Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:Nodal surveillance (NS) has overtaken completion lymphadenectomy as the preferred management for sentinel node-positive (SLN+) melanoma, but requires frequent exams and nodal ultrasound (US). Social determinants of health (SDoH) may affect US adherence in real-world populations, and evaluation of these potential impacts is needed. METHODS:Adults with SLN+ melanoma diagnosed from July 2017 to December 2019 who received NS at nine cancer centers were identified retrospectively. Exposures included insurance status, travel distance, and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Social Vulnerability Index (SVI), a validated measure of area-level SDoH, indicated as 0 (low) to 1 (high) vulnerability. The primary outcome was US adherence (≥ 1 study per 6-month follow-up interval). The secondary outcomes were combined-modality adherence [US, computed tomography (CT), or positron emission tomography (PET)] and loss to follow-up (LTFU). Bivariate analyses and mixed-effects multivariable logistic regression were performed. RESULTS:Most of the 519 patients were male (57%), non-Hispanic white (94.4%), and insured privately (45.3%) or by Medicare (43.5%). The median travel distance was 63.3 miles (interquartile range [IQR], 31.2-111.0 miles), and the median SVI was 0.426 (IQR, 0.253-0.610). The surveillance adherence rates were 41.6% for US and 75.1% for combined modalities. No significant differences in US adherence were observed based on sociodemographic covariates in regression analysis. Medicaid (odds ratio [OR], 3.12; p = 0.02) and uninsured (OR 4.48; p = 0.01) patients had increased likelihood of LTFU. CONCLUSIONS:Less than half of the patients in this multicenter cohort achieved US adherence, although the rates improved with combined modalities. Medicaid or non-insurance were social risk factors for LTFU. Optimizing surveillance practices for socially vulnerable groups will be crucial for the ongoing real-world implementation of NS.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:Early detection of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is associated with improved survival. However, a greater proportion of patients treated at safety net hospitals (SNHs) present with late-stage disease compared to those at academic medical centers (AMCs). This study aims to identify barriers to diagnosis of HCC, highlighting differences between SNHs and AMCs. METHODS:The US Safety Net Collaborative-HCC database was queried. Patients were stratified by facility of diagnosis (SNH or AMC). Patient demographics and HCC screening rates were examined. The primary outcome was stage at diagnosis (AJCC I/II-"early"; AJCC III/IV-"late"). RESULTS:1290 patients were included; 50.2% diagnosed at SNHs and 49.8% at AMCs. At SNHs, 44.4% of patients were diagnosed late, compared to 27.6% at AMCs. On multivariable regression, Black race was associated with late diagnosis in both facilities (SNH: odds ratio 1.96, p = 0.03; AMC: 2.27, <0.01). Screening was associated with decreased odds of late diagnosis (SNH: 0.46, p = 0.04; AMC: 0.37, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS:Black race was associated with late diagnosis of HCC, while screening was associated with early diagnosis across institutional types. These results suggest socially constructed racial bias in screening and diagnosis of HCC. Screening efforts targeting SNH patients and Black patients at all facilities are essential to reduce disparities.

OBJECTIVE:To evaluate long-term oncologic outcomes of patients with stage IV pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) and identify survival benchmarks for comparison when considering resection in these patients. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA/BACKGROUND:Highly selected cohorts of patients with liver-oligometastatic pancreas cancer have reported prolonged survival following resection. The long-term impact of surgery in this setting remains undefined due to a lack of appropriate control groups. METHODS:We identified patients with clinical stage IV PDAC with synchronous liver metastases within our cancer registry. We estimated overall survival (OS) among various patient subgroups using the Kaplan-Meier method. To mitigate immortal time bias, we analyzed long-term outcomes of patients who survived beyond 12 months (landmark time) from diagnosis. RESULTS:We identified 241 patients. Median OS was 7 months (95%CI 5-9), both overall and for patients with liver-only metastasis (n=144). Ninety patients (38% of liver-only; 40% of whole cohort) survived at least 12 months; those who received chemotherapy in this subgroup had a median OS of 26 months (95%CI 17-39). Of these patients, those with resectable or borderline resectable primary tumors and resectable liver-only metastasis (n=9, 4%) had a median OS of 39 months (95%CI 13-NR). CONCLUSIONS:The 4% of our cohort that were potentially eligible for surgery experienced a prolonged survival compared to all-comers with stage IV disease. Oncologic outcomes of patients undergoing resection of metastatic pancreas cancer should be assessed in the context of the expected survival of patients potentially eligible for surgery and not relative to all patients with stage IV disease.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:There is no consensus regarding the role of primary tumor resection for patients with metastatic pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (panNET). We assessed surgical treatment patterns and evaluated the survival impact of primary tumor resection in patients with metastatic panNET. METHODS:Patients with synchronous metastatic nonfunctional panNET in the National Cancer Database (2004-2016) were categorized based on whether they underwent primary tumor resection. We used logistic regressions to assess associations with primary tumor resection. We performed survival analyses with Kaplan-Meier survival functions, log-rank test, and Cox proportional hazard regression within a propensity score matched cohort. RESULTS:In the overall cohort of 2613 patients, 68% (n = 839) underwent primary tumor resection. The proportion of patients who underwent primary tumor resection decreased over time from 36% (2004) to 16% (2016, p < 0.001). After propensity score matching on age at diagnosis, median income quartile, tumor grade, size, liver metastasis, and hospital type, primary tumor resection was associated with longer median overall survival (OS) (65 vs. 24 months; p < 0.001) and was associated with lower hazard of mortality (HR: 0.39, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Primary tumor resection was significantly associated with improved OS, suggesting that, if feasible, surgical resection can be considered for well-selected patients with panNET and synchronous metastasis.

OBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to determine overall trends and center-level variation in utilization of completion lymph node dissection (CLND) and adjuvant systemic therapy for sentinel lymph node (SLN)-positive melanoma. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA/BACKGROUND:Based on recent clinical trials, management options for SLN-positive melanoma now include effective adjuvant systemic therapy and nodal observation instead of CLND. It is unknown how these findings have shaped practice or how these contemporaneous developments have influenced their respective utilization. METHODS:We performed an international cohort study at 21 melanoma referral centers in Australia, Europe, and the United States that treated adults SLN-positive melanoma and negative distant staging from July 2017 to June 2019. We used generalized linear and multinomial logistic regression models with random intercepts for each center to assess center-level variation in CLND and adjuvant systemic treatment, adjusting for patient and disease-specific characteristics. RESULTS:Among 1109 patients, performance of CLND decreased from 28% to 8% and adjuvant systemic therapy use increased from 29 to 60%. For both CLND and adjuvant systemic treatment, the most influential factors were nodal tumor size, stage, and location of treating center. There was notable variation among treating centers in management of stage IIIA patients and use of CLND with adjuvant systemic therapy versus nodal observation alone for similar risk patients. CONCLUSIONS:There has been an overall decline in CLND and simultaneous adoption of adjuvant systemic therapy for patients with SLN-positive melanoma though wide variation in practice remains. Accounting for differences in patient mix, location of care contributed significantly to the observed variation.

BACKGROUND:Time to treatment (TTT) varies widely for patients with gastric cancer. We aimed to evaluate relationships between time to treatment, overall survival (OS), and other surgical outcomes in patients with stage I-III gastric cancer. METHODS:We identified patients with clinical stage I-III gastric cancer who underwent curative-intent gastrectomy within the National Cancer Database (2006-2015) and grouped them by treatment sequence: neoadjuvant chemotherapy or surgery upfront. We defined TTT as weeks from diagnosis to treatment initiation (neoadjuvant chemotherapy or definitive surgical procedure, respectively). Survival differences were assessed by Kaplan-Meier estimate, Cox proportional hazard regression, and log rank test. RESULTS:Among the 22,846 patients with stage I-III gastric cancer, most (56%) received surgery upfront. Median TTT was 5 weeks (IQR 4-7) and 6 weeks (IQR 3-9) for patients in the neoadjuvant and surgery upfront groups, respectively. In the neoadjuvant group, increasing TTT was significantly associated with increasing median OS up to TTT of 5 weeks, with no change in median OS when TTT was > 5 weeks. In the surgery group, increasing TTT was significantly associated with increasing median OS up to 6 weeks; however, increasing TTT between 14 and 21 weeks was associated with decreasing median OS. CONCLUSIONS:The relationship between time to treatment and survival outcomes is non-linear. Among patients who underwent surgery upfront, the relationship between time to treatment and OS was bimodal, suggesting that deferring definitive surgery, up to 14 weeks, is not associated with worse OS or oncologic outcomes. The relationship between time to treatment and overall survival among patients was bimodal, suggesting that deferring definitive surgery up to 14 weeks is not associated with worse OS.

BACKGROUND:Adherence to evidence-based guidelines for gastric cancer is low, particularly at the hospital level, despite a strong association with improved overall survival (OS). We aimed to evaluate patterns of hospital and regional adherence to National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines for gastric cancer. METHODS:Using the National Cancer Database (2004-2015), we identified patients with stage I-III gastric cancer. Hospital-level guideline adherence was calculated by dividing the patients who received guideline adherent care by the total patients treated at that hospital. OS was estimated for each hospital. Associations between adherence, region, and survival were compared using mixed-effects, hierarchical regression. RESULTS:Among 576 hospitals, the median hospital guideline adherence rate was 25% (range 0-76%) and varied significantly by region (p = 0.001). Adherence was highest in the Middle Atlantic (29%) and lowest in the East South Central region (19%); hospitals in the New England, Middle Atlantic, and East North Central regions were more likely to be guideline adherent than those in the East South Central region (all p < 0.05), after adjusting for patient and hospital mix. Most (35%) of the adherence variation was attributable to the hospital. Median 2-year OS varied significantly by region. After adjusting for hospital and patient mix, hazard of mortality was 17% lower in the Middle Atlantic (hazard ratio 0.82, 95% confidence interval 0.74-0.90) relative to the East South Central region, with most of the variation (54%) attributable to patient-level factors. CONCLUSIONS:Hospital-level guideline adherence for gastric cancer demonstrated significant regional variation and was associated with longer OS, suggesting that efforts to improve guideline adherence should be directed toward lower-performing hospitals.