Geller, David A.

Abstract Introduction: Recruitment for rare disease studies is challenging due to small eligible populations. Traditional clinical research management systems often lack tools to track recruitment contacts prior to enrollment. The NET-PRO study, focused on neuroendocrine tumors (NETs), implemented a participation monitoring system to enhance recruitment efficiency and representativeness. Methods: NET-PRO is a multicenter cohort study of 2538 adults diagnosed with gastroenteropancreatic (GEP) or lung NETs between January 2018 and September 2024. Recruitment occurred from January 2022 to February 2025 across 14 U.S. medical centers. Sites used flexible recruitment methods (email, mail, phone, in-clinic) and tracked contacts using REDCap-based tools. Participant characteristics were analyzed by enrollment mode (online or mail) and recruitment difficulty (number of contacts required prior to enrollment) using standardized mean differences, chi-square tests, and ANOVA. Results: Of 9279 contacted patients, 2675 consented (28.8%) and 2538 enrolled (27.4%). Most enrolled online (83.2%), while 16.8% enrolled by mail. Mail respondents were older, had lower education and income, and more comorbidities. Among those enrolled, recruitment difficulty was associated with older age, lower education and income, but not comorbidity. Over half of the most difficult-to-recruit participants enrolled online. Contact methods varied by attempt, with email dominating early contacts and phone/mail used more in later attempts. Conclusions: A participation monitoring tool supported flexible, multimodal recruitment and improved sample representativeness in a rare cancer study. Tracking recruitment contacts enabled adaptive strategies and may reduce bias in observational research by enabling better outreach to harder-to-reach populations.

Introduction: Liver transplantation (LT) provides significant survival benefits to patients with unresectable HCC. In the United States, organ allocation policies for HCCs within the United Network for Organ Sharing criteria do not prioritize patients based on their differences in oncological characteristics. This study assessed whether transplant-associated survival benefits (TASBs) vary among patients with different tumor burden scores (TBS) measured at the time of listing. Methods: We analyzed data from adults applying for HCC MELD exception points between 2002 and 2019, with follow-up until December 2023, using the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. TBS was determined based on the largest tumor diameter and number of HCCs. Patients were categorized into low (≤3), intermediate (3.1–5), and high (>5) TBS groups. TASB was measured as the difference in 5-year survival with and without LT. Results: This study included 36,634 LT candidates. High-TBS patients had higher waitlist dropout rates and marginally lower post-transplant survival, resulting in a significantly greater TASB. The 5-year TASB for the low, intermediate, and high TBS groups were 15.7, 22.1, and 25.0 months, respectively. The adjusted survival benefit expressed in 5-year survival differences was 21.9%, 34.5%, and 39.4% in the low, intermediate, and high TBS groups, respectively ( p <0.001). Conclusions: Higher TBS during listing correlates with greater LT benefits for patients with unresectable HCC within UNOS criteria. We conclude that organ allocation policies in the United States should prioritize patients with high TBS due to their increased risk of dropout and comparable post-transplant survival when compared to patients with less advanced tumors.

AbstractBackground and ObjectivesThere is limited research on management of metastatic anal canal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) to the liver. This study aimed to describe outcomes for patients undergoing liver resection of anal SCC metastases.MethodsA multicenter, retrospective cohort study was conducted by three tertiary‐referral centers. Patients undergoing liver surgery between 2008 and 2022 were included. Cox regression analysis was performed to evaluate predictors of recurrence and survival and Kaplan–Meier analysis was performed for 1‐, 3‐, and 5‐year survival.ResultsTwenty‐one patients underwent liver resection and/or ablation. None were HIV positive and 24% had known HPV infection. 20/21(95%) patients had undergone Nigro protocol for management of the primary tumor with 12/21 (57%) patients experiencing complete response. 4/21 (19%) patients had synchronous liver metastases at time of diagnosis. Median tumor size was 5.0 cm and median tumor number was one. At analysis, 52% remained alive. Median overall survival was 32.2 months. 5‐year overall survival was 50%. Median recurrence‐free survival was 7.7 months and 5‐year recurrence‐free survival was 30%. Need for salvage abdominoperineal resection was negatively associated with recurrence‐free survival. The most common site of recurrence was the liver.ConclusionsLiver resection for metastatic anal SCC can be beneficial for appropriately selected patients.

Objective: To compare minimally invasive (MILR) and open liver resections (OLRs) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients with metabolic syndrome (MS). Background: Liver resections for HCC on MS are associated with high perioperative morbidity and mortality. No data on the minimally invasive approach in this setting exist. Material and Methods: A multicenter study involving 24 institutions was conducted. Propensity scores were calculated, and inverse probability weighting was used to weight comparisons. Short-term and long-term outcomes were investigated. Results: A total of 996 patients were included: 580 in OLR and 416 in MILR. After weighing, groups were well matched. Blood loss was similar between groups (OLR 275.9±3.1 vs MILR 226±4.0, P=0.146). There were no significant differences in 90-day morbidity (38.9% vs 31.9% OLRs and MILRs, P=0.08) and mortality (2.4% vs 2.2% OLRs and MILRs, P=0.84). MILRs were associated with lower rates of major complications (9.3% vs 15.3%, P=0.015), posthepatectomy liver failure (0.6% vs 4.3%, P=0.008), and bile leaks (2.2% vs 6.4%, P=0.003); ascites was significantly lower at postoperative day 1 (2.7% vs 8.1%, P=0.002) and day 3 (3.1% vs 11.4%, P<0.001); hospital stay was significantly shorter (5.8±1.9 vs 7.5±1.7, P<0.001). There was no significant difference in overall survival and disease-free survival. Conclusions: MILR for HCC on MS is associated with equivalent perioperative and oncological outcomes to OLRs. Fewer major complications, posthepatectomy liver failures, ascites, and bile leaks can be obtained, with a shorter hospital stay. The combination of lower short-term severe morbidity and equivalent oncologic outcomes favor MILR for MS when feasible.

Background: Metabolic syndrome (MS) is rapidly growing as risk factor for HCC. Liver resection for HCC in patients with MS is associated with increased postoperative risks. There are no data on factors associated with postoperative complications. Aims: The aim was to identify risk factors and develop and validate a model for postoperative major morbidity after liver resection for HCC in patients with MS, using a large multicentric Western cohort. Materials and Methods: The univariable logistic regression analysis was applied to select predictive factors for 90 days major morbidity. The model was built on the multivariable regression and presented as a nomogram. Performance was evaluated by internal validation through the bootstrap method. The predictive discrimination was assessed through the concordance index. Results: A total of 1087 patients were gathered from 24 centers between 2001 and 2021. Four hundred and eighty-four patients (45.2%) were obese. Most liver resections were performed using an open approach (59.1%), and 743 (68.3%) underwent minor hepatectomies. Three hundred and seventy-six patients (34.6%) developed postoperative complications, with 13.8% major morbidity and 2.9% mortality rates. Seven hundred and thirteen patients had complete data and were included in the prediction model. The model identified obesity, diabetes, ischemic heart disease, portal hypertension, open approach, major hepatectomy, and changes in the nontumoral parenchyma as risk factors for major morbidity. The model demonstrated an AUC of 72.8% (95% CI: 67.2%–78.2%) (https://childb.shinyapps.io/NomogramMajorMorbidity90days/). Conclusions: Patients undergoing liver resection for HCC and MS are at high risk of postoperative major complications and death. Careful patient selection, considering baseline characteristics, liver function, and type of surgery, is key to achieving optimal outcomes.

Objective: The European Guidelines Meeting on Laparoscopic Liver Surgery was held in Southampton on February 10 and 11, 2017 with the aim of presenting and validating clinical practice guidelines for laparoscopic liver surgery. Background: The exponential growth of laparoscopic liver surgery in recent years mandates the development of clinical practice guidelines to direct the speciality's continued safe progression and dissemination. Methods: A unique approach to the development of clinical guidelines was adopted. Three well-validated methods were integrated: the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network methodology for the assessment of evidence and development of guideline statements; the Delphi method of establishing expert consensus, and the AGREE II-GRS Instrument for the assessment of the methodological quality and external validation of the final statements. Results: Along with the committee chairman, 22 European experts; 7 junior experts and an independent validation committee of 11 international surgeons produced 67 guideline statements for the safe progression and dissemination of laparoscopic liver surgery. Each of the statements reached at least a 95% consensus among the experts and were endorsed by the independent validation committee. Conclusion: The European Guidelines Meeting for Laparoscopic Liver Surgery has produced a set of clinical practice guidelines that have been independently validated for the safe development and progression of laparoscopic liver surgery. The Southampton Guidelines have amalgamated the available evidence and a wealth of experts’ knowledge taking in consideration the relevant stakeholders’ opinions and complying with the international methodology standards.