Quality of emergency oncological surgery: time for advanced oncological life support.

OBJECTIVE: In the emergency care of cancer patients, in addition to cancer-related factors, two aspects influence the outcome: (1) where the patient is treated and (2) who will perform the surgery. In Brazil, a significant proportion of patients with surgical oncological emergencies will be operated on in general hospitals by surgeons without training in oncological surgery. OBJECTIVE: The objective was to discuss quality indicators and propose the creation of an urgent oncological surgery advanced life support course. METHODS: Review of articles on the topic. RESULTS: Generally, nonelective resections are associated with higher rates of morbidity and mortality, as well as lower rates of cancer-specific survival. In comparison to elective procedures, the reduced number of harvested lymph nodes and the higher rate of positive margins suggest a compromised degree of radicality in the emergency scenario. CONCLUSION: Among modifiable factors is the training of the emergency surgeon. Enhancing the practice of oncological surgery in emergency settings constitutes a formidable undertaking that entails collaboration across various medical specialties and warrants endorsement and support from medical societies and educational institutions. It is time to establish a national registry encompassing oncological emergencies, develop quality indicators tailored to the national context, and foster the establishment of specialized training programs aimed at enhancing the proficiency of physicians serving in emergency services catering to cancer patients.

Brazilian Society of Surgical Oncology recommendations on Merkel cell carcinoma surgical treatment.

BACKGROUND: Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) is a rare neuroendocrine skin cancer with poor 5-year survival rates. Surgery and radiation are the current first-line treatments for local and nodal disease. OBJECTIVES: The Brazilian Society of Surgical Oncology developed this document aiming to guide the surgical oncology role in multimodal MCC management. METHODS: The consensus was established in three rounds of online discussion, achieving consensus on specific topics including diagnosis, staging, treatment, and follow-up. RESULTS: Patients suspected of having MCC should undergo immunohistochemical examination and preferably undergo pathology review by a dermatopathologist. Initial staging should be performed with dermatologic and nodal physical examination, combined with complementary imaging. Whole-body imaging, preferably with positron emission tomography (PET) or computed tomography (CT) scans, are recommended. Due to the need for multidisciplinary approaches, we recommend that all cases should be discussed in tumor boards and referred to other specialties as soon as possible, reducing potential treatment delays. We recommend that all patients with clinical stage I or II may undergo local excision associated with sentinel lymph node biopsy. The decision on margin size should consider time to recovery, patient's comorbidities, and risk factors. Patients with positive sentinel lymph nodes or the presence of risk factors should undergo postoperative radiation therapy at the primary site. Exclusive radiation is a viable option for patients with low performance. Patients with positive sentinel lymph node biopsy should undergo nodal radiation therapy or lymphadenectomy. In patients with nodal clinical disease, in addition to primary tumor treatment, nodal radiation therapy and/or lymphadenectomy are recommended. Patients with advanced disease should preferably be enrolled in clinical trials and discussed in multidisciplinary meetings. The role of surgery and radiation therapy in the metastatic/advanced setting should be discussed individually and always in tumor boards. CONCLUSION: This document aims to standardize a protocol for initial assessment and treatment for Merkel cell carcinoma, optimizing oncologic outcomes in middle-income countries such as Brazil.

Global Cancer Surgery: pragmatic solutions to improve cancer surgery outcomes worldwide.

The first Lancet Oncology Commission on Global Cancer Surgery was published in 2015 and serves as a landmark paper in the field of cancer surgery. The Commission highlighted the burden of cancer and the importance of cancer surgery, while documenting the many inadequacies in the ability to deliver safe, timely, and affordable cancer surgical care. This Commission builds on the first Commission by focusing on solutions and actions to improve access to cancer surgery globally, developed by drawing upon the expertise from cancer surgery leaders across the world. We present solution frameworks in nine domains that can improve access to cancer surgery. These nine domains were refined to identify solutions specific to the six WHO regions. On the basis of these solutions, we developed eight actions to propel essential improvements in the global capacity for cancer surgery. Our initiatives are broad in scope, pragmatic, affordable, and contextually applicable, and aimed at cancer surgeons as well as leaders, administrators, elected officials, and health policy advocates. We envision that the solutions and actions contained within the Commission will address inequities and promote safe, timely, and affordable cancer surgery for every patient, regardless of their socioeconomic status or geographic location.

Local therapy in advanced melanoma after immune checkpoint inhibitors aiming to achieve complete response.

Background and Objectives: New scenarios for local therapy have arisen after starting immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) to treat advanced melanoma (AM). The aim of this study is to examine the role of local therapies with curative intention for patients with AM that have been on ICI. Methods: This was a single institution, retrospective analysis of unresectable stage III or IV melanoma patients on treatment with anti-PD1 ± anti-CTLA-4 who underwent local therapy with curative intention with no other remaining sites of disease (NRD). Results: Of the 170 patients treated with ICI, 19 (11.2%) met the criteria of curative intention. The median time on ICI before local therapy was 16.6 months (range: 0.92-43.2). At the time of the local treatment, the disease was controlled in 16 (84.25%) and progressing in 3 patients (15.75%); 14 patients (73.7%) treated a single lesion and 5 (26.3%) treated 2 to 3 lesions. In a median follow-up of 17 months (range: 1.51-38.2) after the local therapy and 9.8 months after the last ICI cycle (range: 0.56-31), only 2 (10.5%) out of 19 patients relapsed. Conclusions: Patients with AM on treatment with ICI were able to achieve NRD after local treatment and may benefit from long-term disease control without systemic treatment.

Current clinical practice in the management of Brazilian patients with potentially resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: We aimed to describe the routine clinical practice of physicians involved in the treatment of patients with localized pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) in Brazil. METHODS: Physicians were invited through email and text messages to participate in an electronic survey sponsored by the Brazilian Gastrointestinal Tumor Group (GTG) and the Brazilian Society of Surgical Oncology (SBCO). We evaluated the relationship between variable categories numerically with false discovery rate-adjusted Fisher's exact test p values and graphically with Multiple Correspondence Analysis. RESULTS: Overall, 255 physicians answered the survey. Most (52.5%) were medical oncologists, treated patients predominantly in the private setting (71.0%), and had access to multidisciplinary tumor boards (MTDTB; 76.1%). Medical oncologists were more likely to describe neoadjuvant therapy as beneficial in the resectable setting and surgeons in the borderline resectable setting. Most physicians would use information on risk factors for early recurrence, frailty, and type of surgery to decide treatment strategy. Doctors working predominantly in public institutions were less likely to have access to MTDTB and to consider FOLFIRINOX the most adequate regimen in the neoadjuvant setting. CONCLUSIONS: Considerable differences exist in the management of localized PDAC, some of them possibly explained by the medical specialty, but also by the funding source of health care.

Guidelines from the Brazilian society of surgical oncology regarding indications and technical aspects of neck dissection in papillary, follicular, and medullary thyroid cancers.

Objective: The purpose of these guidelines is to provide specific recommendations for the surgical treatment of neck metastases in patients with papillary, follicular, and medullary thyroid carcinomas. Materials and methods: Recommendations were developed based on research of scientific articles (preferentially meta-analyses) and guidelines issued by international medical specialty societies. The American College of Physicians' Guideline Grading System was used to determine the levels of evidence and grades of recommendations. The following questions were answered: A) Is elective neck dissection indicated in the treatment of papillary, follicular, and medullary thyroid carcinoma? B) When should central, lateral, and modified radical neck dissection be performed? C) Could molecular tests guide the extent of the neck dissection? Results and conclusion: Recommendation 1: Elective central neck dissection is not indicated in patients with cN0 well-differentiated thyroid carcinoma or in those with noninvasive T1 and T2 tumors but may be considered in T3-T4 tumors or in the presence of metastases in the lateral neck compartments. Recommendation 2: Elective central neck dissection is recommended in medullary thyroid carcinoma. Recommendation 3: Selective neck dissection of levels II-V should be indicated to treat neck metastases in papillary thyroid cancer, an approach that decreases the risk of recurrence and mortality. Recommendation 4: Compartmental neck dissection is indicated in the treatment of lymph node recurrence after elective or therapeutic neck dissection; "berry node picking" is not recommended. Recommendation 5: There are currently no recommendations regarding the use of molecular tests in guiding the extent of neck dissection in thyroid cancer.

Guidelines from the Brazilian society of surgical oncology regarding indications and technical aspects of neck dissection in papillary, follicular, and medullary thyroid cancers

ABSTRACT Objective: The purpose of these guidelines is to provide specific recommendations for the surgical treatment of neck metastases in patients with papillary, follicular, and medullary thyroid carcinomas. Materials and methods: Recommendations were developed based on research of scientific articles (preferentially meta-analyses) and guidelines issued by international medical specialty societies. The American College of Physicians' Guideline Grading System was used to determine the levels of evidence and grades of recommendations. The following questions were answered: A) Is elective neck dissection indicated in the treatment of papillary, follicular, and medullary thyroid carcinoma? B) When should central, lateral, and modified radical neck dissection be performed? C) Could molecular tests guide the extent of the neck dissection? Results/conclusion: Recommendation 1: Elective central neck dissection is not indicated in patients with cN0 well-differentiated thyroid carcinoma or in those with noninvasive T1 and T2 tumors but may be considered in T3-T4 tumors or in the presence of metastases in the lateral neck compartments. Recommendation 2: Elective central neck dissection is recommended in medullary thyroid carcinoma. Recommendation 3: Selective neck dissection of levels II-V should be indicated to treat neck metastases in papillary thyroid cancer, an approach that decreases the risk of recurrence and mortality. Recommendation 4: Compartmental neck dissection is indicated in the treatment of lymph node recurrence after elective or therapeutic neck dissection; "berry node picking" is not recommended. Recommendation 5: There are currently no recommendations regarding the use of molecular tests in guiding the extent of neck dissection in thyroid cancer.

Cancer risk-reducing surgery: Brazilian society of surgical oncology guideline part 1 (gynecology and breast).

BACKGROUND: Risk-reducing operations are an important part of the management of hereditary predisposition to cancer. In selected cases, they can considerably reduce the morbidity and mortality associated with cancer in this population. OBJECTIVES: The Brazilian Society of Surgical Oncology (BSSO) developed this guideline to establish national benchmarks for cancer risk-reducing operations. METHODS: The guideline was prepared from May to December 2021 by a multidisciplinary team of experts to discuss the surgical management of cancer predisposition syndromes. Fourteen questions were defined and assigned to expert groups that reviewed the literature and drafted preliminary recommendations. Following a review by the coordinators and a second review by all participants, the groups made final adjustments, classified the level of evidence, and voted on the recommendations. RESULTS: For all questions including risk-reduction bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, hysterectomy, and mastectomy, major agreement was achieved by the participants, always using accessible alternatives. CONCLUSION: This and its accompanying article represent the first guideline in cancer risk reduction surgery developed by the BSSO, and it should serve as an important reference for the management of families with cancer predisposition.

Brazilian Society of Surgical Oncology surgical standards for resectable colorectal cancer liver metastases.

The management of colorectal cancer liver metastasis (CRLM) has become complex because of the increasing availability of medical, radiological, and surgical treatment options applied either alone or in combination. However, resection remains the only evidence-based curative therapy. These Brazilian Society of Surgical Oncology surgical standards are intended to guide clinicians in the decision-making process for modern surgical management of CRLM within a multidisciplinary team in an evidence-based framework, focusing on resectable disease.

Cancer risk-reducing surgery: Brazilian Society of Surgical Oncology Guideline Part 2 (Gastrointestinal and thyroid).

BACKGROUND: Risk-reducing operations are an important part of the management of hereditary predisposition to cancer. In selected cases, they can considerably reduce the morbidity and mortality associated with cancer in this population. OBJECTIVES: The Brazilian Society of Surgical Oncology (BSSO) developed this guideline to establish national benchmarks for cancer risk-reducing operations. METHODS: The guideline was prepared from May to December 2021 by a multidisciplinary team of experts to discuss the surgical management of cancer predisposition syndromes. Eleven questions were defined and assigned to expert groups that reviewed the literature and drafted preliminary recommendations. Following a review by the coordinators and a second review by all participants, the groups made final adjustments, classified the level of evidence, and voted on the recommendations. RESULTS: For all questions including risk-reducing colectomy, gastrectomy, and thyroidectomy, a major agreement was achieved by the participants, always using accessible alternatives. CONCLUSION: This and its accompanying article represent the first guideline in cancer risk reduction surgery developed by the BSSO and it should serve as an important reference for the management of families with cancer predisposition.

Surgery or active surveillance for pNETs < 2 cm: Preliminary results from a single center Brazilian cohort.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Incidence of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNETS) seems to be rising over the years, with many cases incidentally diagnosed. Surgery and active surveillance are current treatment modalities for small pNETS. We review our institutional series and compare outcomes for small asymptomatic and nonfunctioning tumors. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included patients with 2 cm or less and well differentiated pNETS at a single Brazilian Cancer Center. From 2002 to 2020, patients received active surveillance or surgery as a treatment strategy. Short and long-term results were compared. RESULTS: Sixty-four patients were included, 41 in surgical strategy and 23 in the active surveillance approach. Baseline group characteristics were comparable. More patients on active surveillance underwent abdominal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and had tumors located in the pancreatic head (41% vs. 17%, p = 0.038). Minimally invasive procedure was chosen in 80.1% of the surgical patients. No patient died after surgery. Median follow-up period was 38.6 and 46.4 months for active surveillance and surgery cohorts, respectively. No difference in disease progression rate was observed. CONCLUSION: Both approaches seem to be safe for small pNETs. Long-term outcome and quality of life should be considered when discussing such options with patients.

Brazilian Society of Surgical Oncology guidelines for malignant bowel obstruction management.

BACKGROUND: Malignant bowel obstruction (MBO) is a frequent complication in advanced cancer patients and especially those with abdominal tumors. The clinical management of MBO requires a specific and individualized approach based on the disease prognosis. Surgery is recommended. Less invasive approaches such as endoscopic treatments should be considered when surgery is contraindicated. The priority of care for inoperable and consolidated MBO is to control the symptoms and promote the maximum level of comfort. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to develop recommendations for the effective management of MBO. METHODS: A questionnaire was administered to all members of the Brazilian Society of Surgical Oncology, of whom 41 surgeons participated in the survey. A literature review of studies retrieved from the National Library of Medicine database was conducted on particular topics chosen by the participants. These topics addressed questions regarding the MBO management, to define the level of evidence and strength of each recommendation, and an adapted version of the Infectious Diseases Society of America Health Service rating system was used. RESULTS: Most aspects of the medical approach and management strategies reviewed were strongly recommended by the participants. CONCLUSIONS: Guidelines outlining the strategies for management MBO were developed based on the strongest evidence available in the literature.

PD-L1 expression in gastric and gastroesophageal junction cancer patients treated with perioperative chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The incidence, predictive, and prognostic impact of programmed cell death (PD-L1) expression in gastric (GC) and gastroesophageal junction tumors (GEJC) treated with perioperative chemotherapy is poorly understood. We aimed to assess PD-L1 expression by immunohistochemistry (IHC) in both pre and posttreatment specimens evaluating its impact on pathological response and survival outcomes. METHODS: Retrospective cohort of patients with GC and GEJ tumors treated in a single western cancer center between 2007 and 2017. PD-L1 expression was assessed by IHC before and after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, in surgical samples, and reported as combined positive score (CPS). CPS > 1% was tested for its association with pathological response and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: We were able to assess PD-L1 expression in at least one tissue sample from 155 subjects. PD-L1 positivity rate was 20%. In 74 paired samples, a 21% discordance between PD-L1 expression in biopsy sample and surgical specimen was observed. With a median follow-up period of 60.3 months, 5-years disease-free survival was 60.5% with a median OS not reached. PD-L1 expression was neither associated with pathological response or survival outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: PD-L1 expression in the setting of locally advanced GC tumors was relatively low and can vary considering the tissue sample analyzed. This expression had no association with survival or pathological response in this population.

Patterns of disease relapse and posttreatment follow-up of patients with resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma: A single-center analysis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: To describe the patterns of disease relapse and follow-up of patients with resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Additionally, we looked at patients' characteristics at relapse and survival. METHODS: We included patients with potentially resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma diagnosed from 2008 to 2018 who were submitted to resection with clear macroscopic margins and started posttreatment surveillance. RESULTS: The study population consists of 73 patients. The median interval between imaging studies was 3.2 months during the first 2 years of follow-up and 5.1 months thereafter. Forty-eight patients (65.8%) experienced disease relapse. The most frequent single site of relapse was locoregional (N = 21; 43.8%). At relapse, 31 patients (64.6%) were symptomatic and forty-two patients (87.6%) had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 or 1. Most patients were able to undergo additional anticancer therapy (N = 41; 85.4%). Patients with asymptomatic relapses experienced longer median postrelapse survival (25.4 vs. 11.3 months; p = 0.015). CONCLUSIONS: A follow-up protocol that included imaging studies every 3 months in the first 2 years and every 6 months thereafter is able to diagnose disease relapse when patients have adequate performance status and are still able to undergo additional anticancer treatment.

Impact of COVID-19 Disease in Early Breast Cancer Management: A Summary of the Current Evidence.

PURPOSE: An expert panel on breast cancer and COVID-19 disease was convened to address the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic for early breast cancer (eBC) management. METHODS: To ensure that the most clinically relevant information was addressed, essential information was drawn from several of the latest national and international guidelines and another technical document. The expert panel met in five virtual closed sessions from November 2020 to May 2021 to consult on the relevant data from evidence-based results. The data gathered were discussed on an online platform. RESULTS: This article reports the expert panel's highlights of these meetings' discussions. In addition, it provides practical recommendations covering topics regarding diagnosis, treatment, and management of patients with eBC in clinical settings routinely encountered by health care professionals amid the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSION: This article provided guidance on several topics regarding eBC management amid the COVID-19 pandemics to inform safer care practices.

Brazilian society of surgical oncology: Guidelines for the surgical treatment of mid-low rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third leading cause of cancer in North America, Western Europe, and Brazil, and represents an important public health problem. It is estimated that approximately 30% of all the CRC cases correspond to tumors located in the rectum, requiring complex multidisciplinary treatment. In an effort to provide surgeons who treat rectal cancer with the most current information based on the best evidence in the literature, the Brazilian Society of Surgical Oncology (SBCO) has produced the present guidelines for rectal cancer treatment that is focused on the main topics related to daily clinical practice. OBJECTIVES: The SBCO developed the present guidelines to provide recommendations on the main topics related to the treatment of mid-low rectal cancer based on current scientific evidence. METHODS: Between May and June 2021, 11 experts in CRC surgery met to develop the guidelines for the treatment of mid-low rectal cancer. A total of 22 relevant topics were disseminated among the participants. The methodological quality of a final list with 221 sources was evaluated, all the evidence was examined and revised, and the treatment guideline was formulated by the 11-expert committee. To reach a final consensus, all the topics were reviewed via a videoconference meeting that was attended by all 11 of the experts. RESULTS: The prepared guidelines contained 22 topics considered to be highly relevant in the treatment of mid-low rectal cancer, covering subjects related to the tests required for staging, surgical technique-related aspects, recommended measures to reduce surgical complications, neoadjuvant strategies, and nonoperative treatments. In addition, a checklist was proposed to summarize the important information and offer an updated tool to assist surgeons who treat rectal cancer provide the best care to their patients. CONCLUSION: These guidelines summarize concisely the recommendations based on the most current scientific evidence on the most relevant aspects of the treatment of mid-low rectal cancer and are a practical guide that can help surgeons who treat rectal cancer make the best therapeutic decision.

Symptomatic Recurrence and Survival Outcomes After Curative Treatment of Gastric Cancer: Does Intensive Follow-up Evaluation Improve Survival?

BACKGROUND: Intensive surveillance after treatment of gastric cancer patients with curative intent may lead to an earlier diagnosis of disease recurrence, but its impact on survival is uncertain. This study aimed to evaluate whether early diagnosis of disease recurrence among asymptomatic patients was associated with long-term survival. METHODS: This retrospective study analyzed patients with stages 1 to 3C gastric adenocarcinoma treated between 1999 and 2018. All recurrence events were classified as symptomatic or asymptomatic (detected by follow-up tests), and their clinicopathologic characteristics, patterns of recurrence, and survival were analyzed. RESULTS: The cohort consisted of 669 patients treated with a total gastrectomy in 48.6% and a D2-lymphadenectomy in 88.8% of the cases. Most of the tumors were pT3-4 (46.5%), with 45.5% involving lymph node metastases and 42.3% manifesting a diffuse histology. During a median follow-up period of 80.1 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 75.3-84.8 months), 166 patients had recurrences (24.8%), 65.7% of which were symptomatic. The peritoneum was the main site of recurrence (37.2%), and peritoneal recurrence was associated with worse overall survival (OS) (hazard ratio, 1.69; 95%CI, 1.2-2.37). The median disease-free, post-recurrence survival, and OS periods in the asymptomatic and symptomatic groups were respectively 13.4 versus 17.2 months (p = 0.04), 11.9 versus 4.7 months (p < 0.001), and 29.9 versus 26.4 months (p = 0.21). When OS was analyzed among the patients with non-peritoneal recurrence, no difference was observed between the two groups (31.3 vs 31.1 months; p = 0.46). CONCLUSION: Early diagnosis of asymptomatic disease recurrence did not affect the OS of the gastric cancer patients treated with curative intent. The use of intensive surveillance strategies in this scenario still requires further evidence.

Brazilian Group of Gastrointestinal Tumours' consensus guidelines for the management of oesophageal cancer.

Oesophageal cancer is among the ten most common types of cancer worldwide. More than 80% of the cases and deaths related to the disease occur in developing countries. Local socio-economic, epidemiologic and healthcare particularities led us to create a Brazilian guideline for the management of oesophageal and oesophagogastric junction (OGJ) carcinomas. The Brazilian Group of Gastrointestinal Tumours invited 50 physicians with different backgrounds, including radiology, pathology, endoscopy, nuclear medicine, genetics, oncological surgery, radiotherapy and clinical oncology, to collaborate. This document was prepared based on an extensive review of topics related to heredity, diagnosis, staging, pathology, endoscopy, surgery, radiation, systemic therapy (including checkpoint inhibitors) and follow-up, which was followed by presentation, discussion and voting by the panel members. It provides updated evidence-based recommendations to guide clinical management of oesophageal and OGJ carcinomas in several scenarios and clinical settings.