Yang, Qiuyu

Abstract Purpose: Colorectal Cancer (CRC) is a leading cause of death from cancer globally. Surgery is the mainstay of treatment for localized CRC; however, little is known about survival outcomes following CRC surgery in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). In this study, we examine the published literature for data on long-term outcomes following CRC resections in LMICs. Methods: We systematically reviewed PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Global Index Medicus for original research articles reporting survival data after CRC resection with curative intent in LMICs, published between January 2005 and May 2022. LMICs were defined according to the 2020 World Bank categories. We excluded studies without English full text or involving pediatric populations (<18 years), non-primary colorectal, benign disease, and endoscopic/transanal resection only. Studies from China dominated the published literature and were excluded. Abstracts and full texts were reviewed by two independent reviewers, and a third reviewer resolved conflicts. Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) data were extracted, and random effects modelling was used to estimate the pooled survival rates. Results: Our search returned 32,261 articles. After deduplication, 20,729 abstracts were assessed for eligibility, with 154 articles meeting inclusion criteria, representing a total of 20,589 CRC patients. 98 (63.6%) studies were from upper-middle-income (UM) countries, 55 (35.7%) from lower-middle-income (LM) countries and only one was from a low-income (L) country. Notably, only 27 (20%) of the 137 LMICs were represented in the literature. Turkey accounted for the highest frequency (29%) of included articles. Most (60%) of the studies were retrospective cohort design, and only three (3) were randomized controlled trials. The pooled 5-year OS estimate was 88% (95% CI: 77–95) for Stage I disease, 76% (69–81) for Stage II, and 57% (49–64) for Stage III. 5-year DFS estimates were 82% (71–90), 76% (67–84), and 59% (51–65) for stages I, II and III respectively. Survival rates varied considerably between income groups, with the strongest disparity seen with Stage III OS data at 18 months: 89% in UM, 86% in LM, and 50% in L (p=0.0005). Conclusion: With the rising incidence of CRC in LMICs, our work highlights the dearth of data on long-term outcomes following CRC operations in LMICs and emphasizes the urgent need for research capacity building, especially in low-income countries. Citation Format: Oluwasegun Afolaranmi, Thomas M. Diehl, Sehar Salim Virani, Qiuyu Yang, Kenechukwu Okwunze, Adel H. Khan, Nabiha Akhlaq Mughal, Daniel Schroeder, Sheida Pourdashti, Leslie Christensen, Sadaf Khan, Syed Nabeel Zafar. Survival Following Colorectal Cancer Surgery in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 13th Annual Symposium on Global Cancer Research; 2025 Sep 16. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2025;34(12_Suppl):Abstract nr 84.

ABSTRACT Background Prompt detection and intervention are crucial for improving outcomes in acute invasive fungal rhinosinusitis (AIFS). Diagnostic prediction models assist in risk‐stratification, but their accuracy requires testing through external validation. This study aims to validate a previously published diagnostic prediction model for AIFS in an independent cohort. Methods A retrospective chart review was conducted at a tertiary care center (2008–2023) to identify patients with an otolaryngology consult for suspected AIFS. Of 65 patients identified, 11 (16.9%) were diagnosed with AIFS based on histopathology. Risk was calculated using Yin et al.’s predictive model. Predictive performance was assessed by calibration and discrimination. Results Patients had significantly higher rates of diabetes (46.2% vs. 26.1%, p = 0.002), long‐term steroid use (60% vs. 28.2%, p < 0.0001), and solid organ transplantation (38.5% vs. 8.5%, p < 0.001), compared with the development cohort, with conversely lower rates of hematologic malignancy (29.2% vs. 58.7, p < 0.001) and neutropenia (19.4% vs. 41%, p = 0.001). Despite these differences, both the three‐variable (C‐index: 0.844; 95% CI, 0.736–0.952) and four‐variable models (C‐index: 0.963; 95% CI, 0.919–1) showed adequate discrimination. Both models exhibited slight overprediction of risk, with a calibration‐in‐the‐large predicted risk of 24.1% (95% CI, 13.68–34.46) for the three‐variable model and 24.2% (95% CI, 13.76–34.57) for the four‐variable model. Calibration plots confirmed overprediction. Conclusion The AIFS diagnostic model demonstrates acceptable discrimination and calibration on external validation, with generalizability to patients with different comorbidities. Larger studies are recommended to further test the model's predictive performance and clinical applicability.

Abstract Background: The COVID-19 pandemic rapidly altered health care worldwide. To save protective equipment and minimize exposures, many hospitals stopped some or all cancer surgery, leading oncologic providers to quickly adjust patient management. The goal of this study is to describe the breast cancer patient level changes which occurred during the initial months of COVID-19 in the United States. Methods: The American Society of Breast Surgeons developed a COVID-19 specific registry, within the established HIPPA compliant Mastery of Breast Surgery Program. Surgeons entered patient demographic data as well as their surgical and medical care (Neoadjuvant endocrine (NET) vs Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT)). Data fields tracked whether decisions were usual for that practice, or modified due to COVID-19. Results: Between 3/1 and 6/17/2020, data from 1781 patients was entered by 154 surgeons. Mean age was 63, 78% Caucasian, 10% African American, 6% Hispanic; with geographic distribution ranging from 10.8% Northwest to 29.5% Northeast. Initial consultation took place in-person for 94.8% and only 5.2% (89) occurred via video/telephone. To date, just over 1% (14) of patients tested positive for COVID-19. Mean invasive tumor size was 21.2mm and 15.7% were node positive. Of 1445 invasive breast cancers 75% (1081) were ER +/HER2-, 13.5% (195) HER2+, 11.1% (160) triple negative (TNBC) (9/missing data). DCIS comprised 18.2% (325) of the cohort. Of 267 cases of ER+ DCIS, 49% (131) had primary surgery and 49% (130) received NET. The majority of NET use was due to COVID-19, 95% (124). Almost all (50/52) ER- DCIS underwent primary surgery (6/missing ER). Table 1 describes the management for the 1436 patients with invasive cancer with known biomarkers. NET due to COVID-19 was utilized in 45% (482), with only 5% (54) as part of usual practice. Increasing age was not a statistically significant factor in the use of NET (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.97-1.01). In comparison to patients from the Northwest, patients from the Southwest and Northeast had the greatest use of NET(COVID-19) vs NET(usual) (ORs 14.4 and 4.6) Genomic assay testing was performed on the core biopsy in 216 patients, with 65% (141) due to COVID-19. Among the patients who had genomic testing due to COVID-19, 116 (82%) had NET, 18 (13%) had NCT, with the remaining having primary surgery. Of 472 patients treated with primary surgery for which the impact of COVID-19 was provided, surgery was delayed in 20% (96). Patients from the Northeast had a 2.1 x greater odds of having surgery delayed in comparison to those from the Midwest. Patients also experienced changes to their surgical plan with the most common changes being 6% (27) converting from mastectomy to breast conservation and 7% (34) from mastectomy with reconstruction to mastectomy without reconstruction. Conclusion: COVID-19 led to significant modifications in breast cancer treatment, including high rates of NET, genomic assay testing on core biopsies as well as delays in surgery; each of which were consistent with the prioritization and treatment recommendations from the COVID-19 Pandemic Breast Cancer Consortium. The majority of patients with TNBC and HER2+ disease received guideline concordant NCT. The ASBrS Mastery COVID-19 registry provides a snapshot into the rapid care changes caused by the pandemic, has ongoing data entry and analysis and will enable understanding of the impact on long term breast cancer outcomes. Table 1: Biomarker specific treatmentsER+/HER2- (1081)TNBC (160)HER2+/any ER (195)Mean Age656159African American (%)97(9%)21(13%)27(14%)Primary Surgery (usual)386 (36%)50 (31%)37 (19%)Primary Surgery (COVID-19)28 (2.6%)6 (3.7%)6 (3.1%)NET (usual)54 (5%)NA1(0.5%)NET (COVID-19)482 (45%)NA6 (3.6%)NCT (usual)90 (8.3%)98 (61%)137 (70%)NCT (COVID-19)39 (3.6%)6 (3.7%)8 (4.1%) Citation Format: Lee Gravatt Wilke, Toan T Nguyen, Qiuyu Yang, Bret M Hanlon, Kathryn A Wagner, Pamela Strickland, Eric A Brown, Jill Dietz, Judy C Boughey. Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the multidisciplinary management of breast cancer: Initial analysis of the american society of breast surgeons mastery COVID-19 registry [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2020 San Antonio Breast Cancer Virtual Symposium; 2020 Dec 8-11; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2021;81(4 Suppl):Abstract nr SS2-01.