Multicentre retrospective analysis on pulmonary metastasectomy: an European perspective.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the current practice of pulmonary metastasectomy at 15 European Centres. Short- and long-term outcomes were analysed. METHODS: Retrospective analysis on patients ≥18 years who underwent curative-intent pulmonary metastasectomy (January 2010 to December 2018). Data were collected on a purpose-built database (REDCap). Exclusion criteria were: previous lung/extrapulmonary metastasectomy, pneumonectomy, non-curative intent and evidence of extrapulmonary recurrence at the time of lung surgery. RESULTS: A total of 1647 patients [mean age 59.5 (standard deviation; SD = 13.1) years; 56.8% males] were included. The most common primary tumour was colorectal adenocarcinoma. The mean disease-free interval was 3.4 (SD = 3.9) years. Relevant comorbidities were observed in 53.8% patients, with a higher prevalence of metabolic disorders (32.3%). Video-assisted thoracic surgery was the chosen approach in 54.9% cases. Wedge resections were the most common operation (67.1%). Lymph node dissection was carried out in 41.4% cases. The median number of resected lesions was 1 (interquartile range 25-75% = 1-2), ranging from 1 to 57. The mean size of the metastases was 18.2 (SD = 14.1) mm, with a mean negative resection margin of 8.9 (SD = 9.4) mm. A R0 resection of all lung metastases was achieved in 95.7% cases. Thirty-day postoperative morbidity was 14.5%, with the most frequent complication being respiratory failure (5.6%). Thirty-day mortality was 0.4%. Five-year overall survival and recurrence-free survival were 62.0% and 29.6%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Pulmonary metastasectomy is a low-risk procedure that provides satisfactory oncological outcomes and patient survival. Further research should aim at clarifying the many controversial aspects of its daily clinical practice.

Surgery for Oligometastatic Pancreatic Cancer: Defining Biologic Resectability.

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is most often metastatic at diagnosis. As systemic therapy continues to improve alongside advanced surgical techniques, the focus has shifted toward defining biologic, rather than technical, resectability. Several centers have reported metastasectomy for oligometastatic PDAC, yet the indications and potential benefits remain unclear. In this review, we attempt to define oligometastatic disease in PDAC and to explore the rationale for metastasectomy. We evaluate the existing evidence for metastasectomy in liver, peritoneum, and lung individually, assessing the safety and oncologic outcomes for each. Furthermore, we explore contemporary biomarkers of biological resectability in oligometastatic PDAC, including radiographic findings, biochemical markers (such as CA 19-9 and CEA), inflammatory markers (including neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, C-reactive protein, and scoring indices), and liquid biopsy techniques. With careful consideration of existing data, we explore the concept of biologic resectability in guiding patient selection for metastasectomy in PDAC.

Prolonged survival after thoracic metastasectomy in patients with nonseminomatous testicular cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Almost 20 % of patients with Non-Seminomatous Germinative Cell Tumors (NSGCT) will require intrathoracic metastasectomy after chemotherapy. The authors aim to determine their long-term survival rates. METHODS: Retrospective study including patients with NSGCT and intrathoracic metastasis after systemic therapy from January 2011 to June 2022. Treatment outcomes and overall survival were analyzed with the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Thirty-seven male patients were included with a median age of 31.8 years. Six presented with synchronous mediastinum and lung metastasis, nine had only lung, and 22 had mediastinal metastasis. Over half had retroperitoneal lymph node metastasis. Twenty-two had dissimilar pathologies, with a discordance rate of 62 %. Teratoma and embryonal carcinoma were the prevalent primary tumor types, 40.5 % each, while teratoma was predominant (70.3 %) in the metastasis group. Thoracotomy was the main surgical approach (39.2 %) followed by VATS (37.2 %), cervico-sternotomy (9.8 %), sternotomy (5.8 %), and clamshell (3.9 %). Lung resection was performed in 40.5 % of cases. Overall, 10-year survival rates were 94.3 % with no surgical-related mortality. CONCLUSION: Multimodality treatment with systemic therapy followed by radical surgery offers a high cure rate to patients with intrathoracic metastatic testicular germ cell tumors.

Surgical metastasectomy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma in the era of targeted and immune therapy: a narrative review.

PURPOSE: Metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) still harbours a big propensity for future metastasis. Combinations of immune and targeted therapies are currently the cornerstone of management with a less clear role for surgical metastasectomy (SM). METHODS: We performed a narrative review of literature searching for the available evidence on the yield of surgical metastasectomy in the era of targeted and immune therapies. The review consisted of a PubMed search of relevant articles using the Mesh terms:" renal cell carcinoma", "surgery¼, «resection", "metastasectomy", "molecular targeted therapies", "immune checkpoint inhibitors" alone or in combination. RESULTS: In this review, we exposed the place of surgical metastasectomy within a multimodal treatment algorithm for mRCC Also, we detailed the patient selection criteria that yielded the best results when SM was performed. Finally, we discussed the feasibility and advantages of SM per organ site. CONCLUSION: Our work was able to show that SM could be proposed as a consolidation treatment to excise residual lesions that were deemed unresectable prior to a combination of systemic therapies. Contrastingly, it can be proposed as an upfront treatment, leaving systemic therapies as an alternative in case of future relapse. However, patient selection regarding their performance status, metastatic sites, number of lesions and tumorous characteristics is of paramount importance.

Lung surveillance following colorectal cancer pulmonary metastasectomy: Utilization of clinicopathologic risk factors to guide strategy.

BACKGROUND: Appropriately selected patients clearly benefit from resection of colorectal cancer (CRC) pulmonary metastases (PMs). However, there remains equipoise surrounding optimal chest surveillance strategies following pulmonary metastasectomy. We aimed to identify risk factors that may inform chest surveillance in this population. METHODS: Patients who underwent CRC pulmonary metastasectomy were identified from a single institution's prospectively maintained surgical database. Clinicopathologic and genomic characteristics were collected. Patients were stratified by diagnosis of subsequent PM within 6 months of the index lung resection. Multivariate modeling was used to evaluate risk factors. RESULTS: A total of 197 patients met the study's inclusion criteria, of whom 52.3% (n = 103) developed subsequent PM, at a median of 9.51 months following the index metastasectomy. Patients with KRAS alterations (odds ratio [OR], 3.073; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.363-6.926; P = .007), TP53 alterations (OR, 3.109; 95% CI, 1.318-7.341; P = .010) were found to be at risk of PM diagnosis within 6 months of the index metastasectomy, while those with an APC alteration (OR, .218; 95% CI, 0.080-0.598; P = .003) were protected. Moreover, patients who received systemic therapy within 3 months of the initial PM diagnosis also were more likely to develop early lung recurrence (OR, 2.105; 95% CI, 0.971-4.563; P = .059). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with KRAS alterations, TP53 alterations, and no APC alterations developed early recurrence in the lung following pulmonary metastasectomy, as did those who received chemotherapy after their initial PM diagnosis. As such, these groups benefit from early lung imaging after metastasectomy, as chest surveillance protocols should be based on patient-centered clinicopathologic and genomic risk factors.

Effect of metastasectomy on the outcome of patients with ovarian metastasis of colorectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Patients with ovarian metastasis of colorectal cancer (CROM) usually have poor prognosis. Metastasectomy is controversial in patients with CROM. This study aims to evaluate the prognostic value of ovarian metastasectomy and other factors in CROM patients. METHODS: We searched literature up to November 1, 2021 in MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase, Cochrane Library, and Clinicaltrials.gov. Retrospective studies were assessed if survival outcome of CROM patients was reported. Results were pooled in a random-effects model and reported as hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Sensitivity was analyzed. RESULTS: Among 2497 studies screened, 15 studies with 997 patients, published between 2000 and 2021, were included. Longer overall survival (OS) was correlated with ovarian metastasectomy (pooled HR = 0.44, 95% CI: 0.34-0.58, P < 0.05) and R0 resection (pooled HR = 0.26, 95% CI: 0.16-0.41, P < 0.05). Longer disease-specific survival (DSS) was associated with systematic chemotherapy (pooled HR = 0.26, 95% CI: 0.15-0.45, P < 0.0001). Shorter OS was associated with extraovarian metastases (pooled HR = 3.00, 95% CI 1.68-5.36, P < 0.05) and bilateral OM (pooled HR = 1.66, 95% CI: 1.09-2.51, P < 0.05). No significant difference in OS was observed among patients with systematic chemotherapy (pooled HR = 0.68, 95% CI: 0.35-1.31, P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Metastasectomy achieving R0 resection can significantly prolong OS and DSS of CROM patients as a reasonable treatment modality. Primary tumor resection and systematic chemotherapy can improve patients' outcomes. REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022299185 (http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO).

Adrenal Metastasectomy in the Era of Immuno- and Targeted Therapy.

Adrenal metastasectomy has an increasing role in multimodality oncologic care for diverse primary cancer types. In this review, we discuss the epidemiology, evaluation, and contemporary best practices in the management of adrenal metastases from various primaries. Initial evaluation of suspected adrenal metastases should include diagnostic imaging to assess the extent of tumor involvement and determine surgical resectability, as well as biochemical evaluation for hormone secretion. Biopsy has a minimal role and should only be performed in tumors that are established to be non-hormone secreting and when the biopsy results would change clinical management. Adrenal metastasectomy is associated with survival benefit in selected patients. We suggest that adrenal metastasectomy has the greatest benefit in four clinical scenarios: (1) disease limited to the adrenal gland in which adrenalectomy renders the patient disease-free; (2) isolated progression in the adrenal gland in the setting of otherwise controlled metastatic extra-adrenal disease; (3) need for palliation of symptoms related to adrenal metastases; or (4) in the context of tissue-based clinical trials. Both minimally invasive and open adrenalectomy techniques are safe and appear to have equivalent oncologic outcomes. Minimally invasive approaches are favored when technically feasible while maintaining oncologic principles. A multidisciplinary evaluation including clinicians with expertise in the primary cancer type is essential to the successful management of adrenal metastases.

Improving survival after pulmonary metastasectomy for sarcoma: analysis of prognostic factors.

BACKGROUND: Metastatic sarcoma confers a grave prognosis to patients and poses a management dilemma for clinicians. Pulmonary metastasectomy is frequently performed for the recurrence of sarcomatous tumours in the lung, but the evidence-base is poor. No guidelines exist to inform clinicians on appropriate patient selection and surgical technique. AIM: This review aims to establish and analyse the most important prognostic factors for survival post pulmonary metastasectomy for recurrent sarcoma. We summarise the key tumour, peri-operative and patient characteristics that should guide surgical management. METHODS: A comprehensive search of the literature utilising OVID Medline and PubMed databases was conducted to identify all relevant research within the past 15 years. We evaluated all articles that specifically studied sarcoma patients (both bone and soft tissue). CONCLUSION: Disease-free interval and tumour burden remain important prognostic factors, while tumour grade is likely not significant. VATS is a safe and viable alternative to thoracotomy without sacrificing survival outcomes. No single peri-operative characteristic provides useful prognostic information in isolation.

International Multi-institutional Characterization of the Perioperative Morbidity of Metastasectomy for Renal Cell Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Surgical resection of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has been associated with better cancer-specific survival; however, high-quality data on its perioperative morbidity are lacking. Existing population-based data are severely limited by reliance on billing claims to identify outcomes, which may overestimate events owing to a lack of code specificity. OBJECTIVE: To study 30-d complications after metastasectomy for mRCC. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The study involved a retrospective cohort of patients who underwent metastasectomy for mRCC between 2005 and 2020 at two high-volume centers. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: We used generalized estimating equations for a binary response to evaluate associations of features with 30-d complications classified according to Clavien-Dindo grade. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 740 metastasectomies in 522 patients were identified, including 543 performed in the Mayo Clinic and 197 in UZ Leuven. Among the 740 metastasectomies, 193 (26%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 23-29%) had a 30-d complication and 62 (8%, 95% CI 7-11%) had a major (Clavien-Dindo III-V) complication, including eight (1%) perioperative deaths. Age, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, metastasectomy concurrent with nephrectomy, multiple sites of metastasis, pancreatic resection, and metastasis size were significantly associated with postoperative complications (all p < 0.05). Age, multiple sites of metastasis, and pancreatic resection were significantly associated with major (Clavien-Dindo III-V) complications (all p < 0.05). Limitations include the retrospective design and surgical selection bias. CONCLUSIONS: In this multi-institutional series, fewer than 10% of metastasectomies for mRCC resulted in a major complication within 30 d of surgery, which is considerably lower than previously observed in population-based data. Favorable perioperative outcomes can be achieved with metastasectomy at high-volume centers in well-selected patients. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this study we found that fewer than 10% of patients who underwent surgical removal of one or more sites of metastatic kidney cancer experienced a major complication within 30 days of surgery.

Surgical Metastasectomy for Visceral and Bone Prostate Cancer Metastases: A Mini-Review.

Despite growing interest in metastasis-directed therapy (MDT) for prostate cancer (PCa), little is known regarding the feasibility and effectiveness of surgical metastasectomy for isolated lesions. We performed a narrative review of the available evidence supporting metastasectomy for M1b-c lesions in men diagnosed with oligometastatic or oligorecurrent PCa. The case series and case reports we identified indicate that surgical MDT is a safe and feasible treatment option for well-selected patients with a small number of PCa metastases diagnosed via molecular imaging. It is difficult to draw evidence-based conclusions regarding the survival benefit of metastasectomy; however, metastasectomy might lead to a prostate-specific antigen response and could potentially delay systemic therapy in patients with oligometastatic PCa. Prospective studies incorporating novel imaging are needed to better establish the role of metastasectomy for patients with metastatic PCa. PATIENT SUMMARY: We reviewed the evidence on surgical removal of prostate cancer lesions that have spread to the organs (eg, liver and lung) or bone, which are called metastases. Limited results show that this approach is feasible and has favorable outcomes in selected patients.

Repeated Pulmonary Metastasectomy: Third Operations and Beyond.

BACKGROUND: For extrathoracic malignant neoplasms that have metastasized to the lungs, previous investigations have demonstrated both oncologic and survival benefits after pulmonary and repeated metastasectomy. Little is known about the feasibility of incrementally increasing numbers of subsequent metastasectomy procedures. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of patients who underwent ≥3 pulmonary resection procedures for recurrent, metachronous metastatic disease of nonlung primary malignant neoplasms at a single institution between 1992 and 2020. Primary outcomes collected pertained to safety and feasibility, including estimated blood loss (EBL), hospital length of stay, and details of postoperative complications. RESULTS: There were 117 patients who met inclusion criteria, having undergone at least 3 metastasectomy operations, with 55 (47.1%) undergoing a fourth operation and 20 (17.1%) undergoing a fifth operation. EBL did not differ between first and second operations (106.6 mL vs 102.5 mL; P = .76). It was, however, significantly greater at third operations (102.5 mL vs 238.7 mL; P = .000016). We noted an increase in wound complications between the second and third operations (0.9% vs 6.8%; P = .02) and incremental increases in likelihood of prolonged air leak with each subsequent operation. The need for reoperation was low for all and similar between operations. Importantly, hospital length of stay was similar for all procedures, as were the frequencies of hospital readmission. CONCLUSIONS: Third-time redo pulmonary metastasectomy can be performed safely and feasibly in select patients. Further repeated resection should remain a therapeutic option for patients, although risks for potentially longer operating time, greater EBL, and prolonged air leaks may be anticipated.

Lung Metastatectomy: Can Laser-Assisted Surgery Make a Difference?

BACKGROUND: Resection of lung metastases with curative intention in selected patients is associated with prolonged survival. Laser-assisted resection of lung metastases results in complete resection of a high number of lung metastases, while preserving lung parenchyma. However, data concerning laser lung resections are scarce and contradictory. The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic review to evaluate the utility of laser-assisted pulmonary metastasectomy. METHODS: An electronic search in MEDLINE (via PubMed), complemented by manual searches in article references, was conducted to identify eligible studies. RESULTS: Fourteen studies with a total of 1196 patients were included in this metanalysis. Laser-assisted surgery (LAS) for lung metastases is a safe procedure with a postoperative morbidity up to 24.2% and almost zero mortality. LAS resulted in the resection of a high number of lung metastases with reduction of the lung parenchyma loss in comparison with conventional resection methods. Survival was similar between LAS and conventional resections. CONCLUSION: LAS allows radical lung-parenchyma saving resection of a high number of lung metastases with similar survival to conventional methods.

Metastasectomy in renal cell carcinoma: where are we now?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Metastatic RCC has a variable natural history. Treatment choice depends on disease and patient factors, but most importantly disease burden and site of metastasis. This article highlights key variables to consider when contemplating metastasectomy for RCC and provide a narrative review on the evidence for metastasectomy in these patients. RECENT FINDINGS: Tumour subtype is associated with differing patterns of recurrence. Patients with single or few metastatic sites have better outcomes, and those with greater time interval from initial nephrectomy. Local recurrence is particularly amenable to minimally invasive surgical resection and is oncologically sound. Very well selected cases of liver or brain metastases may benefit from metastectomy, although lung and endocrine metastases have more favourable outcomes. Although site and burden of disease is important, the key determinate of outcome in metastasectomy depends mostly on the ability to achieve a complete resection. Adjuvant treatment is not currently advocated. SUMMARY: Metastasectomy should be generally reserved for cases where complete resection is achievable, unless the goal of treatment is to palliate symptoms. This field warrants ongoing research, particularly as systemic therapy and minimally invasive surgical techniques evolve. Elucidating tumour biology to inform patient selection will be important in future research.

Patients with Pulmonary Metastases from Head and Neck Cancer Benefit from Pulmonary Metastasectomy, A Systematic Review.

Background and Objectives: The incidence of distant metastases in patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) is approximately 10%. Pulmonary metastases are the most frequent distant location, with an incidence of 70-85%. The standard treatment options are chemo-, immuno- and radiotherapy. Despite a benefit for long-term survival for patients with isolated pulmonary metastases, pulmonary metastasectomy (PM) is not the treatment of choice. Furthermore, many otorhinolaryngologists are not sufficiently familiar with the concept of PM. This work reviews the recent studies of pulmonary metastatic HNC and the results after pulmonary metastasectomy. Materials and Methods: PubMed, Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane library were checked for the case series' of patients undergoing metastasectomy with pulmonary metastases published since 1 January 2000. Results: We included the data of 15 studies of patients undergoing PM. The 5-year survival rates varied from 21% to 59%, with median survival from 10 to 77 months after PM. We could not identify one specific prognostic factor for long-term survival after surgery. However, at least most studies stated that PM should be planned if a complete (R0) resection is possible. Conclusions: PM showed reliable results and is supposedly the treatment of choice for patients with isolated pulmonary metastases. Patients not suitable for surgery may benefit from other non-surgical therapy. Every HNC patient with pulmonary metastases should be discussed in the multidisciplinary tumor board to optimize the therapy and the outcome.

Can patients with gallbladder adenocarcinoma and liver metastases obtain survival benefit from surgery? A population-based study.

According to international guidelines, surgical treatment is not recommended for gallbladder adenocarcinoma with liver metastases (GCL), and research on the clinical implications of surgery in GCL is very scarce. In this study, we aimed to investigate whether surgery is an effective means to improve survival in GCL. Data were collected from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. A total of 612 people diagnosed with GCL were identified. According to their treatment, patients were categorised into 4 groups: synchronous resection of the primary tumour and liver metastases (SPL), synchronous primary site and other resection (SPO), single resection of the primary site (SPS), and no resection (NR). Our study findings showed that 34 (5.6%) patients received SPL, 18 (2.9%) had SPO, 185 (30.2%) underwent SPS, and 375 (61.3%) received NR. Our analysis showed that surgical treatment was an independent protective prognostic factor for gallbladder cancer cause-specific survival. Groups who underwent SPL, SPO, and SPS showed gradually decreasing survival benefit compared with the NR group (median survival: 9, 5, 4, and 2 months, respectively). Notably, mortality in the SPL, SPO, and SPS groups were significantly different compared with NR group, and the hazard ratio were gradually increased, which were 0.402 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.264-0.611), 0.463 (95% CI 0.274-0.784), and 0.597 (95% CI 0.457-0.779), respectively (all P < 0.05). Survival in patients with GCL was significantly improved via surgery of the primary site with simultaneous metastasectomy. Among them, SPL and SPO showed greater survival advantages in carefully selected patients with GCL. Registered at researchregistery.com: Trial registration number is researchregistry6915.

Metastasectomy in synovial sarcoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Synovial sarcoma (SS) is a malignancy with high metastatic potential. The role of metastasectomy in SS is unclear, with limited data on prognostic factors and clinical outcomes. In this systematic review, we evaluate the survival outcomes post-metastasectomy for patients with SS. METHODS: A systematic review was undertaken following PRISMA guidelines. English studies reporting survival outcomes among adults and children with SS undergoing metastasectomy were evaluated. Databases were searched from inception to May 31, 2021, and included Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Two reviewers independently undertook literature evaluation and screening, data extraction and grading of studies. Risk of bias assessments utilized the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale for Cohort Studies and the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist for Case Series. Qualitative data was summarized in descriptive format, and survival outcome data were assessed for meta-analysis. RESULTS: Thirteen retrospective studies, published between 1993 and 2017, were included, four were cohort studies, and nine were case series. A total of 598 patients with SS were included, of whom 462 had metastatic pulmonary disease, and 309 underwent metastasectomy. The median ages of the study cohorts ranged from 14 to 51 years. The median survival period after metastasectomy ranged from 21 to 80 months. Patients who underwent metastasectomy had a lower risk of mortality compared to those who did not (pooled HR 0.26 95% CI 0.14-0.49). The most common prognostic factors associated with survival included a disease-free interval of greater than 12 months and complete resection of the metastases. DISCUSSION: Although the level of evidence is low, retrospective studies support a clinical advantage for metastasectomy in selected patients with metastatic SS. FUNDING: This was not a funded study. REGISTRATION: This protocol has been registered within the international prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) database (registration ID: CRD42019126906).

Impact of Intraoperative Molecular Imaging after Fluorescent-Guided Pulmonary Metastasectomy for Sarcoma.

BACKGROUND: Intraoperative molecular imaging (IMI) has been shown to improve lesion detection during pulmonary sarcomatous metastasectomy. Our goal in this study was to evaluate whether data garnered from IMI-guided resection of pulmonary sarcoma metastasis translate to improved patient outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: Fifty-two of 65 consecutive patients with a previous history of sarcomas found to have pulmonary nodules during screening were enrolled in a nonrandomized clinical trial. Patients underwent TumorGlow the day before surgery. Data on patient demographics, tumor biologic characteristics, preoperative assessment, and survival were included in the study analysis and compared with institutional historical data of patients who underwent metastasectomy without IMI. p values < 0.05 were considered significant. RESULTS: IMI detected 42 additional lesions in 31 patients (59%) compared with the non-IMI cohort where 25% percent of patients had additional lesions detected using tactile and visual feedback only (p < 0.05). Median progression-free survival (PFS) for patients with IMI-guided pulmonary sarcoma metastasectomy was 36 months vs 28.6 months in the historical cohort (p < 0.05). IMI-guided pulmonary sarcoma metastasectomy had recurrence in the lung with a median time of 18 months compared with non-IMI group at 13 months (p < 0.05). Patients with synchronous lesions in the IMI group underwent systemic therapy at a statistically higher rate and tended to undergo routine screening at shorter interval. CONCLUSIONS: IMI identifies a subset of sarcoma patients during pulmonary metastasectomy who have aggressive disease and informs the medical oncologist to pursue more aggressive systemic therapy. In this setting, IMI can serve both as a diagnostic and prognostic tool without conferring additional risk to the patient.

Benefit of Metastasectomy in Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Propensity Score Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: To quantify the magnitude of benefit of metastasectomy as compared to medical treatment alone in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We therefore conducted a propensity score analysis of overall survival (OS) in 106 mRCC patients with metachronous metastasis, of whom 36 (34%) were treated with metastasectomy, and 70 (66%) with medical therapy alone. RESULTS: The most frequent metastasectomy procedures were lung resections (n = 13) and craniotomies (n = 6). Median time-to-progression after metastasectomy was 0.7 years (25th-75th percentile: 0.3-2.7). After a median follow-up of 6.2 years and 63 deaths, 5-year OS estimates were 41% and 22% in the metastasectomy and medical therapy group, respectively (log-rank P = .00007; Hazard ratio (HR) = 0.38, 95%CI: 0.21-0.68). Patients undergoing metastasectomy had a significantly higher prevalence of favorable prognostic factors, such as fewer bilateral lung metastases and longer disease-free intervals between nephrectomy and metastasis diagnosis. After propensity score weighting for these differences and adjusting for immortal time bias, the favorable association between metastasectomy and OS became much weaker (HR = 0.62, 95%CI: 0.39-1.00, P = .050). Propensity-score-weighted 5-year OS estimates were 24% and 20% in the metastasectomy and medical therapy group, respectively (log-rank P = .001). In exploratory analyses, the benefit of metastasectomy was confined to patients who achieved complete resection of all known metastases. CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of an observational study, these findings support the concept of metastasectomy being associated with an OS benefit in mRCC patients. Metastasectomies not achieving complete resection of all known lesions are likely without OS benefit.

Pulmonary Metastasectomy in Colorectal Cancer (PulMiCC) randomized controlled trial: a systematic review of published responses.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review was to assess the nature and tone of the published responses to the Pulmonary Metastasectomy in Colorectal Cancer (PulMiCC) randomized controlled trial. METHODS: Published articles that cited the PulMiCC trial were identified from Clarivate Web of Science (©. Duplicates and self-citations were excluded and relevant text was extracted. Four independent researchers rated the extracts independently using agreed scales for the representativeness of trial data and the textual tone. The ratings were aggregated and summarized. Two PulMiCC authors carried out a thematic analysis of the extracts. RESULTS: Sixty-four citations were identified and relevant text was extracted and examined. The consensus rating for data inclusion was a median of 0.25 out of 6 (range 0-5.25, interquartile range 0-1.5) and, for textual tone, the median rating was 1.87 out of 6 (range 0-5.75, interquartile range 1-3.5). The majority of citations did not provide adequate representation of the PulMiCC data and the overall textual tone was dismissive. Although some were supportive, many discounted the findings because the trial closed early and was underpowered to show non-inferiority. Two misinterpreted the authors' conclusions but there was an acceptance that 5-year survival was much higher than widely assumed. CONCLUSIONS: Published comments reveal a widespread reluctance to consider seriously the results of a carefully conducted randomized trial. This may be because the results challenge accepted practice because of 'motivated reasoning', but there is a widespread misunderstanding of the fact that though PulMiCC with 93 patients was underpowered to test non-inferiority, it still provides reliable evidence to undermine the widespread belief in a major survival benefit from metastasectomy.