Current trends in the management of Gastro-oEsophageal cancers: Updates to the ESSO core curriculum (ESSO-ETC-UGI-WG initiative).

Gastro-oEsophageal Cancers (GECs) are severe diseases whose management is rapidly evolving. The European Society of Surgical Oncology (ESSO) is committed to the generation and spread of knowledge, and promotes the multidisciplinary management of cancer patients through its core curriculum. The present work discusses the approach to GECs, including the management of oligometastatic oesophagogastric cancers (OMEC), the diagnosis and management of peritoneal metastases from gastric cancer (GC), the management of Siewert Type II tumors, the importance of mesogastric excision, the role of robotic surgery, textbook outcomes, organ preserving options, the use of molecular markers and immune check-point inhibitors in the management of patients with GECs, as well as the improvement of current clinical practice guidelines for the management of patients with GECs. The aim of the present review is to provide a concise overview of the state-of-the-art on the management of patients with GECs and, at the same time, to share the latest advancements in the field and to foster the debate between surgical oncologists treating GECs worldwide. We are sure that our work will, at the same time, give an update to the advanced surgical oncologists and help the training surgical oncologists to settle down the foundations for their future practice.

Effect of Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy on Cytoreductive Surgery in Gastric Cancer With Synchronous Peritoneal Metastases: The Phase III GASTRIPEC-I Trial.

PURPOSE: In patients with peritoneal metastasis (PM) from gastric cancer (GC), chemotherapy is the treatment of choice. Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) are still being debated. This randomized, controlled, open-label, multicenter phase III trial (EudraCT 2006-006088-22; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02158988) explored the impact on overall survival (OS) of HIPEC after CRS. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Adult patients with GC and histologically proven PM were randomly assigned (1:1) to perioperative chemotherapy and CRS alone (CRS-A) or CRS plus HIPEC (CRS + H). HIPEC comprised mitomycin C 15 mg/m2 and cisplatin 75 mg/m2 in 5 L of saline perfused for 60 minutes at 42°C. The primary end point was OS; secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), other distant metastasis-free survival (MFS), and safety. Analyses followed the intention-to-treat principle. RESULTS: Between March 2014 and June 2018, 105 patients were randomly assigned (53 patients to CRS-A and 52 patients to CRS + H). The trial stopped prematurely because of slow recruitment. In 55 patients, treatment stopped before CRS mainly due to disease progression/death. Median OS was the same for both groups (CRS + H, 14.9 [97.2% CI, 8.7 to 17.7] months v CRS-A, 14.9 [97.2% CI, 7.0 to 19.4] months; P = .1647). The PFS was 3.5 months (95% CI, 3.0 to 7.0) in the CRS-A group and 7.1 months (95% CI, 3.7 to 10.5; P = .047) in the CRS + H group. The CRS + H group showed better MFS (10.2 months [95% CI, 7.7 to 14.7] v CRS-A, 9.2 months [95% CI, 6.8 to 11.5]; P = .0286). The incidence of grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) was similar between groups (CRS-A, 38.1% v CRS + H, 43.6%; P = .79). CONCLUSION: This study showed no OS difference between CRS + H and CRS-A. PFS and MFS were significantly better in the CRS + H group, which needs further exploration. HIPEC did not increase AEs.

Synchronous Pleural and Peritoneal Mesothelioma: a Case Report and Narrative Review.

Malignant mesotheliomas most often affect the pleura and tend to spread locally within the originating cavity. Mesotheliomas are already rare diseases, and cases with synchronous pleural and peritoneal involvement are scarce in the literature. Mesothelioma in children is a rare disease representing only 0.9% of all mesotheliomas. They exhibit similar distribution and characteristics as mesotheliomas in adults and generally, a poor prognosis. Due to the rarity, there is no standardized treatment recommendation for children with mesothelioma. Though the malignant mesothelioma tends to spread locally within the originating cavity, pleuM have been reported to metastasize into the peritoneal cavity and vice versa. As there are only few studies concerning the metastatic spread of mesothelioma, it is difficult to define a precise incidence and risk factors for patients to develop metastases of the other mesothelium. There is no standardized therapeutic recommendation for patients with synchronous pleuM and perM. Our patient proved to profit from a radical two-stage surgical approach in combination with locoregional chemotherapy; she showed no sign of tumor recurrences 9 years after tumor resection. In conclusion, clinical studies are needed to confirm the benefit of this treatment and to determine its limitations and selection criteria.

European Groundshot-addressing Europe's cancer research challenges: a Lancet Oncology Commission.

Cancer research is a crucial pillar for countries to deliver more affordable, higher quality, and more equitable cancer care. Patients treated in research-active hospitals have better outcomes than patients who are not treated in these settings. However, cancer in Europe is at a crossroads. Cancer was already a leading cause of premature death before the COVID-19 pandemic, and the disastrous effects of the pandemic on early diagnosis and treatment will probably set back cancer outcomes in Europe by almost a decade. Recognising the pivotal importance of research not just to mitigate the pandemic today, but to build better European cancer services and systems for patients tomorrow, the Lancet Oncology European Groundshot Commission on cancer research brings together a wide range of experts, together with detailed new data on cancer research activity across Europe during the past 12 years. We have deployed this knowledge to help inform Europe's Beating Cancer Plan and the EU Cancer Mission, and to set out an evidence-driven, patient-centred cancer research roadmap for Europe. The high-resolution cancer research data we have generated show current activities, captured through different metrics, including by region, disease burden, research domain, and effect on outcomes. We have also included granular data on research collaboration, gender of researchers, and research funding. The inclusion of granular data has facilitated the identification of areas that are perhaps overemphasised in current cancer research in Europe, while also highlighting domains that are underserved. Our detailed data emphasise the need for more information-driven and data-driven cancer research strategies and planning going forward. A particular focus must be on central and eastern Europe, because our findings emphasise the widening gap in cancer research activity, and capacity and outcomes, compared with the rest of Europe. Citizens and patients, no matter where they are, must benefit from advances in cancer research. This Commission also highlights that the narrow focus on discovery science and biopharmaceutical research in Europe needs to be widened to include such areas as prevention and early diagnosis; treatment modalities such as radiotherapy and surgery; and a larger concentration on developing a research and innovation strategy for the 20 million Europeans living beyond a cancer diagnosis. Our data highlight the important role of comprehensive cancer centres in driving the European cancer research agenda. Crucial to a functioning cancer research strategy and its translation into patient benefit is the need for a greater emphasis on health policy and systems research, including implementation science, so that the innovative technological outputs from cancer research have a clear pathway to delivery. This European cancer research Commission has identified 12 key recommendations within a call to action to reimagine cancer research and its implementation in Europe. We hope this call to action will help to achieve our ambitious 70:35 target: 70% average 10-year survival for all European cancer patients by 2035.

[Peritoneal carcinomatosis of gastric cancer : Treatment options for peritoneal carcinomatosis of gastric cancer]. / Peritonealkarzinose des Magenkarzinoms : Therapeutische Möglichkeiten bei Peritonealkarzinose des Magenkarzinoms.

BACKGROUND: Gastric cancer is one of the most aggressive malignant diseases of the gastrointestinal tract with a high rate of metastasis. Peritoneal metastasis occurs in up to 60% of all patients and synchronously in up to 30% in locally advanced gastric cancer. Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) have been an established treatment option in selected patients for several years, as the HIPEC serves as an alternative administration route. OBJECTIVE: This article presents a schematic display of the various treatment options depending on the extent of peritoneal carcinomatosis in a gastric cancer. METHODS: A literature search and analysis of the current literature on the treatment of gastric cancer with peritoneal metastases were carried out. A differentiation was made between limited and extensive peritoneal carcinomatosis together with the appropriate treatment strategy. RESULTS: Principally, individual systemic chemotherapy is the backbone of treatment of gastric cancer with peritoneal metastases. In selected patients and in cases of limited peritoneal carcinomatosis, CRS and HIPEC can be conducted and survival is improved; however, CRS is still contraindicated in cases of extensive peritoneal carcinomatosis and in exceptional cases pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) can be carried out. CONCLUSION: In selected patients CRS and HIPEC can lead to an improvement with respect to overall and disease-free survival. In cases of extensive peritoneal carcinomatosis, individualized chemotherapy remains the major treatment option.

Frequency of Positive Familial Criteria in Patients with Adenocarcinoma of the Esophageal-Gastric Junction and Stomach: First Prospective Data in a Caucasian Cohort.

OBJECTIVES: Current prospective studies investigating the frequency of hereditary criteria in a Caucasian population for adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG) and stomach (GC) are missing. Genetic testing criteria (screening criteria) for hereditary diffuse gastric cancer (HDGC) were updated in 2020, but do not address patients with intestinal histology (familial intestinal gastric cancer FIGC). Thus, we prospectively screened patients residing in Berlin newly diagnosed with AEG or GC for hereditary criteria to gain insights into the frequency of HDGC. METHODS: Prospective documentation of familial/clinical parameters in patients residing in Berlin with AEG or GC over three years was conducted. Besides HDGC criteria from 2015 and revised 2020, we also documented patients fulfilling these criteria but with intestinal type gastric cancer (FIGC). Statistical analysis was performed using X2-test. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-three patients were finally included (92 GC; male: 50 (n.s.); 61 AEG; male: 47; p = 0.007). Hereditary criteria for HDGC were detected in 9/92 (9.8%) (2015 criteria) and in 14/92 (15.2%) (2020 criteria) of GC patients (AEG: 2015 criteria 3/61 (4.9%) versus 4/61 according to 2020 criteria (6.5%)). Patients fulfilling hereditary criteria but with intestinal histology (FIGC) increased from 8.7% (2015) to 14.1%, respectively (2020) (AEG: 3.2% (2015) versus 6.6% (2020)). Hereditary criteria including intestinal histology were found in 29.3% (GC) and 13.1% (AEG) (p = 0.03) according to the 2020 criteria. CONCLUSIONS: HDGC criteria were found in 15.2% of GC patients according to the 2020 criteria. Percentage increased to 29.3% including patients with intestinal histology among the GC group, and was 13.1% in cases with AEG. These data indicate that family history seems to be of utmost importance in GC to further detect potential hereditary genetic risks. This equally applies for patients with intestinal subtype GC.

Is PIPAC a Treatment Option in Upper and Lower Gastrointestinal Cancer with Peritoneal Metastasis?

Background: The survival prognosis of patients with peritoneal metastasis (PM) of gastrointestinal (GI) cancer is generally poor and treatment consists of, according to international guidelines, systemic chemotherapy. A multimodal treatment approach, including cytoreductive surgery with or without hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy, not only proved to be beneficial mainly in colorectal cancer, but also in selected patients with gastric cancer. The authors performed systematic research of articles and ongoing clinical trials using the keywords "PIPAC" and "gastric cancer" or "colorectal cancer" in PubMed in October 2021. Key findings, such as complications rates, treatment protocols, and overall survival were summarized and illustrated in Tables and critically discussed. Summary: Twenty years ago, the technique of Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC) was developed by Reymond et al. and delivered evidence to be recognized as a basic therapeutic tool in this multimodal therapy. Currently, there are several ongoing Phase II and III trials exploring the usage and efficacy of PIPAC as a neoadjuvant, adjuvant, or palliative component of treatment in patients with PM of GI cancer. Key Messages: The aim of this narrative review was to help navigate the reader throughout the most current evidence for the use PIPAC and to highlight its indication in patients with upper and lower GI cancer with PM. It also provides an outline of ongoing studies and future perspectives.

Indication of Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy in Gastric Cancer (Gastripec, Gastrichip).

Background: Gastric cancer (GC) is associated with a poor prognosis mostly due to peritoneal metastasis, which will develop in time during the patient's disease history. To prevent and treat peritoneal metastasis, different kinds of treatment regimens have been described. Summary: In this review, we addressed two main topics - prophylaxis and treatment of peritoneal metastasis in GC. Prevention should be directed towards diminishing cancer cell spillage and reducing adherence of cancer cells to the abdominal cavity. Postoperative washing of the abdomen with or without chemotherapy and additional heat are herein discussed. Key Messages: Treatment of existing peritoneal metastasis is effective in patients with limited disease and tumour spread. Cytoreductive surgery including resection of peritoneal metastasis followed directly with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy can increase overall survival and progression-free survival in selected patients. Drugs, duration and time schedules of intraperitoneal chemotherapy are reviewed and presented. Intraperitoneal chemotherapy seems to improve the prognosis of patients with GC and peritoneal metastasis after complete resection of both primary and metastatic tumours.

FIRE-9 - PORT / AIO-KRK-0418: a prospective, randomized, open, multicenter Phase III trial to investigate the efficacy of adjuvant/additive chemotherapy in patients with definitely-treated metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Additive/adjuvant chemotherapy as concept after local treatment of colorectal metastases has not been proven to be successful by phase III trials. Accordingly, a standard of care to improve relapse rates and long-term survival is not established and adjuvant chemotherapy cannot be recommended as a standard therapy due to limited evidence in literature. The PORT trial aims to generate evidence that post-resection/ablation/radiation chemotherapy improves the survival in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. METHODS: Patients to be included into this trial must have synchronous or metachronous metastases of colorectal cancer-either resected (R0 or R1) and/or effectively treated by ablation or radiation within 3-10 weeks before randomization-and have the primary tumor resected, without radiographic evidence of active metastatic disease at study entry. The primary endpoint of the trial is progression-free survival after 24 months, secondary endpoints include overall survival, safety, quality of life, treatments (including efficacy) beyond study participation, translational endpoints, and others. One arm of the study comprising 2/3 of the population will be treated for 6 months with modified FOLFOXIRI or modified FOLFOX6 (investigator´s choice, depending on the performance status of the patients but determined before randomization), while the other arm (1/3 of the population) will be observed and undergo scheduled follow-up computed tomography scans according to the interventional arm. DISCUSSION: Optimal oncological management after removal of colorectal metastases is unclear. The PORT trial aims to generate evidence that additive/adjuvant chemotherapy after definitive treatment of colorectal metastases improves progression free and overall survival in patients with colorectal cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is registered with clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT05008809 ) and EudraCT (2020-006,144-18).

Inhibition of MACC1-Induced Metastasis in Esophageal and Gastric Adenocarcinomas.

Esophageal and Gastric Adenocarcinomas (AGE/S) are characterized by early metastasis and poor survival. MACC1 (Metastasis Associated in Colon Cancer 1) acts in colon cancer as a metastasis inducer and is linked to reduced survival. This project illuminates the role and potential for the inhibition of MACC1 in AGE/S. Using 266 of 360 TMAs and survival data of AGE/S patients, we confirm the value of MACC1 as an independent negative prognostic marker in AGE/S patients. MACC1 gene expression is correlated with survival and morphological characteristics. In vitro analysis of lentivirally MACC1-manipulated subclones of FLO-1 and OE33 showed enhanced migration induced by MACC1 in both cell line models, which could be inhibited by the MEK1 inhibitor selumetinib. In vivo, the efficacy of selumetinib on tumor growths and metastases of MACC1-overexpressing FLO-1 cells xenografted intrasplenically in NOG mice was tested. Mice with high-MACC1-expressing cells developed faster and larger distant metastases. Treatment with selumetinib led to a significant reduction in metastasis exclusively in the MACC1-positive xenografts. MACC1 is an enhancer of tumor aggressiveness and a predictor of poor survival in AGE/S. This effect can be inhibited by selumetinib.

HIPEC in Peritoneal Metastasis of Gastric Origin: A Systematic Review of Regimens and Techniques.

(1) Background: Peritoneal metastasis in gastric cancer is associated with a poor prognosis. Complete cytoreductive surgery including gastrectomy and complete removal of all peritoneal lesions followed by hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) achieves promising results. There exists an immersive variety of approaches for HIPEC that makes it difficult to weigh different results obtained in the literature. In order to enable standardization and development of HIPEC, we here present a systematic review of different drug regimens and technical approaches. (2) Methods: PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched on 26 May 2021 using the mesh terms "intraperitoneal chemotherapy AND gastric cancer". Under consideration of systematic review guidelines, articles reporting on HIPEC in combination with CRS were selected. Data on duration, drugs, dosage, and other application parameters as well as morbidity and long term survival data were extracted for subsequent statistical analysis, tabulation, and descriptive synthesis. We assessed the risk of bias due to inhomogeneity of the patient cohort and incompleteness of report of HIPEC parameters. (3) Results: Out of 1421 screened publications, 42 publications presenting data from 1325 patients met the criteria. Most of the publications were single institutional retrospective cohort studies. The most common HIPEC regimen is performed after gastrointestinal anastomosis and consists of 50-200 mg/m2 cisplatinum and 30-40 mg/m2 mytomycin C at 42-43 °C for 60-90 min in a closed abdomen HIPEC system with three tubes. Almost every study reported incompletely on HIPEC parameters. Lower rates of anastomotic leakage were reported in studies that performed HIPEC after gastrointestinal anastomosis. Studies that performed open HIPEC and integrated a two-drug regimen indicated better overall survival rates. (4) Discussion: This is an exhaustive overview of the use of drug regimens and techniques for HIPEC after CRS for gastric cancer peritoneal metastasis. Other indications and application modes of intraperitoneal chemotherapy such as prophylactic or palliative HIPEC apart from CRS were not addressed. (5) Conclusion: Complete report of HIPEC parameters should be included in every publication. A consensus for dose expression either per BSA or as flat dose is desirable for comparison of the drug regimens. Despite numerous variations, we identified the most common regimens and techniques and their advantages and disadvantages according to the data in the literature. More phase I/II studies are needed to identify the best approach for HIPEC. (6) Other: This review was not supported by third parties.

S100A4 Is a Strong Negative Prognostic Marker and Potential Therapeutic Target in Adenocarcinoma of the Stomach and Esophagus.

Deregulated Wnt-signaling is a key mechanism driving metastasis in adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction and stomach (AGE/S). The oncogene S100A4 was identified as a Wnt-signaling target gene and is known to promote metastasis. In this project, we illuminate the role of S100A4 for metastases development and disease prognosis of AGE/S. Five gastric cancer cell lines were assessed for S100A4 expression. Two cell lines with endogenous high S100A4 expression were used for functional phenotyping including analysis of proliferation and migration after stable S100A4 knock-down. The prognostic value of S100A4 was evaluated by analyzing the S100A4 expression of tissue microarrays with samples of 277 patients with AGE/S. S100A4 knock-down induced lower migration in FLO1 and NCI-N87 cells. Treatment with niclosamide in these cells led to partial inhibition of S100A4 and to reduced migration. Patients with high S100A4 expression showed lower 5-year overall and disease-specific survival. In addition, a larger share of patients in the S100A4 high expressing group suffered from metachronous metastasis. This study identifies S100A4 as a negative prognostic marker for patients with AGE/S. The strong correlation between S100A4 expression, metastases development and patient survival might open opportunities to use S100A4 to improve the prognosis of these patients and as a therapeutic target for intervention in this tumor entity.

Sodium Thiosulfate Reduces Acute Kidney Injury in Patients Undergoing Cytoreductive Surgery Plus Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy with Cisplatin: A Single-Center Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) in combination with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) represents a multimodal treatment concept for patients with peritoneal surface malignancies. The use of intraperitoneal cisplatin (CDDP) is associated with a risk of acute kidney injury (AKI). The aim of this study is to evaluate the protective effect of perioperative sodium thiosulfate (STS) administration on kidney function in patients undergoing CRS and CDDP-based HIPEC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed clinical data of all patients who underwent CRS and CDDP-based HIPEC at our hospital between March 2017 and August 2020. Patients were stratified according to the use of sodium thiosulfate (STS vs. no STS). We compared kidney function and clinical outcome parameters between both groups and determined risk factors for postoperative AKI on univariate and multivariate analysis. AKI was classified according to acute kidney injury network (AKIN) criteria. RESULTS: Of 238 patients who underwent CRS and CDDP-based HIPEC, 46 patients received STS and 192 patients did not. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics. In patients who received STS, a lower incidence (6.5% vs. 30.7%; p = 0.001) and severity of AKI (p = 0.009) were observed. On multivariate analysis, the use of STS (OR 0.089, p = 0.001) remained an independent kidney-protective factor, while arterial hypertension (OR 5.283, p < 0.001) and elevated preoperative urea serum level (OR 5.278, p = 0.032) were predictors for postoperative AKI. CONCLUSIONS: The present data suggest that STS protects patients from AKI caused by CRS and CDDP-based HIPEC. Further prospective studies are needed to validate the benefit of STS among kidney-protective strategies.

The Clinical Importance of Preoperative Rectal Swabs in Patients after Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy.

Background: Surgical site infections are among the most common healthcare-associated infections, especially in patients undergoing cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). The aim of this retrospective study was to examine postoperative infectious complications according to preoperative screening findings of nasal and rectal swabs. Methods: Two hundred four consecutive patients received nasal and rectal swab examination for multidrug-resistant (MDR) bacteria within 30 days before the operation in patients where CRS and HIPEC were planned. Inclusion criteria were as follows: confirmed peritoneal metastases (histologically and/or cytologically); age under 85 years; adequate renal, liver, and bone marrow function; no sign of infection preoperatively; resectable disease; and CRS and HIPEC procedure. If surgical site infection occurred, the microbial spectrum of the site was assessed. One hundred twenty-one patients (63 female [52.1%] and 58 male [47.9%]) met the criteria and were further analyzed retrospectively. Statistical correlations between postoperative complications and risk factors were investigated by univariate and multivariate analysis. Results: Postoperative complications in total were observed in 57 patients (47.1%) with major complications (Clavien-Dindo grades 3-4) in 15 patients (12.4%) and infectious complications in 37 (30.6%) patients. The overall prevalence of nasal MRSA carriage was 3.28%, and the overall prevalence of rectal MDR bacteria carriage was 10.7%. In propensity score analysis, colonized patients compared to noncolonized patients showed increased total complications (CD1-5, p = 0.025), infectious complications (p = 0.028), surgical site infections (p = 0.022) as well as pneumonia (p = 0.016). Multivariate analysis showed that in addition to preoperative rectal colonization, American Society of Anesthesiologists score was a risk factor for postoperative complications. Conclusions: Preoperative 3-MRGN and vancomycin-resistant enterococcus colonization were associated with increased complications and surgical site infections. Special antimicrobial treatment pathways are necessary for these patients to reduce postoperative complications due to colonization.

The ESSO core curriculum committee update on surgical oncology.

INTRODUCTION: Surgical oncology is a defined specialty within the European Board of Surgery within the European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS). Variation in training and specialization still occurs across Europe. There is a need to align the core knowledge needed to fulfil the criteria across subspecialities in surgical oncology. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The core curriculum, established in 2013, was developed with contributions from expert advisors from within the European Society of Surgical Oncology (ESSO), European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) and European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO) and related subspeciality experts. RESULTS: The current version reiterates and updates the core curriculum structure needed for current and future candidates who plans to train for and eventually sit the European fellowship exam for the European Board of Surgery in Surgical Oncology. The content included is not intended to be exhaustive but, rather to give the candidate an idea of expectations and areas for in depth study, in addition to the practical requirements. The five elements included are: Basic principles of oncology; Disease site specific oncology; Generic clinical skills; Training recommendations, and, lastly; Eligibility for the EBSQ exam in Surgical Oncology. CONCLUSIONS: As evidence-based care for cancer patients evolves through research into basic science, translational research and clinical trials, the core curriculum will evolve, mature and adapt to deliver continual improvements in cancer outcomes for patients.