Surgeon Perspectives on the Management of Aborted Cancer Surgery: Results of a Society of Surgical Oncology Member Survey.

BACKGROUND: While surgery is generally necessary for most solid-organ cancers, curative-intent resection is occasionally aborted due to unanticipated unresectability or occult metastases. Following aborted cancer surgery (ACS), patients have unique and complex care needs and yet little is known about the optimal approach to their management. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to define the practice patterns and perspectives of an international cohort of cancer surgeons on the management of ACS. METHODS: A validated survey assessing surgeon perspectives on patient care needs and management following ACS was developed. The survey was distributed electronically to members of the Society of Surgical Oncology (SSO). RESULTS: Among 190 participating surgeons, mean age was 49 ± 11 years, 69% were male, 61% worked at an academic institution, and most had a clinical practice focused on liver/pancreas (30%), breast (23%), or melanoma/sarcoma cancers (20%). Participants estimated that ACS occurred in 7 ± 6% of their cancer operations, most often due to occult metastases (67%) or local unresectability (30%). Most surgeons felt (very) comfortable addressing their patients' surgical needs (92%) and cancer treatment-related questions (90%), but fewer expressed comfort addressing psychosocial needs (83%) or symptom-control needs (69%). While they perceived discussing next available therapies as the patients' most important priority after ACS, surgeons reported avoiding postoperative complications as their most important priority (p < 0.001). While 61% and 27% reported utilizing palliative care and psychosocial oncology, respectively, in these situations, 46% noted care coordination as a barrier to addressing patient care needs. CONCLUSIONS: Results from this SSO member survey suggest that ACS is relatively common and associated with unique patient care needs. Surgeons may feel less comfortable assessing psychosocial and symptom-control needs, highlighting the need for novel patient-centered approaches.

Psychological responses to cancer recurrence.

BACKGROUND: There is a dearth of knowledge regarding the psychological responses to a diagnosis of cancer recurrence. METHODS: An ongoing randomized clinical trial provided the context for prospective study. Women with Stage II/III breast carcinoma (N = 227) were initially assessed after their diagnosis/surgery and before adjuvant therapy and then reassessed every 6 months. Eight years into the trial, 30 patients had recurred (R) and were assessed shortly after receiving their second diagnosis. Their data were compared with a sample of trial patients who had no evidence of disease (disease free [DF]; n = 90). The groups were matched on study arm, disease stage, estrogen receptor status, menopausal status, and time since initial diagnosis. RESULTS: As hypothesized, patients' cancer-specific stress at recurrence in the R group was higher (P < 0.05) than stress levels for the DF group at the equivalent point in time. Importantly, the R group reported stress for their recurrent diagnosis equivalent to that reported for their initial diagnosis. Identical results were found for measures of health status and symptomatology. In contrast, analyses for emotional distress and social functioning showed no pattern of disruption for the R group at cancer recurrence and levels equivalent to that of the DF group. CONCLUSIONS: To the authors' knowledge, this was the first controlled, prospective psychological analysis of patients' responses to cancer recurrence. The findings were consistent with a learning theory conceptualization of the cancer stressor. Patients' stress was "compartmentalized" and did not, at least in the early weeks, result in diffuse emotional distress and quality of life disruption, underscoring the resilience of patients when confronted with cancer recurrence.