Surveillance Imaging after Primary Diagnosis of Ductal Carcinoma in Situ.

Background Guidelines recommend annual surveillance imaging after diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Guideline adherence has not been characterized in a contemporary cohort. Purpose To identify uptake and determinants of surveillance imaging in women who underwent treatment for DCIS. Materials and Methods A stratified random sample of women who underwent breast-conserving surgery for primary DCIS between 2008 and 2014 was retrospectively selected from 1330 facilities in the United States. Imaging examinations were recorded from date of diagnosis until first distant recurrence, death, loss to follow-up, or end of study (November 2018). Imaging after treatment was categorized into 10 12-month periods starting 6 months after diagnosis. Primary outcome was per-period receipt of asymptomatic surveillance imaging (mammography, MRI, or US). Secondary outcome was diagnosis of ipsilateral invasive breast cancer. Multivariable logistic regression with repeated measures and generalized estimating equations was used to model receipt of imaging. Rates of diagnosis with ipsilateral invasive breast cancer were compared between women who did and those who did not undergo imaging in the 6-18-month period after diagnosis using inverse probability-weighted Kaplan-Meier estimators. Results A total of 12 559 women (median age, 60 years; IQR, 52-69 years) were evaluated. Uptake of surveillance imaging was 75% in the first period and decreased over time (P < .001). Across the first 5 years after treatment, 52% of women participated in consistent annual surveillance. Surveillance was lower in Black (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.80; 95% CI: 0.74, 0.88; P < .001) and Hispanic (OR, 0.82; 95% CI: 0.72, 0.94; P = .004) women than in White women. Women who underwent surveillance in the first period had a higher 6-year rate of diagnosis of invasive cancer (1.6%; 95% CI: 1.3, 1.9) than those who did not (1.1%; 95% CI: 0.7, 1.4; difference: 0.5%; 95% CI: 0.1, 1.0; P = .03). Conclusion Half of women did not consistently adhere to imaging surveillance guidelines across the first 5 years after treatment, with racial disparities in adherence rates. © RSNA, 2023 Supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Rahbar and Dontchos in this issue.

Implications of missing data on reported breast cancer mortality.

BACKGROUND: National cancer registries are valuable tools to analyze patterns of care and clinical outcomes; yet, missing data may impact the accuracy and generalizability of these data. We sought to evaluate the association between missing data and overall survival (OS). METHODS: Using the NCDB (National Cancer Database) and SEER (Surveillance, Epidemiology, End Results Program), we assessed data missingness among patients diagnosed with invasive breast cancer from 2010 to 2014. Key variables included demographic (age, race, ethnicity, insurance, education, income), tumor (grade, ER, PR, HER2, TNM stages), and treatment (surgery in both databases; chemotherapy and radiation in NCDB). OS was compared between those with and without missing data using Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: Overall, 775,996 patients in the NCDB and 263,016 in SEER were identified; missing at least 1 key variable occurred for 29% and 13%, respectively. Of those, the overwhelming majority (NCDB 80%; SEER 88%) were missing tumor variables. When compared to patients with complete data, missingness was associated with a greater risk of death: NCDB HR 1.23 (99% CI 1.21-1.25) and SEER HR 2.11 (99% CI 2.05-2.18). Patients with complete tumor data had higher unadjusted OS estimates than that of the entire sample: NCDB 82.7% vs 81.8% and SEER 83.5% vs 81.7% for 5-year OS. CONCLUSIONS: Missingness of select variables is not uncommon within large national cancer registries and is associated with a worse OS. Exclusion of patients with missing variables may introduce unintended bias into analyses and result in findings that underestimate breast cancer mortality.

Hospital-level compliance with the commission on cancer's quality of care measures and the association with patient survival.

BACKGROUND: Quality measurement has become a priority for national healthcare reform, and valid measures are necessary to discriminate hospital performance and support value-based healthcare delivery. The Commission on Cancer (CoC) is the largest cancer-specific accreditor of hospital quality in the United States and has implemented Quality of Care Measures to evaluate cancer care delivery. However, none has been formally tested as a valid metric for assessing hospital performance based on actual patient outcomes. METHODS: Eligibility and compliance with the Quality of Care Measures are reported within the National Cancer Database, which also captures data for robust patient-level risk adjustment. Hospital-level compliance was calculated for the core measures, and the association with patient survival was tested using Cox regression. RESULTS: Seven hundred sixty-eight thousand nine hundred sixty-nine unique cancer cases were included from 1323 facilities. Increasing hospital-level compliance was associated with improved survival for only two measures, including a 35% reduced risk of mortality for the gastric cancer measure G15RLN (HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.58-0.72) and a 19% reduced risk of mortality for the colon cancer measure 12RLN (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.77-0.85). For the lung cancer measure LNoSurg, increasing compliance was paradoxically associated with an increased risk of mortality (HR 1.14, 95% CI 1.08-1.20). For the remaining measures, hospital-level compliance demonstrated no consistent association with patient survival. CONCLUSION: Hospital-level compliance with the CoC's Quality of Care Measures is not uniformly aligned with patient survival. In their current form, these measures do not reliably discriminate hospital performance and are limited as a tool for value-based healthcare delivery.

Cabozantinib and Panitumumab for RAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

LESSONS LEARNED: Antitumor activity was observed in the study population. Dose modifications of cabozantinib improve long-term tolerability. Biomarkers are needed to identify patient populations most likely to benefit. Further study of cabozantinib with or without panitumumab in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer is warranted. BACKGROUND: The epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) antibody panitumumab is active in patients with RAS wild-type (WT) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), but nearly all patients experience resistance. MET amplification is a driver of panitumumab resistance. Cabozantinib is an inhibitor of multiple kinases, including vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2 (VEGFR2) and c-MET, and may delay or reverse anti-EGFR resistance. METHODS: In this phase Ib clinical trial, we established the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of cabozantinib and panitumumab. We then treated an expansion cohort to further describe the tolerability and clinical activity of the RP2D. Eligibility included patients with KRAS WT mCRC (later amended to include only RAS WT mCRC) who had received prior treatment with a fluoropyrimidine, oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and bevacizumab. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients were enrolled and treated. The MTD/RP2D was cabozantinib 60 mg p.o. daily and panitumumab 6 mg/kg I.V. every 2 weeks. The objective response rate (ORR) was 16%. Median progression free survival (PFS) was 3.7 months (90% confidence interval [CI], 2.3-7.1). Median overall survival (OS) was 12.1 months (90% CI, 7.5-14.3). Five patients (20%) discontinued treatment due to toxicity, and 18 patients (72%) required a dose reduction of cabozantinib. CONCLUSION: The combination of cabozantinib and panitumumab has activity. Dose reductions of cabozantinib improve tolerability.

Ipilimumab and Radiation in Patients with High-risk Resected or Regionally Advanced Melanoma.

PURPOSE: In this prospective trial, we sought to assess the feasibility of concurrent administration of ipilimumab and radiation as adjuvant, neoadjuvant, or definitive therapy in patients with regionally advanced melanoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty-four patients in two cohorts were enrolled and received ipilimumab at 3 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four doses in conjunction with radiation; median dose was 4,000 cGy (interquartile range, 3,550-4,800 cGy). Patients in cohort 1 were treated adjuvantly; patients in cohort 2 were treated either neoadjuvantly or as definitive therapy. RESULTS: Adverse event profiles were consistent with those previously reported with checkpoint inhibition and radiation. For the neoadjuvant/definitive cohort, the objective response rate was 64% (80% confidence interval, 40%-83%), with 4 of 10 evaluable patients achieving a radiographic complete response. An additional 3 patients in this cohort had a partial response and went on to surgical resection. With 2 years of follow-up, the 6-, 12-, and 24-month relapse-free survival for the adjuvant cohort was 85%, 69%, and 62%, respectively. At 2 years, all patients in the neoadjuvant/definitive cohort and 10/13 patients in the adjuvant cohort were still alive. Correlative studies suggested that response in some patients were associated with specific CD4+ T-cell subsets. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, concurrent administration of ipilimumab and radiation was feasible, and resulted in a high response rate, converting some patients with unresectable disease into surgical candidates. Additional studies to investigate the combination of radiation and checkpoint inhibitor therapy are warranted.

Early 18F-FDG-PET Response During Radiation Therapy for HPV-Related Oropharyngeal Cancer May Predict Disease Recurrence.

PURPOSE: Early indication of treatment outcome may guide therapeutic de-escalation strategies in patients with human papillomavirus (HPV)-related oropharyngeal cancer (OPC). This study investigated the relationships between tumor volume and 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (PET) parameters before and during definitive radiation therapy with treatment outcomes. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients undergoing definitive (chemo)radiation for HPV-related/p16-positive OPC were prospectively enrolled on an institutional review board-approved study. 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET/computed tomography scans were performed at simulation and after 2 weeks at a dose of ∼20 Gy. Tumor volume and standardized uptake value (SUV) characteristics were measured. SUV was normalized to blood pool uptake. Tumor volume and PET parameters associated with recurrence were identified through recursive partitioning (RPART). Recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) curves between RPART-identified cohorts were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and Cox models were used to estimate the hazard ratios (HRs). RESULTS: From 2012 to 2016, 62 patients with HPV-related OPC were enrolled. Median follow-up was 4.4 years. RPART identified patients with intratreatment SUVmax (normalized to blood pool SUVmean) <6.7 or SUVmax (normalized to blood pool SUVmean) ≥6.7 with intratreatment SUV40% ≥2.75 as less likely to recur. For identified subgroups, results of Cox models showed unadjusted HRs for RFS and OS (more likely to recur vs less likely) of 7.33 (90% confidence interval [CI], 2.97-18.12) and 6.09 (90% CI, 2.22-16.71), respectively, and adjusted HRs of 6.57 (90% CI, 2.53-17.05) and 5.61 (90% CI, 1.90-16.54) for RFS and OS, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: PET parameters after 2 weeks of definitive radiation therapy for HPV-related OPC are associated with RFS and OS, thus potentially informing an adaptive treatment approach.

The Evolution of Breast Satisfaction and Well-Being after Breast Cancer: A Propensity-Matched Comparison to the Norm.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer survival continues to improve, with women living longer after treatment. It is not well understood how long-term satisfaction and well-being differ following treatment or how types of reconstruction differ when compared to the norm. METHODS: In a propensity-matched sample, the authors compared patient-reported outcomes in breast cancer patients at various time intervals from surgery with normative BREAST-Q data. All data were obtained using the Army of Women, an online community fostering breast cancer research. Breast cancer patients were stratified by surgical treatment and reconstruction type. Regression lines were estimated and differences in slope tested between cancer patients and noncancer controls. RESULTS: The authors compared normative (n = 922) and breast cancer (n = 4343) cohorts in a propensity-matched analysis. Among the breast cancer patients, 49.4 percent underwent lumpectomy, 17.0 percent underwent mastectomy, 21.7 percent underwent implant reconstruction, and 11.9 percent underwent autologous reconstruction. Median time since surgery was 4.7 years, with 21.1 percent more than 10 years after surgery. At the time of survey, breast cancer patients reported higher Satisfaction with Breasts and Psychosocial Well-being scores compared to noncancer controls (p < 0.01), with the cohorts undergoing lumpectomy and autologous reconstruction both reporting higher scores than the normative controls. After mastectomy, scores averaged lower than the noncancer controls, but improved over time. However, all breast cancer groups reported significantly lower Physical Well-being scores than the noncancer cohort (all p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Breast cancer patients undergoing lumpectomy or autologous reconstruction reported higher psychosocial well-being compared to noncancer controls. These differences were influenced both by time since treatment and by choice of surgical procedure.

A phase Ib study of capecitabine and ziv-aflibercept followed by a phase II single-arm expansion cohort in chemotherapy refractory metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patients with chemotherapy refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) have a poor prognosis and limited therapeutic options. In this phase Ib/II clinical trial, we established the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended phase II dose (RPTD) for the combination of capecitabine and ziv-aflibercept, and then we evaluated the efficacy of the combination in patients with chemotherapy refractory metastatic CRC. METHODS: All patients were required to have a Karnofsky Performance Status > 70% and adequate organ function. The phase Ib dose escalation cohort included patients with advanced solid tumors who had progressed on all standard therapies. Using a standard 3 + 3 design, we identified the MTD and RPTD for the combination. Fifty patients with metastatic CRC who had progressed on or were intolerant of a fluoropyrimidine, oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and bevacizumab were then enrolled in a single-arm phase II expansion cohort, and were treated at the RPTD. Prior EGFR antibody therapy was required for subjects with RAS wildtype tumors. The primary endpoint for the expansion cohort was progression-free survival (PFS) at two months. Secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: A total of 63 patients were enrolled and evaluable for toxicity (13 dose escalation; 50 expansion). The MTD and RPTD were: capecitabine 850 mg/m2, P.O. bid, days 1-14, and ziv-aflibercept 6 mg/kg I.V., day 1, of each 21-day cycle. In the expansion cohort, 72% of patients were progression-free at two months (95% confidence interval [CI], 60-84%). Median PFS and OS were 3.9 months (95% CI, 2.3-4.5) and 7.1 months (95% CI: 5.8-10.0), respectively. Among all patients evaluable for toxicity, the most common treatment related adverse events (all grade [%]; grade ≥ 3 [%]) included palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia (41%; 6%), hypertension (33%; 22%), and mucositis (19%; 5%). RNA was isolated from archived tumor specimens and gene expression analyses revealed no association between angiogenic biomarkers and clinical outcomes. CONCLUSION: The combination of capecitabine and ziv-aflibercept at the RPTD demonstrated acceptable safety and tolerability. PFS at 2 months in patients with chemotherapy refractory metastatic CRC was significantly greater than that in historical controls, indicating that this combination warrants further study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This clinical trial was registered in the www.clinicaltrials.gov system as NCT01661972 on July 31, 2012.

A phase Ib study of the combination regorafenib with PF-03446962 in patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (REGAL-1 trial).

PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended phase II dose (RPTD), as well as the safety and tolerability of PF-03446962, a monoclonal antibody targeting activin receptor like kinase 1 (ALK-1), in combination with regorafenib in patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. METHODS: The first stage of this study was a standard "3 + 3" open-label dose-escalation scheme. Cohorts of 3-6 subjects were started with 120 mg of regorafenib given PO daily for 3 weeks of a 4 week cycle, plus 4.5 mg/kg of PF-03446962 given IV every 2 weeks. Doses of both drugs were adjusted according to dose-limiting toxicities (DLT). Plasma was collected for multiplexed ELISA analysis of factors related to tumor growth and angiogenesis. RESULTS: Seventeen subjects were enrolled, of whom 11 were deemed evaluable. Seven subjects were enrolled at dose level 1, and four were enrolled at level - 1. Overall, three DLTs were observed during the dose-escalation phase: two in level 1 and one in level - 1. A planned dose-expansion cohort was not started due to early termination of the clinical trial. Common adverse events were infusion-related reaction, fatigue, palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome, abdominal pain, dehydration, nausea, back pain, anorexia, and diarrhea. One subject achieved stable disease for 5.5 months, but discontinued treatment due to adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: The regimen of regorafenib and PF-03446962 was associated with unacceptable toxicity and did not demonstrate notable clinical activity in patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer.

Perspectives on the Costs of Cancer Care: A Survey of the American Society of Breast Surgeons.

BACKGROUND: Cancer treatment costs are not routinely addressed in shared decisions for breast cancer surgery. Thus, we sought to characterize cost awareness and communication among surgeons treating breast cancer. METHODS: We conducted a self-administered, confidential electronic survey among members of the American Society of Breast Surgeons from 1 July to 15 September 2018. Questions were based on previously published or validated survey items, and assessed surgeon demographics, cost sensitivity, and communication. Descriptive summaries and cross-tabulations with Chi-square statistics were used, with exact tests where warranted, to assess findings. RESULTS: Of those surveyed (N = 2293), 598 (25%) responded. Surgeons reported that 'risk of recurrence' (70%), 'appearance of the breast' (50%), and 'risks of surgery' (47%) were the most influential on patients' decisions for breast cancer surgery; 6% cited out-of-pocket costs as significant. Over half (53%) of the surgeons agreed that doctors should consider patient costs when choosing cancer treatment, yet the majority of surgeons (58%) reported 'infrequently' (43%) or 'never' (15%) considering patient costs in medical recommendations. The overwhelming majority (87%) of surgeons believed that patients should have access to the costs of their treatment before making medical decisions. Surgeons treating a higher percentage of Medicaid or uninsured patients were more likely to consistently consider costs (p < 0.001). Participants reported that insufficient knowledge or resources (61%), a perceived inability to help with costs (24%), and inadequate time (22%) impeded cost discussions. Notably, 20% of participants believed that discussing costs might impact the quality of care patients receive. CONCLUSIONS: Cost transparency remains rare, however in shared decisions for breast cancer surgery, improved cost awareness by surgeons has the potential to reduce financial hardship.

Retrospective analysis of safety and efficacy of anti-PD-1 therapy and radiation therapy in advanced melanoma: A bi-institutional study.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Antibodies against programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) are standard treatments for advanced melanoma. Palliative radiation therapy (RT) is commonly administered for this disease. Safety and optimal timing for this combination for melanoma has not been established. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, records for melanoma patients who received anti-PD-1 therapy at Duke University or Emory University (1/1/2013-12/30/2015) were reviewed. Patients were categorized by receipt of RT and RT timing relative to anti-PD-1. RESULTS: 151 patients received anti-PD-1 therapy. Median follow-up was 12.9 months. Patients receiving RT (n = 85) had worse baseline prognostic factors than patients without RT (n = 66). One-year overall survival (OS) was lower for RT patients than patients without RT (66%, 95% CI: 55-77% vs 83%, 95% CI: 73-92%). One-year OS was 61% for patients receiving RT before anti-PD-1 (95% CI: 46-76%), 78% for RT during anti-PD-1 (95% CI: 60-95%), and 58% for RT after anti-PD-1 (95% CI: 26-89%). On Cox regression, OS for patients without RT did not differ significantly from patients receiving RT during anti-PD-1 (HR 1.07, 95% CI: 0.41-2.84) or RT before anti-PD-1 (HR 0.56, 95% CI: 0.21-1.45). RT and anti-PD-1 therapy administered within 6 weeks of each other was well tolerated. CONCLUSION: RT can be safely administered with anti-PD-1 therapy. Despite worse baseline prognostic characteristics for patients receiving RT, OS was similar for patients receiving concurrent RT with anti-PD-1 therapy compared to patients receiving anti-PD-1 therapy alone.

Role of pelvic chemoradiation therapy in patients with initially metastatic anal canal cancer: A National Cancer Database review.

BACKGROUND: Although the management of localized anal canal squamous cell carcinomas is well established, the role of pelvic chemoradiation (CRT) in the treatment of patients presenting with synchronous metastatic (stage IV) disease is poorly defined. This study used a national cancer database to compare the overall survival (OS) rates of patients with synchronous metastatic disease receiving CRT to the pelvis and patients treated with chemotherapy (CT) alone. METHODS: This study included adult patients with anal canal squamous cell carcinomas presenting with synchronous metastases diagnosed from 2004 to 2012. Multiple imputation and 2:1 propensity score matching were used to create a matched data set for testing. The proportional hazards model was used to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) for the effect of the treatment group on OS. With only patients in the matched data set, the OS of the treatment groups was estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method by treatment group. RESULTS: This study started with an unmatched data set of 978 patients, and 582 patients were selected for the matched data set: 388 in the CRT group and 194 in the CT-alone group. The HR for the group effect was 0.75 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.61-0.92; P = .006). The median OS was 21.1 months in the CRT group (95% CI, 17.4-24.0 months) and 14.6 months in the CT group (95% CI, 12.2-18.4 months). The corresponding 5-year OS rates were 23% (95% CI, 18%-28%) and 14% (95% CI, 7%-21%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this large series analyzing OS in patients with stage IV anal cancer, CRT was associated with improved OS in comparison with CT alone. Because of the lack of prospective data in this setting, this evidence will help to guide treatment approaches in this group of patients.

Adjuvant Chemotherapy Improves Survival Following Resection of Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer with Pathologic Complete Response.

BACKGROUND: Controversy exists over the use of adjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced (stages II-III) rectal cancer (LARC) patients who demonstrate pathologic complete response (pCR) following neoadjuvant chemoradiation. We conducted a retrospective analysis to determine whether adjuvant chemotherapy imparts survival benefit among this population. METHODS: The National Cancer Database (NCDB) was queried to identify LARC patients with pCR following neoadjuvant chemoradiation. The cohort was stratified by receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy. Multiple imputation and a Cox proportional hazards model were employed to estimate the effect of adjuvant chemotherapy on overall survival. RESULTS: There were 24,418 patients identified in the NCDB with clinically staged II or III rectal cancer who received neoadjuvant chemoradiation. Of these, 5606 (23.0%) had pCR. Among patients with pCR, 1401 (25%) received adjuvant chemotherapy and 4205 (75%) did not. Patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy were slightly younger, more likely to have private insurance, and more likely to have clinically staged III disease, but did not differ significantly in comparison to patients who did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy with respect to race, sex, facility type, Charlson comorbidity score, histologic tumor grade, procedure type, length of stay, or rate of 30-day readmission following surgery. On adjusted analysis, receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy was associated with a lower risk of death at a given time compared to patients who did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy (HR 0.808; 95% CI 0.679-0.961; p = 0.016). CONCLUSION: Supporting existing NCCN guidelines, the findings from this study suggest that adjuvant chemotherapy improves survival for LARC with pCR following neoadjuvant chemoradiation.

Predicting intracranial progression following stereotactic radiosurgery for brain metastases: Implications for post SRS imaging.

PURPOSE: Follow-up imaging after stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is crucial to identify salvageable brain metastases (BM) recurrence. As optimal imaging intervals are poorly understood, we sought to build a predictive model for time to intracranial progression. METHODS: Consecutive patients treated with SRS for BM at three institutions from January 1, 2002 to June 30, 2017 were retrospectively reviewed. We developed a model using stepwise regression that identified four prognostic factors and built a predictive nomogram. RESULTS: We identified 755 patients with primarily non-small cell lung, breast, and melanoma BMs. Factors such as number of BMs, histology, history of prior whole-brain radiation, and time interval from initial cancer diagnosis to metastases were prognostic for intracranial progression. Per our nomogram, risk of intracranial progression by 3 months post-SRS in the high-risk group was 21% compared to 11% in the low-risk group; at 6 months, it was 43% versus 27%. CONCLUSION: We present a nomogram estimating time to BM progression following SRS to potentially personalize surveillance imaging.

Assessing the Impact of a Novel Integrated Palliative Care and Medical Oncology Inpatient Service on Health Care Utilization before Hospice Enrollment.

BACKGROUND: Evidence increasingly supports the integration of specialist palliative care (PC) into routine cancer care. A novel, fully integrated PC and medical oncology inpatient service was developed at Duke University Hospital in 2011. OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of PC integration on health care utilization among hospitalized cancer patients before hospice enrollment. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study. Patients in the solid tumor inpatient unit who were discharged to hospice between September 1, 2009, and June 30, 2010 (pre-PC integration), and September 1, 2011, to June 30, 2012 (postintegration). Cohorts were compared on the following outcomes from their final hospitalization before hospice enrollment: intensive care unit days, invasive procedures, subspecialty consultations, radiographic studies, hospital length of stay, and use of chemotherapy or radiation. Cohort differences were examined with descriptive statistics and nonparametric tests. RESULTS: Two hundred ninety-six patients were included in the analysis (133 pre-PC integration; 163 post-PC integration). Patient characteristics were similar between cohorts. Health care utilization was relatively low in both groups, although 26% and 24% were receiving chemotherapy at the time of admission or during hospitalization in the pre- and post-PC integration cohorts, respectively, and 6.8% in each cohort spent time in an intensive care unit. We found no significant differences in utilization between cohorts. DISCUSSION: PC integration into an inpatient solid tumor service may not impact health care utilization during the final hospitalization before discharge to hospice. This likely reflects the greater benefits of integrating PC farther upstream from the terminal hospitalization, if one hopes to meaningfully impact utilization near the end of life.

A National Snapshot of Patient-Reported Outcomes Comparing Types of Abdominal Flaps for Breast Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to identify differences in patient-reported abdominal well-being, satisfaction, and quality of life in women with muscle-preserving free abdominal versus pedicle transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous (TRAM) flap for breast reconstruction. METHODS: Women with a history of breast cancer surgery were recruited from the Army of Women foundation to take the BREAST-Q and a background questionnaire. Descriptive statistics and regression analyses were used to compare abdominal physical well-being, breast satisfaction, chest physical, psychosocial well-being, and sexual well-being in women undergoing free versus pedicle TRAM flaps. RESULTS: Of 657 women, 273 (41 percent) underwent free flap surgery and 384 (58 percent) underwent pedicle TRAM flap surgery. Compared with unilateral pedicle TRAM flaps, those with unilateral free flaps scored an average of 9.5 points higher (95 percent CI, 5.4 to 13.6; p < 0.0001) and those with bilateral free flaps reported no difference in physical well-being of the abdomen. Compared with bilateral pedicle TRAM flaps, the following groups scored higher in physical well-being of the abdomen: unilateral free flaps, an average of 17.4 (95 percent CI, 11.5 to 23.3; p < 0.0001); bilateral free flaps, an average of 6.8 (95 percent CI, 0.3 to 13.3; p = 0.04); and unilateral pedicle TRAM flaps, an average of 7.9 (95 percent CI, 2.4 to 13.4; p = 0.005) higher. Women with bilateral pedicle flaps reported sexual well-being scores 7.4 (95 percent CI, 0.6 to 14.3; p = 0.03) and 6.8 (95 percent CI, 0.3 to 13.2; p = 0.04) points lower than those with unilateral free and unilateral pedicle flaps. CONCLUSIONS: Muscle-preserving techniques result in improved abdominal wall function and decreased morbidity compared with pedicle TRAM flap reconstruction. These data highlight the importance of offering patients the option of microsurgical techniques.

Intratreatment Response Assessment With 18F-FDG PET: Correlation of Semiquantitative PET Features With Pathologic Response of Esophageal Cancer to Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy.

PURPOSE: This prospective study seeks to extract semiquantitative positron emission tomography (PET) features from 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET scans performed before and during neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for esophageal cancer and to compare their accuracy in predicting histopathologic response. METHODS AND MATERIALS: From 2012 to 2016, 26 patients with esophageal cancer underwent pretreatment and intratreatment PET scans during chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery. Median patient age was 63 years (interquartile range, 58-68 years); 26 patients had esophageal adenocarcinoma, and 3 had esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. The intratreatment PET scan was performed at a median of 32.4 Gy (interquartile range, 30.6-32.4 Gy). PET features of the primary site including maximum standardized uptake value (SUV), SUV mean, metabolic tumor volume, and total lesion glycolysis were extracted from the pretreatment and intratreatment PET scans. Patients were histopathologic responders if there was complete or near-complete tumor response by modified Ryan scheme. Mean values of PET features were compared between histopathologic responders and nonresponders. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was used to compare the accuracy of PET features in predicting histopathologic response. RESULTS: Eleven patients (42%) were histopathologic responders. PET features most discriminatory of histopathologic response on AUC analysis were volumetric PET features from the intratreatment PET including metabolic tumor volume based on manual contour (AUC, 0.73; 95% confidence interval, 0.52-0.93) and total lesion glycolysis based on semiautomatic 40% SUV threshold (AUC, 0.73; 95% confidence interval, 0.53-0.94). CONCLUSIONS: Volumetric PET features from the intratreatment PET were the most accurate predictors of histopathologic response.

Association of Interim FDG-PET Imaging During Chemoradiation for Squamous Anal Canal Carcinoma With Recurrence.

PURPOSE: Imaging parameters from 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (18F-FDG PET) before and after chemoradiation therapy (CRT) for anal canal cancer correlate with clinical outcomes. This prospective, hypothesis-generating pilot study investigates the relationship between interim PET imaging during CRT for anal canal cancer and clinical outcome. METHODS AND MATERIALS: From June 2012 to August 2015, 30 patients with anal canal cancer were enrolled in a prospective clinical study of PET prior to and during CRT after ∼30 Gy. PET parameters of the primary site included maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax), metabolic tumor volume (MTV), and total lesion glycolysis (TLG). MTV and TLG were calculated based on 40% SUVmax (MTV40, TLG40) or SUV 2.5 (MTV2.5, TLG2.5) thresholds for pretreatment and interim images. Absolute and change in PET parameters were assessed for association with freedom from local and regional recurrence (FFLR) using single-predictor Cox regression models. Local and regional recurrence were primary and nodal (in-field) recurrences, respectively. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients were eligible for analysis. Patients were excluded with nonsquamous cell histology, recurrent anal cancer, and incomplete studies due to treatment toxicity or patient choice. Median follow-up was 2.5 years. Pretreatment MTV40 (HR 1.4 [95% CI 1.02-2.05]), interim MTV2.5 (1.4 [1.04-1.89]), and interim TLG2.5 (1.1 [1.01-1.21]) were associated with FFLR. CONCLUSIONS: In this prospective pilot study, interim PET parameters were associated with FFLR. These results warrant further investigation assessing the value of interim PET as a biomarker of response in the treatment of patients with anal cancer.

Phase I study of pazopanib plus TH-302 in advanced solid tumors.

PURPOSE: To define the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), recommended phase II dose (RPTD), and assess safety and tolerability for the combination of pazopanib plus TH-302, an investigational hypoxia-activated prodrug (HAP), in adult patients with advanced solid tumors. METHODS: This was an open-label, non-randomized, single-center, phase I trial consisting 2 stages. Stage 1 was a standard "3 + 3" dose escalation design to determine safety and the RPTD for TH-302 plus pazopanib combination. Stage 2 was an expanded cohort to better describe the tolerability and toxicity profile at the MTD. Pazopanib was orally dosed at 800 mg daily on days 1-28 for all cohorts. TH-302 was administered intravenously on days 1, 8 and 15 of a 28-day cycle at doses of 340 mg/m2 (cohort 1) or 480 mg/m2 (cohort 2). Dose limiting toxicity (DLT) was assessed in the first 28-day cycle. Efficacy was assessed every 2 cycles. RESULTS: Thirty patients were enrolled between December 2011 and September 2013. In the dose escalation stage, 7 patients were enrolled in the 340 mg/m2 TH-302 cohort and 6 patients in the 480 mg/m2 TH-302 cohort. Ten patients were evaluable for DLT. DLTs included grade 2 intolerable esophagitis (n = 1) in the 340 mg/m2 TH-302 cohort, and grade 3 vaginal inflammation (n = 1) and grade 3 neutropenia with grade 3 thrombocytopenia (n = 1, same patient) in the 480 mg/m2 TH-302 cohort. The 340 mg/m2 TH-302 cohort was determined to be MTD and RPTD. The most common treatment-related adverse events were hematologic (anemia, neutropenia, and thrombocytopenia), nausea/vomiting, palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome, constipation, fatigue, mucositis, anorexia, pain, and hypertension. Partial response (PR) was observed in 10% (n = 3) of patients, stable disease (SD) in 57% (n = 17), and progressive disease (PD) in 23% (n = 7). Due to toxicity, 3 patients were discontinued from study drug prior to first radiographic assessment but were included in these calculations. Disease control ≥6 months was observed in 37% of patients (n = 11). CONCLUSIONS: The RPTD for this novel combination is pazopanib 800 mg daily on days 1-28 plus TH-302 340 mg/m2 on days 1, 8 and 15 of each 28-day cycle. Preliminary activity was seen in treatment-refractory cancers and supports potential value of co-targeting tumor angiogenesis and tumor hypoxia.

Preoperative or postoperative radiotherapy versus surgery alone for retroperitoneal sarcoma: a case-control, propensity score-matched analysis of a nationwide clinical oncology database.

BACKGROUND: Recruitment into clinical trials for retroperitoneal sarcoma has been challenging, resulting in termination of the only randomised multicentre trial in the USA investigating perioperative radiotherapy. Nonetheless, use of radiotherapy for retroperitoneal sarcoma has increased over the past decade, substantiated primarily by its established role in extremity sarcoma. In this study, we used a nationwide clinical oncology database to separately compare overall survival for patients with retroperitoneal sarcoma who had surgery and preoperative radiotherapy or surgery and postoperative radiotherapy versus surgery alone. METHODS: We did two case-control, propensity score-matched analyses of the National Cancer Data Base, which included adult patients with retroperitoneal sarcoma who were diagnosed from 2003 to 2011. Patients were included if they had localised, primary retroperitoneal sarcoma. Patients were classified into three groups based on use of radiotherapy: preoperative radiotherapy, postoperative radiotherapy, and no radiotherapy (surgery alone). Patients were excluded if they received both preoperative radiotherapy and postoperative radiotherapy, or if they received intraoperative radiotherapy. Parallel propensity score-matched datasets were created for patients who received preoperative radiotherapy versus those who received no radiotherapy and for patients who received postoperative therapy versus those who received no radiotherapy. Propensity scores were calculated with logistic regression, with multiple imputation and backwards elimination, with a significance level to stay of 0·05. Matching was done with a nearest-neighbour algorithm and matched 1:2 for the preoperative radiotherapy dataset and 1:1 for the postoperative radiotherapy dataset. The primary objective of interest was overall survival for patients who received preoperative radiotherapy or postoperative radiotherapy compared with those who received no radiotherapy within the propensity score-matched datasets. FINDINGS: 9068 patients were included in this analysis: 563 in the preoperative radiotherapy group, 2215 in the postoperative radiotherapy group, and 6290 in the no radiotherapy group. Matching resulted in two comparison groups (preoperative radiotherapy vs no radiotherapy, and postoperative radiotherapy vs no radiotherapy) with negligible differences in all demographic, clinicopathological, and treatment-level variables. In the matched case-control analysis for preoperative radiotherapy median follow-up time was 42 months (IQR 27-70) for the preoperative radiotherapy group versus 43 months (25-64) for the no radiotherapy group; median overall survival was 110 months (95% CI 75-not estimable) versus 66 months (61-76), respectively. In the matched case-control analysis for postoperative radiotherapy median follow-up time was 54 months (IQR 32-79) for patients in the postoperative radiotherapy group and 47 months (26-72) for patients in the no radiotherapy group; median overall survival was 89 months (95% CI 79-100) versus 64 months (59-69), respectively. Both preoperative radiotherapy (HR 0·70, 95% CI 0·59-0·82; p<0·0001) and postoperative radiotherapy (HR 0·78, 0·71-0·85; p<0·0001) were significantly associated with improved overall survival compared with surgery alone. INTERPRETATION: To the best of our knowledge, this is the largest study to date of the effect of radiotherapy on overall survival in patients with retroperitoneal sarcoma. Radiotherapy was associated with improved overall survival compared with surgery alone when delivered as either preoperative radiotherapy or postoperative radiotherapy. Together with the results from the ongoing randomised EORTC trial (62092-22092; NCT01344018) investigating preoperative radiotherapy for retroperitoneal sarcoma pending, these data might provide additional support for the increasing use of radiotherapy for patients with retroperitoneal sarcoma undergoing surgical resection. FUNDING: Department of Surgery, Duke University School of Medicine.