Outcomes of Breast Cancer Patients Treated with Chemotherapy, Biologic Therapy, Endocrine Therapy, or Active Surveillance During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

PURPOSE: Provide real-world data regarding the risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection and mortality in breast cancer (BC) patients on active cancer treatment. METHODS: Clinical data were abstracted from the 3778 BC patients seen at a multisite cancer center in New York between February 1, 2020 and May 1, 2020, including patient demographics, tumor histology, cancer treatment, and SARS-CoV-2 testing results. Incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection by treatment type (chemotherapy [CT] vs endocrine and/or HER2 directed therapy [E/H]) was compared by Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting. In those diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection, Mann-Whitney test was used to a assess risk factors for severe disease and mortality. RESULTS: Three thousand sixty-two patients met study inclusion criteria with 641 patients tested for SARS-COV-2 by RT-PCR or serology. Overall, 64 patients (2.1%) were diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection by either serology, RT-PCR, or documented clinical diagnosis. Comparing matched patients who received chemotherapy (n = 379) with those who received non-cytotoxic therapies (n = 2343) the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 did not differ between treatment groups (weighted risk; 3.5% CT vs 2.7% E/H, P = .523). Twenty-seven patients (0.9%) expired over follow-up, with 10 deaths attributed to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Chemotherapy was not associated with increased risk for death following SARS-CoV-2 infection (weighted risk; 0.7% CT vs 0.1% E/H, P = .246). Advanced disease (stage IV), age, BMI, and Charlson's Comorbidity Index score were associated with increased mortality following SARS-CoV-2 infection (P ≤ .05). CONCLUSION: BC treatment, including chemotherapy, can be safely administered in the context of enhanced infectious precautions, and should not be withheld particularly when given for curative intent.

Low-Dose Tocilizumab With High-Dose Corticosteroids in Patients Hospitalized for COVID-19 Hypoxic Respiratory Failure Improves Mortality Without Increased Infection Risk.

BACKGROUND: Severe hypoxic respiratory failure from COVID-19 pneumonia carries a high mortality risk. There is uncertainty surrounding which patients benefit from corticosteroids in combination with tocilizumab and the dosage and timing of these agents. The balance of controlling inflammation without increasing the risk of secondary infection is difficult. At present, dexamethasone 6 mg is the standard of care in COVID-19 hypoxia; whether this is the ideal choice of steroid or dosage remains to be proven. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective was to assess the impact on mortality of tocilizumab only, corticosteroids only, and combination therapy in patients with COVID-19 respiratory failure. METHODS: A multihospital, retrospective study of adult patients with severe respiratory failure from COVID-19 who received supportive therapy, corticosteroids, tocilizumab, or combination therapy were assessed for 28-day mortality, biomarker improvement, and relative risk of infection. Propensity-matched analysis was performed between corticosteroid alone and combination therapies to further assess mortality benefit. RESULTS: The steroid-only, tocilizumab-only, and combination groups showed hazard reduction in mortality at 28 days when compared with supportive therapy. In a propensity-matched analysis, the combination group (daily equivalent dexamethasone 10 mg and tocilizumab 400 mg) had an improved 28-day mortality compared with the steroid-only group (daily equivalent dexamethasone 10 mg; hazard ratio (95% CI) = 0.56 (0.38-0.84), P = 0.005] without increasing the risk of infection. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: Combination of tocilizumab and corticosteroids was associated with improved 28-day survival when compared with corticosteroids alone. Modification of steroid dosing strategy as well as steroid type may further optimize therapeutic effect of the COVID-19 treatment.

Population-Level Incidence and Predictors of Surgically Induced Diabetes and Exocrine Insufficiency after Partial Pancreatic Resection.

CONTEXT: Endocrine and exocrine insufficiency after partial pancreatectomy affect quality of life, cardiovascular health, and nutritional status. However, their incidence and predictors are unknown. OBJECTIVE: To identify the incidence and predictors of new-onset diabetes and exocrine insufficiency after partial pancreatectomy. DESIGN: We retrospectively reviewed 1165 cases of partial pancreatectomy, performed from 1998 to 2010, from a large population-based database. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Incidence of new onset diabetes and exocrine insufficiency RESULTS: Of 1165 patients undergoing partial pancreatectomy, 41.8% had preexisting diabetes. In the remaining 678 patients, at a median 3.6 months, diabetes developed in 274 (40.4%) and pancreatic insufficiency developed in 235 (34.7%) patients. Independent predictors of new-onset diabetes were higher Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI; hazard ratio [HR] = 1.62 for CCI of 1, p = 0.02; HR = 1.95 for CCI ≥ 2, p < 0.01) and pancreatitis (HR = 1.51, p = 0.03). There was no difference in diabetes after Whipple procedure vs distal pancreatic resections, or malignant vs benign pathologic findings. Independent predictors of exocrine insufficiency were female sex (HR = 1.32, p = 0.002) and higher CCI (HR = 1.85 for CCI of 1, p < 0.01; HR = 2.05 for CCI ≥ 2, p < 0.01). Distal resection and Asian race predicted decreased exocrine insufficiency (HR = 0.35, p < 0.01; HR = 0.54, p < 0.01, respectively). CONCLUSION: In a large population-based database, the rates of postpancreatectomy endocrine and exocrine insufficiency were 40% and 35%, respectively. These data are critical for informing patients' and physicians' expectations.

Factors associated with decisional regret among patients undergoing major thoracic and abdominal operations.

BACKGROUND: No study has specifically investigated patient attitudes on decisional regret concerning major operative procedures. The objective of the present study was to define the prevalence of regret among patients who had undergone a major abdominal or thoracic operative procedure and to identify factors associated with postoperative regret. METHODS: Decisional regret was assessed using the validated Decision Regret Scale, which consisted of 5 items with Likert-scale responses. Data on preoperative decision-making preferences and postoperative regret, quality of life, and symptoms of anxiety and depression were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: Overall, 157 (68.9%) patients agreed to participate and completed the survey, while 12 (5.3%) patients declined citing lack of time or interest. The types of operative procedures varied, with 65 (41.7%) patients undergoing a thoracic operation, 59 (37.8%) resection of the pancreas, liver or bile duct, and 32 (20.5%) patients having a colorectal/enteric operation. Although most patients (n = 98, 62.4%) expressed no degree of regret, a subset of patients did; specifically, 59 (37.6%) patients conveyed a varied degree of postoperative regret, with 20 (12.7%) patients expressing a moderate degree of regret, and 13 patients (8.3%) experiencing substantial regret. Postoperative regret was associated with a history of postoperative complications (odds ratio 4.7, 95% confidence interval 1.2-17.7, P < .01) and with discordance between a patient's preferred and actual perceived decision-making role (odds ratio 5.3, 95% confidence interval 1.6-17.4, P < .01). Patients experiencing regret were 5 times more likely than patients not experiencing regret to demonstrate borderline or abnormal depression scores (odds ratio 5.4, 95% confidence interval 1.6-18.0, P < .01); anxiety scores directly correlated with regret (rho 0.254, P < .01). CONCLUSION: Patient-reported decisional regret after major abdominal and thoracic operations was present in 37% of patients, with roughly 1 in 12 patients reporting substantial regret and distress over the decision to have undergone operation. Discordance between patients' preferred and actual involvement in operative decision-making was associated with postoperative regret, as was poor quality of life, anxiety, and depression.

A Singular Hope: How the Discussion Around Cancer Surgery Sometimes Fails.

BACKGROUND: Patients with cancer often have an overly optimistic view of prognosis, as well as potential benefits of treatment. Patient-surgeon communication in the preoperative period has not received as much attention as communicating prognosis or bad news in the postoperative setting. METHODS: The published literature on patient-physician communication in the preoperative setting among patients considering surgery for a malignant indication was reviewed. PubMed was queried for MESH terms including "surgery," "preoperative," "discussion," "treatment goals," "patient perceptions," and "cure." Information on how surgeons and patients may be empowered to improve communication about goals of care was also outlined. RESULTS: Physicians tended not to dwell on prognosis in early discussions, instead emphasizing the uniqueness of individuals and the uncertainty of statistics. The treatment plan often became the dominant feature of the conversation and functioned to deflect attention from discussions of prognosis. Surgeons tended to understate possible complications and provided little detail regarding potential severity or long-term consequences. While most patients wished to be informed of their prognosis, only a subset actually received an estimate of life expectancy. Because optimism with respect to prognosis (often simplified as "hope") has been largely considered essential for positivity and optimism-even a false or inappropriate optimism-many providers have created, tolerated, or enabled it. Several studies have emphasized, however, that hope can be maintained with truthful discussion, even if the topic is a bad prognosis or eventual death. CONCLUSIONS: Open, honest, and patient-driven discussions before surgery will lead to more robust shared decision making and create more engaged and satisfied patients (and caregivers). Enhanced preoperative discussion can also facilitate clarity about the possibility of cancer recurrence, cure, preferences about advance care planning, and formation of advance directives.

A cross-sectional study of patient and provider perception of "cure" as a goal of cancer surgery.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Patients with advanced cancer often misperceive the purpose and likely effectiveness of cancer treatments. The aim of this study was to characterize patient and provider perceptions in the setting of surgery for potentially curable cancer. METHODS: One hundred and six patient-surgeon dyads were surveyed about their expectations for upcoming surgery. Items scored using a Likert scale were compared using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. RESULTS: Patients and surgeons reported excellent communication and shared decision-making. Patients more often than surgeons perceived that surgery was "Likely" or "Very Likely" to cure their cancer (86.0% vs. 72.0%, P = 0.011), extend their lives (94.0% vs. 82.0%, P = 0.007), and relieve cancer-related symptoms (65.0% vs. 35.0%, P < 0.001). Patients less often felt that surgery would be associated with complications (33.0% vs. 48.0%, P = 0.016). Over half (53.9%) of patients believed that they were more likely to experience surgical cancer cure compared with someone else with the same diagnosis while 70.8% of surgeons declared a patient's relative chances of surgical cure "the same." CONCLUSIONS: Patients with resectable lung and gastrointestinal cancers have more optimistic perceptions about the outcomes of an upcoming surgery than their surgeons, even in a setting of good communication and shared decision-making. J. Surg. Oncol. 2016;114:677-683. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Cancer surgeons' attitudes and practices about discussing the chance of operative "cure".

BACKGROUND: While physician attitudes about treatment goals have been examined around end-of-life care, surgeon attitudes regarding communication of therapeutic goals prior to cancer-directed operations have not been investigated. We examined how surgeons discuss the potential for cancer "cure" prior to operative treatment and how surgeons perceive patient priorities and treatment goals. METHODS: Surgeons were invited to complete a Web-based survey about attitudes and practices when discussing cancer-directed operations, including how they defined cancer cure and whether and how they discussed cure as a treatment goal. RESULTS: A total of 551 e-mail invitations were sent and opened; 205 responses were received (response rate 37.2%). While 44.9% of surgeons reported being asked about cure in all or most discussions, only 37.6% used the word cure as often. When discussing cure, an equal number of surgeons reported using qualitative versus quantitative language to express probability of cure (45.7% and 47.4%, respectively). Roughly one third of surgeons (n = 65, 31.7%) defined cure as 5-year, disease-free survival; 36.1% (n = 74) defined cure as absence of recurrence over the patient's lifetime; and 21 (10.2%) defined cure as return to baseline population risk for that specific cancer. Over half of surgeons (n = 112, 56.9%) perceived that to "be cured" was among the top 2 priorities of patients presenting for operative treatment. CONCLUSION: When discussing relative benefits and goals of therapy, surgeon self-reported discussions of cure varied considerably. Despite identifying cure as a top priority for patients, surgeons were not inclined to incorporate cure into discussions of risks, benefits, and goals of therapy.

Associations Between Patient Perceptions of Communication, Cure, and Other Patient-Related Factors Regarding Patient-Reported Quality of Care Following Surgical Resection of Lung and Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The objective of the current study was to analyze various patient-related factors related to patient-reported quality of overall and surgical care following surgical resection of lung or colorectal cancer. METHODS: Between 2003 and 2005, 3,954 patients who underwent cancer-directed surgery for newly diagnosed lung (30.3%) or colorectal (69.7%) cancer were identified from a population- and health system-based survey of participants from multiple US regions. Factors associated with patient-perceived quality of overall and surgical care were analyzed with multivariable logistic regression models. RESULTS: Overall, 56.7% of patients reported excellent quality of overall care and 67.9% of patients reported excellent quality of surgical care; there was no difference by cancer type (P > 0.05). Factors associated with lower likelihood to report excellent quality of overall and surgical care included female sex, minority race, and the presence of multiple comorbidities (all odds ratio [OR] <1, all P < 0.05). Patients who had higher levels of education (overall quality: OR 1.62; surgical quality: OR 1.26), higher annual income (overall quality: OR 1.29; surgical quality: OR 1.23), and good physical function (overall quality: OR 1.35; surgical quality: OR 1.24) were all more likely to report excellent quality of overall and surgical care (all P < 0.05). Furthermore, patients who reported their physician as having excellent communication skills (overall quality: OR 6.49; surgical quality: OR 3.74) as well as patients who perceived their cancer as likely curable (overall quality: OR 1.17; surgical quality: OR 1.11) were more likely to report excellent quality of overall and surgical care (all P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Patient-reported quality of care is associated with several factors including race, income, and educational status, as well as physician communication and patient perception of likelihood of cure. Future studies are needed to more closely examine patient-physician relationships and communication barriers, particularly among minority patients and those with lower income and educational status.

Patient perceptions regarding the likelihood of cure after surgical resection of lung and colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: The objective of the current study was to characterize the prevalence of the expectation that surgical resection of lung or colorectal cancer might be curative. The authors sought to assess patient-level, tumor-level, and communication-level factors associated with the perception of cure. METHODS: Between 2003 and 2005, a total of 3954 patients who underwent cancer-directed surgery for lung (30.3%) or colorectal (69.7%) cancer were identified from a population-based and health system-based survey of participants from multiple US regions. RESULTS: Approximately 80.0% of patients with lung cancer and 89.7% of those with colorectal cancer responded that surgery would cure their cancer. Even 57.4% and 79.8% of patients with stage IV lung and colorectal cancer, respectively, believed surgery was likely to be curative. On multivariable analyses, the odds ratio (OR) of the perception of curative intent was found to be higher among patients with colorectal versus lung cancer (OR, 2.27). Patients who were female, with an advanced tumor stage, unmarried, and having a higher number of comorbidities were less likely to believe that surgery would cure their cancer; educational level, physical function, and insurance status were not found to be associated with perception of cure. Patients who reported optimal physician communication scores (reference score, 0-80; score of 80-100 [OR, 1.40] and score of 100 [OR, 1.89]) and a shared role in decision-making with their physician (OR, 1.16) or family (OR, 1.17) had a higher odds of perceiving surgery would be curative, whereas patients who reported physician-controlled (OR, 0.56) or family-controlled (OR, 0.72) decision-making were less likely to believe surgery would provide a cure. CONCLUSIONS: Greater focus on patient-physician engagement, communication, and barriers to discussing goals of care with patients who are diagnosed with cancer is needed.

The role of molecular analysis in the diagnosis and surveillance of pancreatic cystic neoplasms.

CONTEXT: Molecular analysis of pancreatic cyst fluid obtained by EUS-FNA may increase diagnostic accuracy. We evaluated the utility of cyst-fluid molecular analysis, including mutational analysis of K-ras, loss of heterozygosity (LOH) at tumor suppressor loci, and DNA content in the diagnoses and surveillance of pancreatic cysts. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the Columbia University Pancreas Center database for all patients who underwent EUS/FNA for the evaluation of pancreatic cystic lesions followed by surgical resection or surveillance between 2006-2011. We compared accuracy of molecular analysis for mucinous etiology and malignant behavior to cyst-fluid CEA and cytology and surgical pathology in resected tumors. We recorded changes in molecular features over serial encounters in tumors under surveillance. Differences across groups were compared using Student's t or the Mann-Whitney U test for continuous variables and the Fisher's exact test for binary variables. RESULTS: Among 40 resected cysts with intermediate-risk features, molecular characteristics increased the diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA (n=11) but identified mucinous cysts less accurately than cyst fluid CEA (P=0.21 vs. 0.03). The combination of a K-ras mutation and ≥2 loss of heterozygosity was highly specific (96%) but insensitive for malignant behavior (50%). Initial data on surveillance (n=16) suggests that molecular changes occur frequently, and do not correlate with changes in cyst size, morphology, or CEA. CONCLUSIONS: In intermediate-risk pancreatic cysts, the presence of a K-ras mutation or loss of heterozygosity suggests mucinous etiology. K-ras mutation plus ≥2 loss of heterozygosity is strongly associated with malignancy, but sensitivity is low; while the presence of these mutations may be helpful, negative findings are uninformative. Molecular changes are observed in the course of cyst surveillance, which may be significant in long-term follow-up.

Neoadjuvant therapy for non-metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

Treatment of pancreatic cancer is increasingly multimodal, with patients receiving chemotherapy, radiation, and surgical extirpation in hope of long-term cure. There is ongoing debate over the timing, sequence, and necessity of these treatments as they pertain to the spectrum of local-regional disease. Current guidelines support a neoadjuvant strategy in patients with locally advanced and borderline resectable disease. Although there is currently no high-level evidence to recommend neoadjuvant therapy for all patients, there are data to suggest that wider application of neoadjuvant therapy may be beneficial. Random-assignment prospective trials are ongoing. In this review we examine the literature addressing a neoadjuvant approach to potentially resectable, borderline resectable, and locally advanced pancreatic cancer and highlight the outcomes of preoperative emergence of latent metastatic disease, attempted resection rates, margin negative resection rates, and pathologic response to treatment.

Positron emission tomography (PET) has limited utility in the staging of pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Positron emission tomography (PET) as an adjunct to conventional imaging in the staging of pancreatic adenocarcinoma is controversial. Herein, we assess the utility of PET in identifying metastatic disease and evaluate the prognostic potential of standard uptake value (SUV). METHODS: Imaging and follow-up data for patients diagnosed with pancreatic adenocarcinoma were reviewed retrospectively. Resectability was assessed based on established criteria, and sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of PET were compared to those of conventional imaging modalities. RESULTS: For 123 patients evaluated 2005-2011, PET and CT/MRI were concordant in 108 (88 %) cases; however, PET identified occult metastatic lesions in seven (5.6 %). False-positive PETs delayed surgery for three (8.3 %) patients. In a cohort free of metastatic disease in 78.9 % of cases, the sensitivity and specificity of PET for metastases were 89.3 and 85.1 %, respectively, compared with 62.5 and 93.5 % for CT and 61.5 and 100.0 % for MRI. Positive predictive value and negative predictive value of PET were 64.1 and 96.4 %, respectively, compared with 75.0 and 88.9 % for CT and 100.0 and 91.9 % for MRI. Average difference in maximum SUV of resectable and unresectable lesions was not statistically significant (5.65 vs. 6.5, p = 0.224) nor was maximum SUV a statistically significant predictor of survival (p = 0.18). CONCLUSION: PET is more sensitive in identifying metastatic lesions than CT or MRI; however, it has a lower specificity, lower positive predictive value, and in some cases, can delay definitive surgical management. Therefore, PET has limited utility as an adjunctive modality in staging of pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

Quality of life in patients after total pancreatectomy is comparable with quality of life in patients who undergo a partial pancreatic resection.

BACKGROUND: Quality of life after total pancreatectomy (TP) is perceived to be poor secondary to insulin-dependent diabetes and pancreatic insufficiency. As a result, surgeons may be reluctant to offer TP for benign and premalignant pancreatic diseases. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed presenting features, operative characteristics, and postoperative outcomes of all patients who underwent TP at our institution. Quality of life was assessed using institutional questionnaires and validated general, pancreatic disease-related, and diabetes-related instruments (European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire [EORTC QLQ-C30 and module EORTC-PAN26], Audit of Diabetes Dependent Quality of Life), and compared with frequency-matched controls, patients after a pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). Continuous variables were compared using Student t-test or analysis of variance. Categorical variables were compared using χ(2) or Fisher exact test. RESULTS: Between 1994 and 2011, 77 TPs were performed. Overall morbidity was 49%, but only 15.8% patients experienced a major complication. Perioperative mortality was 2.6%. Comparing 17 TP and 14 PD patients who returned surveys, there were no statistically significant differences in quality of life in global health, functional status, or symptom domains of EORTC QLQ-C30 or in pancreatic disease-specific EORTC-PAN26. TP patients had slightly but not significantly higher incidence of hypoglycemic events as compared with PD patients with postoperative diabetes. A negative impact of diabetes assessed by Audit of Diabetes Dependent Quality of Life did not differ between TP and PD. Life domains most negatively impacted by diabetes involved travel and physical activity, whereas self-confidence, friendships and personal relationships, motivation, and feelings about the future remained unaffected. CONCLUSIONS: Although TP-induced diabetes negatively impacts select activities and functions, overall quality of life is comparable with that of patients who undergo a partial pancreatic resection.

Short-term but not long-term loss of patency of venous reconstruction during pancreatic resection is associated with decreased survival.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic surgery with vascular reconstruction is increasingly performed to offer the benefits of surgical resection to patients with locally advanced disease. The short- and long-term patency rates and the clinical significance of thrombosis of such reconstructions are unknown. METHODS: We reviewed pancreatectomies requiring venous reconstruction from 1994 to 2011. We sought to identify predictors of acute (within 30 days) and late thrombosis. We compared survival of patients with thrombosis to patients with patent reconstructions. RESULTS: Of 203 pancreatectomies requiring venous reconstruction, acute thrombosis occurred in nine (4.4 %) cases and was associated with increased perioperative mortality (22.2 versus 4.6 %, p = 0.023). Even when nonfatal, acute thrombosis was associated with decreased median survival (7.1 versus 15.9 months, p = 0.011) and increased hazard of death (hazard ratio 8.6, confidence interval 3.7-19.9, p < 0.001). A late loss of patency was seen in 31.2 % of cases at a median of 9.5 months. Later loss of patency was not associated with decreased median survival or increased hazard of death. CONCLUSIONS: Acute thrombosis of the portal venous reconstructions after pancreatectomy is associated with increased perioperative mortality and, even when nonfatal, is associated with decreased survival. Late loss of patency occurs in one-third of patients but does not affect survival.

Predictors of recurrence in intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm: experience with 183 pancreatic resections.

OBJECTIVES: We examined long-term outcomes in patients with surgically treated intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN) to determine if any clinical or histologic features could predict risk of recurrent disease. METHODS: We reviewed 183 margin-negative surgical resections performed for IPMN between 1994 and 2011 with documented postoperative abdominal imaging. We calculated time to recurrent disease as indicated by radiographic change and created a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model to assess the relationship between patient characteristics and histopathologic tumor features and disease recurrence. RESULTS: Among patients with margin-negative resections and adequate imaging follow-up, we observed a recurrence rate of 13% over a median follow-up of 32.0 months. Individuals with invasive tumors on original pathology were more likely to recur (HR 5.2, 95% CI 2.2-12.2); however, original pathology did not predict disease severity on recurrence. Controlling for invasive pathology, no other histologic feature of the original tumor, including dysplasia at the surgical margin, predicted recurrence. Among non-invasive IPMN, pancreatitis was associated with disease recurrence (HR 3.6, 95% CI 1.2-10.7). CONCLUSIONS: The frequency of recurrent disease in this population and the inability to predict recurrence argues for universal and continuous surveillance after resection for IPMN. The relationship between pancreatitis and disease recurrence should be investigated further.

Management and outcomes of bowel obstruction in patients with stage IV colon cancer: a population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Bowel obstruction is a common complication of late-stage abdominal cancer, especially colon cancer, which has been investigated predominantly in small, single-institution studies. OBJECTIVE: We used a large, population-based data set to explore the surgical treatment of bowel obstruction and its outcomes after hospitalization for obstruction among patients with stage IV colon cancer. DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study. SETTING AND PATIENTS: We identified 1004 patients aged 65 years or older in the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare database diagnosed with stage IV colon cancer January 1, 1991 to December 31, 2005, who were later hospitalized for bowel obstruction. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We describe outcomes after hospitalization and analyzed the associations between surgical treatment of obstruction and outcomes. RESULTS: Hospitalization for bowel obstruction occurred a median of 7.4 months after colon cancer diagnosis, and median survival after obstruction was approximately 2.5 months. Median hospitalization for obstruction was about 1 week and in-hospital mortality was 12.7%. Between discharge and death, 25% of patients were readmitted to the hospital at least once for obstruction, and, on average, patients lived 5 days out of the hospital for every day in the hospital between obstruction diagnosis and death. Survival was 3 times longer in those whose obstruction claims suggested an adhesive obstruction origin. In multivariable models, surgical compared with nonsurgical management was not associated with prolonged survival (p = 0.134). LIMITATIONS: Use of an administrative database did not allow determination of quality of life or relief of obstruction as an outcome, nor could nonsurgical interventions, eg, endoscopic stenting or octreotide, be assessed. CONCLUSIONS: In this population-based study of patients with stage IV colon cancer who had bowel obstruction, overall survival following obstruction was poor irrespective of treatment. Universally poor outcomes suggest that a diagnosis of obstruction in the setting of advanced colon cancer should be considered a preterminal event.

Incidence and predictors of bowel obstruction in elderly patients with stage IV colon cancer: a population-based cohort study.

IMPORTANCE: Research has been limited on the incidence, mechanisms, etiology, and treatment of symptoms that require palliation in patients with terminal cancer. Bowel obstruction (BO) is a common complication of advanced abdominal cancer, including colon cancer, for which small, single-institution studies have suggested an incidence rate of 15% to 29%. Large population-based studies examining the incidence or risk factors associated with BO in cancer are lacking. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the incidence and risk factors associated with BO in patients with stage IV colon cancer. DESIGN AND SETTING: Retrospective cohort, population-based study of patients in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results and Medicare claims linked databases who were diagnosed as having stage IV colon cancer from January 1, 1991, through December 31, 2005. PATIENTS: Patients 65 years or older with stage IV colon cancer (n = 12 553). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Time to BO, defined by inpatient hospitalization for BO. We used Cox proportional hazards regression models to determine associations between BO and patient, prior treatment, and tumor features. RESULTS: We identified 1004 patients with stage IV colon cancer subsequently hospitalized with BO (8.0%). In multivariable analysis, proximal tumor site (hazard ratio, 1.22 [95% CI, 1.07-1.40]), high tumor grade (1.34 [1.16-1.55]), mucinous histological type (1.27 [1.08-1.50]), and nodal stage N2 (1.52 [1.26-1.84]) were associated with increased risk of BO, as was the presence of obstruction at cancer diagnosis (1.75 [1.47-2.04]). A more recent diagnosis was associated with decreased risk of subsequent obstruction (hazard ratio, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.72-0.98]). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this large population of patients with stage IV colon cancer, BO after diagnosis was less common (8.0%) than previously reported. Risk was associated with site and histological type of the primary tumor. Future studies will explore management and outcomes in this serious, common complication.

MRCP is not a cost-effective strategy in the management of silent common bile duct stones.

BACKGROUND: Few formal cost-effectiveness analyses simultaneously evaluate radiographic, endoscopic, and surgical approaches to the management of choledocholithiasis. STUDY DESIGN: Using the decision analytic software TreeAge, we modeled the initial clinical management of a patient presenting with symptomatic cholelithiasis without overt signs of choledocholithiasis. In this base case, we assumed a 10 % probability of concurrent asymptomatic choledocholithiasis. Our model evaluated four diagnostic/therapeutic strategies: universal magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP), universal endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC), or laparoscopic cholecystectomy with universal intraoperative cholangiogram (LCIOC). All probabilities were estimated from a review of published literature. Procedure and intervention costs were equated with Medicare reimbursements. Costs of hospitalizations were derived from median hospitalization reimbursement for New York State using diagnosis-related groups (DRG). Sensitivity analyses were performed on all cost and probability variables. RESULTS: The most cost-effective strategy in the diagnosis and management of symptomatic cholelithiasis with a 10 % risk of asymptomatic choledocholithiasis was LCIOC. This was followed by LC alone, MRCP, and ERCP. LC was preferred only when the probability that a retained CBD stone would eventually become symptomatic fell below 15 % or if the probability of technical success of an intraoperative cholangiogram (IOC) was less than 35 %. Universal MRCP and ERCP were both more costly and less effective than surgical strategies, even at a high probability of asymptomatic choledocholithiasis. Within the tested range for both procedural and hospitalization-related costs for any of the surgical or endoscopic interventions, LCIOC and LC were always more cost-effective than universal MRCP or ERCP, irrespective of the presence or absence of complications. Varying the cost, sensitivity, and specificity of MRCP had no effect on this outcome. CONCLUSIONS: LC with routine IOC is the preferred strategy in a cost-effectiveness analysis of the management of symptomatic cholelithiasis with asymptomatic choledocholithiasis. MRCP was both more costly and less effective under all tested scenarios.