Nurse-Delivered Brief Behavioral Treatment for Insomnia in Lung Cancer Survivors: A Pilot RCT.

Objective/Background: Insomnia occurs in 50 to 80% of lung cancer survivors. Cognitive behavioral therapy is the standard treatment for insomnia (CBTI); however, treatment length and lack of psychologists trained in CBTI limits access. Brief Behavioral Treatment for Insomnia (BBTI), a nurse-delivered modified CBTI, is proposed. This feasibility pilot study sought to compare the BBTI intervention to attention control Healthy Eating Program (HEP) for insomnia in lung cancer survivors. Participants: The participants comprised adults, 21 years of age or older with insomnia and stage I/II non-small cell lung cancer, more than 6 weeks from surgery and living in Western NY. Methods: Participants (n = 40) were randomly assigned to an experimental (BBTI) or attention control condition (Healthy Eating Program). Thirty participants completed the study. Results: Participants were 66 years of age (± 7.6; range 53-82), 40% (n = 16) male, 87.5% (n = 35) Caucasian, 50% (n = 20) married, BMI 27.7 (± 5.8), and 12% (n = 5) never smokers. Baseline sleep diary sleep efficiency, ISI and other baseline covariates were balanced between the groups. Sleep efficiency improved ≥85% in BBTI group (p = .02), but not in HEP control group (p = 1.00). Mean ISI for BBTI and attention control were 6.40 ± 4.98 and 14.10 ± 4.48 (p = .001) respectively. In addition, BBTI group mean total FACT-L score improved by 6.66 points from baseline while HEP group score worsened (p = .049). Conclusions: BBTI is a practical, evidence-based, clinically relevant intervention that improved sleep and quality of life in lung cancer survivors with insomnia. Additional research to evaluate efficacy, duration, and implementation strategies are essential.

Concomitant Mediastinoscopy Increases the Risk of Postoperative Pneumonia After Pulmonary Lobectomy.

BACKGROUND: Mediastinoscopy is considered the gold standard for preresectional staging of lung cancer. We sought to examine the effect of concomitant mediastinoscopy on postoperative pneumonia (POP) in patients undergoing lobectomy. METHODS: All patients in our institutional database (2008-2015) undergoing lobectomy who did not receive neoadjuvant therapy were included in our study. The relationship between mediastinoscopy and POP was examined using univariate (Chi square) and multivariate analyses (binary logistic regression). In order to validate our institutional findings, lobectomy data in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) from 2005 to 2014 were analyzed for these associations. RESULTS: Of 810 patients who underwent a lobectomy at our institution, 741 (91.5%) surgeries were performed by video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) and 487 (60.1%) patients underwent concomitant mediastinoscopy. Univariate analysis demonstrated an association between mediastinoscopy and POP in patients undergoing VATS [odds ratio (OR) 1.80; p = 0.003], but not open lobectomy. Multivariate analysis retained mediastinoscopy as a variable, although the relationship showed only a trend (OR 1.64; p = 0.1). In the NSQIP cohort (N = 12,562), concomitant mediastinoscopy was performed in 9.0% of patients, with 44.5% of all the lobectomies performed by VATS. Mediastinoscopy was associated with POP in patients having both open (OR1.69; p < 0.001) and VATS lobectomy (OR 1.72; p = 0.002). This effect remained in multivariate analysis in both the open and VATS lobectomy groups (OR 1.46, p = 0.003; and 1.53, p = 0.02, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Mediastinoscopy may be associated with an increased risk of POP after pulmonary lobectomy. This observation should be examined in other datasets as it potentially impacts preresectional staging algorithms for patients with lung cancer.

Patient Survey of Referral From One Surgeon to Another to Reduce Maximum Waiting Time for Elective Surgery and Hours of Overutilized Operating Room Time.

BACKGROUND: Studies of shared (patient-provider) decision making for elective surgical care have examined both the decision whether to have surgery and patients' understanding of treatment options. We consider shared decision making applied to case scheduling, since implementation would reduce labor costs. METHODS: Study questions were presented in sequence of waiting times, starting with 4 workdays. "Assume the consultant surgeon (ie, the surgeon in charge) you met in clinic did not have time available to do your surgery within the next 4 workdays, but his/her colleague would have had time to do your surgery within the next 4 workdays. Would you have wanted to discuss with a member of the surgical team (eg, the scheduler or the surgeon) the availability of surgery with a different, equally qualified surgeon at Mayo Clinic who had time available within the next 4 workdays, on a date of your choosing?" There were 980 invited patients who underwent lung resection or cholecystectomy between 2011 and 2016; 135 respondents completed the study and 6 respondents dropped out after the study questions were displayed. RESULTS: The percentages of patients whose response to the study questions was "4 days" were 58.8% (40/68) among lung resection patients and 58.2% (39/67) among cholecystectomy patients. The 97.5% 2-sided confidence interval for the median maximum wait was 4 days to 4 days. Patients' choices for the waiting time sufficient to discuss having another surgeon perform the procedure did not differ between procedures (P = .91). Results were insensitive to patients' sex, age, travel time to hospital, or number of office visits before surgery (all P ≥ .20). CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that bringing up the option with the patient of changing surgeons when a colleague is available and has the operating room time to perform the procedure sooner is being respectful of most patients' individual preferences (ie, patient-centered).

Monte Carlo Simulations Comparing Fisher Exact Test and Unequal Variances t Test for Analysis of Differences Between Groups in Brief Hospital Lengths of Stay.

BACKGROUND: We examined type I and II error rates for analysis of (1) mean hospital length of stay (LOS) versus (2) percentage of hospital LOS that are overnight. These 2 end points are suitable for when LOS is treated as a secondary economic end point. METHODS: We repeatedly resampled LOS for 5052 discharges of thoracoscopic wedge resections and lung lobectomy at 26 hospitals. RESULTS: Unequal variances t test (Welch method) and Fisher exact test both were conservative (ie, type I error rate less than nominal level). The Wilcoxon rank sum test was included as a comparator; the type I error rates did not differ from the nominal level of 0.05 or 0.01. Fisher exact test was more powerful than the unequal variances t test at detecting differences among hospitals; estimated odds ratio for obtaining P < .05 with Fisher exact test versus unequal variances t test = 1.94, with 95% confidence interval, 1.31-3.01. Fisher exact test and Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney had comparable statistical power in terms of differentiating LOS between hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: For studies with LOS to be used as a secondary end point of economic interest, there is currently considerable interest in the planned analysis being for the percentage of patients suitable for ambulatory surgery (ie, hospital LOS equals 0 or 1 midnight). Our results show that there need not be a loss of statistical power when groups are compared using this binary end point, as compared with either Welch method or Wilcoxon rank sum test.

Readmissions to Different Hospitals After Common Surgical Procedures and Consequences for Implementation of Perioperative Surgical Home Programs.

BACKGROUND: We consider whether there should be greater priority of information sharing about postacute surgical resources used: (1) at skilled nursing facilities or inpatient rehabilitation hospitals to which patients are transferred upon discharge (when applicable) versus (2) at different hospitals where readmissions occur. Obtaining and storing data electronically from these 2 sources for Perioperative Surgical Home initiatives are dissimilar; both can be challenging depending on the country and health system. METHODS: Using the 2013 US Nationwide Readmissions Database, we studied discharges of surgical diagnosis-related group (DRG) with US national median length of stay (LOS) ≥ 3 days and ≥ 10 hospitals each with ≥ 100 discharges for the Medicare Severity DRG. RESULTS: Nationwide, 16.15% (95% confidence interval [CI], 15.14%-17.22%) of discharges were with a disposition of "not to home" (ie, transfer to a skilled nursing facility or an inpatient rehabilitation hospital). Within 30 days, 0.88% of discharges (0.82%-0.95%) were followed by readmission and to a different hospital than the original hospital where the surgery was performed. Among all discharges, disposition "not to home" versus "to home" was associated with greater odds that the patient would have readmission within 30 days and to a different hospital than where the surgery was performed (2.11, 95% CI, 1.96-2.27; P < .0001). In part, this was because disposition "not to home" was associated with greater odds of readmission to any hospital (1.90, 95% CI, 1.82-1.98; P < .0001). In addition, among the subset of discharges with readmission within 30 days, disposition "not to home" versus "to home" was associated with greater odds that the readmission was to a different hospital than where the surgery was performed (1.20, 95% CI, 1.11-1.31; P < .0001). There was no association between the hospitals' median LOS for the DRG and the odds that readmission was to a different hospital (P = .82). The odds ratio per each 1 day decrease in the hospital median LOS was 1.01 (95% CI, 0.91-1.12). CONCLUSIONS: Departments and hospitals wishing to demonstrate the value of their Perioperative Surgical Home initiatives, or to calculate risk assumption contracts, should ensure that their informatics priorities include obtaining accurate data on resource use at postacute care facilities such as skilled nursing facilities. Although approximately a quarter of readmissions are to different hospitals than where surgery was performed, provided that is recognized, obtaining those missing data is of less importance.

Comparative effectiveness of stereotactic radiosurgery versus whole-brain radiation therapy for patients with brain metastases from breast or non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment for patients with brain metastases remains controversial as the use of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) alone, replacing whole-brain radiation therapy (WBRT), has increased. This study determined the patterns of care at multiple institutions before 2010 and examined whether or not survival was different between patients treated with SRS and patients treated with WBRT. METHODS: This study examined the overall survival of patients treated with radiation therapy for brain metastases from non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC; initially diagnosed in 2007-2009) or breast cancer (initially diagnosed in 1997-2009) at 5 centers. Propensity score analyses were performed to adjust for confounding factors such as the number of metastases, the extent of extracranial metastases, and the treatment center. RESULTS: Overall, 27.8% of 400 NSCLC patients and 13.4% of 387 breast cancer patients underwent SRS alone for the treatment of brain metastases. Few patients with more than 3 brain metastases or lesions ≥ 4 cm in size underwent SRS. Patients with fewer than 4 brain metastases less than 4 cm in size (n = 189 for NSCLC and n = 117 for breast cancer) who were treated with SRS had longer survival (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] for NSCLC, 0.58; 95% confidence Interval [CI], 0.38-0.87; P = .01; adjusted HR for breast cancer, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.33-0.91; P = .02) than those treated with WBRT. CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated for fewer than 4 brain metastases from NSCLC or breast cancer with SRS alone had longer survival than those treated with WBRT in this multi-institutional, retrospective study, even after adjustments for the propensity to undergo SRS. Cancer 2016;122:2091-100. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Automated tobacco assessment and cessation support for cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Tobacco assessment and cessation support are not routinely included in cancer care. An automated tobacco assessment and cessation program was developed to increase the delivery of tobacco cessation support for cancer patients. METHODS: A structured tobacco assessment was incorporated into the electronic health record at Roswell Park Cancer Institute to identify tobacco use in cancer patients at diagnosis and during follow-up. All patients who reported tobacco use within the past 30 days were automatically referred to a dedicated cessation program that provided cessation counseling. Data were analyzed for referral accuracy and interest in cessation support. RESULTS: Between October 2010 and December 2012, 11,868 patients were screened for tobacco use, and 2765 were identified as tobacco users and were referred to the cessation service. In referred patients, 1381 of those patients received only a mailed invitation to contact the cessation service, and 1384 received a mailing as well as telephone contact attempts from the cessation service. In the 1126 (81.4%) patients contacted by telephone, 51 (4.5%) reported no tobacco use within the past 30 days, 35 (3.1%) were medically unable to participate, and 30 (2.7%) declined participation. Of the 1381 patients who received only a mailed invitation, 16 (1.2%) contacted the cessation program for assistance. Three questions at initial consult and follow-up generated over 98% of referrals. Tobacco assessment frequency every 4 weeks delayed referral in < 1% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: An automated electronic health record-based tobacco assessment and cessation referral program can identify substantial numbers of smokers who are receptive to enrollment in a cessation support service.

Incremental Societal Costs of Perioperative Complications Following Adult Elective Inpatient Major Therapeutic Surgery in the State of Florida: A Seven-Year Retrospective Epidemiological Analysis.

Introduction There is an expanding role for anesthesiologists in the preoperative optimization and postoperative management of patients, often in the context of a so-called perioperative surgical home. Such efforts typically include enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols and often an anesthesiologist-led team for perioperative management. Studies of the cost-effectiveness of such approaches have generally been conducted at single institutions, with most patients cared for by small numbers of surgeons. This limitation creates generalizability issues as to whether improvement was related mostly to organizational culture or the studied surgeons' practices (non-generalizable) versus the procedures (generalizable). We studied whether other organizations can rely on achieving similar benefits following the adoption of a studied process improvement strategy at a single institution. Methods All patients undergoing elective major therapeutic inpatient surgery discharged between October 2015 and June 2022 at non-federal hospitals in the state of Florida were included. For each discharge, the United States Medicare Severity Diagnosis-Related Group (MS-DRG) weighting factor (i.e., the multiplier for the hospital's base rate for admissions that determines reimbursement) and the Clinical Classification Software Refined (CCSR) code for the principal procedure were determined at admission and discharge from the state's inpatient healthcare database based on the diagnoses present at those time points. An increase in the weighting factor from admission to discharge represents societal costs from perioperative complications. Statewide, by hospital, and by surgeon, we calculated the total increase for each CCSR's weighting factor. Our primary hypothesis was that surgeon variability would be statistically greater than CCSR variability but that the incremental effect would be <5%. If CCSR and surgeon variability were comparable, this would be supportive of generalizability. In contrast, if there were a predominant effect related to the surgeon, results from one institution might not be applicable to others. Results Among the 1,482,344 discharges studied, the pooled (N=7 years) contributions to MS-DRG weighting factor increases from the upper 20% of surgeons were 2.8% more than from the upper 20% of CCSRs (95% CI 1.9%-3.9%, p=0.0006). Those CCSRs accounted for 85.5% (95% CI 79.4%-91.7%, p<0.0001) of the total increase in the MS-DRG weighting factor. The average contribution of the top two surgeons at each hospital to that hospital's increase in the weighting factor ranged among CCSRs from 68% to 97%. The median and 75th percentile of surgeons performing at least 10% of the total number of cases at each hospital was similar to those values for the contributions to the increases in the MS-DRG weighting factor, median 2.0 to 3.0, and 75th percentile 1.75 to 4.0. Conclusions Because variability among surgeons in their contributions to increases in the MS-DRG weighting factor only slightly exceeded the variability among CCSR surgical categories, perioperative surgical home and ERAS study research results involving single institutions and a small number of surgeons would likely be generalizable to other hospitals and healthcare systems. Funding agencies should not be hesitant to fund single-center perioperative surgical home studies and ERAS interventions based on concerns related to lack of generalizability.

Temporal trends in outcomes following sublobar and lobar resections for small (≤ 2 cm) non-small cell lung cancers--a Surveillance Epidemiology End Results database analysis.

BACKGROUND: Since the randomized, controlled study that favored lobectomy for resection of stage I non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLCs) by the Lung Cancer Study Group, there have been improvements in staging. The liberal use of computed tomography also may have altered the types of early lung cancer diagnosed. Studies published since then have drawn contradictory conclusions on the benefit of lobectomy over sublobar resections for early-stage NSCLC. We examined the Surveillance Epidemiology End Results database to test our hypothesis that the relationship between extent of resection and outcome has changed since the Lung Cancer Study Group study was published. METHODS: We examined stage I NSCLCs ≤ 2 cm in size over three periods: 1988-1998 (Early), 1999-2004 (Intermediate), and 2005-2008 (Late). For each period, we assessed overall and disease-specific survivals and their associations with the extents of resection, by univariate and multivariate analyses. Sublobar resections in the Early group could not be categorized into segmentectomies and wedge resections because these were not coded separately. RESULTS: The proportion of NSCLCs ≤ 2 cm increased from 0.98% in 1988 to 2.2% in 2008. Multivariate analyses showed that sublobar resection was inferior to lobectomy in the Early period (hazard ratio [HR], 1.41; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.21-1.65). This effect decreased in the Intermediate period, in which segmentectomies but not wedge resections were equivalent to lobectomies (wedge versus lobectomy HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.01-1.41; segmentectomy versus lobectomy HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.8-1.36). The difference disappeared in the Late period, when both wedge resections and segmentectomies were equivalent to lobectomy (wedge versus lobectomy HR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.79-1.5; segmentectomy versus lobectomy HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.47-1.45). Trends for both overall survival and disease-specific survival were identical. CONCLUSIONS: The survival benefit of lobectomy over sublobar resection decreased over the past 2 decades with no discernible difference in the most contemporary cases. These results support reevaluation of lobectomy as the standard of care for small (≤ 2-cm) NSCLCs.

Laparoscopic excision of gastric mass yields intra-abdominal esophageal duplication cyst.

A 69-year-old man with presumed solid gastric mass determined by computed tomography, endoscopic ultrasonography, and fine-needle aspiration underwent videoscopic excision of what resulted in a cystic structure consistent with intra-abdominal esophageal duplication cyst. Esophageal duplication cysts are rare congenital lesions that are difficult to diagnose. They seldom occur entirely below the diaphragm, and occurrence in adults is unusual. Only six such cases are reported in the literature. When diagnosis is made, treatment decisions are not always straight forward, although excision is frequently pursued. The current case describes this unique finding and presents laparoscopic excision as a safe treatment alternative.

Analyzing the impact of minimally invasive surgical approaches on post-operative outcomes of pneumonectomy and sleeve lobectomy patients.

Background: Some patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have superior short- and long-term outcomes with sleeve lobectomy rather than pneumonectomy. Originally sleeve lobectomy was reserved for patients with limited pulmonary function, however, the reported superior results allowed sleeve lobectomy to be performed in expanded patient populations. In a further attempt to improve post-operative outcomes surgeons have adopted minimally invasive techniques Minimally invasive approaches have potential benefits to patients such as decreased morbidity and mortality while maintaining the same caliber of oncologic outcomes. Methods: We identified patients at our institution who underwent sleeve lobectomy or pneumonectomy to treat NSCLC from 2007 to 2017. We analyzed these groups in respect to 30- and 90-day mortality, complications, local recurrence, and median survival. We included multivariate analysis to determine the impact of a minimally invasive approach, sex, extent of resection, and histology. Differences in mortality were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method using the log-rank test to compare the groups. A two-tailed Z test for difference in proportions was done to analyze complications, local recurrence, 30-day and 90-day mortality. Results: A total of 108 patients underwent sleeve lobectomy (n=34) or pneumonectomy (n=74) for treatment of NSCLC with 18 undergoing open pneumonectomy, 56 undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) pneumonectomy, 29 undergoing open sleeve lobectomy, and 5 undergoing VATS sleeve lobectomy. There was no significant difference in 30-day mortality (P=0.064) but there was a difference in 90-day (P=0.007). There was no difference in complication rates (P=0.234) or local recurrence rates (P=0.779). The pneumonectomy patients had a median survival of 23.6 months (95% CI: 3.8-43.4 months). The sleeve lobectomy group had a median survival of 60.7 months (95% CI: 43.3-78.2 months) (P=0.008). On multivariate analysis extent of resection (P<0.001) and tumor stage (P=0.036) were associated with survival. There was no significant difference between the VATS approach and the open surgical approach (P=0.053). Conclusions: When considering patients undergoing surgery for NSCLC sleeve lobectomy resulted in lower 90-day mortality and better 3-year survival compared to patients undergoing PN. Having a sleeve lobectomy rather than a pneumonectomy and having earlier-stage disease lead to significantly improved survival on multivariate analysis. Having a VATS operation leads to a non-inferior post-operative outcome compared to open surgery.

Palliative care.

These guidelines were developed and updated by an interdisciplinary group of experts based on clinical experience and available scientific evidence. The goal of these guidelines is to help patients with cancer experience the best quality of life possible throughout the illness trajectory by providing guidance for the primary oncology team for symptom screening, assessment, palliative care interventions, reassessment, and afterdeath care. Palliative care should be initiated by the primary oncology team and augmented by collaboration with an interdisciplinary team of palliative care experts.

Advances in bronchoscopy for lung cancer.

Bronchoscopic techniques have seen significant advances in the last decade. The development and refinement of different types of endobronchial ultrasound and navigation systems have led to improved diagnostic yield and lung cancer staging capabilities. The complication rate of these minimally invasive procedures is extremely low as compared to traditional transthoracic needle biopsy and surgical sampling. These advances augment the safe array of methods utilized in the work up and management algorithms of lung cancer.

Does Operative Duration of Lobectomy for Early Lung Cancer Increase Perioperative Morbidity?

BACKGROUND: Longer bariatric, colorectal, plastic, spine, and urologic operations increase complications and lengths of stay. We aimed to determine whether this is a risk factor for lung lobectomy morbidity. METHODS: The Society of Thoracic Surgeons General Thoracic Surgery Database was queried for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer lobectomy with surgical duration treated as a continuous variable. Univariate and multivariate analyses compared patient and clinical characteristics with perioperative outcomes and procedure durations. Robotic cases were combined with thoracoscopic cases for duration analyses into a minimally invasive group. All analyses were conducted in SAS v9.4 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC) at a significance level of .05. RESULTS: In 17,852 patients mean duration of thoracotomy, thoracoscopy, and robotic lobectomies were 178 ± 84, 185 ± 73, and 214 ± 82 minutes, respectively (P < .001). The most common complications were prolonged air leak (12.3%), atrial fibrillation (12%), pneumonia (4.4%), and atelectasis requiring bronchoscopy (4.1%). Procedure duration was associated with increased odds of intraoperative packed red blood cell transfusion (P < .001) and length of stay > 5 days (P < .001) for both thoracotomy and minimally invasive lobectomy. Increased odds of pneumonia (P < .001), atelectasis (P < .001), and unexpected intensive care unit admission (P = .006) for thoracotomy lobectomy were associated with longer procedure duration. Increased lobectomy duration was not associated with readmission (P = .549) or 30-day mortality (P = .208). CONCLUSIONS: Longer early-stage lung cancer lobectomy durations are associated with postoperative morbidity and increased length of stay. Although the effects of protracted operation times on long-term survival are unknown, short-term mortality differences were not detected. Measures that decrease operative durations without sacrificing safety and oncologic outcome should be undertaken by surgeons and hospital systems.

Impact of a Thoracic Multidisciplinary Conference on Lung Cancer Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: With the complexity of cancer treatment rising, the role of multidisciplinary conferences (MDCs) in making diagnostic and treatment decisions has become critical. This study evaluated the impact of a thoracic MDC (T-MDC) on lung cancer care quality and survival. METHODS: Lung cancer cases over 7 years were identified from the Roswell Park cancer registry system. The survival rates and treatment plans of 300 patients presented at the MDC were compared with 300 matched patients. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines were used to define the standard of care. The compliance of care plans with NCCN guidelines was summarized using counts and percentages, with comparisons made using the Fisher exact test. Survival outcomes were summarized using Kaplan-Meier methods. RESULTS: There was improvement in median overall survival (36.9 vs 19.3 months; P < .001) and cancer-specific survival (48 vs 28.1 months; P < .001) for lung cancer patients discussed at the T-MDC compared with controls. These differences were statistically significant in patients with stages III/IV disease but not in patients with stages I/II disease. The NCCN guidelines compliance rate of treatment plans improved from 80% to 94% (P < .001) after MDC discussion. MDC recommendations resulted in treatment plan changes in 123 of 300 patients (41%). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that lung cancer patients have a survival benefit from MDC discussion compared with controls. Patients with advanced disease (stages III and IV) benefited the most. Further research is necessary to understand the precise mechanisms that drive these results.

Statistical grand rounds: Importance of appropriately modeling procedure and duration in logistic regression studies of perioperative morbidity and mortality.

Multiple logistic regression studies frequently are performed with duration (e.g., operative time) included as an independent variable. We use narrative review of the statistical literature to highlight that when the association between duration and outcome is presumptively significant, the procedure itself (e.g., video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy or thoracotomy lobectomy) needs to be tested for inclusion in the logistic regression. If the procedure is a true covariate but excluded in lieu of category of procedure (e.g., lung resection), estimates of the odds ratios for other independent variables are biased. In addition, actual durations are sometimes used as the independent variable, rather than scheduled (forecasted) durations. Only the scheduled duration is known when a patient would be randomized in a trial of preoperative or intraoperative intervention and/or meets with the surgeon and anesthesiologist preoperatively. By reviewing the literature about logistic regression and about predicting case duration, we show that the use of actual instead of scheduled duration can result in biased logistic regression results.

Exceeding Radiation Dose to Volume Parameters for the Proximal Airways with Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy Is More Likely for Ultracentral Lung Tumors and Associated with Worse Outcome.

The preferred radiotherapeutic approach for central (CLT) and ultracentral (UCLT) lung tumors is unclear. We assessed the toxicity and outcomes of patients with CLT and UCLT who underwent definitive five-fraction stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). We reviewed the charts of patients with either CLT or UCLT managed with SBRT from June 2010-April 2019. CLT were defined as gross tumor volume (GTV) within 2 cm of either the proximal bronchial tree, trachea, mediastinum, aorta, or spinal cord. UCLT were defined as GTV abutting any of these structures. Propensity score matching was performed for gender, performance status, and history of prior lung cancer. Within this cohort of 83 patients, 43 (51.8%) patients had UCLT. The median patient age was 73.1 years with a median follow up of 29.9 months. The two most common dose fractionation schemes were 5000 cGy (44.6%) and 5500 cGy (42.2%) in five fractions. Multivariate analysis revealed UCLT to be associated with worse overall survival (OS) (HR = 1.9, p = 0.02) but not time to progression (TTP). Using propensity score match pairing, UCLT correlated with reduced non-cancer associated survival (p = 0.049) and OS (p = 0.03), but not TTP. Within the matched cohort, dosimetric study found exceeding a D4cc of 18 Gy to either the proximal bronchus (HR = 3.9, p = 0.007) or trachea (HR = 4.0, p = 0.02) was correlated with worse non-cancer associated survival. In patients undergoing five fraction SBRT, UCLT location was associated with worse non-cancer associated survival and OS, which could be secondary to excessive D4cc dose to the proximal airways.

Prior Treatment for Non-small Cell Lung Cancer Is Associated With Improved Survival in Patients who Undergo Definitive Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for a Subsequent Lung Malignancy: A Retrospective Multivariate and Matched Pair Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Despite occurring commonly, the prognoses of second early-stage non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC) are not well known. METHODS: The authors retrospectively reviewed the charts of inoperable patients who underwent thoracic stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) from February 2007 to April 2019. Those with previous small cell lung cancers or SBRT treatments for tumors other than NSCLC were excluded. Multivariate Cox regression and a matched pair cohort analyses evaluated the prognoses of patients undergoing definitive SBRT for a new second primary. RESULTS: Of 438 patients who underwent definitive SBRT for NSCLC, 84 had previously treated NSCLC. Univariate log-rank tests identified gender, Karnofksy performance status (KPS), prior lung cancer, anticoagulation use, and history of heart disease to correlate with overall survival (OS) (P<0.05). These factors were incorporated into a multivariate Cox regression model that demonstrated female sex (P=0.004, hazard ratio [HR]=0.68), KPS (P<0.001, HR=2.0), and prior lung cancer (P=0.049, HR=0.7) to be significantly associated with OS. A similar approach found only gender (P=0.017, HR=0.64) and tumor stage (P=0.02, HR=1.7) to correlate with relapse-free survival. To support the Cox regression analysis, propensity score matching was performed using gender, age, KPS, tumor stage, history of heart disease, and anticoagulation use. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis within the matched pairs found prior lung cancer to be associated with improved OS (P=0.011), but not relapse-free survival (P=0.44). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with initial lung cancer SBRT inoperable cases, ablative radiotherapy for new primaries was associated with improved OS. Physicians should not be dissuaded from offering SBRT to such patients.

Influence of procedure classification on process variability and parameter uncertainty of surgical case durations.

BACKGROUND: Predictive variability of operating room (OR) times influences decision making on the day of surgery including when to start add-on cases, whether to move a case from one OR to another, and where to assign relief staff. One contributor to predictive variability is process variability, which arises among cases of the same procedure(s). Another contributor is parameter uncertainty, which is caused by small sample sizes of historical data. METHODS: Process variability was quantified using absolute percentage errors of surgeons' bias-corrected estimates of OR time. The influence of procedure classification on process variability was studied using a dataset of 61,353 cases, each with 1 to 5 scheduled and actual Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes (i.e., a standardized vocabulary). Parameter uncertainty's sensitivity to sample size was quantified by studying ratios of 90% prediction bounds to medians. That studied dataset of 65,661 cases was used previously to validate a Bayesian method to calculate 90% prediction bounds using combinations of surgeons' scheduled estimates and historical OR times. RESULTS: (1) Process variability differed significantly among 11 groups of surgical specialty and case urgency (P < 0.0001). For example, absolute percentage errors exceeded the overall median of 22% for 57% of urgent spine surgery cases versus 42% of elective spine surgery cases. (2) Process variability was not increased when scheduled and actual CPTs differed (P = 0.23 without and P = 0.47 with stratification based on the 11 groups), because most differences represented known (planned) options inherent to procedures. (3) Process variability was not associated with incidence of procedures (P = 0.79), after excluding cataract surgery, a procedure with high relative variability. (4) Parameter uncertainty from uncommon procedures (0-2 historical cases) accounted for essentially all of the uncertainty in decisions dependent on estimates of OR times. The Bayesian method moderated the effect of small sample sizes on uncertainty in estimates of OR times. In contrast, from prior work, the use of broad categories of procedures reduces parameter uncertainty but at the expense of increased process variability. CONCLUSIONS: For procedures with few historic data, the Bayesian method allows for effective case duration prediction, permitting use of detailed procedure descriptions. Although fine resolution of scheduling procedures increases the chance of performed procedure(s) differing from scheduled procedure(s), this does not increase process variability. Future studies need both to address differences in process variability among specialties and accept the limitation that findings from one may not apply to others.

Prospective trial of thoracic and spine surgeons' updating of their estimated case durations at the start of cases.

BACKGROUND: Surgeon estimates of case durations are important for operating room (OR) management decision making because many cases are rare combinations of procedures with few or no historical data. Thoracic and spine surgeons updated their scheduled OR times on the day of surgery just before the "time out" in the OR. METHODS: All elective (scheduled) general thoracic (n = 39) and spine surgery (n = 48) cases at 1 hospital were studied over 3-month and 1.5-month periods, respectively. RESULTS: Among cases with a change in predicted duration, most changes were made based on updates to the surgical or anesthetic procedures (thoracic 85%, spine 86%). For thoracic surgery, there was overall no significant median reduction in absolute prediction error (median 0 minutes, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0-0 minutes). Among the 37% of cases with changed predicted durations, there was a significant reduction in absolute error (median 38 minutes, 95% CI >7.5 minutes). For spine surgery, there was overall no reduction in the absolute error (median 0 minutes, 95% CI 0-0 minutes). Among the 29% of cases with changed predicted durations, absolute error was no worse, but not significantly better (point estimate of median reduction 34 minutes, 95% CI >0 minutes). Secondary observations made were no effect of updates on bias, frequent rounding of scheduled durations to the nearest half hour, and increased predictive error caused by decisions that reduced expected overutilized OR time. CONCLUSIONS: A systematic program of routinely and/or always asking for updated case duration predictions will not substantively improve OR management decision making. However, when a change in surgical approach, surgical procedure, or anesthetic procedure is identified (e.g., at the intraoperative briefing before case start), the updated estimate of case duration should be used, because such updates are not worse and often better than original estimates.