Pectoralis Muscle Dosimetry and Posttreatment Rehabilitation Utilization for Patients With Early-Stage Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: Up to 50% of women treated for localized breast cancer will experience some degree of arm or shoulder morbidity. Although radiation is thought to contribute to this morbidity, the mechanism remains unclear. Prior studies have shown biologic and radiographic changes in the pectoralis muscles after radiation. This study thus aimed to investigate the relationship between radiation to the pectoralis muscles and referrals for rehabilitation services posttreatment for arm and shoulder morbidity. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A retrospective 1:1 matched case-control study was conducted for patients with breast cancer who were and were not referred for breast or shoulder rehabilitation services between 2014 and 2019 at a single academic institution. Patients were included if they had a lumpectomy and adjuvant radiation. Patients who underwent an axillary lymph node dissection were excluded. Cohorts were matched based on age, axillary surgery, and use of radiation boost. Muscle doses were converted to equivalent dose in 2 Gy fractions assuming an α:ß ratio of 2.5 and were compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS: In our cohort of 50 patients of a median age 60 years (interquartile range, 53-68 years), 36 patients (72%) underwent a sentinel lymph node biopsy in addition to a lumpectomy. Although pectoralis muscle doses were generally higher in those receiving rehabilitation services, this was not statistically significant. Pectoralis major V20-40 Gy reached borderline significance, as did pectoralis major mean dose (17.69 vs 20.89 Gy; P = .06). CONCLUSIONS: In this limited cohort of patients, we could not definitively conclude a relationship between pectoralis muscle doses and use of rehabilitation services. Given the borderline significant findings, this should be further investigated in a larger cohort.

Factors affecting timing of surgery following neoadjuvant chemoradiation for esophageal cancer.

Background: Neoadjuvant chemoradiation with esophagectomy is standard management for locally advanced esophageal cancer. Studies have shown that surgical timing following chemoradiation is important for minimizing postoperative complications, however in practice timing is often variable and delayed. Although postoperative impact of surgical timing has been studied, less is known about factors associated with delays. Materials and methods: A retrospective review was performed for 96 patients with esophageal cancer who underwent chemoradiation then esophagectomy between 2018 and 2020 at a single institution. Univariable and stepwise multivariable analyses were used to assess association between social (demographics, insurance) and clinical variables (pre-operative weight, comorbidities, prior cardiothoracic surgery, smoking history, disease staging) with time to surgery (≤8 weeks "on-time" vs. >8 weeks "delayed"). Results: Fifty-one patients underwent esophagectomy within 8 weeks of chemoradiation; 45 had a delayed operation. Univariate analysis showed the following characteristics were significantly different between on-time and delayed groups: weight loss within 3 months of surgery (3.9 ± 5.1 kg vs. 1.5 ± 3.6 kg; P = 0.009), prior cardiovascular disease (29% vs. 49%; P = 0.05), prior cardiothoracic surgery (4% vs. 22%; P = 0.01), history of ever smoked (69% vs. 87%; P = 0.04), absent nodal metastasis on pathology (57% vs. 82%; P = 0.008). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that prior cardiothoracic surgery (OR 8.924, 95%CI 1.67-47.60; P = 0.01) and absent nodal metastasis (OR 4.186, 95%CI 1.50-11.72; P = 0.006) were associated with delayed surgery. Conclusions: Delayed esophagectomy following chemoradiotherapy is associated with prior cardiothoracic surgery and absent nodal metastasis. Further investigations should focus on understanding how these factors contribute to delays to guide treatment planning and mitigate sources of outcome disparities.

The Effect of Wire Versus Magnetic Seed Localization on Lumpectomy Cavity Size.

PURPOSE: Our purpose was to assess whether an association exists between surgical localization technique and lumpectomy cavity size on radiation therapy planning computed tomography (CT) scan. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A single-institution retrospective review was conducted of women undergoing breast conserving surgery with wire or magnetic seed guided lumpectomy followed by adjuvant radiation therapy from 2018 to 2021. Patients of a surgeon only performing 1 localization technique or undergoing bracketed localization were excluded. The primary outcome was lumpectomy cavity size on simulation CT. Confounding due to imbalance in patient and tumor factors was addressed with overlap weights derived from a propensity score analysis and used in a weighted multivariable analysis. Secondary outcomes included positive margins, total pathologic volume, boost delivery, and boost modality. RESULTS: Of 617 women who received lumpectomy during the study period, 387 were included in final analysis. Tumors of patients undergoing seed localization were more likely unifocal, assessable by ultrasound, and smaller. Seed use rates ranged from 27.7% to 70.7% per surgeon. There was no difference in positive margins (6.4 vs 5.4%, P = .79) or second surgeries (9.4 vs 8.1%, P = .79) between groups. Close margin rates were similar for ductal carcinoma in situ (P = .35) and invasive carcinoma (P = .97). In unadjusted bivariable analyses, wire localization was associated with larger total pathology volume (P = .004), but localization technique showed no association with CT cavity volume (P = .15). After adjusting for potentially confounding variables, multivariable analysis failed to show an association between localization technique and either CT cavity (P = .35) or total path volume (P = .08). There was no difference in indicated-boost delivery (P = .15) or electron boost (P = .14) by localization technique. CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference in CT cavity size by localization technique, suggesting choice between surgical techniques does not impede radiation therapy boost delivery.

Framework for virtual education of COVID-19 vaccines for Mandarin-speaking learners: an educational intervention module.

BACKGROUND: In the United States, patients with limited English proficiency face significant barriers to comprehending and acting upon health-related information, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic. The ability of health professionals to communicate COVID-19-related information to Mandarin-speaking patients has proved critical in discussions about vaccine efficacy, side effects, and post-vaccine protection. METHODS: The authors created a one-hour educational module to help Mandarin-speaking medical students better convey COVID-19 vaccine information to Mandarin-only speakers. The module is composed of an educational guide, which introduced key terminology and addressed commonly asked questions, and pre- and post-surveys. The authors recruited 59 Mandarin-speaking medical students all of whom had previously completed a medical Mandarin elective. The module and surveys were distributed and completed in August 2021. Data analysis measured the change in aggregate mean for subjective five-point Likert-scale questions and change in percent accuracy for objective knowledge-based questions. RESULTS: 86.4% of participants were primary English speakers with variable levels of Mandarin proficiency. The educational module significantly improved participants' subjective comfort level in discussing the COVID-19 vaccine in English and Mandarin. The largest improvement in both English and Mandarin was demonstrated in participants' ability to explain differences between the COVID-19 vaccines, with an aggregate mean improvement of 0.39 for English and 1.48 for Mandarin. Survey respondents also demonstrated increased percent accuracy in knowledge-based objective questions in Mandarin. CONCLUSIONS: This module provides Mandarin-learning medical students with skills to deliver reliable information to the general population and acts as a model for the continued development of educational modules for multilingual medical professionals.

Evidence-based opioid prescribing guidelines after lung resection: a prospective, multicenter analysis.

Background: Opioid prescribing guidelines have significantly decreased overprescribing and post-discharge use after cardiac surgery; however, limited recommendations exist for general thoracic surgery patients, a similarly high-risk population. We examined opioid prescribing and patient-reported use to develop evidence-based, opioid prescribing guidelines after lung cancer resection. Methods: This prospective, statewide, quality improvement study was conducted between January 2020 to March 2021 and included patients undergoing surgical resection of a primary lung cancer across 11 institutions. Patient-reported outcomes at 1-month follow-up were linked with clinical data and Society of Thoracic Surgery (STS) database records to characterize prescribing patterns and post-discharge use. The primary outcome was quantity of opioid used after discharge; secondary outcomes included quantity of opioid prescribed at discharge and patient-reported pain scores. Opioid quantities are reported in number of 5-mg oxycodone tablets (mean ± standard deviation). Results: Of the 602 patients identified, 429 met inclusion criteria. Questionnaire response rate was 65.0%. At discharge, 83.4% of patients were provided a prescription for opioids of mean size 20.5±13.1 pills, while patients reported using 8.2±13.0 pills after discharge (P<0.001), including 43.7% who used none. Those not taking opioids on the calendar day prior to discharge (32.4%) used fewer pills (4.4±8.1 vs. 11.7±14.9, P<0.001). Refill rate was 21.5% for patients provided a prescription at discharge, while 12.5% of patients not prescribed opioids at discharge required a new prescription before follow-up. Pain scores were 2.4±2.5 for incision site and 3.0±2.8 for overall pain (scale 0-10). Conclusions: Patient-reported post-discharge opioid use, surgical approach, and in-hospital opioid use before discharge should be used to inform prescribing recommendations after lung resection.

Racial variation in baseline characteristics and wait times among patients undergoing bariatric surgery.

BACKGROUND: Although bariatric surgery is the most effective treatment for obesity and weight-related comorbid diseases, utilization rates are disproportionately low among non-white patients. We sought to understand if variation in baseline characteristics or access to care exists between white and non-white patients. METHODS: Using a statewide bariatric-specific data registry, we evaluated all patients who underwent bariatric surgery between 2006 and 2020 and completed a preoperative baseline questionnaire, which included a question about self-identification of race. Patient characteristics, co-morbidities, and time from initial preoperative clinic evaluation to date of surgery were compared among racial groups. RESULTS: A total of 73,141 patients met inclusion criteria with 18,741 (25.5%) self-identified as non-white. These included Black/African American (n = 11,904), Hispanic (n = 3448), Asian (n = 121), Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander (n = 41), Middle Eastern (n = 164), Multiple (n = 2047) and other (n = 608). Non-white males were the least represented group, accounting for only 4% of all bariatric cases performed. Non-white patients were more likely to be younger (43.0 years vs. 46.6 years, p < 0.0001), disabled (16% vs. 11.4%, p < 0.0001) and have Medicaid (8.4% vs. 3.8%, p < 0.0001) when compared to white patients, despite having higher rates of college education (78.0% vs. 76.6, p < 0.0001). In addition, median time from initial evaluation to surgery was also longer among non-white patients (157 days vs. 127 days, p < 0.0001), despite having higher rates of patients with a body mass index above 50 kg/m2 (39.0% vs. 33.2%, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Non-white patients undergoing bariatric surgery represent an extremely diverse group of patients with more socioeconomic disadvantages and longer wait times when compared to white patients despite presenting with higher rates of severe obesity. Current guidelines and referral patterns for bariatric surgery may not be equitable and need further examination when considering the management of obesity within diverse populations to reduce disparities in care-of which non-white males are particularly at risk.

Pregnenolone sulphate-independent inhibition of TRPM3 channels by progesterone.

Transient Receptor Potential Melastatin 3 (TRPM3) is a widely expressed calcium-permeable non-selective cation channel that is stimulated by high concentrations of nifedipine or by physiological steroids that include pregnenolone sulphate. Here we sought to identify steroids that inhibit TRPM3. Channel activity was studied using calcium-measurement and patch-clamp techniques. Progesterone (0.01-10µM) suppressed TRPM3 activity evoked by pregnenolone sulphate. Progesterone metabolites and 17ß-oestradiol were also inhibitory but the effects were relatively small. Dihydrotestosterone was an inhibitor at concentrations higher than 1µM. Corticosteroids lacked effect. Overlay assays indicated that pregnenolone sulphate, progesterone and dihydrotestosterone bound to TRPM3. In contrast to dihydrotestosterone, progesterone inhibited nifedipine-evoked TRPM3 activity or activity in the absence of an exogenous activator, suggesting a pregnenolone sulphate-independent mechanism of action. Dihydrotestosterone, like a non-steroid look-alike compound, acted as a competitive antagonist at the pregnenolone sulphate binding site. Progesterone inhibited endogenous TRPM3 in vascular smooth muscle cells. Relevance of TRPM3 or the progesterone effect to ovarian cells, which have been suggested to express TRPM3, was not identified. The data further define a chemical framework for competition with pregnenolone sulphate at TRPM3 and expand knowledge of steroid interactions with TRPM3, suggesting direct steroid binding and pregnenolone sulphate-independent inhibition by progesterone.