Disparities in treatment and survival for patients with isolated colorectal liver metastases

Liver transplant versus liver resection in patients with multifocal hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The optimal surgical option in patients with multifocal hepatocellular carcinoma (MHCC) is an area of active research. The preference varies based on geographic variations and institutional policies. We sought to determine long-term outcomes in patients with MHCC based on surgical treatment-liver transplant (LT) vs resection (LR).

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of the National Cancer Database (2004-2015) and identified patients with MHCC within Milan criteria. Patients with α-fetoprotein ≥ 1000 ng/mL and those who underwent ablation were excluded. The primary outcome measure was long-term survival in patients undergoing LT vs LR. The secondary aim of our study was to determine clinicodemographic factors associated with the receipt of LT and LR.

RESULTS

A total of 1546 patients were included, of whom 1211 received LT and 335 underwent LR. Patients who were non-Hispanic White (70.8% vs 54.9%; P < .01), privately insured (53.7% vs 36.7%; P < .01), and treated at academic centers (85.4% vs 71.6%; P < .01) were more likely to receive an LT. Multivariable Cox analysis revealed LT was associated with improved survival compared with LR (hazard ratio, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.28-0.42).

CONCLUSION

We described clinical and sociodemographic differences in LT and LR patients and found LT to be associated with a decreased mortality risk compared with LR. The study's findings should be interpreted in the context of several limitations, including the selection of MHCC criteria within Milan criteria.

Disparities in the Receipt of Systemic Treatment in Metastatic Melanoma

BACKGROUND

In 2011, immunotherapy and targeted therapy revolutionized melanoma treatment. However, inequities in their use may limit the benefits seen by certain patients.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of patients in the National Cancer Database for patients with stage IV melanoma from 2 time periods: 2004-2010 and 2016-2020, distinguishing between those who received systemic therapy and those who did not. We investigated the rates and factors associated with treatment omission. We employed Kaplan-Meier analysis to explore the impact of treatment on overall survival.

RESULTS

A total of 19,961 patients met the inclusion criteria: 7621 patients were diagnosed in 2004-2010 and 12,340 patients in 2016-2020, of whom 54.9% and 28.3% did not receive systemic treatment, respectively. The rate of "no treatment" has decreased to a plateau of ∼25% in 2020. Median overall survival was improved with treatment in both time periods (2004-2010: 8.8 vs. 5.6 mo [ P <0.05]; and 2016-2020: 25.9 vs. 4.3 mo [ P <0.05]). Nonmedical factors associated with the omission of treatment in both periods included low socioeconomic status, Medicaid or no health insurance, and treatment at low-volume centers. In the period from 2016 to 2020, patients treated at nonacademic programs were also less likely to receive treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Systemic therapies significantly improve survival for patients with metastatic melanoma, but significant disparities exist with their receipt. Local efforts are needed to ensure all patients benefit from these revolutionary treatments.

Is sentinel lymph node biopsy needed for lentigo maligna melanoma?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) is an area of debate in the management of lentigo maligna melanoma (LMM). The utility of SLNB and its prognostic value in LMM have not yet been studied with large databases.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of the National Cancer Database (2012-2020) and the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (2010-2019) database for patients with cutaneous nonmetastatic LMM with Breslow thickness >1.0 mm. Multivariable logistic regression identified factors associated with SLNB performance and sentinel lymph node (SLN) positivity. Univariable and multivariable analyses assessed overall survival (OS) and melanoma-specific survival (MSS) based on SLNB performance and SLN status.

RESULTS

Compared to other melanoma subtypes, LMM had lower rates of SLNB (66.6% vs. 80.0%-84.0%) and SLN positivity (11.3% vs. 18.6%-34.2%). Compared to patients who did not undergo SLNB, SLN status was significantly associated with improved OS in patients with SLN positive (HR = 0.64 [0.55-0.76]) and SLN negative (HR = 0.68 [0.49-0.94]), and worse MSS only in patients with positive SLN (HR = 3.93, p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The improved OS associated with SLNB likely implies surgical selection bias. Analysis of MSS confirms appropriate patient selection and suggests important prognostic value associated with SLN status. These results support continued SLNB for LMM patients according to standard guidelines.

Surgical management of 1- to 2-cm neuroendocrine tumors of the appendix: Appendectomy or right hemicolectomy?

BACKGROUND

The surgical management of 1- to 2-cm neuroendocrine tumors of the appendix is an area of debate. We analyzed the clinical outcomes of appendectomy and compared them to right hemicolectomy.

METHODS

We queried the National Cancer Database to identify patients treated for 1- to 2-cm ANETs from 2004 to 2018. Patients were stratified by surgical approach (appendectomy vs. hemicolectomy). Multivariable models were used to identify factors associated with the choice of surgical approach and the association between surgical approach and overall survival.

RESULTS

Of the 3,189 patients we included, 1,573 (49.3%) underwent right hemicolectomy and 1,616 (50.7%) appendectomy. The appendectomy rate increased from 37.7% in 2004 to 58.9% in 2018. On multivariable analysis, patients with grade 2 and 3 tumors were less likely to undergo appendectomy alone (odds ratio = 0.41, 95% confidence interval = 0.26-0.66). Longer travel distance was associated with a higher likelihood of undergoing appendectomy (odds ratio = 2.52, 95% confidence interval = 1.15-5.51). After adjusting for tumor grade, appendectomy alone had similar survival to hemicolectomy (hazard ratio = 1.03, 95% confidence interval = 0.67-1.59).

CONCLUSION

In this updated analysis of the National Cancer Database, right hemicolectomy was not associated with improved overall survival compared to appendectomy alone for 1- to 2-cm neuroendocrine tumors of the appendix. Although patients with grade 2 or 3 tumors are more likely to undergo right hemicolectomy, this procedure may not improve their treatment or overall outcome.

Adjuvant Chemotherapy Is Associated with Improved Survival for Stage III Colon Cancer When Initiated Beyond 8 Weeks

BACKGROUND

The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines recommend adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) within 6-8 weeks of surgical resection for patients with stage III colon cancer. However, postoperative complications or prolonged surgical recovery may affect the receipt of AC. The aim of this study was to assess the utility of AC for patients with prolonged postoperative recovery.

METHODS

We queried the National Cancer Database (2010-2018) for patients with resected stage III colon cancer. Patients were categorized as having either normal or prolonged length of stay (PLOS: >7 days, 75th percentile). Multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression and logistic regressions were used to identify factors associated with overall survival and receipt of AC.

RESULTS

Of the 113,387 patients included, 30,196 (26.6%) experienced PLOS. Of the 88,115 (77.7%) patients who received AC, 22,707 (25.8%) initiated AC more than 8 weeks after surgery. Patients with PLOS were less likely to receive AC (71.5% vs. 80.0%, OR: 0.72, 95%CI=0.70-0.75) and displayed inferior survival (75 vs. 116 months, HR: 1.39, 95%CI=1.36-1.43). Receipt of AC was also associated with patient factors such as high socioeconomic status, private insurance, and White race (p<0.05 for all). AC within and after 8 weeks of surgery was associated with improved survival for patients with both normal LOS and PLOS (normal LOS: <8 weeks HR: 0.56, 95% CI: 0.54-0.59, >8 weeks HR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.65-0.71; PLOS: <8 weeks HR: 0.51, 95% CI: 0.48-0.54, >8 weeks HR: 0.63, 95% CI 0.60-0.67). AC was associated with significantly improved survival if initiated up to 15 weeks postoperatively (normal LOS: HR: 0.72, 95%CI=0.61-0.85; PLOS: HR: 0.75, 95%CI=0.62-0.90), and very few patients (<3.0%) initiated AC beyond this time.

CONCLUSION

Receipt of AC for stage III colon cancer may be affected by surgical complications or otherwise prolonged recovery. Timely and even delayed AC (>8 weeks) are both associated with improved overall survival. These findings highlight the importance of delivering guideline-based systemic therapies, even after complicated surgical recovery.

Understanding Factors Leading to Surgical Attrition for "Resectable" Gastric Cancer

OBJECTIVES

We used a novel combined analysis to evaluate various factors associated with failure to surgical resection in non-metastatic gastric cancer.

METHODS

We identified factors associated with the receipt of surgery in publicly available clinical trial data for gastric cancer and in the National Cancer Database (NCDB) for patients with stages I-III gastric adenocarcinoma. Next, we evaluated variable importance in predicting the receipt of surgery in the NCDB.

RESULTS

In published clinical trial data, 10% of patients in surgery-first arms did not undergo surgery, mostly due to disease progression and 15% of patients in neoadjuvant therapy arms failed to reach surgery. Effects related to neoadjuvant administration explained the increased attrition (5%). In the NCDB, 61.7% of patients underwent definitive surgery. In a subset of NCDB patients resembling those enrolled in clinical trials (younger, healthier, and privately insured patients treated at high-volume and academic centers) the rate of surgery was 79.2%. Decreased likelihood of surgery was associated with advanced age (OR 0.97, p < 0.01), Charlson-Deyo score of 2+ (OR 0.90, p < 0.01), T4 tumors (OR 0.39, p < 0.01), N+ disease (OR 0.84, p < 0.01), low socioeconomic status (OR 0.86, p = 0.01), uninsured or on Medicaid (OR 0.58 and 0.69, respectively, p < 0.01), low facility volume (OR 0.64, p < 0.01), and non-academic cancer programs (OR 0.79, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Review of clinical trials shows attrition due to unavoidable tumor and treatment factors (~ 15%). The NCDB indicates non-medical patient and provider characteristics (i.e., age, insurance status, facility volume) associated with attrition. This combined analysis highlights specific opportunities for improving potentially curative surgery rates.