and compares prominent NSCLC therapies, placing emphasis on the interplay among types of therapies and the synergistic benefits some combinatorial therapies have demonstrated over the past several years.

Association of operative time and approach on postoperative complications for esophagectomy.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive esophagectomy is associated with decreased postoperative complications compared with open esophagectomy. However, the risks of complications for minimally invasive esophagectomy compared with open esophagectomy may be affected by operative time. The objectives of this study are to (1) compare the incidence of postoperative complications for minimally invasive esophagectomy and open esophagectomy and (2) evaluate the association of postoperative complications on operative approach and operative time. METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis of patients who underwent an esophagectomy in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Procedure-Targeted Data File was performed from 2016 to 2020. For analysis, minimally invasive esophagectomy and open esophagectomy were stratified into tertiles of operative time. A bivariate analysis of postoperative complications comparing minimally invasive esophagectomy with open esophagectomy was performed. Multivariable Poisson regression models were estimated evaluating the association of the likelihood of postoperative complications with operative approach and operative time. RESULTS: In total, 8,574 patients who underwent esophagectomy were included: 5,369 patients underwent minimally invasive esophagectomy, and 3,205 patients underwent open esophagectomy. Median operative time was 402 minutes for minimally invasive esophagectomy and 321 minutes for open esophagectomy. The incidence of postoperative complications and 30-day mortality was lower in the minimally invasive esophagectomy group than the open esophagectomy group within the same tertiles of operative time. When we compared patients who underwent short open esophagectomy with those who underwent long minimally invasive esophagectomy, there were no significant differences in complications. CONCLUSION: There is no significant association of postoperative complications for short open esophagectomy compared with long minimally invasive esophagectomy. Patients should be selected for minimally invasive esophagectomy when there is appropriate surgeon experience and hospital resources.