1
|
Boitano TK, Virk A, Michael Straughn Jr J, Dowdy SC. Quality corner: Safely using cephalosporins in almost all patients with penicillin allergies: Mini-review and suggested protocol to improve efficacy and surgical outcomes. Gynecol Oncol Rep 2024; 53:101389. [PMID: 38623269 PMCID: PMC11016857 DOI: 10.1016/j.gore.2024.101389] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/05/2024] [Revised: 04/01/2024] [Accepted: 04/03/2024] [Indexed: 04/17/2024] Open
Abstract
Surgical site infections (SSI) are one of the most common gynecologic oncology postoperative complications and they have a significant deleterious impact on the healthcare system and in patients' outcomes. Cefazolin is the recommended antibiotic in women undergoing gynecologic surgical procedures that require that require prophylaxis. However, 10-20% of patients may report a penicillin allergy which can result in administration of a less effective antibiotic. This quality review evaluated the literature around this common perioperative issue and demonstrated that healthcare teams should consider the implementation of a protocol to safely use cefazolin in most patients with a penicillin allergy. Overall, literature shows this is a safe adjustment and would improve antimicrobial stewardship, decrease SSI rates, avoid acute kidney injury, and increase cost savings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Teresa K.L. Boitano
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA
| | - Abinash Virk
- Division of Public Health, Infectious Diseases, and Occupational Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - J. Michael Straughn Jr
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA
| | - Sean C. Dowdy
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Glaser GE, Dowdy SC. Sentinel lymph node biopsy in high-risk endometrial cancer: The dénouement. Gynecol Oncol 2024; 182:A1-A2. [PMID: 38521580 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2024.03.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/25/2024]
Affiliation(s)
- Gretchen E Glaser
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Sean C Dowdy
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN, USA; Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Healthcare Deliver, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Fader AN, Ko EM, Pollock BD, Blank SV, Cohn DE, Huh W, Shahin MS, Dowdy SC. An SGO commentary: U.S. News and World Report gynecologic oncology procedural ratings-Do they reflect high-quality care? Gynecol Oncol 2024; 182:188-191. [PMID: 38493022 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2024.01.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/14/2023] [Revised: 12/21/2023] [Accepted: 01/04/2024] [Indexed: 03/18/2024]
Affiliation(s)
- Amanda N Fader
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine Baltimore, MD, United States of America
| | - Emily M Ko
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States of America
| | - Benjamin D Pollock
- Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, United States of America
| | - Stephanie V Blank
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, United States of America
| | - David E Cohn
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, United States of America
| | - Warner Huh
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Alabama, Birmingham, AL, United States of America
| | - Mark S Shahin
- Asplundh Cancer Pavilion of Sidney Kimmel Cancer, Jefferson Abington Hospital, Willow Grove, PA, United States of America
| | - Sean C Dowdy
- Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States of America; Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States of America.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Pollock BD, Devkaran S, Dowdy SC. Missed opportunities in hospital quality measurement during the COVID-19 pandemic: a retrospective investigation of US hospitals' CMS Star Ratings and 30-day mortality during the early pandemic. BMJ Open 2024; 14:e079351. [PMID: 38316594 PMCID: PMC10860033 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-079351] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/29/2023] [Accepted: 01/08/2024] [Indexed: 02/07/2024] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES In the USA and UK, pandemic-era outcome data have been excluded from hospital rankings and pay-for-performance programmes. We assessed the relationship between US hospitals' pre-pandemic Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Overall Hospital Star ratings and early pandemic 30-day mortality among both patients with COVID and non-COVID to understand whether pre-existing structures, processes and outcomes related to quality enabled greater pandemic resiliency. DESIGN AND DATA SOURCE A retrospective, claim-based data study using the 100% Inpatient Standard Analytic File and Medicare Beneficiary Summary File including all US Medicare Fee-for-Service inpatient encounters from 1 April 2020 to 30 November 2020 linked with the CMS Hospital Star Ratings using six-digit CMS provider IDs. OUTCOME MEASURE The outcome was risk-adjusted 30-day mortality. We used multivariate logistic regression adjusting for age, sex, Elixhauser mortality index, US Census Region, month, hospital-specific January 2020 CMS Star rating (1-5 stars), COVID diagnosis (U07.1) and COVID diagnosis×CMS Star Rating interaction. RESULTS We included 4 473 390 Medicare encounters from 2533 hospitals, with 92 896 (28.2%) mortalities among COVID-19 encounters and 387 029 (9.3%) mortalities among non-COVID encounters. There was significantly greater odds of mortality as CMS Star Ratings decreased, with 18% (95% CI 15% to 22%; p<0.0001), 33% (95% CI 30% to 37%; p<0.0001), 38% (95% CI 34% to 42%; p<0.0001) and 60% (95% CI 55% to 66%; p<0.0001), greater odds of COVID mortality comparing 4-star, 3-star, 2-star and 1-star hospitals (respectively) to 5-star hospitals. Among non-COVID encounters, there were 17% (95% CI 16% to 19%; p<0.0001), 24% (95% CI 23% to 26%; p<0.0001), 32% (95% CI 30% to 33%; p<0.0001) and 40% (95% CI 38% to 42%; p<0.0001) greater odds of mortality at 4-star, 3-star, 2-star and 1-star hospitals (respectively) as compared with 5-star hospitals. CONCLUSION Our results support a need to further understand how quality outcomes were maintained during the pandemic. Valuable insights can be gained by including the reporting of risk-adjusted pandemic era hospital quality outcomes for high and low performing hospitals.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Benjamin D Pollock
- Division of Health Care Delivery Research, Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida, USA
| | - Subashnie Devkaran
- Quality & Value, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
- Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
| | - Sean C Dowdy
- Quality & Value, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
- Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Gonzalez-Bosquet J, Weroha SJ, Bakkum-Gamez JN, Weaver AL, McGree ME, Dowdy SC, Famuyide AO, Kipp BR, Halling KC, Yadav S, Couch FJ, Podratz KC. Prognostic stratification of endometrial cancers with high microsatellite instability or no specific molecular profile. Front Oncol 2023; 13:1105504. [PMID: 37287928 PMCID: PMC10242089 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2023.1105504] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/22/2022] [Accepted: 05/09/2023] [Indexed: 06/09/2023] Open
Abstract
Objective To identify high-risk disease in clinicopathologic low-risk endometrial cancer (EC) with high microsatellite instability (MSI-H) or no specific molecular profile (NSMP) and therapeutic insensitivity in clinicopathologic high-risk MSI-H/NSMP EC. Methods We searched The Cancer Genome Atlas for DNA sequencing, RNA expression, and surveillance data regarding MSI-H/NSMP EC. We used a molecular classification system of E2F1 and CCNA2 expression and sequence variations in POLE, PPP2R1A, or FBXW7 (ECPPF) to prognostically stratify MSI-H/NSMP ECs. Clinical outcomes were annotated after integrating ECPPF and sequence variations in homologous recombination (HR) genes. Results Data were available for 239 patients with EC, which included 58 MSI-H and 89 NSMP cases. ECPPF effectively stratified MSI-H/NSMP EC into distinct molecular groups with prognostic implications: molecular low risk (MLR), with low CCNA2 and E2F1 expression, and molecular high risk (MHR), with high CCNA2 and E2F1 expression and/or PPP2R1A and/or FBXW7 variants. The 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate was 43.8% in the MHR group with clinicopathologic low-risk indicators and 93.9% in the MLR group (P<.001). In the MHR group, wild-type HR genes were present in 28% of cases but in 81% of documented recurrences. The 3-year DFS rate in patients with MSI-H/NSMP EC with clinicopathologic high-risk indicators was significantly higher in the MLR (94.1%) and MHR/HR variant gene (88.9%) groups than in the MHR/HR wild-type gene group (50.3%, P<.001). Conclusion ECPPF may resolve prognostic challenges for MSI-H/NSMP EC by identifying occult high-risk disease in EC with clinicopathologic low-risk indicators and therapeutic insensitivity in EC with clinicopathologic high-risk indicators.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jesus Gonzalez-Bosquet
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, United States
| | - S. John Weroha
- Division of Medical Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States
| | | | - Amy L. Weaver
- Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States
| | - Michaela E. McGree
- Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States
| | - Sean C. Dowdy
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States
| | - Abimbola O. Famuyide
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States
| | - Benjamin R. Kipp
- Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States
| | - Kevin C. Halling
- Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States
| | - Siddhartha Yadav
- Division of Medical Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States
| | - Fergus J. Couch
- Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States
- Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States
| | - Karl C. Podratz
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Nelson G, Dowdy SC. Surgeon-administered transversus abdominis plane block in gynecologic surgery-is it time to tap out? Am J Obstet Gynecol 2023; 228:491-493. [PMID: 36967370 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2023.03.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/23/2023] [Accepted: 03/01/2023] [Indexed: 05/01/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Gregg Nelson
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
| | - Sean C Dowdy
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Nelson G, Fotopoulou C, Taylor J, Glaser G, Bakkum-Gamez J, Meyer LA, Stone R, Mena G, Elias KM, Altman AD, Bisch SP, Ramirez PT, Dowdy SC. Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS®) society guidelines for gynecologic oncology: Addressing implementation challenges - 2023 update. Gynecol Oncol 2023; 173:58-67. [PMID: 37086524 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2023.04.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 25.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/27/2023] [Revised: 04/11/2023] [Accepted: 04/13/2023] [Indexed: 04/24/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Despite evidence supporting its use, many Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) recommendations remain poorly adhered to and barriers to ERAS implementation persist. In this second updated ERAS® Society guideline, a consensus for optimal perioperative care in gynecologic oncology surgery is presented, with a specific emphasis on implementation challenges. METHODS Based on the gaps identified by clinician stakeholder groups, nine implementation challenge topics were prioritized for review. A database search of publications using Embase and PubMed was performed (2018-2023). Studies on each topic were selected with emphasis on meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials, and large prospective cohort studies. These studies were then reviewed and graded by an international panel according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. RESULTS All recommendations on ERAS implementation challenge topics are based on best available evidence. The level of evidence for each item is presented accordingly. CONCLUSIONS The updated evidence base and recommendations for stakeholder derived ERAS implementation challenges in gynecologic oncology are presented by the ERAS® Society in this consensus review.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- G Nelson
- Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
| | - C Fotopoulou
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - J Taylor
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - G Glaser
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - J Bakkum-Gamez
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - L A Meyer
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - R Stone
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - G Mena
- Department of Anesthesiology, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - K M Elias
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Reproductive Biology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - A D Altman
- Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
| | - S P Bisch
- Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - P T Ramirez
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Houston Methodist Hospital, Houston, TX, USA
| | - S C Dowdy
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN, USA
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Pollock BD, Dowdy SC. Hospital quality reporting in the pandemic era: to what extent did hospitals' COVID-19 census burdens impact 30-day mortality among non-COVID Medicare beneficiaries? BMJ Open Qual 2023; 12:bmjoq-2023-002269. [PMID: 36944449 PMCID: PMC10032135 DOI: 10.1136/bmjoq-2023-002269] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/17/2023] [Accepted: 03/10/2023] [Indexed: 03/23/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Highly visible hospital quality reporting stakeholders in the USA such as the US News & World Report (USNWR) and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) play an important health systems role via their transparent public reporting of hospital outcomes and performance. However, during the pandemic, many such quality measurement stakeholders and pay-for-performance programmes in the USA and Europe have eschewed the traditional risk adjustment paradigm, instead choosing to pre-emptively exclude months or years of pandemic era performance data due largely to hospitals' perceived COVID-19 burdens. These data exclusions may lead patients to draw misleading conclusions about where to seek care, while also masking genuine improvements or deteriorations in hospital quality that may have occurred during the pandemic. Here, we assessed to what extent hospitals' COVID-19 burdens (proportion of hospitalised patients with COVID-19) were associated with their non-COVID 30-day mortality rates from March through November 2020 to inform whether inclusion of pandemic-era data may still be appropriate. DESIGN This was a retrospective cohort study using the 100% CMS Inpatient Standard Analytic File and Master Beneficiary Summary File to include all US Medicare inpatient encounters with admission dates from 1 April 2020 through 30 November 2020, excluding COVID-19 encounters. Using linear regression, we modelled the association between hospitals' COVID-19 proportions and observed/expected (O/E) ratios, testing whether the relationship was non-linear. We calculated alternative hospital O/E ratios after selective pandemic data exclusions mirroring the USNWR data exclusion methodology. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS We analysed 4 182 226 consecutive Medicare inpatient encounters from across 2601 US hospitals. RESULTS The association between hospital COVID-19 proportion and non-COVID O/E 30-day mortality was statistically significant (p<0.0001), but weakly correlated (r2=0.06). The median (IQR) pairwise relative difference in hospital O/E ratios comparing the alternative analysis with the original analysis was +3.7% (-2.5%, +6.7%), with 1908/2571 (74.2%) of hospitals having relative differences within ±10%. CONCLUSIONS For non-COVID patient outcomes such as mortality, evidence-based inclusion of pandemic-era data is methodologically plausible and must be explored rather than exclusion of months or years of relevant patient outcomes data.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Benjamin D Pollock
- Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
| | - Sean C Dowdy
- Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
- Department of Quality, Experience, and Affordability, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Pollock BD, Dykhoff HJ, Breeher LE, Mabry TM, Franco PM, Noe KH, Ramar K, Young T, Dowdy SC. A Multisite Assessment of Inpatient Safety Event Rates During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic. Mayo Clin Proc Innov Qual Outcomes 2023; 7:51-57. [PMID: 36590139 PMCID: PMC9790867 DOI: 10.1016/j.mayocpiqo.2022.12.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/12/2022] [Revised: 12/06/2022] [Accepted: 12/15/2022] [Indexed: 12/27/2022] Open
Abstract
To date, there has been a notable lack of peer-reviewed or publicly available data documenting rates of hospital quality outcomes and patient safety events during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic era. The dearth of evidence is perhaps related to the US health care system triaging resources toward patient care and away from reporting and research and also reflects that data used in publicly reported hospital quality rankings and ratings typically lag 2-5 years. At our institution, a learning health system assessment is underway to evaluate how patient safety was affected by the pandemic. Here we share and discuss early findings, noting the limitations of self-reported safety event reporting, and suggest the need for further widespread investigations at other US hospitals. During the 2-year study period from January 1, 2020, through December 31, 2021 across 3 large US academic medical centers at our institution, we documented an overall rate of 25.8 safety events per 1000 inpatient days. The rate of events meeting "harm" criteria was 12.4 per 1000 inpatient days, the rate of nonharm events was 11.1 per 1000 inpatient days, and the fall rate was 2.3 per 1000 inpatient days. This descriptive exploratory analysis suggests that patient safety event rates at our institution did not increase over the course of the pandemic. However, increasing health care worker absences were nonlinearly and strongly associated with patient safety event rates, which raises questions regarding the mechanisms by which patient safety event rates may be affected by staff absences during pandemic peaks.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Benjamin D. Pollock
- Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Division of Health Care Delivery Research, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL,Correspondence: Address to Benjamin D. Pollock, PhD, MSPH, Health Services Research, Mayo Clinic—Stabile 750N, 4500 San Pablo Road, Jacksonville, FL 32224
| | - Hayley J. Dykhoff
- Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Division of Health Care Delivery Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | - Laura E. Breeher
- Division of Preventive, Occupational, and Aerospace Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | - Tad M. Mabry
- Quality, Experience, & Affordability, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | | | | | - Kannan Ramar
- Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Center for Sleep Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | - Timothy Young
- Quality, Experience, & Affordability, Mayo Clinic, Eau Claire, WI
| | - Sean C. Dowdy
- Quality, Experience, & Affordability, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Pollock BD, Meier SK, Snaza KS, Shah ND, Dowdy SC, Ting HH. A Simple and Interpretable Mortality-Based Value Metric for Condition- or Procedure-Specific Hospital Performance Reporting. Mayo Clin Proc Innov Qual Outcomes 2022; 7:1-8. [PMID: 36505980 PMCID: PMC9727624 DOI: 10.1016/j.mayocpiqo.2022.10.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/10/2022] Open
Abstract
Objective To develop a simple, interpretable value metric (VM) to assess the value of care of hospitals for specific procedures or conditions by operationalizing the value equation: Value = Quality/Cost. Patients and Methods The present study was conducted on a retrospective cohort from 2015 to 2018 drawn from the 100% US sample of Medicare inpatient claims. The final cohort comprised 637,341 consecutive inpatient encounters with a cancer-related Medicare Severity-Diagnosis Related Grouping and 13,307 consecutive inpatient encounters with the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision or International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision procedure code for partial or total gastrectomy. Claims-based demographic and clinical variables were used for risk adjustment, including age, sex, year, dual eligibility, reason for Medicare entitlement, and binary indicators for each of the Elixhauser comorbidities used in the Elixhauser mortality index. Risk-adjusted 30-day mortality and risk-adjusted encounter-specific costs were combined to form the VM, which was calculated as follows: number needed to treat = 1/(Mortalitynational - Mortalityhospital), and VM = number needed to treat × risk-adjusted cost per encounter. Results Among hospitals with better-than-average 30-day cancer mortality rates, the cost to prevent 1 excess 30-day mortality for an inpatient cancer encounter ranged from $71,000 (best value) to $1.4 billion (worst value), with a median value of $543,000. Among hospitals with better-than-average 30-day gastrectomy mortality rates, the cost to prevent 1 excess 30-day mortality for an inpatient gastrectomy encounter ranged from $710,000 (best value) to $95 million (worst value), with a median value of $1.8 million. Conclusion This simple VM may have utility for interpretable reporting of hospitals' value of care for specific conditions or procedures. We found substantial inter- and intrahospital variation in value when defined as the costs of preventing 1 excess cancer or gastrectomy mortality compared with the national average, implying that hospitals with similar quality of care may differ widely in the value of that care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Benjamin D. Pollock
- Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida,Correspondence: Address to Benjamin D. Pollock, PhD, MSPH, Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic – Stabile 750N, 4500 San Pablo Road, Jacksonville, FL 32224.
| | - Sarah K. Meier
- Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Kari S. Snaza
- Enterprise Quality, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | | | - Sean C. Dowdy
- Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota,Enterprise Quality, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | | |
Collapse
|
11
|
Pollock BD, Poe JD, Dowdy SC. Translating the Leapfrog Safety Letter Grade to a Percentile: Unlock Your Hospital's Door to Quality Improvement With This Easy "Quality Hack". J Patient Saf 2022; 18:702. [PMID: 36170587 DOI: 10.1097/pts.0000000000000994] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
|
12
|
Pollock BD, Franco PM, Noe KH, Poe JD, Limper AH, Farrugia G, Ting HH, Dowdy SC. A Learning Health System Approach to Hospital Quality Performance Benchmarking: The Composite Hospital Quality Index. Am J Med Qual 2022; 37:444-448. [PMID: 35706102 DOI: 10.1097/jmq.0000000000000069] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
US hospital quality rankings and ratings use disparate methodologies and are weakly correlated. This causes confusion for patients and hospital quality staff. At the authors' institution, a Composite Hospital Quality Index (CHQI) was developed to combine hospital quality ratings. This approach is described and a calculator is shared here for other health systems to explore their performance. Among the US News and World Report Top 50 Hospitals, hospital-specific numeric summary scores were aggregated from the 2021 Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Hospital Overall Star Rating, the Spring 2021 Leapfrog Safety Grade, and the April 2021 Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems Star Rating. The CHQI is the hospital-specific sum of the national percentile-rankings across these 3 ratings. In this example, mean (SD) percentiles were as follows: CMS Stars 74 (19), Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems 63 (19), Leapfrog 65 (24), with mean (SD) CHQI of 202 (49). The CHQI is used at the authors' institution to identify improvement opportunities and ensure that high-quality care is delivered across the health system.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Benjamin D Pollock
- Division of Health Care Delivery Research, Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL
- Department of Quality, Experience, and Affordability, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL
| | - Pablo Moreno Franco
- Department of Quality, Experience, and Affordability, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL
- Department of Critical Care, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL
| | | | - John D Poe
- Department of Quality, Experience, and Affordability, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
- Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | - Andrew H Limper
- Department of Quality, Experience, and Affordability, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
- Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
- Department of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | | | - Henry H Ting
- Global Health & Wellbeing, Delta Air Lines, Atlanta, GA
- Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN
| | - Sean C Dowdy
- Department of Quality, Experience, and Affordability, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
- Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Yao X, Paulson M, Maniaci MJ, Dunn AN, Nelson CR, Behnken EM, Hart MS, Sangaralingham LR, Inselman SA, Lampman MA, Dunlay SM, Dowdy SC, Habermann EB. Effect of hospital-at-home vs. traditional brick-and-mortar hospital care in acutely ill adults: study protocol for a pragmatic randomized controlled trial. Trials 2022; 23:503. [PMID: 35710450 PMCID: PMC9201794 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-022-06430-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/04/2022] [Accepted: 05/26/2022] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Delivering acute hospital care to patients at home might reduce costs and improve patient experience. Mayo Clinic's Advanced Care at Home (ACH) program is a novel virtual hybrid model of "Hospital at Home." This pragmatic randomized controlled non-inferiority trial aims to compare two acute care delivery models: ACH vs. traditional brick-and-mortar hospital care in acutely ill patients. METHODS We aim to enroll 360 acutely ill adult patients (≥18 years) who are admitted to three hospitals in Arizona, Florida, and Wisconsin, two of which are academic medical centers and one is a community-based practice. The eligibility criteria will follow what is used in routine practice determined by local clinical teams, including clinical stability, social stability, health insurance plans, and zip codes. Patients will be randomized 1:1 to ACH or traditional inpatient care, stratified by site. The primary outcome is a composite outcome of all-cause mortality and 30-day readmission. Secondary outcomes include individual outcomes in the composite endpoint, fall with injury, medication errors, emergency room visit, transfer to intensive care unit (ICU), cost, the number of days alive out of hospital, and patient-reported quality of life. A mixed-methods study will be conducted with patients, clinicians, and other staff to investigate their experience. DISCUSSION The pragmatic trial will examine a novel virtual hybrid model for delivering high-acuity medical care at home. The findings will inform patient selection and future large-scale implementation. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05212077. Registered on 27 January 2022.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Xiaoxi Yao
- Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA. .,Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
| | - Margaret Paulson
- Division of Hospital Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic Health Systems, Eau Claire, WI, USA
| | - Michael J Maniaci
- Division of Hospital Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, USA
| | - Ajani N Dunn
- Administrative Operations, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, USA
| | - Chad R Nelson
- Division of Hospital Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA
| | - Emma M Behnken
- Knowledge and Evaluation Research Unit, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Melissa S Hart
- Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA
| | - Lindsey R Sangaralingham
- Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA
| | - Shealeigh A Inselman
- Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA
| | - Michelle A Lampman
- Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA
| | - Shannon M Dunlay
- Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA.,Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Sean C Dowdy
- Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA
| | - Elizabeth B Habermann
- Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Bhakta S, Pollock BD, Erben YM, Edwards MA, Noe KH, Dowdy SC, Moreno Franco P, Cowart JB. The association of acute COVID-19 infection with Patient Safety Indicator-12 events in a multisite healthcare system. J Hosp Med 2022; 17:350-357. [PMID: 35527519 PMCID: PMC9347852 DOI: 10.1002/jhm.12832] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/29/2021] [Revised: 03/27/2022] [Accepted: 04/05/2022] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Patient Safety Indicator (PSI)-12, a hospital quality measure designed by Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) to capture potentially preventable adverse events, captures perioperative venous thromboembolism (VTE). It is unclear how COVID-19 has affected PSI-12 performance. OBJECTIVE We sought to compare the cumulative incidence of PSI-12 in patients with and without acute COVID-19 infection. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This was a retrospective cohort study including PSI-12-eligible events at three Mayo Clinic medical centers (4/1/2020-10/5/2021). EXPOSURE, MAIN OUTCOMES, AND MEASURES We compared the unadjusted rate and adjusted risk ratio (aRR) for PSI-12 events among patients with and without COVID-19 infection using Fisher's exact χ2 test and the AHRQ risk-adjustment software, respectively. We summarized the clinical outcomes of COVID-19 patients with a PSI-12 event. RESULTS Our cohort included 50,400 consecutive hospitalizations. Rates of PSI-12 events were significantly higher among patients with acute COVID-19 infection (8/257 [3.11%; 95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.35%-6.04%]) compared to patients without COVID-19 (210/50,143 [0.42%; 95% CI, 0.36%-0.48%]) with a PSI-12 event during the encounter (p < .001). The risk-adjusted rate of PSI-12 was significantly higher in patients with acute COVID-19 infection (1.50% vs. 0.38%; aRR, 3.90; 95% CI, 2.12-7.17; p < .001). All COVID-19 patients with PSI-12 events had severe disease and 4 died. The most common procedure was tracheostomy (75%); the mean (SD) days from surgical procedure to VTE were 0.12 (7.32) days. CONCLUSION Patients with acute COVID-19 infection are at higher risk for PSI-12. The present definition of PSI-12 does not account for COVID-19. This may impact hospitals' quality performance if COVID-19 infection is not accounted for by exclusion or risk adjustment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shivang Bhakta
- Department of Critical Care MedicineMayo ClinicJacksonvilleFloridaUSA
| | - Benjamin D. Pollock
- Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care DeliveryMayo ClinicJacksonvilleFloridaUSA
- Department of Quality, Experience, & AffordabilityMayo ClinicJacksonvilleFloridaUSA
| | - Young M. Erben
- Division of Vascular and Endovascular SurgeryMayo ClinicJacksonvilleFloridaUSA
| | | | - Katherine H. Noe
- Department of Quality, Experience, & AffordabilityMayo ClinicScottsdaleArizonaUSA
| | - Sean C. Dowdy
- Department of Quality, Experience, & AffordabilityMayo ClinicRochesterMinnesotaUSA
- Robert D. Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care DeliveryMayo ClinicRochesterMinnesotaUSA
| | - Pablo Moreno Franco
- Department of Critical Care MedicineMayo ClinicJacksonvilleFloridaUSA
- Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care DeliveryMayo ClinicJacksonvilleFloridaUSA
- Department of Quality, Experience, & AffordabilityMayo ClinicJacksonvilleFloridaUSA
| | - Jennifer B. Cowart
- Department of Quality, Experience, & AffordabilityMayo ClinicJacksonvilleFloridaUSA
- Division of Hospital Internal MedicineMayo ClinicJacksonvilleFloridaUSA
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Cima RR, Bearden BA, Kollengode A, Nienow JM, Weisbrod CA, Dowdy SC, Amstutz GJ, Narr BJ. Avoiding Retained Surgical Items at an Academic Medical Center: Sustainability of a Surgical Quality Improvement Project. Am J Med Qual 2022; 37:236-245. [PMID: 34803134 DOI: 10.1097/jmq.0000000000000030] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
Unintentionally retained surgical items (RSIs) are a serious complication representing a surgical "Never" event. The authors previously reported the process and significant improvement over a 3-year multiphased quality improvement RSI reduction effort that included sponge-counting technology. Herein, they report the sustainability of that effort over the decade following the formal quality improvement project conclusion. This retrospective analysis includes descriptive and qualitative data collected during RSI event root cause analysis. Between January 2009 and December 2019, 640 889 operations were performed with 24 RSIs reported. The resulting RSI rate of 1 per 26 704 operations represent a 486% performance improvement compared to the preintervention rate of 1 per 5500 operations. The interval, in days, between RSI events increased to 160 from 26 during the preintervention phase. Cotton sponges were the most retained RSI despite the use of sponge-counting technology. A significant and sustained reduction in RSI is possible after designing a sustainable comprehensive multidisciplinary effort.
Collapse
|
16
|
Wethington SL, Wahner-Hendrickson AE, Swisher EM, Kaufmann SH, Karlan BY, Fader AN, Dowdy SC. PARP inhibitor maintenance for primary ovarian cancer - A missed opportunity for precision medicine. Gynecol Oncol 2021; 163:11-13. [PMID: 34391577 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2021.08.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/22/2021] [Accepted: 08/02/2021] [Indexed: 10/20/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Stephanie L Wethington
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, The Kelly Gynecologic Oncology Service, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | | | - Elizabeth M Swisher
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | | | - Beth Y Karlan
- Women's Cancer Program, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California, USA
| | - Amanda Nickles Fader
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, The Kelly Gynecologic Oncology Service, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Sean C Dowdy
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Storlie CB, Pollock BD, Rojas RL, Demuth GO, Johnson PW, Wilson PM, Heinzen EP, Liu H, Carter RE, Habermann EB, Kor DJ, Neville MR, Limper AH, Noe KH, Bydon M, Franco PM, Sampathkumar P, Shah ND, Dunlay SM, Dowdy SC. Quantifying the Importance of COVID-19 Vaccination to Our Future Outlook. Mayo Clin Proc 2021; 96:1890-1895. [PMID: 34218862 PMCID: PMC8075811 DOI: 10.1016/j.mayocp.2021.04.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/09/2021] [Accepted: 04/14/2021] [Indexed: 11/23/2022]
Abstract
Predictive models have played a critical role in local, national, and international response to the COVID-19 pandemic. In the United States, health care systems and governmental agencies have relied on several models, such as the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, Youyang Gu (YYG), Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ensemble, to predict short- and long-term trends in disease activity. The Mayo Clinic Bayesian SIR model, recently made publicly available, has informed Mayo Clinic practice leadership at all sites across the United States and has been shared with Minnesota governmental leadership to help inform critical decisions during the past year. One key to the accuracy of the Mayo Clinic model is its ability to adapt to the constantly changing dynamics of the pandemic and uncertainties of human behavior, such as changes in the rate of contact among the population over time and by geographic location and now new virus variants. The Mayo Clinic model can also be used to forecast COVID-19 trends in different hypothetical worlds in which no vaccine is available, vaccinations are no longer being accepted from this point forward, and 75% of the population is already vaccinated. Surveys indicate that half of American adults are hesitant to receive a COVID-19 vaccine, and lack of understanding of the benefits of vaccination is an important barrier to use. The focus of this paper is to illustrate the stark contrast between these 3 scenarios and to demonstrate, mathematically, the benefit of high vaccine uptake on the future course of the pandemic.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Curtis B Storlie
- Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.
| | | | - Ricardo L Rojas
- Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | - Gabriel O Demuth
- Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | | | - Patrick M Wilson
- Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Robert D. Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | - Ethan P Heinzen
- Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | - Hongfang Liu
- Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | - Rickey E Carter
- Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | - Elizabeth B Habermann
- Division of Health Care Policy and Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Robert D. Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | - Daryl J Kor
- Department of Anesthesiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Division of Critical Care Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | | | | | | | - Mohamad Bydon
- Department of Neurologic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | | | | | - Nilay D Shah
- Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Department of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | - Shannon M Dunlay
- Department of Gynecologic Surgery, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN
| | - Sean C Dowdy
- Department of Cardiovascular Diseases, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Toboni MD, Crane EK, Brown J, Shushkevich A, Chiang S, Slomovitz BM, Levine DA, Dowdy SC, Klopp A, Powell MA, Thaker PH. Uterine carcinosarcomas: From pathology to practice. Gynecol Oncol 2021; 162:235-241. [PMID: 34030871 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2021.05.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/13/2021] [Accepted: 05/05/2021] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Uterine carcinosarcoma (UCS) is a rare but aggressive cancer. In early-stage disease data guiding treatment is sparse. The purpose of this review is to summarize the findings from the 2019 NRG oncology group summer symposium meeting as well as a review of the current literature, with a particular focus on molecular targets, ongoing clinical trials, and treatment of early and advanced/recurrent disease. METHODS A combination of expert presentations and an extensive literature search was undertaken to summarize the literature in this review. MEDLINE was queried for peer-reviewed publications on UCS. This search was not limited by year or study design, but was limited to English language publications. ClinicalTrials.gov was queried for ongoing trials in UCS. RESULTS UCS is a rare cancer that is biphasic, with the carcinomatous component driving its aggressive nature. Level 3 evidence regarding early stage disease is lacking, but retrospective data suggests adjuvant therapy is warranted. The recent results of GOG 261 have contributed valuable information towards treatment strategy, including use of paclitaxel and carboplatin for UCS. Clinical trials are ongoing to investigate new targeted agents in UCS. CONCLUSION Ongoing endometrial cancer clinical trials now include UCS patients. In combination with advances in molecular profiling, this will provide patients with UCS improved therapeutic options. Until that time, surgical resection and traditional cytotoxic chemotherapy remains standard of care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael D Toboni
- Washington University School of Medicine and Siteman Cancer Center, St. Louis, MO, United States.
| | - Erin K Crane
- Levine Cancer Institute, Atrium Health, Charlotte, NC, United States
| | - Jubilee Brown
- Levine Cancer Institute, Atrium Health, Charlotte, NC, United States
| | | | - Sarah Chiang
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States
| | | | - Douglas A Levine
- Perlmutter Cancer Center, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, United States
| | | | - Ann Klopp
- The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Matthew A Powell
- Washington University School of Medicine and Siteman Cancer Center, St. Louis, MO, United States
| | - Premal H Thaker
- Washington University School of Medicine and Siteman Cancer Center, St. Louis, MO, United States
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Gonzalez-Bosquet J, Bakkum-Gamez JN, Weaver AL, McGree ME, Dowdy SC, Famuyide AO, Kipp BR, Halling KC, Couch FJ, Podratz KC. PP2A and E3 ubiquitin ligase deficiencies: Seminal biological drivers in endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2021; 162:182-189. [PMID: 33867147 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2021.04.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/05/2021] [Accepted: 04/07/2021] [Indexed: 12/31/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE PI3K-AKT pathway mutations initiate a kinase cascade that characterizes endometrial cancer (EC). As kinases seldom cause oncogenic transformation without dysregulation of antagonistic phosphatases, pivotal interactions governing this pathway were explored and correlated with clinical outcomes. METHODS After exclusion of patients with POLE mutations from The Cancer Genome Atlas EC cohort with endometrioid or serous EC, the study population was 209 patients with DNA sequencing, quantitative gene-specific RNA expression, copy number variation (CNV), and surveillance data available. Extracted data were annotated and integrated. RESULTS A PIK3CA, PTEN, or PIK3R1 mutant (-mu) was present in 83% of patients; 57% harbored more than 1 mutation without adversely impacting progression-free survival (PFS) (P = .10). PIK3CA CNV of at least 1.1 (CNV high [-H]) was detected in 26% and linked to TP53-mu and CIP2A expression (P < .001) but was not associated with PFS (P = .24). PIK3CA expression was significantly different between those with CIP2A-H and CIP2A low (-L) expression (the endogenous inhibitor of protein phosphatase 2A [PP2A]), when stratified by PIK3CA mutational status or by PIK3CA CNV-H and CNV-L (all P < .01). CIP2A-H or PPP2R1A-mu mitigates PP2A kinase dephosphorylation, and FBXW7-mu nullifies E3 ubiquitin ligase (E3UL) oncoprotein degradation. CIP2A-H and PPP2R1A-mu (PP2A impairment) and FBXW7-mu (E3UL impairment) were associated with compromised PFS (P < .001) and were prognostically discriminatory for PIK3CA-mu and PIK3CA CNV-H tumors (P < .001). Among documented recurrences, 84% were associated with impaired PP2A (75%) and/or E3UL (20%). CONCLUSION PP2A and E3UL deficiencies are seminal biological drivers in EC independent of PIK3CA-mu, PTEN-mu, and PIK3R1-mu and PIK3CA CNV.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jesus Gonzalez-Bosquet
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, United States of America
| | - Jamie N Bakkum-Gamez
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States of America; Mayo Clinic Cancer Center, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States of America
| | - Amy L Weaver
- Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States of America
| | - Michaela E McGree
- Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States of America
| | - Sean C Dowdy
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States of America; Mayo Clinic Cancer Center, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States of America
| | - Abimbola O Famuyide
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States of America
| | - Benjamin R Kipp
- Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States of America; Department of Clinical Genomics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States of America
| | - Kevin C Halling
- Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States of America; Department of Clinical Genomics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States of America
| | - Fergus J Couch
- Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States of America; Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States of America
| | - Karl C Podratz
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States of America.
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Levy N, Quinlan J, El-Boghdadly K, Fawcett WJ, Agarwal V, Bastable RB, Cox FJ, de Boer HD, Dowdy SC, Hattingh K, Knaggs RD, Mariano ER, Pelosi P, Scott MJ, Lobo DN, Macintyre PE. An international multidisciplinary consensus statement on the prevention of opioid-related harm in adult surgical patients. Anaesthesia 2021; 76:520-536. [PMID: 33027841 DOI: 10.1111/anae.15262] [Citation(s) in RCA: 79] [Impact Index Per Article: 26.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 08/29/2020] [Indexed: 01/01/2023]
Abstract
This international multidisciplinary consensus statement was developed to provide balanced guidance on the safe peri-operative use of opioids in adults. An international panel of healthcare professionals evaluated the literature relating to postoperative opioid-related harm, including persistent postoperative opioid use; opioid-induced ventilatory impairment; non-medical opioid use; opioid diversion and dependence; and driving under the influence of prescription opioids. Recommended strategies to reduce harm include pre-operative assessment of the risk of persistent postoperative opioid use; use of an assessment of patient function rather than unidimensional pain scores alone to guide adequacy of analgesia; avoidance of long-acting (modified-release and transdermal patches) opioid formulations and combination analgesics; limiting the number of tablets prescribed at discharge; providing deprescribing advice; avoidance of automatic prescription refills; safe disposal of unused medicines; reducing the risk of opioid diversion; and better education of healthcare professionals, patients and carers. This consensus statement provides a framework for better prescribing practices that could help reduce the risk of postoperative opioid-related harm in adults.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- N Levy
- Department of Anaesthesia and Peri-operative Medicine, West Suffolk Hospital, Bury St. Edmunds, UK
| | - J Quinlan
- Nuffield Department of Anaesthetics, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK
| | - K El-Boghdadly
- Department of Anaesthesia, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
- King's College London, London, UK
| | - W J Fawcett
- Department of Anaesthesia and Pain Medicine, Royal Surrey County Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Guildford, UK
| | - V Agarwal
- Department of Anaesthesia, Critical Care and Pain, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
| | | | - F J Cox
- Pain Management Service, Critical Care and Anaesthesia, Royal Brompton and Harefield NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - H D de Boer
- Department of Anaesthesiology, Pain Medicine and Procedural Sedation and Analgesia, Martini General Hospital Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - S C Dowdy
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - K Hattingh
- Bendigo Health, Bendigo, Victoria, Australia
| | - R D Knaggs
- School of Pharmacy, Pain Centre Versus Arthritis, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| | - E R Mariano
- Department of Anesthesiology, Peri-operative and Pain Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
- Anesthesiology and Peri-operative Care Service, Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, CA, USA
| | - P Pelosi
- Department of Surgical Sciences and Integrated Diagnostics, University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy
- IRCCS for Oncology and Neurosciences, San Martino Policlinico Hospital, Genoa, Italy
| | - M J Scott
- Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - D N Lobo
- Gastrointestinal Surgery, Nottingham Digestive Diseases Centre, National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Nottingham Biomedical Research Centre, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust and University of Nottingham, Queen's Medical Centre, Nottingham, UK
- David Greenfield Metabolic Physiology Unit, MRC Versus Arthritis Centre for Musculoskeletal Ageing Research, School of Life Sciences, University of Nottingham, Queen's Medical Centre, Nottingham, UK
| | - P E Macintyre
- Department of Anaesthesia, Pain Medicine and Hyperbaric Medicine, Royal Adelaide Hospital and University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Kalogera E, Nelson G, Dowdy SC. Enhanced Recovery in Gynecologic Surgery. J Gynecol Surg 2021. [DOI: 10.1089/gyn.2021.0007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
| | - Gregg Nelson
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Tom Baker Cancer Centre, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Sean C. Dowdy
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Pollock BD, Carter RE, Dowdy SC, Dunlay SM, Habermann EB, Kor DJ, Limper AH, Liu H, Franco PM, Neville MR, Noe KH, Poe JD, Sampathkumar P, Storlie CB, Ting HH, Shah ND. Deployment of an Interdisciplinary Predictive Analytics Task Force to Inform Hospital Operational Decision-Making During the COVID-19 Pandemic. Mayo Clin Proc 2021; 96:690-698. [PMID: 33673920 PMCID: PMC7833949 DOI: 10.1016/j.mayocp.2020.12.019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/12/2020] [Revised: 12/11/2020] [Accepted: 12/23/2020] [Indexed: 11/21/2022]
Abstract
In March 2020, our institution developed an interdisciplinary predictive analytics task force to provide coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) hospital census forecasting to help clinical leaders understand the potential impacts on hospital operations. As the situation unfolded into a pandemic, our task force provided predictive insights through a structured set of visualizations and key messages that have helped the practice to anticipate and react to changing operational needs and opportunities. The framework shared here for the deployment of a COVID-19 predictive analytics task force could be adapted for effective implementation at other institutions to provide evidence-based messaging for operational decision-making. For hospitals without such a structure, immediate consideration may be warranted in light of the devastating COVID-19 third-wave which has arrived for winter 2020-2021.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Benjamin D Pollock
- Department of Quality, Experience, and Affordability, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL; Department of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ.
| | - Rickey E Carter
- Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL; Department of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ
| | - Sean C Dowdy
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL; Department of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ
| | - Shannon M Dunlay
- Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Department of Health Sciences Research and Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | - Elizabeth B Habermann
- Department of Health Sciences Research and Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | - Daryl J Kor
- Department of Data and Analytics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | - Andrew H Limper
- Department of Health Sciences Research and Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | - Hongfang Liu
- Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | - Pablo Moreno Franco
- Department of Quality, Experience, and Affordability, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Department of Critical Care Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL
| | - Matthew R Neville
- Department of Health Sciences Research and Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | - Katherine H Noe
- Department of Quality, Experience, and Affordability, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Department of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ
| | - John D Poe
- Department of Quality, Experience, and Affordability, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | | | - Curtis B Storlie
- Department of Health Sciences Research and Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | - Henry H Ting
- Department of Quality, Experience, and Affordability, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | - Nilay D Shah
- Department of Health Sciences Research and Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Sisodia RC, Dewdney SB, Fader AN, Wethington SL, Melamed A, Von Gruenigen VE, Zivanovic O, Carter J, Cohn DE, Huh W, Wenzel L, Doll K, Cella D, Dowdy SC. Patient reported outcomes measures in gynecologic oncology: A primer for clinical use, part I. Gynecol Oncol 2021; 158:194-200. [PMID: 32580886 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2020.04.696] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/07/2020] [Accepted: 04/18/2020] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Rachel C Sisodia
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Massachusetts General Hospital, United States of America.
| | - Summer B Dewdney
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL, United States of America
| | - Amanda N Fader
- Kelly Gynecologic Oncology Service, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, United States of America
| | - Stephanie L Wethington
- Kelly Gynecologic Oncology Service, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, United States of America
| | - Alexander Melamed
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Columbia University Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, NY, United States of America
| | - Vivian E Von Gruenigen
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospitals of Cleveland, United States of America
| | - Oliver Zivanovic
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 300 East 66th Street, 8th Floor, New York, NY, 10065, United States of America
| | - Jeanne Carter
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 300 East 66th Street, 8th Floor, New York, NY, 10065, United States of America
| | - David E Cohn
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH 43210, United States of America
| | - Warner Huh
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University and Alabama, Birmingham, AL, United States of America
| | - Lari Wenzel
- Universtiy of California, Irvine, United States of America
| | - Kemi Doll
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States of America
| | - David Cella
- Department of Medical Social Sciences and Robert H Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center, Northwestern University, United States of America
| | - Sean C Dowdy
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, United States of America
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Bosquet JG, Zhang Q, Cliby WA, Bakkum-Gamez JN, Cen L, Dowdy SC, Sherman ME, Weroha SJ, Clayton AC, Kipp BR, Halling KC, Couch FJ, Podratz KC. Association of a novel endometrial cancer biomarker panel with prognostic risk, platinum insensitivity, and targetable therapeutic options. PLoS One 2021; 16:e0245664. [PMID: 33503056 PMCID: PMC7840025 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0245664] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/20/2020] [Accepted: 01/05/2021] [Indexed: 01/15/2023] Open
Abstract
During the past decade, the age-adjusted mortality rate for endometrial cancer (EC) increased 1.9% annually with TP53 mutant (TP53-mu) EC disproportionally represented in advanced disease and deaths. Therefore, we aimed to assess pivotal molecular parameters that differentiate clinical outcomes in high- and low-risk EC. Using the Cancer Genome Atlas, we analyzed EC specimens with available DNA sequences and quantitative gene-specific RNA expression data. After polymerase ɛ (POLE)-mutant specimens were excluded, differential gene-specific mutations and mRNA expressions were annotated and integrated. Consequent to TP53-mu failure to induce p21, derepression of multiple oncogenes harboring promoter p21 repressive sites was observed, including CCNA2 and FOXM1 (P < .001 compared with TP53 wild type [TP53-wt]). TP53-wt EC with high CCNA2 expression (CCNA2-H) had a targeted transcriptomic profile similar to that of TP53-mu EC, suggesting CCNA2 is a seminal determinant for both TP53-wt and TP53-mu EC. CCNA2 enhances E2F1 function, upregulating FOXM1 and CIP2A, as observed in TP53-mu and CCNA2-H TP53-wt EC (P < .001). CIP2A inhibits protein phosphatase 2A, leading to AKT inactivation of GSK3β and restricted oncoprotein degradation; PPP2R1A and FBXW7 mutations yield similar results. Upregulation of FOXM1 and failed degradation of FOXM1 is evidenced by marked upregulation of multiple homologous recombination genes (P < .001). Integrating these molecular aberrations generated a molecular biomarker panel with significant prognostic discrimination (P = 5.8×10−7); adjusting for age, histology, grade, myometrial invasion, TP53 status, and stage, only CCNA2-H/E2F1-H (P = .0003), FBXW7-mu/PPP2R1A-mu (P = .0002), and stage (P = .017) were significant. The generated prognostic molecular classification system identifies dissimilar signaling aberrations potentially amenable to targetable therapeutic options.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jesus Gonzalez Bosquet
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa, United States of America
| | - Qing Zhang
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, United States of America
| | - William A. Cliby
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, United States of America
| | - Jamie N. Bakkum-Gamez
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, United States of America
| | - Ling Cen
- Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida, United States of America
| | - Sean C. Dowdy
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, United States of America
| | - Mark E. Sherman
- Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida, United States of America
| | - S. John Weroha
- Division of Medical Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, United States of America
| | - Amy C. Clayton
- Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, United States of America
| | - Benjamin R. Kipp
- Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, United States of America
| | - Kevin C. Halling
- Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, United States of America
| | - Fergus J. Couch
- Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, United States of America
| | - Karl C. Podratz
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, United States of America
- * E-mail:
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Kho PF, Amant F, Annibali D, Ashton K, Attia J, Auer PL, Beckmann MW, Black A, Brinton L, Buchanan DD, Chanock SJ, Chen C, Chen MM, Cheng THT, Cook LS, Crous-Bous M, Czene K, De Vivo I, Dennis J, Dörk T, Dowdy SC, Dunning AM, Dürst M, Easton DF, Ekici AB, Fasching PA, Fridley BL, Friedenreich CM, García-Closas M, Gaudet MM, Giles GG, Goode EL, Gorman M, Haiman CA, Hall P, Hankinson SE, Hein A, Hillemanns P, Hodgson S, Hoivik EA, Holliday EG, Hunter DJ, Jones A, Kraft P, Krakstad C, Lambrechts D, Le Marchand L, Liang X, Lindblom A, Lissowska J, Long J, Lu L, Magliocco AM, Martin L, McEvoy M, Milne RL, Mints M, Nassir R, Otton G, Palles C, Pooler L, Proietto T, Rebbeck TR, Renner SP, Risch HA, Rübner M, Runnebaum I, Sacerdote C, Sarto GE, Schumacher F, Scott RJ, Setiawan VW, Shah M, Sheng X, Shu XO, Southey MC, Tham E, Tomlinson I, Trovik J, Turman C, Tyrer JP, Van Den Berg D, Wang Z, Wentzensen N, Xia L, Xiang YB, Yang HP, Yu H, Zheng W, Webb PM, Thompson DJ, Spurdle AB, Glubb DM, O'Mara TA. Mendelian randomization analyses suggest a role for cholesterol in the development of endometrial cancer. Int J Cancer 2021; 148:307-319. [PMID: 32851660 PMCID: PMC7757859 DOI: 10.1002/ijc.33206] [Citation(s) in RCA: 30] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/03/2019] [Revised: 05/08/2020] [Accepted: 05/26/2020] [Indexed: 01/14/2023]
Abstract
Blood lipids have been associated with the development of a range of cancers, including breast, lung and colorectal cancer. For endometrial cancer, observational studies have reported inconsistent associations between blood lipids and cancer risk. To reduce biases from unmeasured confounding, we performed a bidirectional, two-sample Mendelian randomization analysis to investigate the relationship between levels of three blood lipids (low-density lipoprotein [LDL] and high-density lipoprotein [HDL] cholesterol, and triglycerides) and endometrial cancer risk. Genetic variants associated with each of these blood lipid levels (P < 5 × 10-8 ) were identified as instrumental variables, and assessed using genome-wide association study data from the Endometrial Cancer Association Consortium (12 906 cases and 108 979 controls) and the Global Lipids Genetic Consortium (n = 188 578). Mendelian randomization analyses found genetically raised LDL cholesterol levels to be associated with lower risks of endometrial cancer of all histologies combined, and of endometrioid and non-endometrioid subtypes. Conversely, higher genetically predicted HDL cholesterol levels were associated with increased risk of non-endometrioid endometrial cancer. After accounting for the potential confounding role of obesity (as measured by genetic variants associated with body mass index), the association between genetically predicted increased LDL cholesterol levels and lower endometrial cancer risk remained significant, especially for non-endometrioid endometrial cancer. There was no evidence to support a role for triglycerides in endometrial cancer development. Our study supports a role for LDL and HDL cholesterol in the development of non-endometrioid endometrial cancer. Further studies are required to understand the mechanisms underlying these findings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Pik-Fang Kho
- Department of Genetics and Computational Biology, QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
- School of Biomedical Science, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
| | - Frederic Amant
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Gynecologic Oncology, University Hospitals KU Leuven, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Daniela Annibali
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Gynecologic Oncology, University Hospitals KU Leuven, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Katie Ashton
- Hunter Medical Research Institute, John Hunter Hospital, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia
- Centre for Information Based Medicine, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, New South Wales, Australia
- Discipline of Medical Genetics, School of Biomedical Sciences and Pharmacy, Faculty of Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, New South Wales, Australia
| | - John Attia
- Hunter Medical Research Institute, John Hunter Hospital, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia
- Centre for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Paul L. Auer
- Cancer Prevention Program, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington
- Zilber School of Public Health, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Milwaukee, Wisconsin
| | - Matthias W. Beckmann
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Comprehensive Cancer Center ER-EMN, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Amanda Black
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Louise Brinton
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Daniel D. Buchanan
- Department of Clinical Pathology, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Genomic Medicine and Family Cancer Clinic, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
- University of Melbourne Centre for Cancer Research, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
| | - Stephen J. Chanock
- Department of Health and Human Services, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Chu Chen
- Epidemiology Program, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington
| | - Maxine M. Chen
- Department of Epidemiology, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Timothy H. T. Cheng
- Wellcome Trust Centre for Human Genetics and Oxford NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Linda S. Cook
- University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center, Albuquerque, New Mexico
- Department of Cancer Epidemiology and Prevention Research, Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Marta Crous-Bous
- Department of Epidemiology, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts
- Channing Division of Network Medicine, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Kamila Czene
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Immaculata De Vivo
- Department of Epidemiology, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts
- Channing Division of Network Medicine, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Joe Dennis
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Thilo Dörk
- Gynaecology Research Unit, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany
| | - Sean C. Dowdy
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Alison M. Dunning
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Matthias Dürst
- Department of Gynaecology, Jena University Hospital - Friedrich Schiller University, Jena, Germany
| | - Douglas F. Easton
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Arif B. Ekici
- Institute of Human Genetics, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Peter A. Fasching
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Comprehensive Cancer Center ER-EMN, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany
- David Geffen School of Medicine, Department of Medicine Division of Hematology and Oncology, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California
| | - Brooke L. Fridley
- Department of Biostatistics, Kansas University Medical Center, Kansas City, Kansas
| | - Christine M. Friedenreich
- Department of Cancer Epidemiology and Prevention Research, Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Montserrat García-Closas
- Department of Health and Human Services, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Mia M. Gaudet
- Behavioral and Epidemiology Research Group, American Cancer Society, Atlanta, Georgia
| | - Graham G. Giles
- Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Cancer Epidemiology Division, Cancer Council Victoria, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Precision Medicine, School of Clinical Sciences at Monash Health, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia
| | - Ellen L. Goode
- Department of Health Science Research, Division of Epidemiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Maggie Gorman
- Wellcome Trust Centre for Human Genetics and Oxford NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Christopher A. Haiman
- Department of Preventive Medicine, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California
| | - Per Hall
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
- Department of Oncology, Södersjukhuset, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Susan E. Hankinson
- Channing Division of Network Medicine, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
- Department of Biostatistics & Epidemiology, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Amherst, Massachusetts
| | - Alexander Hein
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Comprehensive Cancer Center ER-EMN, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Peter Hillemanns
- Gynaecology Research Unit, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany
| | - Shirley Hodgson
- Department of Clinical Genetics, St George's, University of London, London, UK
| | - Erling A. Hoivik
- Centre for Cancer Biomarkers CCBIO, Department of Clinical Science, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
| | - Elizabeth G. Holliday
- Hunter Medical Research Institute, John Hunter Hospital, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia
- Centre for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, New South Wales, Australia
| | - David J. Hunter
- Department of Epidemiology, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts
- Program in Genetic Epidemiology and Statistical Genetics, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts
- Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Angela Jones
- Wellcome Trust Centre for Human Genetics and Oxford NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Peter Kraft
- Department of Epidemiology, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts
- Program in Genetic Epidemiology and Statistical Genetics, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Camilla Krakstad
- Centre for Cancer Biomarkers CCBIO, Department of Clinical Science, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
| | - Diether Lambrechts
- VIB Center for Cancer Biology, Leuven, Belgium
- Laboratory for Translational Genetics, Department of Human Genetics, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Loic Le Marchand
- Epidemiology Program, University of Hawaii Cancer Center, Honolulu, Hawaii
| | - Xiaolin Liang
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Annika Lindblom
- Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Jolanta Lissowska
- Department of Cancer Epidemiology and Prevention, M. Sklodowska-Curie Cancer Center, Oncology Institute, Warsaw, Poland
| | - Jirong Long
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt Epidemiology Center, Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - Lingeng Lu
- Chronic Disease Epidemiology, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut
| | - Anthony M. Magliocco
- Department of Anatomic Pathology, Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institute, Tampa, Florida
| | - Lynn Martin
- Institute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Mark McEvoy
- Centre for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Roger L. Milne
- Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Cancer Epidemiology Division, Cancer Council Victoria, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Precision Medicine, School of Clinical Sciences at Monash Health, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia
| | - Miriam Mints
- Department of Women's and Children's Health, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Rami Nassir
- Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Medicine, University of California Davis, Davis, California
| | - Geoffrey Otton
- School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Claire Palles
- Wellcome Trust Centre for Human Genetics and Oxford NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Loreall Pooler
- Department of Preventive Medicine, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California
| | - Tony Proietto
- School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Timothy R. Rebbeck
- Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Stefan P. Renner
- Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Harvey A. Risch
- Chronic Disease Epidemiology, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut
| | - Matthias Rübner
- Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-EMN, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Ingo Runnebaum
- Department of Gynaecology, Jena University Hospital - Friedrich Schiller University, Jena, Germany
| | - Carlotta Sacerdote
- Center for Cancer Prevention (CPO-Peimonte), Turin, Italy
- Human Genetics Foundation (HuGeF), Turin, Italy
| | - Gloria E. Sarto
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin
| | - Fredrick Schumacher
- Department of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio
| | - Rodney J. Scott
- Hunter Medical Research Institute, John Hunter Hospital, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia
- Discipline of Medical Genetics, School of Biomedical Sciences and Pharmacy, Faculty of Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, New South Wales, Australia
- Division of Molecular Medicine, Pathology North, John Hunter Hospital, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia
| | - V. Wendy Setiawan
- Department of Preventive Medicine, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California
| | - Mitul Shah
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Xin Sheng
- Department of Preventive Medicine, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California
| | - Xiao-Ou Shu
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt Epidemiology Center, Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - Melissa C. Southey
- Department of Clinical Pathology, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Cancer Epidemiology Division, Cancer Council Victoria, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Precision Medicine, School of Clinical Sciences at Monash Health, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia
| | - Emma Tham
- Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
- Clinical Genetics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Ian Tomlinson
- Wellcome Trust Centre for Human Genetics and Oxford NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
- Institute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Jone Trovik
- Centre for Cancer Biomarkers CCBIO, Department of Clinical Science, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
| | - Constance Turman
- Department of Epidemiology, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Jonathan P. Tyrer
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - David Van Den Berg
- Department of Preventive Medicine, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California
| | - Zhaoming Wang
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Nicolas Wentzensen
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Lucy Xia
- Department of Preventive Medicine, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California
| | - Yong-Bing Xiang
- State Key Laboratory of Oncogene and Related Genes & Department of Epidemiology, Shanghai Cancer Institute, Renji Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China
| | - Hannah P. Yang
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Herbert Yu
- Epidemiology Program, University of Hawaii Cancer Center, Honolulu, Hawaii
| | - Wei Zheng
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt Epidemiology Center, Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - Penelope M. Webb
- Population Health Department, QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
| | - Deborah J. Thompson
- Centre for Cancer Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Amanda B. Spurdle
- Department of Genetics and Computational Biology, QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
| | - Dylan M. Glubb
- Department of Genetics and Computational Biology, QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
| | - Tracy A. O'Mara
- Department of Genetics and Computational Biology, QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Moynagh MR, Dowdy SC, Welch B, Glaser GE, Schmitz JJ, Jatoi A, Langstraat CL, Block MS, Kurup AN, Kumar A. Image-guided tumor ablation in gynecologic oncology: Review of interventional oncology techniques and case examples highlighting a collaborative, multidisciplinary program. Gynecol Oncol 2020; 160:835-843. [PMID: 33388156 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2020.12.037] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/09/2020] [Accepted: 12/23/2020] [Indexed: 01/20/2023]
Abstract
As interventional oncology services within radiology mature, image-guided ablation techniques are increasingly applied to recurrent gynecologic malignancies. Ablation may be performed using thermal techniques like cryoablation, microwave ablation, or radiofrequency ablation, as well as non-thermal ones, such as focused ultrasound or irreversible electroporation. Feasibility and approach depend on tumor type, size, number, anatomic location, proximity of critical structures, and goals of therapy. Current indications include local control of limited metastatic disease or palliation of painful bone metastases refractory or unsuitable to conventional therapies. Technical aspects of these procedures, including methods to protect nearby critical structures are presented through illustrative examples. Cases amenable to image-guided ablation include, but are not limited to, hepatic or pulmonary metastases, musculoskeletal metastases, retroperitoneal nodal metastases, pelvic side wall disease, abdominal wall disease, and vaginal or vulvar tumors. Protective maneuvers, such as hydro-displacement of bowel, neuromonitoring, and retrograde pyeloperfusion through ureteral stents, permit safe ablation despite close proximity to vulnerable nerves or organs. Image-guided ablation offers an alternative modality to achieve local tumor control without the risks associated with surgery or systemic treatment in appropriately selected patients. A multidisciplinary approach to use of image-guided ablation includes collaboration between gynecologic oncology, interventional radiology, anesthesia, urology and radiation oncology teams allowing for appropriate patient-centered case selection. Long-term follow up and additional studies are needed to determine the oncologic benefits of such techniques.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael R Moynagh
- Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States of America
| | - Sean C Dowdy
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Gynecologic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States of America
| | - Brian Welch
- Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States of America
| | - Gretchen E Glaser
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Gynecologic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States of America
| | - John J Schmitz
- Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States of America
| | - Aminah Jatoi
- Department of Medical Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States of America
| | - Carrie L Langstraat
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Gynecologic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States of America
| | - Matthew S Block
- Department of Medical Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States of America
| | - A Nicholas Kurup
- Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States of America
| | - Amanika Kumar
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Gynecologic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States of America.
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Altman AD, Robert M, Armbrust R, Fawcett WJ, Nihira M, Jones CN, Tamussino K, Sehouli J, Dowdy SC, Nelson G. Guidelines for vulvar and vaginal surgery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Society recommendations. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2020; 223:475-485. [PMID: 32717257 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2020.07.039] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/27/2020] [Revised: 07/17/2020] [Accepted: 07/22/2020] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
This is the first collaborative Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Society guideline for optimal perioperative care for vulvar and vaginal surgeries. An Embase and PubMed database search of publications was performed. Studies on each topic within the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery vulvar and vaginal outline were selected, with emphasis on meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials, and prospective cohort studies. All studies were reviewed and graded according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system. All recommendations on the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery topics are based on the best available evidence. The level of evidence for each item is presented.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alon D Altman
- Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.
| | - Magali Robert
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Cumming School of Medicine, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Robert Armbrust
- Department of Gynecology with Center for Oncological Surgery, Charité University Medicine of Berlin, European Competence Center for Ovarian Cancer, Berlin, Germany
| | - William J Fawcett
- Department of Anaesthesia, Royal Surrey County Hospital, Guildford, Surrey, United Kingdom
| | - Mikio Nihira
- Division of Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of California, Riverside, Riverside, CA
| | - Chris N Jones
- Department of Anaesthesia, Royal Surrey County Hospital, Guildford, Surrey, United Kingdom
| | - Karl Tamussino
- Division of Gynecology, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria
| | - Jalid Sehouli
- Department of Gynecology with Center for Oncological Surgery, Charité University Medicine of Berlin, European Competence Center for Ovarian Cancer, Berlin, Germany
| | - Sean C Dowdy
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN
| | - Gregg Nelson
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Tom Baker Cancer Centre, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Nelson G, Dowdy SC. Level I evidence establishes enhanced recovery after surgery as standard of care in gynecologic surgery: now is the time to implement! Am J Obstet Gynecol 2020; 223:473-474. [PMID: 32977904 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2020.07.048] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/22/2020] [Accepted: 07/28/2020] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
|
29
|
Affiliation(s)
| | - Sean C Dowdy
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | - John C O'Horo
- Division of Infectious Diseases, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Shushkevich A, Thaker PH, Littell RD, Shah NA, Chiang S, Thornton K, Hensley ML, Slomovitz BM, Holcomb KM, Leitao MM, Toboni MD, Powell MA, Levine DA, Dowdy SC, Klopp A, Brown J. State of the science: Uterine sarcomas: From pathology to practice. Gynecol Oncol 2020; 159:3-7. [PMID: 32839026 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2020.08.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Affiliation(s)
| | - Premal H Thaker
- Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, United States
| | - Ramey D Littell
- Kaiser Permanente Northern California Gynecologic Cancer Program, San Francisco, CA, United States
| | | | - Sarah Chiang
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States
| | | | - Martee L Hensley
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States
| | | | - Kevin M Holcomb
- Weill Cornell Medical College at New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, United States
| | - Mario M Leitao
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States
| | - Michael D Toboni
- Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, United States
| | - Matthew A Powell
- Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, United States
| | - Douglas A Levine
- Perlmutter Cancer Center, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, United States
| | | | - Ann Klopp
- The University of Texas M.D., Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Jubilee Brown
- Levine Cancer Institute, Atrium Health, Charlotte, NC, United States.
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Son J, Chambers LM, Carr C, Michener CM, Yao M, Beavis A, Yen TT, Stone RL, Wethington SL, Fader AN, Burkett WC, Richardson DL, Staley AS, Ahn S, Gehrig PA, Torres D, Dowdy SC, Sullivan MW, Modesitt SC, Watson C, Veade A, Ehrisman J, Havrilesky L, Secord AA, Loreen A, Griffin K, Jackson A, Viswanathan A, Ricci S. Adjuvant treatment improves overall survival in women with high-intermediate risk early-stage endometrial cancer with lymphovascular space invasion. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2020; 30:1738-1747. [PMID: 32771986 DOI: 10.1136/ijgc-2020-001454] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/11/2020] [Revised: 07/01/2020] [Accepted: 07/07/2020] [Indexed: 11/03/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Adjuvant therapy in early-stage endometrial cancer has not shown a clear overall survival benefit, and hence, patient selection remains crucial. OBJECTIVE To determine whether women with high-intermediate risk, early-stage endometrial cancer with lymphovascular space invasion particularly benefit from adjuvant treatment in improving oncologic outcomes. METHODS A multi-center retrospective study was conducted in women with stage IA, IB, and II endometrial cancer with lymphovascular space invasion who met criteria for high-intermediate risk by Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG) 99. Patients were stratified by the type of adjuvant treatment received. Clinical and pathologic features were abstracted. Progression-free and overall survival were evaluated using multivariable analysis. RESULTS 405 patients were included with the median age of 67 years (range 27-92, IQR 59-73). 75.0% of the patients had full staging with lymphadenectomy, and 8.6% had sentinel lymph node biopsy (total 83.6%). After surgery, 24.9% of the patients underwent observation and 75.1% received adjuvant therapy, which included external beam radiation therapy (15.1%), vaginal brachytherapy (45.4%), and combined brachytherapy + chemotherapy (19.1%). Overall, adjuvant treatment resulted in improved oncologic outcomes for both 5-year progression-free survival (77.2% vs 69.6%, HR 0.55, p=0.01) and overall survival (81.5% vs 60.2%, HR 0.42, p<0.001). After adjusting for stage, grade 2/3, and age, improved progression-free survival and overall survival were observed for the following adjuvant subgroups compared with observation: external beam radiation (overall survival HR 0.47, p=0.047, progression-free survival not significant), vaginal brachytherapy (overall survival HR 0.35, p<0.001; progression-free survival HR 0.42, p=0.003), and brachytherapy + chemotherapy (overall survival HR 0.30 p=0.002; progression-free survival HR 0.35, p=0.006). Compared with vaginal brachytherapy alone, external beam radiation or the addition of chemotherapy did not further improve progression-free survival (p=0.80, p=0.65, respectively) or overall survival (p=0.47, p=0.74, respectively). CONCLUSION Adjuvant therapy improves both progression-free survival and overall survival in women with early-stage endometrial cancer meeting high-intermediate risk criteria with lymphovascular space invasion. External beam radiation or adding chemotherapy did not confer additional survival advantage compared with vaginal brachytherapy alone.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ji Son
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Women's Health Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
| | - Laura M Chambers
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Women's Health Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
| | - Caitlin Carr
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Women's Health Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
| | - Chad M Michener
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Women's Health Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
| | - Meng Yao
- Quantitative Health Sciences, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
| | - Anna Beavis
- The Kelly Gynecologic Oncology Service, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Ting-Tai Yen
- The Kelly Gynecologic Oncology Service, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Rebecca L Stone
- The Kelly Gynecologic Oncology Service, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Stephanie L Wethington
- The Kelly Gynecologic Oncology Service, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Amanda N Fader
- The Kelly Gynecologic Oncology Service, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Wesley C Burkett
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, USA
| | - Debra L Richardson
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, USA
| | - Allison S Staley
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA
| | - Susie Ahn
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA
| | - Paola A Gehrig
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA
| | - Diogo Torres
- Division of Gynecologic Surgery, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
| | - Sean C Dowdy
- Division of Gynecologic Surgery, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
| | - Mackenzie W Sullivan
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Virginia Health System, Charlottesville, Virginia, USA
| | - Susan C Modesitt
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Virginia Health System, Charlottesville, Virginia, USA
| | - Catherine Watson
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA
| | - Ashley Veade
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA
| | - Jessie Ehrisman
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA
| | - Laura Havrilesky
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA
| | - Angeles Alvarez Secord
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA
| | - Amy Loreen
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Cincinnati Academic Health Center, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
| | - Kaitlyn Griffin
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Cincinnati Academic Health Center, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
| | - Amanda Jackson
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Cincinnati Academic Health Center, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
| | - Akila Viswanathan
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Stephanie Ricci
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Women's Health Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Kalogera E, Van Houten HK, Sangaralingham LR, Borah BJ, Dowdy SC. Use of bowel preparation does not reduce postoperative infectious morbidity following minimally invasive or open hysterectomies. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2020; 223:231.e1-231.e12. [PMID: 32112733 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2020.02.035] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/04/2019] [Revised: 02/09/2020] [Accepted: 02/18/2020] [Indexed: 01/22/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Literature on the use of bowel preparation in gynecologic surgery is scarce and limited to minimally invasive gynecologic surgery. The decision on the use of bowel preparation before benign or malignant hysterectomies is mostly driven by extrapolating data from the colorectal literature. OBJECTIVE Bowel preparation is a controversial element within enhanced recovery protocols, and literature investigating its efficacy in gynecologic surgery is scarce. Our aim was to determine if mechanical bowel preparation alone, oral antibiotics alone, or a combination are associated with decreased rates of surgical site infections or anastomotic leaks compared to no bowel preparation following benign or malignant hysterectomy. STUDY DESIGN We identified women who underwent hysterectomy between January 2006 and July 2017 using OptumLabs, a large US commercial health plan database. Inverse propensity score weighting was used separately for benign and malignant groups to balance baseline characteristics. Primary outcomes of 30-day surgical site infection, anastomotic leaks, and major morbidity were assessed using multivariate logistic regression that adjusted for race, census region, household income, diabetes, and other unbalanced variables following propensity score weighting. RESULTS A total of 224,687 hysterectomies (benign, 186,148; malignant, 38,539) were identified. Median age was 45 years for the benign and 54 years for the malignant cohort. Surgical approach was as follows: benign: laparoscopic/robotic, 27.2%; laparotomy, 32.6%; vaginal, 40.2%; malignant: laparoscopic/robotic, 28.8%; laparotomy, 47.7%; vaginal, 23.5%. Bowel resection was performed in 0.4% of the benign and 2.8% of the malignant cohort. Type of bowel preparation was as follows: benign: none, 93.8%; mechanical bowel preparation only, 4.6%; oral antibiotics only, 1.1%; mechanical bowel preparation with oral antibiotics, 0.5%; malignant: none, 87.2%; mechanical bowel preparation only, 9.6%; oral antibiotics only, 1.8%; mechanical bowel preparation with oral antibiotics, 1.4%. Use of bowel preparation did not decrease rates of surgical site infections, anastomotic leaks, or major morbidity following benign or malignant hysterectomy. Among malignant abdominal hysterectomies, there was no difference in the rates of infectious morbidity between mechanical bowel preparation alone, oral antibiotics alone, or mechanical bowel preparation with oral antibiotics, compared to no preparation. CONCLUSION Bowel preparation does not protect against surgical site infections or major morbidity following benign or malignant hysterectomy, regardless of surgical approach, and may be safely omitted.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Holy K Van Houten
- Department of Health Sciences, Division of Health Care Policy and Research & Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; OptumLabs, Cambridge, MA
| | - Lindsey R Sangaralingham
- Department of Health Sciences, Division of Health Care Policy and Research & Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; OptumLabs, Cambridge, MA
| | - Bijan J Borah
- Department of Health Sciences, Division of Health Care Policy and Research & Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | - Sean C Dowdy
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Pollock BD, Herrin J, Neville MR, Dowdy SC, Moreno Franco P, Shah ND, Ting HH. Association of Do-Not-Resuscitate Patient Case Mix With Publicly Reported Risk-Standardized Hospital Mortality and Readmission Rates. JAMA Netw Open 2020; 3:e2010383. [PMID: 32662845 PMCID: PMC7361656 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.10383] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/14/2022] Open
Abstract
IMPORTANCE The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services's (CMS's) 30-day risk-standardized mortality rate (RSMR) and risk-standardized readmission rate (RSRR) models do not adjust for do-not-resuscitate (DNR) status of hospitalized patients and may bias Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program (HRRP) financial penalties and Overall Hospital Quality Star Ratings. OBJECTIVE To identify the association between hospital-level DNR prevalence and condition-specific 30-day RSMR and RSRR and the implications of this association for HRRP financial penalty. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This cross-sectional study obtained patient-level data from the Medicare Limited Data Set Inpatient Standard Analytical File and hospital-level data from the CMS Hospital Compare website for all consecutive Medicare inpatient encounters from July 1, 2015, to June 30, 2018, in 4484 US hospitals. Hospitalized patients had a principal diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction (AMI), heart failure (HF), stroke, pneumonia, or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Incoming acute care transfers, discharges against medical advice, and patients coming from or discharged to hospice were among those excluded from the analysis. EXPOSURES Present-on-admission (POA) DNR status was defined as an International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision diagnosis code of V49.86 (before October 1, 2015) or as an International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision diagnosis code of Z66 (beginning October 1, 2015). Hospital-level prevalence of POA DNR status was calculated for each of the 5 conditions. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Hospital-level 30-day RSMRs and RSRRs for 5 condition-specific cohorts (mortality cohorts: AMI, HF, stroke, pneumonia, and COPD; readmission cohorts: AMI, HF, pneumonia, and COPD) and HRRP financial penalty status (yes or no). RESULTS Included in the study were 4 884 237 inpatient encounters across condition-specific 30-day mortality cohorts (patient mean [SD] age, 78.8 [8.5] years; 2 608 182 women [53.4%]) and 4 450 378 inpatient encounters across condition-specific 30-day readmission cohorts (patient mean [SD] age, 78.6 [8.5] years; 2 349 799 women [52.8%]). Hospital-level median (interquartile range [IQR]) prevalence of POA DNR status in the mortality cohorts varied: 11% (7%-16%) for AMI, 13% (7%-23%) for HF, 14% (9%-22%) for stroke, 17% (9%-26%) for pneumonia, and 10% (5%-18%) for COPD. For the readmission cohorts, the hospital-level median (IQR) POA DNR prevalence was 9% (6%-15%) for AMI, 12% (6%-22%) for HF, 16% (8%-24%) for pneumonia, and 9% (4%-17%) for COPD. The 30-day RSMRs were significantly higher for hospitals in the highest quintiles vs the lowest quintiles of DNR prevalence (eg, AMI: 12.9 [95% CI, 12.8-13.1] vs 12.5 [95% CI, 12.4-12.7]; P < .001). The inverse was true among the readmission cohorts, with the highest quintiles of DNR prevalence exhibiting the lowest RSRRs (eg, AMI: 15.3 [95% CI, 15.1-15.5] vs 15.9 [95% CI, 15.7-16.0]; P < .001). A 1% absolute increase in risk-adjusted hospital-level DNR prevalence was associated with greater odds of avoiding HRRP financial penalty (odds ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.04-1.08; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE This cross-sectional study found that the lack of adjustment in CMS 30-day RSMR and RSRR models for POA DNR status of hospitalized patients may be associated with biased readmission penalization and hospital-level performance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Benjamin D. Pollock
- Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida
- Department of Quality, Experience, and Affordability, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Jeph Herrin
- Flying Buttress Associates, Charlottesville, Virginia
- Section of Cardiovascular Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut
| | - Matthew R. Neville
- Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida
- Department of Quality, Experience, and Affordability, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Sean C. Dowdy
- Department of Quality, Experience, and Affordability, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Pablo Moreno Franco
- Department of Quality, Experience, and Affordability, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
- Department of Critical Care Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida
| | - Nilay D. Shah
- Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida
| | - Henry H. Ting
- Department of Quality, Experience, and Affordability, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
- Department of Cardiovascular Diseases, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Sisodia RC, Dewdney SB, Fader AN, Wethington SL, Melamed A, Von Gruenigen VE, Zivanovic O, Carter J, Cohn DE, Huh W, Wenzel L, Doll K, Cella D, Dowdy SC. Patient reported outcomes measures in gynecologic oncology: A primer for clinical use, Part II. Gynecol Oncol 2020; 158:201-207. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2020.03.022] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/07/2020] [Accepted: 03/16/2020] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
|
35
|
Glaser GE, Kalogera E, Kumar A, Yi J, Destephano C, Ubl D, Glasgow A, Habermann E, Dowdy SC. Outcomes and patient perspectives following implementation of tiered opioid prescription guidelines in gynecologic surgery. Gynecol Oncol 2020; 157:476-481. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2020.02.025] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/03/2019] [Revised: 02/12/2020] [Accepted: 02/16/2020] [Indexed: 01/05/2023]
|
36
|
Schmitt JJ, Baker MV, Occhino JA, McGree ME, Weaver AL, Bakkum-Gamez JN, Dowdy SC, Pasupathy KS, Gebhart JB. Prospective Implementation and Evaluation of a Decision-Tree Algorithm for Route of Hysterectomy. Obstet Gynecol 2020; 135:761-769. [PMID: 32168206 PMCID: PMC10947415 DOI: 10.1097/aog.0000000000003725] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To evaluate the rate of vaginal hysterectomy and outcomes after initiation of a prospective decision-tree algorithm to determine the optimal surgical route of hysterectomy. METHODS A prospective algorithm to determine optimal route of hysterectomy was developed, which uses the following factors: history of laparotomy, uterine size, and vaginal access. The algorithm was implemented at our institution from November 24, 2015, to December 31, 2017, for patients requiring hysterectomy for benign indications. Expected route of hysterectomy was assigned by the algorithm and was compared with the actual route performed to identify compliance compared with deviation. Surgical outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS Of 365 patients who met inclusion criteria, 202 (55.3%) were expected to have a total vaginal hysterectomy, 57 (15.6%) were expected to have an examination under anesthesia followed by total vaginal hysterectomy, 52 (14.2%) were expected to have an examination under anesthesia followed by robotic-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy, and 54 (14.8%) were expected to have an abdominal or robotic-laparoscopic route of hysterectomy. Forty-six procedures (12.6%) deviated from the algorithm to a more invasive route (44 robotic, two abdominal). Seven patients had total vaginal hysterectomy when robotic-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy or abdominal hysterectomy was expected by the algorithm. Overall, 71% of patients were expected to have a vaginal route of hysterectomy per the algorithm, of whom 81.5% had a total vaginal hysterectomy performed; more than 99% of the total vaginal hysterectomies attempted were successfully completed. CONCLUSION Vaginal surgery is feasible, carries a low complication rate with excellent outcomes, and should have a place in gynecologic surgery. National use of this prospective algorithm may increase the rate of total vaginal hysterectomy and decrease health care costs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jennifer J Schmitt
- Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery, Allina Health, St. Paul, and the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, the Division of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, and the Division of Health Care Policy and Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
37
|
Beavis AL, Yen TT, Stone RL, Wethington SL, Carr C, Son J, Chambers L, Michener CM, Ricci S, Burkett WC, Richardson DL, Staley AS, Ahn S, Gehrig PA, Torres D, Dowdy SC, Sullivan MW, Modesitt SC, Watson C, Veade A, Ehrisman J, Havrilesky L, Secord AA, Loreen A, Griffin K, Jackson A, Viswanathan AN, Jager LR, Fader AN. Adjuvant therapy for early stage, endometrial cancer with lymphovascular space invasion: Is there a role for chemotherapy? Gynecol Oncol 2020; 156:568-574. [PMID: 31948730 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2019.12.028] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/09/2019] [Revised: 12/16/2019] [Accepted: 12/20/2019] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Lymphovascular space invasion (LVSI) is an independent risk factor for recurrence and poor survival in early-stage endometrioid endometrial cancer (EEC), but optimal adjuvant treatment is unknown. We aimed to compare the survival of women with early-stage EEC with LVSI treated postoperatively with observation (OBS), radiation (RAD, external beam and/or vaginal brachytherapy), or chemotherapy (CHEMO)+/-RAD. METHODS This was a multi-institutional, retrospective cohort study of women with stage I or II EEC with LVSI who underwent hysterectomy+/-lymphadenectomy from 2005 to 2015 and received OBS, RAD, or CHEMO+/-RAD postoperatively. Progression-free survival and overall survival were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier estimates and Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS In total, 478 women were included; median age was 64 years, median follow-up was 50.3 months. After surgery, 143 (30%) underwent OBS, 232 (48.5%) received RAD, and 103(21.5%) received CHEMO+/-RAD (95% of whom received RAD). Demographics were similar among groups, but those undergoing OBS had lower stage and grade. A total of 101 (21%) women recurred. Progression-free survival (PFS) was improved in both CHEMO+/-RAD (HR = 0.18, 95% CI: 0.09-0.39) and RAD (HR = 0.31, 95% CI: 0.18-0.54) groups compared to OBS, though neither adjuvant therapy was superior to the other. However, in grade 3 tumors, the CHEMO+/-RAD group had superior PFS compared to both RAD (HR 0.25; 95% CI: 0.12-0.52) and OBS cohorts (HR = 0.10, 95% CI: 0.03-0.32). Overall survival did not differ by treatment. CONCLUSIONS In early-stage EEC with LVSI, adjuvant therapy improved PFS compared to observation alone. In those with grade 3 EEC, adjuvant chemotherapy with or without radiation improved PFS compared to observation or radiation alone.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anna L Beavis
- The Kelly Gynecologic Oncology Service, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
| | - Ting-Tai Yen
- The Kelly Gynecologic Oncology Service, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Rebecca L Stone
- The Kelly Gynecologic Oncology Service, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Stephanie L Wethington
- The Kelly Gynecologic Oncology Service, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Caitlin Carr
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Ji Son
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Laura Chambers
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Chad M Michener
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Stephanie Ricci
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Wesley C Burkett
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, USA
| | - Debra L Richardson
- Stephenson Cancer Center, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, USA
| | - Allison-Stuart Staley
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Susie Ahn
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Paola A Gehrig
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Diogo Torres
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Sean C Dowdy
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Mackenzie W Sullivan
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA
| | - Susan C Modesitt
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA
| | - Catherine Watson
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Ashely Veade
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Jessie Ehrisman
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Laura Havrilesky
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Angeles Alvarez Secord
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Amy Loreen
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Cincinnati Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH, USA
| | - Kaitlyn Griffin
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Cincinnati Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH, USA
| | - Amanda Jackson
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Cincinnati Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH, USA
| | - Akila N Viswanathan
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Leah R Jager
- Department of Biostatistics, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Amanda N Fader
- The Kelly Gynecologic Oncology Service, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| |
Collapse
|
38
|
Narasimhulu DM, Bews KA, Hanson KT, Chang YHH, Dowdy SC, Cliby WA. Using evidence to direct quality improvement efforts: Defining the highest impact complications after complex cytoreductive surgery for ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2019; 156:278-283. [PMID: 31785863 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2019.11.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/21/2019] [Revised: 11/02/2019] [Accepted: 11/06/2019] [Indexed: 01/29/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE We sought to identify postoperative complications with the greatest impact on patient-centric outcomes to serve as high yield QI targets in ovarian cancer (OC) surgery. METHODS Women undergoing complex CRS (defined as cytoreductive surgery with colon resection) for OC between January 1, 2012 and 12/31/2016 were identified from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database. We determined the population attributable fraction (PAF) to quantify the contribution of each major complication towards adverse outcomes. PAF represents the burden of adverse outcomes that could be eliminated if the corresponding complication was prevented. Organ space surgical site infection (SSI) was used as a surrogate for anastomotic leak (AL). RESULTS A total of 1434 women met inclusion criteria. Any adverse clinical outcome (composite of death, reoperation, or end organ dysfunction) occurred in 9.1% of women, and AL was the largest contributor to adverse clinical outcomes [PAF = 33.4% (95%CI: 22.3%-45.6%)]. The rates of increased resource utilization were as follows; prolonged hospitalization in 23.7%, non-home discharge in 10.7% and unplanned readmission in 14.8% of women. AL was the largest contributor to prolonged hospitalizations [PAF = 75.7% (95%CI: 51.4%-90.0%)] and readmissions [PAF = 17.1% (95%CI: 11.5%-22.6%)]; while transfusion was the largest contributor to non-home discharge [PAF = 22.8% (95%CI: 0.7%-42.4%)]. By comparison, the impact of other complications, including those targeted by the Surgical Care Improvement Project (SCIP), such as incisional SSI, venous thromboembolism, myocardial infarction, and urinary infection, was small. CONCLUSIONS Anastomotic leak is the largest contributor to adverse clinical outcomes and increased resource utilization after complex cytoreductive surgery. Quality improvement efforts to reduce AL and its impact should be of highest priority in OC surgery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Katherine A Bews
- The Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery Surgical Outcomes Program, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Kristine T Hanson
- The Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery Surgical Outcomes Program, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Yu-Hui H Chang
- The Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery Surgical Outcomes Program, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA; Division of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ, USA
| | - Sean C Dowdy
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Gynecologic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - William A Cliby
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Gynecologic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
39
|
Leitao MM, Zhou QC, Gomez-Hidalgo NR, Iasonos A, Baser R, Mezzancello M, Chang K, Ward J, Chi DS, Long Roche K, Sonoda Y, Brown CL, Mueller JJ, Gardner GJ, Jewell EL, Broach V, Zivanovic O, Dowdy SC, Mariani A, Abu-Rustum NR. Patient-reported outcomes after surgery for endometrial carcinoma: Prevalence of lower-extremity lymphedema after sentinel lymph node mapping versus lymphadenectomy. Gynecol Oncol 2019; 156:147-153. [PMID: 31780238 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2019.11.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 51] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/03/2019] [Revised: 10/31/2019] [Accepted: 11/02/2019] [Indexed: 12/31/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To compare the prevalence of patient-reported lower-extremity lymphedema (LEL) with sentinel lymph node (SLN) mapping versus comprehensive lymph node dissection (LND) for the surgical management of newly diagnosed endometrial carcinoma. METHODS Patients who underwent primary surgery for endometrial cancer from 01/2006-12/2012 were mailed a survey that included a validated 13-item LEL screening questionnaire in 08/2016. Patients diagnosed with LEL prior to surgery and those who answered ≤6 survey items were excluded. RESULTS Of 1275 potential participants, 623 (49%) responded to the survey and 599 were evaluable (180 SLN, 352 LND, 67 hysterectomy alone). Median BMI was similar among cohorts (P = 0.99). External-beam radiation therapy (EBRT) was used in 10/180 (5.5%) SLN and 35/352 (10%) LND patients (P = 0.1). Self-reported LEL prevalence was 27% (49/180) and 41% (144/352), respectively (OR, 1.85; 95% CI, 1.25-2.74; P = 0.002). LEL prevalence was 51% (23/45) in patients who received EBRT and 35% (170/487) in those who did not (OR, 1.95; 95% CI, 1.06-3.6; P = 0.03). High BMI was associated with increased prevalence of LEL (OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.02-1.06; P = 0.001). After controlling for EBRT and BMI, LND retained independent association with an increased prevalence of LEL over SLN (OR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.22-2.69; P = 0.003). Patients with self-reported LEL had significantly worse QOL compared to those without self-reported LEL. CONCLUSIONS This is the first study to assess patient-reported LEL after SLN mapping for endometrial cancer. SLN mapping was independently associated with a significantly lower prevalence of patient-reported LEL. High BMI and adjuvant EBRT were associated with an increased prevalence of patient-reported LEL.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mario M Leitao
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, NY, NY, USA; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Weill Cornell Medical College, NY, NY, USA.
| | - Qin C Zhou
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, NY, NY, USA
| | - Natalia R Gomez-Hidalgo
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, NY, NY, USA
| | - Alexia Iasonos
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, NY, NY, USA
| | - Ray Baser
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, NY, NY, USA
| | - Marissa Mezzancello
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, NY, NY, USA
| | - Kaity Chang
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, NY, NY, USA
| | - Jae Ward
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, NY, NY, USA
| | - Dennis S Chi
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, NY, NY, USA; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Weill Cornell Medical College, NY, NY, USA
| | - Kara Long Roche
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, NY, NY, USA; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Weill Cornell Medical College, NY, NY, USA
| | - Yukio Sonoda
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, NY, NY, USA; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Weill Cornell Medical College, NY, NY, USA
| | - Carol L Brown
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, NY, NY, USA; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Weill Cornell Medical College, NY, NY, USA
| | - Jennifer J Mueller
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, NY, NY, USA; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Weill Cornell Medical College, NY, NY, USA
| | - Ginger J Gardner
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, NY, NY, USA; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Weill Cornell Medical College, NY, NY, USA
| | - Elizabeth L Jewell
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, NY, NY, USA; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Weill Cornell Medical College, NY, NY, USA
| | - Vance Broach
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, NY, NY, USA; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Weill Cornell Medical College, NY, NY, USA
| | - Oliver Zivanovic
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, NY, NY, USA; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Weill Cornell Medical College, NY, NY, USA
| | - Sean C Dowdy
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Andrea Mariani
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Nadeem R Abu-Rustum
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, NY, NY, USA; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Weill Cornell Medical College, NY, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
40
|
Schlappe BA, Weaver AL, McGree ME, Ducie J, Zahl Eriksson AG, Dowdy SC, Cliby WA, Glaser GE, Abu-Rustum NR, Mariani A, Leitao MM. Multicenter study comparing oncologic outcomes after lymph node assessment via a sentinel lymph node algorithm versus comprehensive pelvic and paraaortic lymphadenectomy in patients with serous and clear cell endometrial carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol 2019; 156:62-69. [PMID: 31776037 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2019.11.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 37] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/24/2019] [Revised: 10/29/2019] [Accepted: 11/02/2019] [Indexed: 01/12/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To compare survival after nodal assessment using a sentinel lymph node (SLN) algorithm versus comprehensive pelvic and paraaortic lymphadenectomy (LND) in serous or clear cell endometrial carcinoma, and to compare survival in node-negative cases. METHODS Three-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival were compared between one institution that used comprehensive LND to the renal veins and a second institution that used an SLN algorithm with ultra-staging with inverse-probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) derived from propensity scores to adjust for covariate imbalance between cohorts. RESULTS 214 patients were identified (118 SLN cohort, 96 LND cohort). Adjuvant therapy differed between the cohorts; 84% and 40% in the SLN and LND cohorts, respectively, received chemotherapy ± radiation therapy. The IPTW-adjusted 3-year RFS rates were 69% and 80%, respectively. The IPTW-adjusted 3-year OS rates were 88% and 77%, respectively. The IPTW-adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for the association of surgical approach (SLN vs LND) with progression and death was 1.46 (95% CI: 0.70-3.04) and 0.44 (95% CI: 0.19-1.02), respectively. In the 168 node-negative cases, the IPTW-adjusted 3-year RFS rates were 73% and 91%, respectively. The IPTW-adjusted 3-year OS rates were 88% and 86%, respectively. In this subgroup, IPTW-adjusted HR for the association of surgical approach (SLN vs LND) with progression and death was 3.12 (95% CI: 1.02-9.57) and 0.69 (95% CI: 0.24-1.95), respectively. CONCLUSION OS was not compromised with the SLN algorithm. SLN may be associated with a decreased RFS but similar OS in node-negative cases despite the majority receiving chemotherapy. This may be due to differences in surveillance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Brooke A Schlappe
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Amy L Weaver
- Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Michaela E McGree
- Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Jennifer Ducie
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Ane Gerda Zahl Eriksson
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Sean C Dowdy
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - William A Cliby
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Gretchen E Glaser
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Nadeem R Abu-Rustum
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Weill Cornell Medical Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Andrea Mariani
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Mario M Leitao
- Gynecology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Weill Cornell Medical Center, New York, NY, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
41
|
Kanakkanthara A, Kurmi K, Ekstrom TL, Hou X, Purfeerst ER, Heinzen EP, Correia C, Huntoon CJ, O'Brien D, Wahner Hendrickson AE, Dowdy SC, Li H, Oberg AL, Hitosugi T, Kaufmann SH, Weroha SJ, Karnitz LM. BRCA1 Deficiency Upregulates NNMT, Which Reprograms Metabolism and Sensitizes Ovarian Cancer Cells to Mitochondrial Metabolic Targeting Agents. Cancer Res 2019; 79:5920-5929. [PMID: 31619387 DOI: 10.1158/0008-5472.can-19-1405] [Citation(s) in RCA: 31] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/03/2019] [Revised: 09/05/2019] [Accepted: 10/09/2019] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
BRCA1 plays a key role in homologous recombination (HR) DNA repair. Accordingly, changes that downregulate BRCA1, including BRCA1 mutations and reduced BRCA1 transcription, due to promoter hypermethylation or loss of the BRCA1 transcriptional regulator CDK12, disrupt HR in multiple cancers. In addition, BRCA1 has also been implicated in the regulation of metabolism. Here, we show that reducing BRCA1 expression, either by CDK12 or BRCA1 depletion, led to metabolic reprogramming of ovarian cancer cells, causing decreased mitochondrial respiration and reduced ATP levels. BRCA1 depletion drove this reprogramming by upregulating nicotinamide N-methyltransferase (NNMT). Notably, the metabolic alterations caused by BRCA1 depletion and NNMT upregulation sensitized ovarian cancer cells to agents that inhibit mitochondrial metabolism (VLX600 and tigecycline) and to agents that inhibit glucose import (WZB117). These observations suggest that inhibition of energy metabolism may be a potential strategy to selectively target BRCA1-deficient high-grade serous ovarian cancer, which is characterized by frequent BRCA1 loss and NNMT overexpression. SIGNIFICANCE: Loss of BRCA1 reprograms metabolism, creating a therapeutically targetable vulnerability in ovarian cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Arun Kanakkanthara
- Department of Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.,Department of Molecular Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Kiran Kurmi
- Department of Molecular Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | | | - Xiaonan Hou
- Department of Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | | | - Ethan P Heinzen
- Division of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | | | | | - Daniel O'Brien
- Division of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | | | - Sean C Dowdy
- Division of Gynecologic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Hu Li
- Department of Molecular Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Ann L Oberg
- Division of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Taro Hitosugi
- Department of Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.,Department of Molecular Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Scott H Kaufmann
- Department of Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.,Department of Molecular Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - S John Weroha
- Department of Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Larry M Karnitz
- Department of Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota. .,Department of Molecular Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| |
Collapse
|
42
|
McKenna NP, Glasgow AE, Cima RR, Gettman MT, Dowdy SC, Crowson CS, Habermann EB. Does This Patient Need Labs? Development and Validation of an Applet to Guide Postoperative Hemoglobin Checks. J Am Coll Surg 2019. [DOI: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2019.08.332] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/25/2022]
|
43
|
Heitz F, Kommoss S, Tourani R, Grandelis A, Uppendahl L, Aliferis C, Burges A, Wang C, Canzler U, Wang J, Belau A, Prader S, Hanker L, Ma S, Ataseven B, Hilpert F, Schneider S, Sehouli J, Kimmig R, Kurzeder C, Schmalfeldt B, Braicu EI, Harter P, Dowdy SC, Winterhoff BJ, Pfisterer J, du Bois A. Dilution of Molecular-Pathologic Gene Signatures by Medically Associated Factors Might Prevent Prediction of Resection Status After Debulking Surgery in Patients With Advanced Ovarian Cancer. Clin Cancer Res 2019; 26:213-219. [PMID: 31527166 DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-19-1741] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/30/2019] [Revised: 08/08/2019] [Accepted: 09/11/2019] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Predicting surgical outcome could improve individualizing treatment strategies for patients with advanced ovarian cancer. It has been suggested earlier that gene expression signatures (GES) might harbor the potential to predict surgical outcome. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN Data derived from high-grade serous tumor tissue of FIGO stage IIIC/IV patients of AGO-OVAR11 trial were used to generate a transcriptome profiling. Previously identified molecular signatures were tested. A theoretical model was implemented to evaluate the impact of medically associated factors for residual disease (RD) on the performance of GES that predicts RD status. RESULTS A total of 266 patients met inclusion criteria, of those, 39.1% underwent complete resection. Previously reported GES did not predict RD in this cohort. Similarly, The Cancer Genome Atlas molecular subtypes, an independent de novo signature and the total gene expression dataset using all 21,000 genes were not able to predict RD status. Medical reasons for RD were identified as potential limiting factors that impact the ability to use GES to predict RD. In a center with high complete resection rates, a GES which would perfectly predict tumor biological RD would have a performance of only AUC 0.83, due to reasons other than tumor biology. CONCLUSIONS Previously identified GES cannot be generalized. Medically associated factors for RD may be the main obstacle to predict surgical outcome in an all-comer population of patients with advanced ovarian cancer. If biomarkers derived from tumor tissue are used to predict outcome of patients with cancer, selection bias should be focused on to prevent overestimation of the power of such a biomarker.See related commentary by Handley and Sood, p. 9.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Florian Heitz
- Department of Gynecology and Gynecologic Oncology, Kliniken-Essen-Mitte, Germany. .,Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin Institute of Health, Department of Gynecology, Berlin, Germany.,AGO Study Group
| | - Stefan Kommoss
- AGO Study Group.,Department of Women's Health, Tuebingen University Hospital, Tuebingen, Germany
| | - Roshan Tourani
- Institute for Health Informatics (IHI), Academic Health Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | - Anthony Grandelis
- Department of Gynecology, Obstetrics and Women's Health, Division of Gynecologic Oncology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | - Locke Uppendahl
- Department of Gynecology, Obstetrics and Women's Health, Division of Gynecologic Oncology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | - Constantin Aliferis
- Institute for Health Informatics (IHI), Academic Health Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | - Alexander Burges
- AGO Study Group.,Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Germany
| | - Chen Wang
- Division of Gynecologic Surgery, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Ulrich Canzler
- AGO Study Group.,Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Jinhua Wang
- Institute for Health Informatics (IHI), Academic Health Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | - Antje Belau
- AGO Study Group.,Ernst Moritz Arndt Universität Greifswald - Klinik und Poliklinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Greifswald, Germany
| | - Sonia Prader
- Department of Gynecology and Gynecologic Oncology, Kliniken-Essen-Mitte, Germany
| | - Lars Hanker
- AGO Study Group.,Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, University of Schleswig-Holstein, Lübeck, Germany
| | - Sisi Ma
- Institute for Health Informatics (IHI), Academic Health Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | - Beyhan Ataseven
- Department of Gynecology and Gynecologic Oncology, Kliniken-Essen-Mitte, Germany.,Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Germany
| | - Felix Hilpert
- AGO Study Group.,Krankenhaus Jerusalem Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Stephanie Schneider
- Department of Gynecology and Gynecologic Oncology, Kliniken-Essen-Mitte, Germany
| | - Jalid Sehouli
- Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin Institute of Health, Department of Gynecology, Berlin, Germany
| | - Rainer Kimmig
- AGO Study Group.,Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany
| | - Christian Kurzeder
- AGO Study Group.,Universitätsspital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.,Department of Obstrics and Gynecology, University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | - Barbara Schmalfeldt
- AGO Study Group.,Technical University of Munich - Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany.,Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Elena I Braicu
- Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin Institute of Health, Department of Gynecology, Berlin, Germany
| | - Philipp Harter
- Department of Gynecology and Gynecologic Oncology, Kliniken-Essen-Mitte, Germany.,AGO Study Group
| | - Sean C Dowdy
- Division of Gynecologic Surgery, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Boris J Winterhoff
- Department of Gynecology, Obstetrics and Women's Health, Division of Gynecologic Oncology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
| | | | - Andreas du Bois
- Department of Gynecology and Gynecologic Oncology, Kliniken-Essen-Mitte, Germany.,AGO Study Group
| |
Collapse
|
44
|
Wijk L, Udumyan R, Pache B, Altman AD, Williams LL, Elias KM, McGee J, Wells T, Gramlich L, Holcomb K, Achtari C, Ljungqvist O, Dowdy SC, Nelson G. International validation of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Society guidelines on enhanced recovery for gynecologic surgery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2019; 221:237.e1-237.e11. [PMID: 31051119 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2019.04.028] [Citation(s) in RCA: 77] [Impact Index Per Article: 15.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/14/2019] [Revised: 04/17/2019] [Accepted: 04/24/2019] [Indexed: 01/06/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Society publishes guidelines on perioperative care, but these guidelines should be validated prospectively. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the association between compliance with Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Gynecologic/Oncology guideline elements and postoperative outcomes in an international cohort. STUDY DESIGN The study comprised 2101 patients undergoing elective gynecologic/oncology surgery between January 2011 and November 2017 in 10 hospitals across Canada, the United States, and Europe. Patient demographics, surgical/anesthesia details, and Enhanced Recovery After Surgery protocol compliance elements (pre-, intra-, and postoperative phases) were entered into the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Interactive Audit System. Surgical complexity was stratified according to the Aletti scoring system (low vs medium/high). The following covariates were accounted for in the analysis: age, body mass index, smoking status, presence of diabetes, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage, preoperative chemotherapy, radiotherapy, operating time, surgical approach (open vs minimally invasive), intraoperative blood loss, hospital, and Enhanced Recovery After Surgery implementation status. The primary end points were primary hospital length of stay and complications. Negative binomial regression was used to model length of stay, and logistic regression to model complications, as a function of compliance score and covariates. RESULTS Patient demographics included a median age 56 years, 35.5% obese, 15% smokers, and 26.7% American Society of Anesthesiologists Class III-IV. Final diagnosis was malignant in 49% of patients. Laparotomy was used in 75.9% of cases, and the remainder minimally invasive surgery. The majority of cases (86%) were of low complexity (Aletti score ≤3). In patients with ovarian cancer, 69.5% had a medium/high complexity surgery (Aletti score 4-11). Median length of stay was 2 days in the low- and 5 days in the medium/high-complexity group. Every unit increase in Enhanced Recovery After Surgery guideline score was associated with 8% (IRR, 0.92; 95% confidence interval, 0.90-0.95; P<.001) decrease in days in hospital among low-complexity, and 12% (IRR, 0.88; 95% confidence interval, 0.82-0.93; P<.001) decrease among patients with medium/high-complexity scores. For every unit increase in Enhanced Recovery After Surgery guideline score, the odds of total complications were estimated to be 12% lower (P<.05) among low-complexity patients. CONCLUSION Audit of surgical practices demonstrates that improved compliance with Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Gynecologic/Oncology guidelines is associated with an improvement in clinical outcomes, including length of stay, highlighting the importance of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery implementation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lena Wijk
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Örebro University Hospital, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Örebro University, Sweden.
| | - Ruzan Udumyan
- Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Medical Sciences, Örebro University, Sweden
| | - Basile Pache
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland
| | - Alon D Altman
- Winnipeg Health Sciences Centre, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada
| | - Laura L Williams
- Gynecologic Oncology of Middle Tennessee, HCA Centennial Hospital, Nashville, TN
| | - Kevin M Elias
- Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Jake McGee
- London Health Sciences Centre, London, ON, Canada
| | | | | | - Kevin Holcomb
- Clinical Obstetrics and Gynecology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY
| | - Chahin Achtari
- Gynecology Service, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland
| | - Olle Ljungqvist
- Department of Surgery, Örebro University Hospital, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Örebro University, Sweden
| | - Sean C Dowdy
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | - Gregg Nelson
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Tom Baker Cancer Centre, Calgary, AB, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
45
|
Kilts TP, Glaser GE, Langstraat CL, Kumar A, Weaver AL, Mc Gree ME, Gostout BS, Podratz KC, Dowdy SC, Cliby WA, Mariani A, Bakkum-Gamez JN. Comparing risk stratification criteria for predicting lymphatic dissemination in endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2019; 155:21-26. [PMID: 31409487 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2019.08.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/17/2019] [Revised: 07/26/2019] [Accepted: 08/02/2019] [Indexed: 01/29/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To compare two published risk stratification models (Milwaukee Model vs. Mayo Criteria) to predict lymphatic dissemination (LD) in endometrioid endometrial cancer (EC). METHODS Patients with stage I-III EC undergoing surgery from 1/1/2004-9/30/2013 were retrospectively reviewed and classified as low-risk vs at-risk for LD using two independent risk models. LD was defined as positive nodes at surgery or lymph node recurrence within 2 years of surgery after negative lymph node dissection (LND) or when LND was not performed. False positive (FP) and false negative (FN) rates for each risk model were calculated. RESULTS Among 1103 patients, 81 (7.3%) had LD (72 positive LN and 9 LN recurrences), and most (90.2%) had stage I EC. The Milwaukee Model yielded a low at-risk rate for LD (38.1%) but a high FN rate (13.6%, 95% CI 7.0-23.0). The traditional Mayo Criteria using a cut-off of 2 cm for tumor diameter (TD) had a higher at-risk rate for LD (69.5%) but a FN rate of 0% (95% CI, 0-4.5). Modifying the Mayo Criteria using a TD cutoff of ≤3 cm identified fewer women at-risk (56.8% vs. 69.5%) and had a lower FP rate (53.6% vs. 67.1%), but had a higher FN rate (3.7%, 95% CI, 0.8-10.4). CONCLUSIONS The Milwaukee Model had the lowest at-risk rate of LD but an unacceptable FN rate. Modifying the Mayo Criteria by increasing the TD cutoff from the traditional ≤2 cm to ≤3 cm would spare an estimated 13.5% of patients LND, but the accompanying FN rate is unacceptably high. The traditional Mayo Criteria for low-risk EC remains the most sensitive in determining which patients LND can be omitted.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Toni P Kilts
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Mayo Clinic, 200 1st St SW, Rochester, MN 55905, United States
| | - Gretchen E Glaser
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Mayo Clinic, 200 1st St SW, Rochester, MN 55905, United States
| | - Carrie L Langstraat
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Mayo Clinic, 200 1st St SW, Rochester, MN 55905, United States
| | - Amanika Kumar
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Mayo Clinic, 200 1st St SW, Rochester, MN 55905, United States
| | - Amy L Weaver
- Division of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, 55905, United States
| | - Michaela E Mc Gree
- Division of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, 55905, United States
| | - Bobbie S Gostout
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Mayo Clinic, 200 1st St SW, Rochester, MN 55905, United States
| | - Karl C Podratz
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Mayo Clinic, 200 1st St SW, Rochester, MN 55905, United States
| | - Sean C Dowdy
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Mayo Clinic, 200 1st St SW, Rochester, MN 55905, United States
| | - William A Cliby
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Mayo Clinic, 200 1st St SW, Rochester, MN 55905, United States
| | - Andrea Mariani
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Mayo Clinic, 200 1st St SW, Rochester, MN 55905, United States
| | - Jamie N Bakkum-Gamez
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Mayo Clinic, 200 1st St SW, Rochester, MN 55905, United States.
| |
Collapse
|
46
|
Mert I, Cliby WA, Bews KA, Habermann EB, Dowdy SC. Evidence-based wound classification for vulvar surgery: Implications for risk adjustment. Gynecol Oncol 2019; 154:280-282. [PMID: 31248667 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2019.06.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/10/2019] [Revised: 06/03/2019] [Accepted: 06/06/2019] [Indexed: 01/29/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES The correct wound classification for vulvar procedures (VP) is ambiguous according to current definitions, and infection rates are poorly described. We aimed to analyze rates of surgical site infection (SSI) in women who underwent VP to correctly categorize wound classification. METHODS Patients who underwent VP for dysplasia or carcinoma were collected from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database (NSQIP). SSI rates of vulvar cases were compared to patients who underwent abdominal hysterectomy via laparotomy, stratified by the National Academy of Sciences wound classification. Descriptive analyses and trend tests of categorical variables were performed. RESULTS Between 2008 and 2016, 2116 and 31,506 patients underwent a VP or TAH, respectively. Among VP, 1345 (63.6%), 364 (17.2%), and 407 (19.2%) women underwent simple vulvectomy, radical vulvectomy, or radical vulvectomy with lymphadenectomy, respectively. The overall rate of SSI for VP was higher than that observed for TAH (5.6% vs. 3.8%; p < 0.0001). While patients undergoing TAH displayed a corresponding increase in the rate of SSI with wound type (type I: 3.4%; type II: 3.8%, type III: 6.8%; type IV 10.6%; p < 0.001), no such correlation was observed for simple VP (type I: 3.3%, type II: 3.0%; type III: 3.2%; type IV: 0%; p = 0.40). On the other hand, a non-significant correlation was observed for radical VP (type I: 4.0%, type II: 10.1%; type III: 14.3%; type IV: 20.0%; p = 0.08). The overall rate of SSI in patients undergoing any radical VP was similar to patients undergoing hysterectomy with a type IV wound (10.1% vs 10.6%, p = 0.87). CONCLUSION Patients undergoing VP are at high risk of infection. Simple vulvectomy should be classified as a type II and radical vulvectomy as a type III wound. These recommendations are important for proper risk adjustment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- I Mert
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - W A Cliby
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - K A Bews
- Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA; Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery Surgical Outcomes Program, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - E B Habermann
- Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA; Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery Surgical Outcomes Program, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - S C Dowdy
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
47
|
Dowdy SC. Enhanced recovery after surgery for ovarian cancer. Clin Adv Hematol Oncol 2019; 17:217-219. [PMID: 31188812] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [MESH Headings] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/09/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Sean C Dowdy
- Mayo Clinic College of Medicine and Science, Rochester, Minnesota
| |
Collapse
|
48
|
Nelson G, Bakkum-Gamez J, Kalogera E, Glaser G, Altman A, Meyer LA, Taylor JS, Iniesta M, Lasala J, Mena G, Scott M, Gillis C, Elias K, Wijk L, Huang J, Nygren J, Ljungqvist O, Ramirez PT, Dowdy SC. Guidelines for perioperative care in gynecologic/oncology: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society recommendations-2019 update. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2019; 29:651-668. [PMID: 30877144 DOI: 10.1136/ijgc-2019-000356] [Citation(s) in RCA: 365] [Impact Index Per Article: 73.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/12/2019] [Accepted: 02/18/2019] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND This is the first updated Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society guideline presenting a consensus for optimal perioperative care in gynecologic/oncology surgery. METHODS A database search of publications using Embase and PubMed was performed. Studies on each item within the ERAS gynecologic/oncology protocol were selected with emphasis on meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials, and large prospective cohort studies. These studies were then reviewed and graded according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. RESULTS All recommendations on ERAS protocol items are based on best available evidence. The level of evidence for each item is presented accordingly. CONCLUSIONS The updated evidence base and recommendation for items within the ERAS gynecologic/oncology perioperative care pathway are presented by the ERAS® Society in this consensus review.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gregg Nelson
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Tom Baker Cancer Centre, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Jamie Bakkum-Gamez
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
| | - Eleftheria Kalogera
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
| | - Gretchen Glaser
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
| | - Alon Altman
- Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
| | - Larissa A Meyer
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Jolyn S Taylor
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Maria Iniesta
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Javier Lasala
- Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Gabriel Mena
- Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Michael Scott
- Department of Anesthesia, Virginia Commonwealth University Hospital, Richmond, Virginia, USA
| | - Chelsia Gillis
- Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Kevin Elias
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Lena Wijk
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden
| | - Jeffrey Huang
- Department of Anesthesiology, Oak Hill Hospital, Brooksville, Florida, USA
| | - Jonas Nygren
- Departments of Surgery and Clinical Sciences, Ersta Hospital and Danderyd Hospital, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Olle Ljungqvist
- Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine and Health, School of Health and Medical Sciences, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden
| | - Pedro T Ramirez
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Sean C Dowdy
- Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
| |
Collapse
|
49
|
Kalogera E, Glaser GE, Kumar A, Dowdy SC, Langstraat CL. Enhanced Recovery after Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Procedures with Bowel Surgery: A Systematic Review. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2019; 26:288-298. [DOI: 10.1016/j.jmig.2018.10.016] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/03/2018] [Revised: 10/16/2018] [Accepted: 10/17/2018] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
|
50
|
Long B, Lilyquist J, Weaver A, Hu C, Gnanaolivu R, Lee KY, Hart SN, Polley EC, Bakkum-Gamez JN, Couch FJ, Dowdy SC. Cancer susceptibility gene mutations in type I and II endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2019; 152:20-25. [PMID: 30612635 PMCID: PMC6326093 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2018.10.019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/29/2018] [Revised: 10/11/2018] [Accepted: 10/16/2018] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To determine the incidence of germline cancer predisposition gene mutations in patients with endometrial cancer (EC) subtypes. METHODS Germline DNA was extracted from whole blood collected from consenting patients undergoing primary surgery for EC between 5/2005 and 11/2016. DNA samples were evaluated by product sequencing from a targeted multiplex PCR panel including 21 known/suspected cancer predisposition genes. Variants were classified as pathogenic/likely pathogenic based on allele frequency (<0.003), effects on protein function, and ClinVar assertions. RESULTS Germline panel testing was performed on 1170 cases of EC; 849 (72.6%) were type I, and 321 (27.4%) were type II EC, including 135 (11.5%) uterine serous cancers (USC). BRCA1 mutations were enriched in Type II EC compared to Type I EC (0.93% vs. 0.12%, p = 0.07). Lynch Syndrome (LS) mutations were identified in 1.4% of type I and 1.6% of type II EC (p = 0.79), including 1.5% for USC. In total, predisposition gene mutations were present in 4.2% of type I and 5.3% of type II EC, as well as 6.7% of patients with USC). CONCLUSIONS BRCA1/2 and Lynch mutations were rare in this cohort of unselected patients with type I and II EC, including USC. However, the presence of predisposition gene mutations in 4.2% of EC type I, 5.3% of EC type II, and 6.7% of USC suggests that somatic mutation testing should be considered for all EC patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Beverly Long
- Mayo Clinic, Division of Gynecologic Oncology, United States of America.
| | - Jenna Lilyquist
- Mayo Clinic, Department of Epidemiology, United States of America
| | - Amy Weaver
- Mayo Clinic, Department of Biostatistics, United States of America
| | - Chunling Hu
- Mayo Clinic, Department of Pathology, United States of America
| | - Rohan Gnanaolivu
- Mayo Clinic, Department of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, United States of America
| | - Kun Y Lee
- Mayo Clinic, Department of Pathology, United States of America
| | - Steven N Hart
- Mayo Clinic, Department of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, United States of America
| | - Eric C Polley
- Mayo Clinic, Department of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, United States of America
| | | | - Fergus J Couch
- Mayo Clinic, Department of Epidemiology, United States of America
| | - Sean C Dowdy
- Mayo Clinic, Division of Gynecologic Oncology, United States of America
| |
Collapse
|