Impact of Hepatic Metastasectomy in the Multimodal Treatment of Metastatic Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Surgical management of hepatic metastases in patients with stage IV breast cancer remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of hepatic metastasectomy on long-term outcomes. METHODS: The 2004-2015 National Cancer Database was queried for all patients diagnosed with stage IV breast cancer with metastases isolated to the liver. Patient demographics, disease-, treatment- and outcome-related data were analyzed. RESULTS: Of 2,895 patients, only 90 (3.1%) underwent hepatic resection. Compared to patients who did not undergo metastasectomy, patients treated with metastasectomy tended to be younger (52 ± 12.7 versus 59.2 ± 14.6; P < 0.001) and have private insurance (74.4% versus 45.3%; P < 0.001). Independent predictors of metastasectomy included younger age (OR 0.98; CI 0.96-0.99; P = 0.01), lobular carcinoma (OR 2.26; CI 1.06-4.82; P = 0.03), and prior surgery of the primary site (partial mastectomy (OR 6.96; CI 3.47-13.95; P < 0.001) or total mastectomy (OR 5.74; CI 3.06-10.76; P < 0.001)). Compared to no metastasectomy, hepatic metastasectomy was independently associated with a 37% reduction in the risk of death (HR 0.63; CI 0.44-0.91; P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Stage IV breast cancer with metastases to the liver is rare and few patients undergo hepatic resection. However, in this select patient population, hepatic metastasectomy was associated with a significant survival advantage when included in the multimodal treatment of synchronous stage IV breast cancer.

Rates, Predictors, and Outcomes of Portal Lymphadenectomy for Resectable Gallbladder Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Lymphadenectomy (LND) is recommended following surgical resection of ≥ T1b gallbladder cancer (GBC). However, frequency and stage-specific survival benefits of LND remain unclear. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The National Cancer Database (NCDB; 2006-15) was queried for resected pathologic stage I-III GBC. LND performance, predictors of receiving LND, and LND association with overall survival (OS) were assessed. RESULTS: Of 2302 total patients, 1343 (58.3%) underwent LND. Patients who underwent LND were younger and more frequently had private health insurance, a negative surgical margin, higher pathologic T stage, and received adjuvant chemotherapy (all p < 0.001). LND rates were highest at academic centers (70.1%) relative to all other facility types (p < 0.001). LND was independently associated with improved OS [hazard ratio (HR) 0.52, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.44-0.61]. LND was associated with improved OS for pT1b, pT2, and pT3 patients (all p < 0.05) on univariate analysis. LND was independently associated with improved OS in pT2 (HR 0.44, CI 0.35-0.56) and pT3 (HR 0.54, CI 0.43-0.69) patients. CONCLUSIONS: LND is associated with a 48% reduction in risk of death in patients with resectable non-metastatic GBC, with greatest impact in pT2-3 patients. Patients without LND have similar OS to patients with node-positive disease, highlighting the importance of LND. Underutilization of LND likely results in undertreatment of patients with undiagnosed nodal disease, which may contribute to unfavorable oncologic outcomes.