Metastasis Pattern and Survival Analysis in Primary Small Bowel Adenocarcinoma: A SEER-Based Study

Integrated budget impact model to estimate the impact of introducing selpercatinib as a tumor-agnostic treatment option for patients with RET-altered solid tumors in the US

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the potential budget impact on US third party payers (commercial or Medicare) associated with addition of selpercatinib as a tumor-agnostic treatment for patients with Rearranged during Transfection (RET)-altered solid tumors.

METHODS

An integrated budget impact model (iBIM) with 3-year (Y) time horizon was developed for 19 RET-altered tumors. It is referred to as an integrated model because it is a single model that integrated results across multiple tumor types (as opposed to tumor-specific models developed traditionally). The model estimated eligible patient populations and included tumor-specific comparator treatments for each tumor type. Estimated annual total costs (2022USD, $) included costs of drug, administration, supportive care, and toxicity. For a one-million-member plan, the number of patients with RET-altered tumors eligible for treatment, incremental total costs, and incremental per-member per-month (PMPM) costs associated with introduction of selpercatinib treatment were estimated. Uncertainty associated with model parameters was assessed using various sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

Commercial perspective estimated 11.68 patients/million with RET-altered tumors as treatment-eligible annually, of which 7.59 (Y1), 8.17 (Y2), and 8.76 (Y3) patients would be selpercatinib-treated (based on forecasted market share). The associated incremental total and PMPM costs (commercial) were estimated to be: $873,099 and $0.073 (Y1), $2,160,525 and $0.180 (Y2), and $2,561,281 and $0.213 (Y3), respectively. The Medicare perspective estimated 55.82 patients/million with RET-altered tumors as treatment-eligible annually, of which 36.29 (Y1), 39.08 (Y2), and 41.87 (Y3) patients would be selpercatinib-treated. The associated incremental total and PMPM costs (Medicare) were estimated to be: $4,447,832 and $0.371 (Y1), $11,076,422 and $0.923 (Y2), and $12,637,458 and $1.053 (Y3), respectively. One-way sensitivity analyses across both perspectives identified drug costs, selpercatinib market share, incidence of RET, and treatment duration as significant drivers of incremental costs.

CONCLUSIONS

Three-year incremental PMPM cost estimates suggest a modest impact on payer-budgets associated with introduction of tumor-agnostic selpercatinib treatment.

Prediction of distant metastasis and specific survival prediction of small intestine cancer patients with metastasis: A population-based study

BACKGROUND

Small intestine cancer (SIC) is difficult to diagnose early and presents a poor prognosis due to distant metastasis. This study aimed to develop nomograms for diagnosing and assessing the prognosis of SIC with distant metastasis.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with SIC between 2010 and 2015 were included from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results database. Univariate and multifactor analysis determined independent risk factors for distant metastasis and prognostic factors for overall and cancer-specific survival. We then constructed the corresponding three nomograms and assessed the diagnostic accuracy of the nomograms by net reclassification improvement, receiver operating characteristic curves and calibration curves, assessed the clinical utility by decision curve analysis.

RESULTS

The cohort consisted of 6697 patients, of whom 1299 had distant metastasis at diagnosis. Tstage, Nstage, age, tumor size, grade, and histological type were independent risk factors for distant metastasis. Age, histological type, T stage, N stage, grade, tumor size, whether receiving surgery, number of lymph nodes removed, and the presence of bone or lung metastases were predictors of both overall survival and cancer-specific survival. The nomograms showed excellent accuracy in predicting distant metastasis and prognosis.

CONCLUSION

Nomograms were developed and validated for SIC patients with distant metastasis, aiding physicians in making rational and personalized clinical decisions.

Characteristics and outcomes of small bowel adenocarcinoma: 14 years of experience at a single tertiary hospital in Saudi Arabia

Small bowel adenocarcinoma (SBA) is an extremely rare cancer type. In the present study, the patient characteristics and clinical outcomes of patients diagnosed and treated for SBA at a single tertiary hospital were reported. All patients diagnosed and managed between 2007 and 2020 were reviewed. Regression analysis was used to assess variables associated with the metastatic stage at diagnosis. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate survival and the log-rank test was used to determine factors associated with survival outcomes. Out of 137 cases of small bowel primary tumor, 43 consecutive patients with SBA were diagnosed with a median age of 53 years and the majority (76.7%) were males. The common initial presenting symptoms were abdominal pain (58.8%) and bowel obstruction (30.2%). The most common primary site was the duodenum (60.5%) and the majority (65.1%) were diagnosed with stage III/IV disease. Patients with a high neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) (≥0.85) were more likely to be in the metastatic stage at diagnosis (P=0.01). The 3-year overall survival (OS) rates based on stage were 100% (I), 85% (II), 53% (III) and 33.9% (IV) (P=0.001). In addition to the stage, the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (P<0.001), NLR (P<0.001), hypoalbuminemia (P=0.02) and chemotherapy in a metastatic setting (P=0.02) were prognostic factors for OS. In conclusion, NLR is a potential prognostic biomarker for a metastatic stage at diagnosis. Advanced stage, lower performance status score, low albumin level and high NLR are associated with short OS.

Survival effects of primary and metastatic surgical treatment in metastatic small intestinal tumors: A propensity score–matching study

Objective

To analyze the effects of primary tumor resection and metastatic lesion resection on the survival of metastatic small intestinal tumors.

Methods

The research subjects were patients with metastatic small bowel tumors identified from 2004 to 2016 in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Propensity score matching and Kaplan–Meier analyses were performed to analyze the effect of surgery on the prognosis.

Results

A total of 4,034 patients from the SEER database were analyzed. Both before and after the propensity score–matching analysis, the prognosis of patients who underwent primary tumor surgery and metastatic surgery was better than that of patients who did not undergo surgery; all were patients with metastatic small bowel adenocarcinoma (mSIA) or metastatic small intestinal neuroendocrine tumors (mSI-NETs) (all p < .005). Patients with mSIA and adequate lymph node dissection had a longer prognosis than mSIA patients with inadequate lymph node dissection, but this survival benefit was not present in mSI-NET patients. It made no difference in the prognosis of mSIA and mSI-NETs whether localized surgery or intestine-ectomy was performed. Patients with mSIA who underwent primary and metastatic excision plus chemotherapy had the best overall survival and cancer-specific survival rates, whereas mSI-NET patients who underwent primary and metastatic excision had the best overall survival and cancer-specific survival rates (all p < .001).

Conclusion

In these carefully selected patients, primary tumor resection and/or metastatic lesion resection significantly improved the survival rates for patients with mSIA and mSI-NETs. The mSIA patients with resectable primary tumors seemed to require a sufficient number of lymph node dissections more than the patients with well-differentiated mSI-NETs.

Localized Small Bowel Adenocarcinoma Management: Evidence Summary

Small bowel cancers are rare diseases whose prognosis is poorer than that of colon cancers. Due to disease rarity, there is little data on small bowel adenocarcinoma (SBA) treatment, and most recommendations come from expert agreements or analogies to the management of colon cancer. Although relatively high rates of local recurrence are observed for duodenal malignancies, distant metastatic relapse remains common and requires adjuvant systemic therapy. Given the similarities between SBA and colorectal cancer, radiotherapy and chemotherapy strategies used for the latter disease are frequently pursued for the former disease, specifically for tumors located in the duodenum. However, no previous randomized study has evaluated the benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy on the overall survival of SBA patients. Most previous studies on treatment outcomes and prognostic factors in this context were based on large international databases, such as the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results or the National Cancer Database. Studies are required to establish and validate prognostic and predictive markers relevant in this context to inform the use of (neo) adjuvant treatment. Among those, deficient mismatch repair tumors represent 20% of SBAs, but their impact on chemosensitivity remains unknown. Herein, we summarize the current evidence on the management of localized SBA, including future perspectives.

Outcomes of Patients with Small Intestine Adenocarcinoma in a Canadian Province: A Retrospective Multi-Center Population-Based Cohort Study

Background: Small intestine adenocarcinoma is a rare cancer. The current study aims to determine the outcomes of patients with small intestine adenocarcinoma in a Canadian province. Methods: This retrospective population-based cohort study assessed patients with small intestine adenocarcinoma who were diagnosed from 2008 to 2017 in Saskatchewan. A Cox proportional multivariate regression analysis was performed to determine the correlation between survival and exploratory factors. Results: 112 eligible patients with a median age of 73 years and M:F of 47:53 were identified. Overall, 75% had a comorbid illness, and 45% had a WHO performance status >1. Of the 112 patients, 51 (46%) had early-stage disease and 61 (54%) had advanced-stage disease. The median overall survival (mOS) was as follows: stage one, 59 months; stage two, 30 months; stage three, 20 months; and stage four, 3 months (p < 0.001). The median disease-free survival of patients with stage three disease who received adjuvant chemotherapy was 26 months (95% CI:23.1−28.9) vs. 4 months (0.0−9.1) with observation (p = 0.04). Patients who received chemotherapy for advanced disease had a mOS of 10 months (3.5−16.5) vs. 2 months (0.45−3.6) without chemotherapy (p < 0.001). In the multivariate analysis, stage four disease, hazard ratio (HR), 3.20 (1.84−5.40); WHO performance status >1, HR, 2.22 (1.42−3.45); lack of surgery, HR, 2.10 (1.25−3.50); and a neutrophil:lymphocyte ratio of >4.5, HR, 1.72 (1.10−2.71) were significantly correlated with inferior survival. Conclusions: Most patients with small intestine adenocarcinoma were diagnosed with advanced-stage disease. Advanced-stage disease, poor performance status, lack of surgery and a baseline neutrophil:lymphocyte ratio >4.5 were correlated with inferior survival.

Development of a Deep Learning Model for Malignant Small Bowel Tumors Survival: A SEER-Based Study

Background This study aims to explore a deep learning (DL) algorithm for developing a prognostic model and perform survival analyses in SBT patients. Methods The demographic and clinical features of patients with SBTs were extracted from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database. We randomly split the samples into the training set and the validation set at 7:3. Cox proportional hazards (Cox-PH) analysis and the DeepSurv algorithm were used to develop models. The performance of the Cox-PH and DeepSurv models was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic curves, calibration curves, C-statistics and decision-curve analysis (DCA). A Kaplan−Meier (K−M) survival analysis was performed for further explanation on prognostic effect of the Cox-PH model. Results The multivariate analysis demonstrated that seven variables were associated with cancer-specific survival (CSS) (all p < 0.05). The DeepSurv model showed better performance than the Cox-PH model (C-index: 0.871 vs. 0.866). The calibration curves and DCA revealed that the two models had good discrimination and calibration. Moreover, patients with ileac malignancy and N2 stage disease were not responding to surgery according to the K−M analysis. Conclusions This study reported a DeepSurv model that performed well in CSS in SBT patients. It might offer insights into future research to explore more DL algorithms in cohort studies.