Chang, Yu-Hui

ABSTRACT Background and Objectives There is increasing use of neoadjuvant treatment (NAT) for patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC). The role of additional adjuvant chemotherapy (AT) is not well‐defined. This study aims to determine the impact of lymphovascular invasion (LVI) and lymph node (LN) involvement on overall survival (OS) in patients with resected PDAC and determine the impact of AT after NAT. Methods This is an observational cohort study of patients with PDAC who underwent NAT and surgical resection. A multivariable model was used to assess for differences in OS. An interaction term between LVI or LN involvement and AT use was utilized to test the benefit of additional AT. Results Seven thousand four hundred and fourteen patients were included; group A (LVI‐, LN‐) had 2787 patients, B (LVI + , LN‐) 652, C (LVI‐, LN + ) 1,712, and D (LVI + , LN + ) 2263. Median OS differed significantly between groups, A had the most favorable survival (34.1 months), followed by B (27.8 months), C (26.3 months), and D (21.2 months, p < 0.001). In patients with persistent LVI or LN involvement after NAT, additional AT was not associated with OS (group A, HR: 0.94, p = 0.4; B and C, HR: 1.0, p = 0.99; D, HR: 0.94, p = 0.32). Conclusions LVI and LN involvement were independently associated with worse OS. After NAT, the use of AT in patients with persistent LVI and LN involvement was not associated with improved OS.

Introduction. Optimization of outcomes of extra-abdominal STS is not clearly understood. We sought to determine whether hospital surgical volume and adherence to NCCN guidelines, or both, are associated with outcomes in the treatment of extra-abdominal soft tissue sarcoma (STS).Methods. The National Cancer Database (NCDB) was queried for patients undergoing surgery for extra-abdominal STS diagnosed from 2003 to 2007. Mean annual hospital volume for STS surgery was divided into volume terciles (1T ≤3, 2T 4–10, and 3T ≥11 cases/year). Adherence to NCCN guidelines was determined. Primary outcome was overall survival.Results. Our study population consisted of 13,684 patients with a median age of 56 years. 3T hospitals were more likely to adhere to NCCN guidelines for stage III patients (63% versus 47%;p≤0.001) than 1T hospitals. On multivariable analysis, adherence to NCCN guidelines was associated with improved survival (HR = 0.79, CI 0.73–0.87;p<0.001), but hospital volume was not (3T versus 1T: HR = 0.92, CI 0.82–1.02;p=0.12). Five-year overall survival was comparable for compliant groups at 1T, 2T, and 3T hospitals (72%, 72.4%, and 72.6%, resp.). 3T hospitals were not associated with a lower risk of 30-day mortality (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.44–1.11) compared to 1T hospitals but did have a higher R0 resection rate (OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.32–1.54).Conclusions. Adherence to NCCN guidelines, irrespective of hospital volume, is associated with improved overall survival for patients with extra-abdominal STS. High-volume hospitals more often adhere to guidelines, but low-volume hospitals that follow national guidelines may achieve comparable outcomes.

New onset diabetes after transplantation (NODAT) occurs less frequently in living donor liver transplant (LDLT) recipients than in deceased donor liver transplant (DDLT) recipients. The aim of this study was to compare the incidence and predictive factors for NODAT in LDLT versus DDLT recipients. The Organ Procurement and Transplant Network/United Network for Organ Sharing database was reviewed from 2004 to 2010, and 902 LDLT and 19,582 DDLT nondiabetic recipients were included. The overall incidence of NODAT was 12.2% at 1 year after liver transplantation. At 1, 3, and 5 years after transplant, the incidence of NODAT in LDLT recipients was 7.4, 2.1, and 2.6%, respectively, compared to 12.5, 3.4, and 1.9%, respectively, in DDLT recipients. LDLT recipients have a lower risk of NODAT compared to DDLT recipients (hazard ratio = 0.63 (0.52–0.75),P<0.001). Predictors for NODAT in LDLT recipients were hepatitis C (HCV) and treated acute cellular rejection (ACR). Risk factors in DDLT recipients were recipient male gender, recipient age, body mass index, donor age, donor diabetes, HCV, and treated ACR. LDLT recipients have a lower incidence and fewer risk factors for NODAT compared to DDLT recipients. Early identification of risk factors will assist timely clinical interventions to prevent NODAT complications.