En bloc chest wall resection in locally advanced cT3N2 (stage IIIB) lung cancer involving the chest wall: Revisiting guidelines.

Objectives: Current National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines recommend definitive chemoradiation rather than surgery for patients with locally advanced clinical stage T3 and N2 (stage IIIB) lung cancer involving the chest wall. The data supporting this recommendation are controversial. We studied whether surgery confers a survival advantage over definitive chemoradiation in the National Cancer Database. Methods: We identified all patients with clinical stage T3 and N2 lung cancer in the National Cancer Database from 2004 to 2017 who underwent a lobectomy with en bloc chest wall resection and compared them with patients with clinical stage T3 and N2 lung cancer who had definitive chemoradiation. We used propensity score matching to minimize confounding by indication while excluding patients with tumors in the upper lobes to exclude Pancoast tumors. We used 1:1 propensity score matching and Kaplan-Meir survival analyses to estimate associations. Results: Of 4467 patients meeting all inclusion/exclusion criteria, 210 (4.49%) had an en bloc chest wall resection. Patients undergoing surgical resection were younger (mean age = 60.3 ± 10.3 years vs 67.5 ± 10.4 years; P < .001) and had more adenocarcinoma (59.0% vs 44.5%; P < .001) but were otherwise similar in terms of sex (37.1% female vs 42.0%; P = .167) and race (Whites 84.3% vs 84.0%; P = .276) compared with the definitive chemoradiation group. After resection, there was an unadjusted 30- and 90-day mortality rate of 3.3% and 9.5%, respectively. A substantial survival benefit with surgical resection persisted after propensity score matching (log-rank P < .001). Conclusions: In this large observational study, we found that in select patients, en bloc chest wall resection for locally advanced clinical stage T3 and N2 lung cancer was associated with improved survival compared with definitive chemoradiation. National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines should be revisited.

Fragmented care in localized pancreatic cancer: Is commission on cancer accreditation associated with improved overall survival?

BACKGROUND: Prior studies of fragmentation of care in pancreatic cancer have not adjusted for indicators of hospital quality such as Commission on Cancer accreditation. The effect of fragmentation of care has not been well defined. METHODS: We queried the National Cancer Database to identify patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy and distal pancreatectomy with perioperative systemic therapy for clinical stages I-III pancreatic cancer between 2006 and 2019. Patients who received systemic therapy at a center different than the center performing surgery were categorized as having fragmentation of care. Patients having fragmentation of care were further categorized on the basis of whether (fragmentation of care Commission on Cancer) or not (fragmentation of care non-Commission on Cancer) systemic therapy was administered at a facility accredited by the Commission on Cancer. RESULTS: A total of 11,732 patients met inclusion criteria; 5,668 (48.3%) underwent fragmentation of care, and 3,426 (29.2%) fragmentation of care non-Commission on Cancer. Patients undergoing fragmentation of care non-Commission on Cancer were less likely to receive neoadjuvant systemic therapy than those undergoing fragmentation of care Commission on Cancer or non-fragmented care (27.7% vs 40.1% vs 36.8%, P < .001). On Cox analysis, advanced age, comorbid disease, node-positive disease, and facility type were associated with risk of overall survival. Fragmentation of care was not (adjusted hazard ratio = 0.99, 95% confidence interval [0.94-1.06], P = .8). On Kaplan-Meier analysis, there were no significant differences in 5-year overall survival between treatment cohorts. CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing fragmentation of care for localized pancreatic cancer, those treated with systemic therapy in Commission on Cancer accredited facilities are more likely to be given neoadjuvant therapy but demonstrate no significant improvement in survival relative to those undergoing non-fragmented care or those undergoing fragmentation of care but receiving systemic therapy in nonaccredited facilities.

Fragmented care, Commission on Cancer accreditation, and overall survival in patients receiving surgery and chemotherapy for esophageal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Increasing regionalization for esophagectomy for cancer may lead patients to travel for surgery at one institution and receive chemotherapy at another closer to home. We explore the effects on survival for care fragmentation, the Commission on Cancer status of secondary institutions providing chemotherapy, and the type of institution performing surgery. METHODS: We queried the National Cancer Database to identify all patients who underwent esophagectomy for esophageal cancer and received perioperative chemotherapy between 2006 and 2019. Patients were divided into single-center care, fragmented-to-Commission on Cancer care, or fragmented-to-non-Commission on Cancer care. We identified associations using multivariable logistic regression, Kaplan-Meier survival analyses, and Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: A total of 18,502 patients met the criteria for inclusion: 8,290 (44.8%) received single-center care; 3,414 (18.5%) fragmented-to-Commission on Cancer care; and 6,798 (36.4%) fragmented-to-non-Commission on Cancer care. Fragmented care was more likely in White patients (adjusted odds ratio = 1.25; P < .001) and in patients nonadjacent to a metropolitan area (adjusted odds ratio = 1.36; P < .001). Overall survival was equivalent between single-center and fragmented care, but undergoing an esophagectomy at an academic center was associated with improved survival (adjusted hazard ratio = 0.82; P = .016). In patients with an esophagectomy at a nonacademic center, overall survival was best if perioperative chemotherapy was administered at Commission on Cancer-accredited facilities compared with chemotherapy at fragmented-to-non-Commission on Cancer centers (P = .022). CONCLUSION: Most of the esophageal cancer care in the US is fragmented at multiple institutions. When care is fragmented, it is most commonly at non-Commission on Cancer centers for perioperative chemotherapy. Overall survival is best when esophagectomy is performed at an academic center, and perioperative therapy is administered at Commission on Cancer-accredited facilities.

Does commission on cancer (CoC) accreditation mitigate the effect of care fragmentation on clinical outcome in localized rectal cancer?

BACKGROUND: Studies of fragmented care (FC) in rectal cancer have not adjusted for indicators of hospital quality and may misrepresent the effects of FC. METHODS: We queried the National Cancer Database to identify patients undergoing care for clinical stage II and III rectal adenocarcinoma between 2006 and 2019. Those undergoing FC were sub-categorized based on whether (FC CoC) or not (FC non-CoC) they received systemic therapy at CoC accredited facilities. RESULTS: 44,339 patients met inclusion criteria; 23,921 (54 â€‹%) underwent FC, 16,929 (71 â€‹%) FC non-CoC. Differences in utilization of neoadjuvant therapy (92.3 â€‹% vs 89.7 â€‹% vs 89.5 â€‹%, p â€‹< â€‹0.01) and 5-year overall survival (76.1 vs 75.5 vs 74.1 %, p â€‹< â€‹0.01) between treatment cohorts were marginal. CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing multimodality therapy for rectal cancer, care fragmentation is not associated with long-term clinical outcome. Decisions regarding where these patients go for systemic therapy may be safely made on the basis of ease of access.

Robotic chest wall resection for primary benign chest wall tumors and locally advanced lung cancer: an institutional case series and national report.

Background: Limited data exists for robotic chest wall resection; we report institutional and national experience of robotic chest wall resection. Methods: In this comparative retrospective case series we describe patients who underwent robotic chest wall resection at our institution and enrich this case series with data from the National Cancer Database (NCDB). We describe our preoperative workup, operative technique, and postoperative care. Outcomes included conversion to open, length of stay, readmissions, and 30- and 90-day mortality. The results are descriptively reported and compared. Results: We describe 6 patients institutionally and 96 NCDB patients. At our institution 66.7% were males, median age was 70.0 (range, 39-91) years, and 50% were primary chest wall tumors. Median tumor size was 5.25 (range, 2.3-8.3) cm. Outcomes were as follows: no open conversions, median length of stay 3 (range, 1-6) days, no unplanned 30-day readmissions or 90-day mortality. In the NCDB, 55.2% were males with median age of 68.5 (range, 30-89) years. Median tumor size was 3.90 (range, 2.4-6.0) cm. NCDB outcomes were as follows: 18.8% open conversion, median length of stay 7 (range, 5-10) days, 3.1% unplanned 30-day readmission, and 8.3% 90-day mortality. Our institutional case series had 18.0 months median follow-up (range, 6-54 months) with no functional deficits. Median survival in NCDB was 49.6 months. Conclusions: Robotic chest wall resection is feasible and is performed nationally with acceptable short- and long-term outcomes. Our institutional experience reports our technique, resultant short hospital stay, and excellent functional outcomes.

State of the Art: Extracorporeal Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation for In-Hospital Arrest.

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation has been used since the 1970s and recently has seen increased use for in-hospital arrest requiring extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR). This paper provides an updated review of the ECPR literature and practical recommendations for implementation of an ECPR program.

Mid-Term Outcomes in Patients with Congenitally Corrected Transposition of the Great Arteries: A Single Center Experience.

BACKGROUND: Optimal management of patients with congenitally corrected transposition of the great arteries (ccTGA) is unclear. The goal of this study was to compare the outcomes in patients with ccTGA undergoing different management strategies. STUDY DESIGN: Patients with ccTGA believed suitable for biventricular circulation, treated between 1995 and 2016, were included. The cohort was divided into 4 groups: systemic right ventricle (RV) (patients without surgical intervention or with a classic repair), anatomic repair, Fontan palliation, and patients receiving only a pulmonary artery band (PAB) or a shunt. Transplant-free survival from presentation was calculated for each group. RESULTS: The cohort included 97 patients: 45 (46%) systemic RV, 26 (27%) anatomic repair, 9 (9%) Fontan, and 17 (18%) PAB/shunt. Median age at presentation was 2 months (range 0 days to 69 years) and median follow-up was 10 years (1 month to 28 years). At initial presentation, 10 (11%) patients had any RV dysfunction (8 mild, 2 severe), and 16 (18%) patients had moderate or severe tricuspid regurgitation (TR). During the study, 10 (10%) patients died, and 3 (3%) patients underwent transplantation. At last follow-up, 11 (11%) patients were in New York Heart Association class III/IV, 5 (5%) had moderate or severe systemic ventricle dysfunction, and 16 (16%) had moderate or severe systemic atrioventricular valve regurgitation. Transplant-free survivals at 10 years were 93%, 86%, 100%, and 79% for systemic RV, anatomic repair, Fontan palliation, and PAB/shunt, respectively (p = 0.33). On multivariate analysis, only systemic RV dysfunction was associated with a higher risk for death or transplant (p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Transplant-free survival in ccTGA appears to be similar between patients with a systemic RV, anatomic repair, and Fontan procedure. Systemic RV dysfunction is a risk factor for death and transplant.

Measuring the grafting density of nanoparticles in solution by analytical ultracentrifugation and total organic carbon analysis.

Many of the solution phase properties of nanoparticles, such as their colloidal stability and hydrodynamic diameter, are governed by the number of stabilizing groups bound to the particle surface (i.e., grafting density). Here, we show how two techniques, analytical ultracentrifugation (AUC) and total organic carbon analysis (TOC), can be applied separately to the measurement of this parameter. AUC directly measures the density of nanoparticle-polymer conjugates while TOC provides the total carbon content of its aqueous dispersions. When these techniques are applied to model gold nanoparticles capped with thiolated poly(ethylene glycol), the measured grafting densities across a range of polymer chain lengths, polymer concentrations, and nanoparticle diameters agree to within 20%. Moreover, the measured grafting densities correlate well with the polymer content determined by thermogravimetric analysis of solid conjugate samples. Using these tools, we examine the particle core diameter, polymer chain length, and polymer solution concentration dependence of nanoparticle grafting densities in a gold nanoparticle-poly(ethylene glycol) conjugate system.