Nationwide Analysis of Locoregional Management for Ductal Carcinoma In Situ in Males: An NCDB Analysis of the Surgical Approach to DCIS in Males.

BACKGROUND: Limited data exist regarding the optimal locoregional approach for males with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). This study examined trends in management and survival for males with DCIS. METHODS: The National Cancer Database (NCDB) was queried for males with a diagnosis of DCIS from 2006 to 2017. Patients were categorized by locoregional management. Continuous variables were evaluated by Kruskal-Wallis and categorical variables by chi-square or Fisher's exact test. Univariable and multivariable logistic regressions were performed to evaluate for predictors of patients receiving partial mastectomy (PM) with radiation. Survival was analyzed by Kaplan-Meier. RESULTS: Between 2006 and 2017, 711 males with DCIS were identified. Most received mastectomy alone (57.1%). No change was observed in management approach from 2006 to 2017. Patients who underwent mastectomy alone were mostly hormone-positive (95.9% were estrogen-positive, 90.9% were progesterone-positive), although this cohort was least likely to receive hormone therapy (17.2%). Among those who underwent PM with radiation, only 61% of those who were hormone-positive received hormone therapy. Univariable analysis demonstrated that those of black race had lower odds of receiving PM with radiation (odds ratio [OR], 0.58; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.36-0.84), which persisted in the multivariable analysis with control for age and tumor size (OR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.15-0.67). Overall survival did not differ significantly between the four treatment methods (p = 0.08). CONCLUSIONS: The management approach to male DCIS did not change from 2006 to 2017. Survival did not differ between treatment methods. Demographic and clinicopathologic features, including race, may influence locoregional treatments received, and further studies are needed to further understand this.

Relationship of dose to vascular target volumes and local failure in pancreatic cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemoradiation.

Objective: The objectives of this study were to evaluate whether dose to the vasculature is associated with local control after surgery in patients with borderline resectable (BLR) and resectable pancreatic cancer (PCA) receiving neoadjuvant radiation therapy (RT) and to identify a dose threshold for clinical use. Methods: Patients with BLR and resectable PCA treated with neoadjuvant RT were retrospectively reviewed. During this period, the institutional paradigm shifted from standard fractionation to hypofractionation/stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). A vasculature clinical target volume (Vasc CTV) was contoured for each patient and defined as a 5-mm margin around the superior mesenteric artery (SMA) from its origin to the pancreatic head, the celiac artery from its origin to the level of the trifurcation and any involved vein. The Vasc CTV D95 was normalized to a 2-Gy equivalent dose to determine the optimal dose associated with optimal local failure-free survival (LFFS). Results: Forty-seven patients were included in the analysis. A Vasc CTV D95 of 32.7 Gy was the optimal cutoff for LFFS. Patients with Vasc CTV D95 Equivalent dose in 2 Gy per fraction (EQD2) >32.7 Gy had significantly longer LFFS compared to patients with Vasc CTV D95 EQD2 ≤32.7 Gy at 12 months (91% vs. 51%, respectively) and 24 months (86% vs. 12%, respectively). The median disease-free survival (DFS) for patients with EQD2 >32.7 Gy was 30.4 months compared to 14.0 months in patients with EQD2 ≤32.7 Gy (p = 0.01). There was no significant difference in overall survival (OS) between the two groups. Conclusions: During neoadjuvant treatment, dose to the Vasc CTV is associated with durability of local control (LC) after resection and should be intentionally included in the treatment volume with an EQD2 goal of 31-33 Gy.

Trends and Outcomes Associated With Axillary Management of Males With Clinical N0 Breast Cancer-An NCDB Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy (SLNB) is standard of care for women with clinically N0 breast cancer. However, there are no randomized controlled studies in men determining optimal surgical axillary management. METHODS: Using the National Cancer Database, males diagnosed from 2006-2016 with clinical T1-4 N0 tumors treated with primary surgery were identified and categorized by axillary management. Clinicopathologic variables were compared between two timeframes, 2006-2011 and 2012-2016. Survival analysis was performed. RESULTS: We identified 2,646 males meeting criteria. Use of SLNB increased (65.9%-72.8%, P < 0.01). For those who underwent ALND, administration of radiation (31.1% versus 48.8%, P < 0.01) and endocrine therapy (70.2% versus 80.7%, P < 0.01) increased. There was no difference in survival between timeframes (P = 0.42). For those who underwent SLNB, tumor grade (P = 0.02) and pathologic T stage (P < 0.01) were higher and more patients underwent mastectomy (74.9% versus 79.4%, P = 0.02). Administration of chemotherapy decreased (35.1% versus 27.2%, P < 0.01) and endocrine therapy increased (72.1% versus 81.3%, P < 0.01). Survival of those who underwent sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) diagnosed 2012-2016 was worse than those diagnosed 2006-2011 (P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Use of SLNB alone has increased while ALND has declined in males with clinically N0 breast cancer. However, patients who underwent SLNB alone in the later time period had worse clinical characteristics and experienced differences in adjuvant therapy. This suggests increased acceptance of the use of SLNB for axillary management. Further analysis is warranted to evaluate methods of axillary staging and the impact on outcomes in males with breast cancer.

Patterns of Failure After Neoadjuvant Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy or Fractionated Chemoradiation in Resectable and Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer.

OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to compare outcomes of patients with borderline and resectable pancreatic cancer treated with neoadjuvant stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) versus fractionated chemoradiation. METHODS: Patients with borderline or resectable pancreatic cancer treated with neoadjuvant intent between November 2011 and December 2017 were reviewed. The SBRT volume/dose was 33 Gy in 5 fractions to gross tumor plus abutting vessel with or without 25 Gy in 5 fractions to pancreatic head/body and celiac/superior mesenteric artery. Fractionated chemoradiation volume/dose was 50.4 Gy in 28 fractions to gross tumor, superior mesenteric/celiac arteries, and enlarged lymph nodes with concurrent bolus 5-FU, leucovorin, oxaliplatin, irinotecan or gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel. Failure patterns, local recurrence-free survival (LRFS), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival were assessed. RESULTS: Forty-three patients were reviewed (18 SBRTs and 25 fractionated). Among patients who underwent resection, patients treated with fractionated chemoradiation had improved LRFS (12-month LRFS, 86% vs 62%, P = 0.003) and PFS (median PFS, 23 months vs 11 months, P = 0.006) compared with SBRT. There was no difference in overall survival. CONCLUSIONS: Stereotactic body radiation therapy may result in inferior LRFS and PFS compared with fractionated chemoradiation, likely because of under coverage of high-risk vascular targets.