Oncological outcomes of standard versus prolonged time to surgery after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for oesophageal cancer in the multicentre, randomised, controlled NeoRes II trial.

BACKGROUND: The optimal time to surgery (TTS) after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) for oesophageal cancer is unknown and has traditionally been 4-6 weeks in clinical practice. Observational studies have suggested better outcomes, especially in terms of histological response, after prolonged delay of up to 3 months after nCRT. The NeoRes II trial is the first randomised trial to compare standard to prolonged TTS after nCRT for oesophageal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with resectable, locally advanced oesophageal cancer were randomly assigned to standard delay of surgery of 4-6 weeks or prolonged delay of 10-12 weeks after nCRT. The primary endpoint was complete histological response of the primary tumour in patients with adenocarcinoma (AC). Secondary endpoints included histological tumour response, resection margins, overall and progression-free survival in all patients and stratified by histologic type. RESULTS: Between February 2015 and March 2019, 249 patients from 10 participating centres in Sweden, Norway and Germany were randomised: 125 to standard and 124 to prolonged TTS. There was no significant difference in complete histological response between AC patients allocated to standard (21%) compared to prolonged (26%) TTS (P = 0.429). Tumour regression, resection margins and number of resected lymph nodes, total and metastatic, did not differ between the allocated interventions. The first quartile overall survival in patients allocated to standard TTS was 26.5 months compared to 14.2 months after prolonged TTS (P = 0.003) and the overall risk of death during follow-up was 35% higher after prolonged delay (hazard ratio 1.35, 95% confidence interval 0.94-1.95, P = 0.107). CONCLUSION: Prolonged TTS did not improve histological complete response or other pathological endpoints, while there was a strong trend towards worse survival, suggesting caution in routinely delaying surgery for >6 weeks after nCRT.

Antibiotic treatment for appendicitis in Norway and Sweden: a nationwide survey on treatment practices.

BACKGROUND: Appendicitis is one of the most common causes of acute abdomen. Uncomplicated appendicitis is as an inflamed appendix without perforation, gangrene or abscess formation. Recent trials show that one can safely treat uncomplicated appendicitis with antibiotics, given patient approval and appropriate follow-up. A recent study has also indicated no difference between antibiotic treatment and placebo. Our aim was to investigate if Norwegian and Swedish surgical departments treat uncomplicated appendicitis with antibiotics and to explore their opinions on this treatment practice. METHODS: A questionnaire was distributed to all heads of department in hospitals that treat appendicitis in Norway and Sweden. Answers were collected using a REDCap survey. Answers were compared between centers and nations and the results were presented anonymously. RESULTS: We sent the questionnaire to 94 eligible recipients and received 61 (65%) answers. In total, 8/61 (13%) departments stated that they have established antibiotic treatment as sole treatment for uncomplicated appendicitis. Almost half of the responders stated that they have used antibiotics sporadically to treat uncomplicated appendicitis. Lack of evidence and guidelines were noted as reasons why antibiotic treatment has not been implemented as sole treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Most Norwegian and Swedish departments have not implemented antibiotic treatment as the sole treatment for uncomplicated appendicitis. Despite several recent large trials on this subject, lack of evidence and guidelines was the most frequently reported reason in our survey.

Multicentre study of multidisciplinary team assessment of pancreatic cancer resectability and treatment allocation.

BACKGROUND: Multidisciplinary team (MDT) meetings have been adopted widely to ensure optimal treatment for patients with cancer. Agreements in tumour staging, resectability assessments and treatment allocation between different MDTs were assessed. METHODS: Of all patients referred to one hospital, 19 patients considered to have non-metastatic pancreatic cancer for evaluation were selected randomly for a multicentre study of MDT decisions in seven units across Northern Europe. Anonymized clinical information and radiological images were disseminated to the MDTs. All patients were reviewed by the MDTs for radiological T, N and M category, resectability assessment and treatment allocation. Each MDT was blinded to the decisions of other teams. Agreements were expressed as raw percentages and Krippendorff's α values, both with 95 per cent confidence intervals. RESULTS: A total of 132 evaluations in 19 patients were carried out by the seven MDTs (1 evaluation was excluded owing to technical problems). The level of agreement for T, N and M categories ranged from moderate to near perfect (46·8, 61·1 and 82·8 per cent respectively), but there was substantial variation in assessment of resectability; seven patients were considered to be resectable by one MDT but unresectable by another. The MDTs all agreed on either a curative or palliative strategy in less than half of the patients (9 of 19). Only fair agreement in treatment allocation was observed (Krippendorff's α 0·31, 95 per cent c.i. 0·16 to 0·45). There was a high level of agreement in treatment allocation where resectability assessments were concordant. CONCLUSION: Considerable disparities in MDT evaluations of patients with pancreatic cancer exist, including substantial variation in resectability assessments.

Health-Related Quality of Life, Cachexia and Overall Survival After Major Upper Abdominal Surgery: A Prospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Major upper abdominal surgery is often associated with reduced health-related quality of life and reduced survival. Patients with upper abdominal malignancies often suffer from cachexia, represented by preoperative weight loss and sarcopenia (low skeletal muscle mass) and this might affect both health-related quality of life and survival. We aimed to investigate how health-related quality of life is affected by cachexia and how health-related quality of life relates to long-term survival after major upper abdominal surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 2001 to 2006, 447 patients were included in a Norwegian multicenter randomized controlled trial in major upper abdominal surgery. In this study, six years later, these patients were analyzed as a single prospective cohort and survival data were retrieved from the National Population Registry. Cachexia was derived from patient-reported preoperative weight loss and sarcopenia as assessed from computed tomography images taken within three months preoperatively. In the original trial, self-reported health-related quality of life was assessed preoperatively at trial enrollment and eight weeks postoperatively with the health-related quality of life questionnaire Short Form 36. RESULTS: A majority of the patients experienced improved mental health-related quality of life and, to a lesser extent, deteriorated physical health-related quality of life following surgery. There was a significant association between preoperative weight loss and reduced physical health-related quality of life. No association between sarcopenia and health-related quality of life was observed. Overall survival was significantly associated with physical health-related quality of life both pre- and postoperatively, and with postoperative mental health-related quality of life. The association between health-related quality of life and survival was particularly strong for postoperative physical health-related quality of life. CONCLUSION: Postoperative physical health-related quality of life strongly correlates with overall survival after major upper abdominal surgery.

Risk factors, complications and survival after upper abdominal surgery: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative weight loss and abnormal serum-albumin have traditionally been associated with reduced survival. More recently, a correlation between postoperative complications and reduced long-term survival has been reported and the significance of the relative proportion of skeletal muscle, visceral and subcutaneous adipose tissue has been examined with conflicting results. We investigated how preoperative body composition and major non-fatal complications related to overall survival and compared this to established predictors in a large cohort undergoing upper abdominal surgery. METHODS: From 2001 to 2006, 447 patients were included in a Norwegian multicenter randomized controlled trial in major upper abdominal surgery. Patients were now, six years later, analyzed as a single prospective cohort and overall survival was retrieved from the National Population Registry. Body composition indices were calculated from CT images taken within three months preoperatively. RESULTS: Preoperative serum-albumin <35 g/l (HR = 1.52, p = 0 .014) and weight loss >5 % (HR = 1.38, p = 0.023) were independently associated with reduced survival. There was no association between any of the preoperative body composition indices and reduced survival. Major postoperative complications were independently associated with reduced survival but only as long as patients who died within 90 days were included in the analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Our study has confirmed the robust significance of the traditional indicators, preoperative serum-albumin and weight loss. The body composition indices did not prove beneficial as global indicators of poor prognosis in upper abdominal surgery. We found no association between non-fatal postoperative complications and long-term survival.