Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:Hispanic patients have a higher incidence of gastric cancer when compared to non-Hispanics. Outlining clinicodemographic characteristics and assessing the impact of ethnicity on stage-specific survival may identify opportunities to improve gastric cancer care for this population. METHODS:Patients with gastric cancer in the US Safety Net Collaborative (2012-2014) were retrospectively reviewed. Demographics, clinicopathologic characteristics, operative details, and outcomes were compared between Hispanic and non-Hispanic patients. Early onset gastric cancer was defined as age <50 years. Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional-hazards models were used to identify the impact of ethnicity on disease-specific survival (DSS). RESULTS:Seven hundred and ninety-seven patients were included, of which 219 (28%) were Hispanic. Hispanic patients were more likely to seek care at safety-net hospitals (66 vs 39%) and be uninsured (36 vs 17%), and less likely to have a primary care provider (PCP) (46 vs 75%; all P<0.05). Hispanic patients were twice as likely to present with early onset gastric cancer (28 vs 15%) and were more frequently diagnosed in the emergency room (54 vs 37%) with both abdominal pain and weight loss (44 vs 31%; all P <0.05). Treatment paradigms, operative outcomes, and DSS were similar between Hispanic and non-Hispanic patients when accounting for cancer stage. Cancer stage, pathologically positive nodes, and negative surgical margins were independently associated with DSS. CONCLUSIONS:A diagnosis of gastric cancer must be considered in previously healthy Hispanic patients who present to the emergency room with both abdominal pain and weight loss. Fewer than 50% of Hispanic patients have a PCP, indicating poor outpatient support. Efforts to improve outpatient support and screening may improve gastric cancer outcomes in this vulnerable population.

BACKGROUND:For patients with sentinel lymph node (SLN)-positive cutaneous melanoma, the Second Multicenter Selective Lymphadenectomy trial demonstrated equivalent disease-specific survival (DSS) with active surveillance using nodal ultrasound versus completion lymph node dissection (CLND). Adoption and outcomes of active surveillance in clinical practice and in adjuvant therapy recipients are unknown. METHODS:In a retrospective cohort of SLN-positive adults treated at 21 institutions in Australia, Europe, and the United States from June 2017 to November 2019, the authors evaluated the impact of active surveillance and adjuvant therapy on all-site recurrence-free survival (RFS), isolated nodal RFS, distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and DSS using Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazard models. RESULTS:Among 6347 SLN biopsies, 1154 (18%) were positive and had initial negative distant staging. In total, 965 patients (84%) received active surveillance, 189 (16%) underwent CLND. Four hundred thirty-nine patients received adjuvant therapy (surveillance, 38%; CLND, 39%), with the majority (83%) receiving anti-PD-1 immunotherapy. After a median follow-up of 11 months, 220 patients developed recurrent disease (surveillance, 19%; CLND, 22%), and 24 died of melanoma (surveillance, 2%; CLND, 4%). Sixty-eight patients had an isolated nodal recurrence (surveillance, 6%; CLND, 4%). In patients who received adjuvant treatment without undergoing prior CLND, all isolated nodal recurrences were resectable. On risk-adjusted multivariable analyses, CLND was associated with improved isolated nodal RFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.36; 95% CI, 0.15-0.88), but not all-site RFS (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.45-1.02). Adjuvant therapy improved all-site RFS (HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.47-0.57). DSS and DMFS did not differ by nodal management or adjuvant treatment. CONCLUSIONS:Active surveillance has been adopted for most SLN-positive patients. At initial assessment, real-world outcomes align with randomized trial findings, including in adjuvant therapy recipients. LAY SUMMARY/UNASSIGNED:For patients with melanoma of the skin and microscopic spread to lymph nodes, monitoring with ultrasound is an alternative to surgically removing the remaining lymph nodes. The authors studied adoption and real-world outcomes of ultrasound monitoring in over 1000 patients treated at 21 centers worldwide, finding that most patients now have ultrasounds instead of surgery. Although slightly more patients have cancer return in the lymph nodes with this strategy, typically, it can be removed with delayed surgery. Compared with up-front surgery, ultrasound monitoring results in the same overall risk of melanoma coming back at any location or of dying from melanoma.

BACKGROUND:Access to health insurance and curative interventions [surgery/liver-directed-therapy (LDT)] affects survival for early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The aim of this multi-institutional study of high-volume safety-net hospitals (SNHs) and their tertiary-academic-centers (AC) was to identify the impact of type/lack of insurance on survival disparities across hospitals, particularly SNHs whose mission is to minimize insurance related access-to-care barriers for vulnerable populations. METHODS:Early-stage HCC patients (2012-2014) from the US Safety-Net Collaborative were propensity-score matched by treatment at SNH/AC. Overall survival (OS) was the primary outcome. Multivariable Cox proportional-hazard analysis was performed accounting for sociodemographic/clinical parameters. RESULTS:Among 925 patients, those with no insurance (NI) had decreased curative surgery, compared to those with government insurance (GI) and private insurance [PI, (PI-SNH:60.5% vs. GI-SNH:33.1% vs. NI-SNH:13.6%, p < 0.001)], and decreased median OS (PI-SNH:32.1 vs. GI-SNH:22.8 vs. NI-SNH:9.4 months, p = 0.002). On multivariable regression controlling for sociodemographic/clinical parameters, NI-SNH (HR:2.5, 95% CI:1.3-4.9, p = 0.007) was the only insurance type/hospital system combination with significantly worse OS. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:NI-SNH patients received less curative treatment than other insurance/hospitals types suggesting that treatment barriers, beyond access-to-care, need to be identified and addressed to achieve survival equity in early-stage HCC for vulnerable populations (NI-SNH).

BACKGROUND:While hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is ideally diagnosed outpatient by screening at-risk patients, many are diagnosed in Emergency Departments (ED) due to undiagnosed liver disease and/or limited access-to-healthcare. This study aims to identify sociodemographic/clinical factors associated with being diagnosed with HCC in the ED to identify patients who may benefit from improved access-to-care. METHODS:HCC patients diagnosed between 2012 and 2014 in the ED or an outpatient setting [Primary Care Physician (PCP) or hepatologist] were identified from the US Safety-Net Collaborative database and underwent retrospective chart-review. Multivariable regression identified predictors for an ED diagnosis. RESULTS:Among 1620 patients, median age was 60, 68% were diagnosed outpatient, and 32% were diagnosed in the ED. ED patients were more likely male, Black/Hispanic, uninsured, and presented with more decompensated liver disease, aggressive features, and advanced clinical stage. On multivariable regression, controlling for age, gender, race/ethnicity, poverty, insurance, and PCP/navigator access, predictors for ED diagnosis were male (odds ratio [OR] 1.6, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.1-2.2, p = 0.010), black (OR 1.7, 95% CI: 1.2-2.3, p = 0.002), Hispanic (OR 1.6, 95% CI: 1.1-2.6, p = 0.029), > 25% below poverty line (OR 1.4, 95% CI: 1.1-1.9, p = 0.019), uninsured (OR 3.9, 95% CI: 2.4-6.1, p < 0.001), and lack of PCP (OR 2.3, 95% CI: 1.5-3.6, p < 0.001) or navigator (OR 1.8, 95% CI: 1.3-2.5, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS:The sociodemographic/clinical profile of patients diagnosed with HCC in EDs differs significantly from those diagnosed outpatient. ED patients were more likely racial/ethnic minorities, uninsured, and had limited access to healthcare. This study highlights the importance of improved access-to-care in already vulnerable populations.

BACKGROUND:In sentinel lymph node (SLN)-positive melanoma, two randomized trials demonstrated equivalent melanoma-specific survival with nodal surveillance vs completion lymph node dissection (CLND). Patients with microsatellites, extranodal extension (ENE) in the SLN, or >3 positive SLNs constitute a high-risk group largely excluded from the randomized trials, for whom appropriate management remains unknown. STUDY DESIGN/METHODS:SLN-positive patients with any of the three high-risk features were identified from an international cohort. CLND patients were matched 1:1 with surveillance patients using propensity scores. Risk of any-site recurrence, SLN-basin-only recurrence, and melanoma-specific mortality were compared. RESULTS:Among 1,154 SLN-positive patients, 166 had ENE, microsatellites, and/or >3 positive SLN. At 18.5 months median follow-up, 49% had recurrence (vs 26% in patients without high-risk features, p < 0.01). Among high-risk patients, 52 (31%) underwent CLND and 114 (69%) received surveillance. Fifty-one CLND patients were matched to 51 surveillance patients. The matched cohort was balanced on tumor, nodal, and adjuvant treatment factors. There were no significant differences in any-site recurrence (CLND 49%, surveillance 45%, p = 0.99), SLN-basin-only recurrence (CLND 6%, surveillance 14%, p = 0.20), or melanoma-specific mortality (CLND 14%, surveillance 12%, p = 0.86). CONCLUSIONS:SLN-positive patients with microsatellites, ENE, or >3 positive SLN constitute a high-risk group with a 2-fold greater recurrence risk. For those managed with nodal surveillance, SLN-basin recurrences were more frequent, but all-site recurrence and melanoma-specific mortality were comparable to patients treated with CLND. Most recurrences were outside the SLN-basin, supporting use of nodal surveillance for SLN-positive patients with microsatellites, ENE, and/or >3 positive SLN.

BACKGROUND:Widespread HCV treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients remains limited. Our aim was to evaluate the association of HCV treatment with survival and assess barriers to treatment. METHODS:Patients in the U.S. Safety Net Collaborative with HCV and HCC were included. Primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes were recurrence-free survival (RFS) and barriers to receiving HCV treatment. RESULTS:Of 941 patients, 57% received care at tertiary referral centers (n=533), 74% did not receive HCV treatment (n=696), 6% underwent resection (n=54), 17% liver transplant (n=163), 50% liver-directed therapy (n=473), and 7% chemotherapy (n=60). HCV treatment was associated with improved OS compared to no HCV treatment (70 vs 21 months, p<0.01), persisting across clinical stages, HCC treatment modalities, and treatment facilities (all p<0.01). Surgical patients who received HCV treatment had improved RFS compared to those who did not (91 vs 80 months, p=0.03). On MVA, HCV treated patients had improved OS and RFS. On MVA, factors associated with failure to receive HCV treatment included Black race, higher MELD, and advanced clinical stage (all p<0.05). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:HCV treatment for HCC patients portends improved survival, regardless of clinical stage, HCC treatment, or facility type. Efforts must address barriers to HCV treatment.

Clinical trials have demonstrated the efficacy of immunotherapy, especially checkpoint blockade inhibitors, in the treatment of patients with metastatic melanoma. More recently, improvements in survival have been reported in patients with high-risk resectable melanoma when these agents are used in the adjuvant setting. Increasing interest in neoadjuvant immunotherapy for high-risk resectable melanoma has been fueled by early reports of significant efficacy. We review the rationale and data behind utilizing neoadjuvant immunotherapy.

BACKGROUND:Although consensus guidelines generally discourage any surgical management (ASM; i.e., resection and/or transplantation) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and portal vein thrombosis (PVT), recent series from Asia have challenged this paradigm. METHODS:Patients from the US Safety Net Collaborative database (2012-2014) with localized HCC and radiographically confirmed PVT were propensity-score matched based on demographic and clinicopathologic factors associated with receipt of ASM and overall survival (OS). OS was compared between patients undergoing ASM and those not selected for surgery. RESULTS:Of 1910 HCC patients, 207 (14.5%) had localized disease and PVT. The majority received either liver-directed therapies (LDTs; 34%) and/or targeted systemic therapies (36%). Twenty-one patients (10.1%) underwent ASM (resection [n = 11], transplantation [n = 10]); a third experienced any complication with no 30-day mortalities. Independent predictors of undergoing ASM were younger age, recent hepatology consultation, and lower model of end-stage liver disease (MELD) score. After matching for age, comorbidities, MELD, tumor size, receipt of LDT, or systemic therapy, OS was significantly longer for patients selected for ASM versus non-ASM patients (median not reached vs. 5.8 months, p < .001). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:In a large North American multi-institutional cohort, a minority of HCC patients with PVT were selected for ASM. Resection or transplantation was associated with improved survival and may have a role in the multimodality management in selected patients.

BACKGROUND:Acral lentiginous melanoma is associated with worse survival than other subtypes of melanoma. Understanding prognostic factors for survival and recurrence can help better inform follow-up care. OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:To analyze the clinicopathologic features, melanoma-specific survival, and recurrence-free survival by substage in a large, multi-institutional cohort of primary acral lentiginous melanoma patients. METHODS:Retrospective review of the United States Melanoma Consortium database, a multi-center prospectively collected database of acral lentiginous melanoma patients treated between January 2000 and December 2017. RESULTS:= .001) were also prognostic factors for recurrence-free survival. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:In this cohort of patients, acral lentiginous melanoma was associated with poor outcomes even in early stage disease, consistent with prior reports. Stage IIB and IIC disease were associated with particularly low melanoma-specific and recurrence-free survival. This suggests that studies investigating adjuvant therapies in stage II patients may be especially valuable in acral lentiginous melanoma patients.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:We hypothesized that initial biopsy may understage acral lentiginous melanoma (ALM) and lead to undertreatment or incomplete staging. Understanding this possibility can potentially aid surgical planning and improve primary tumor staging. METHODS:A retrospective review of primary ALMs treated from 2000 to 2017 in the US Melanoma Consortium database was performed. We reviewed pathology characteristics of initial biopsy, final excision specimens, surgical margins, and sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB). RESULTS:We identified 418 primary ALMs (321 plantar, 34 palmar, 63 subungual) with initial biopsy and final pathology results. Median final thickness was 1.8 mm (range 0.0-19.0). There was a discrepancy between initial biopsy and final pathology thickness in 180 (43%) patients with a median difference of 1.6 mm (range 0.1-16.4). Final T category was increased in 132 patients (32%), including 47% of initially in situ, 32% of T1, 39% of T2, and 28% of T3 lesions. T category was more likely to be increased in subungual (46%) and palmar (38%) melanomas than plantar (28%, p = 0.01). Among patients upstaged to T2 or higher, 71% had ≤ 1-cm margins taken. Among the 27 patients upstaged to T1b or higher, 8 (30%) did not have a SLNB performed, resulting in incomplete initial staging. CONCLUSIONS:In this large series of ALMs, final T category was frequently increased on final pathology. A high index of suspicion is necessary for lesions initially in situ or T1 and consideration should be given to performing additional punch biopsies, wider margin excisions, and/or SLNB.