Recurrence pattern and outcomes in T4 colon cancer: A single institution analysis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Patients with T4 colon adenocarcinoma have an increased risk of locoregional and distant recurrence. This study defines the metastatic pattern, predictors of recurrence, and efficacy of adjuvant treatment in T4 colon cancer. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of patients with T4 colon adenocarcinoma from May 2005 to November 2015 at a tertiary care hospital. Baseline factors, follow-up, recurrence, and survival were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: Locoregional recurrence (LR) rates for N0, N1, and N2 were 21/85 (24.7%), 14/50 (28%), and 21/46 (45.7%), respectively (P = .014). Multivariate analysis for distant recurrence was significant for positive nodes (hazard ratio [HR], 3.3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-9.9). Multivariate analysis for LR was significant for the following variables: perforation (HR, 2.7; 95% CI, 1.2-6.2), lymphovascular invasion (HR, 2.7; 95% CI, 1.1-6.7), positive nodes (HR, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.2-6.9), and positive margins (HR, 5.0; 95% CI, 2.1-12.1). Multivariate analysis for overall survival was significant for: signet ring histology (HR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.2-5.8), positive nodes (HR, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.2-4.4), and positive margin (HR, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.4-5.8). CONCLUSION: T4 colon adenocarcinoma has a high risk of LR and mortality. Clinical trials utilizing the aforementioned high-risk features may increase the ability to demonstrate beneficial intervention.

Open surgical partial nephrectomy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma.

We aimed to determine the ability of partial nephrectomy to prevent end-stage renal disease and tumor recurrence or progression in patients with upper tract urothelial carcinoma. Retrospectively, eight patients undergoing partial nephrectomy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma were identified and their medical records reviewed. All patients had imperative indications for nephron sparing, and diagnosis of upper tract urothelial carcinoma not adequately amenable to endoscopic management. Although three patients suffered acute tubular necrosis, only one required postoperative hemodialysis. During the follow-up period 25% (2/8) developed end-stage renal disease, including the one patient who had received postoperative hemodialysis. Recurrences occurred in five of seven patients with adequate oncological surveillance. Recurrences were successfully treated endoscopically in 80% (4/5) patients, and one patient had metastases. Of the eight patients, four have died. Death occurred 4 months, 1 year, 1.2 years and 3.5 years after partial nephrectomy. Of these patients, one succumbed to metastatic disease; the exact cause of death is unknown in the other three, but there was no documentation of metastatic cancer. The mean duration of follow up in the remaining four patients, all without evidence of metastatic urothelial cancer, is 71 months (range 22-108 months). In summary, partial nephrectomy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma in patients with imperative indications averts end-stage renal disease in most patients, and appears to be associated with acceptable disease-specific survival. Partial nephrectomy is a sparingly used option in patients with upper tract urothelial carcinoma refractory to endoscopic management who have imperative indications for nephron sparing.

Medical Cannabis in Cancer Patients: A Survey of a Community Hematology Oncology Population.

OBJECTIVES: Cancer patients are using medical cannabis (MC) to address symptoms; however, little data exist to guide clinicians when counseling patients. We seek to define the patterns of MC use among cancer patients, as well as efficacy and safety of MC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Cancer patients attending oncology office visits at Beaumont Hospital, Michigan from July to December 2018 were anonymously surveyed. The survey included data regarding demographics, diagnosis, treatment, symptom burden, and MC use. Patients who reported MC use since their cancer diagnosis completed a section on patterns of use, efficacy, and safety. RESULTS: The response rate was 188 of 327 (57.5%). MC use was reported by 46 of 188 (24.5%). A median composite baseline symptom score ranging from 8 (best) to 32 (worst) was higher in patients using MC versus nonusers; 17.5 versus 14.4 (P<0.001). Pain was the symptom with the highest frequency of improvement 34/42 (81%), followed by appetite 34/44 (77.3%), and anxiety 32/44 (73%). MC improved the ability to tolerate treatment in 24/44 (54.5%). Cloudy thinking is the symptom that worsened the most 7/42 (16.7%), with decreased energy being experienced by 4/41 (9.8%) of the users. CONCLUSIONS: MC was utilized by a significant portion of cancer patients in this sample, across age, diagnosis, stage, and treatment. Patients with a higher severity of baseline symptoms were more likely to use MC and report a favorable efficacy profile of MC. Minimal toxicity was reported in this cohort. Prospective studies are needed to define the efficacy and safety of MC.