Wasif, Nabil

ABSTRACT Background Post‐pancreatectomy exocrine insufficiency is common after resection for pancreatic cancer and requires pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy (PERT). We sought to determine the out‐of‐pocket cost of PERT and the association between PERT and survival. Methods The SEER‐linked Medicare database was queried for patients with pancreatic cancer who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) or distal pancreatectomy (DP) from 2010 to 2019. Cumulative out‐of‐pocket costs were calculated and stratified by procedure and radiation. Results 11,854 Medicare beneficiaries with resected pancreatic cancer were identified, 4,653 (39%) required PERT and 7,201 (61%) did not. Median age was 73.0, 50.6% were female and 83.6% White. 25.9% underwent DP and 74.1% underwent PD; 7% received neoadjuvant radiation while 23.5% received adjuvant radiation. Logistic regression demonstrated that female sex (OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.16‐1.35, p < 0.001), neoadjuvant radiation (OR 1.93, 95% CI 1.67‐2.24, p < 0.001), and PD (OR 2.45, 95% CI 2.23‐2.7, p < 0.001) were risk factors for requiring PERT. Patients without subsidies who underwent DP paid a cumulative $4,736 out‐of‐pocket for PERT after 5 years, those who underwent PD paid $5,601 out‐of‐pocket. Conclusions Nearly 40% of Medicare beneficiaries took PERT after resection for pancreatic cancer and paid thousands in out‐of‐pocket costs. While a conservative estimate, these findings highlight the importance of addressing this financial burden to patients.

ABSTRACT Background and Objectives NCCN guidelines recommend right hemicolectomy (RHC) for appendiceal neuroendocrine tumors (aNETs) > 2 cm and observation for < 1 cm. However, optimal surgical management of 1–2 cm tumors remains controversial. This study compared long‐term survival and recurrence between patients undergoing RHC versus appendectomy (APY) for 1–2 cm aNETs. Methods Patients with pathologically confirmed 1–2 cm aNETs treated at three Mayo Clinic sites (1972–2024) were included. Primary outcomes were recurrence and all‐cause mortality after resection. Associations with lymph node (LN) metastasis were assessed in patients with lymphadenectomy. Results Sixty‐five patients were identified: 29 (45%) underwent APY, 35 (54%) RHC, and one ileocecectomy. Median age at diagnosis was 39 years; 71% were female and 94% white. LN positivity was 15.2% for tumors with nodes examined. Tumor size > 1.5 cm, stage T3/T4, and lymphovascular invasion were not associated with nodal metastasis. No survival differences were observed between APY and RHC. LN positivity did not impact survival. No recurrences occurred during a median follow‐up of 6.25 years (IQR 2.44–12.63). Conclusions Among patients with 1–2 cm aNETs, RHC conferred no survival benefit over APY. Absence of recurrence and the limited prognostic value of nodal disease suggest APY alone may suffice for this population.

BACKGROUND: Subtotal cholecystectomy is increasingly recommended as a bailout strategy for the difficult gallbladder, yet its long-term durability and the risk profile of subsequent completion cholecystectomy remain incompletely defined. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a population-based retrospective cohort study of adults undergoing laparoscopic or open subtotal cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis from 2012 to 2021 using Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project state databases from New York and Florida. The primary endpoint was remnant cholecystitis, defined as a postoperative emergency, inpatient, or outpatient diagnosis of cholecystitis or need for subsequent cholecystectomy. Kaplan–Meier analysis estimated cumulative incidence. Secondary outcomes included completion cholecystectomy and bile duct injury requiring surgical repair. RESULTS: Among 2,682 patients (98.7% laparoscopic), the cumulative incidence of remnant cholecystitis was 13.3% during a median follow-up of 2 years (interquartile range [IQR] 0.7 to 4.1). The median time to developing remnant cholecystitis was 28 days (IQR 13 to 91), with 79.7% occurring within 6 months. Only 70 patients (2.6%) underwent completion cholecystectomy at a median of 103 days (IQR 43 to 202). Completion cholecystectomy was performed via open surgery in 47.1% of patients and was associated with a 7.1% bile duct injury rate and median length of stay of 3 days (IQR 1 to 7), compared with a 0.9% bile duct injury rate for subtotal cholecystectomy overall. CONCLUSIONS: Although remnant cholecystitis occurred in 13.3% of patients after subtotal cholecystectomy, few required completion cholecystectomy. When necessary, completion cholecystectomy was frequently open and associated with a substantially higher bile duct injury rate, supporting referral to experienced hepatobiliary centers for reoperation.

Background: ASCO recommends extended venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) or direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) following cancer surgery. However, these recommendations were based on trials using routine venography, which detects asymptomatic VTEs, and real-life efficacy is not well studied. We aimed to assess the association of extended VTE prophylaxis with the incidence of clinically significant VTE after elective cancer surgery. Patients and Methods: In this retrospective, population-based cohort study, we identified patients who underwent surgical resection for lung, breast, esophageal, gastric, pancreas, and colon cancer from 2010 to 2017 using the SEER–Medicare linked dataset. Patients were divided into 1 of 2 main groups for comparative analyses: those who received extended VTE prophylaxis after cancer surgery and those who did not. Patients who received extended VTE prophylaxis after cancer surgery were identified as those prescribed prophylactic doses of LMWH or a DOAC within 7 days of discharge, as captured in Medicare Part D files. Results: A total of 113,739 Medicare beneficiaries were identified, of whom 1,570 (1.4%) received extended VTE prophylaxis. There was a year-over-year increase in the use of extended VTE prophylaxis during the study period, rising from 0.6% in 2010 to 3.3% in 2017. The overall incidence of VTE was 1.6% at 1 month, 4.3% at 6 months, 5.7% at 12 months, with significant differences observed across cancer types ( P <.001). However, patients who received extended VTE prophylaxis had a higher 1-year cumulative incidence of postoperative VTE compared with those who did not (11.4% vs 5.3%; P <.001), an association that was consistent across cancer sites. In adjusted analyses, extended VTE prophylaxis was independently associated with an increased risk of VTE (hazard ratio, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.3–2.0; P <.001). Extended prophylaxis was also associated with a higher 1-year incidence of bleeding events compared with patients who did not receive prophylaxis (12.0% vs 8.5%; P <.001). Conclusions: The utilization of extended VTE prophylaxis after cancer surgery remains low, although it has increased every year. Paradoxically, patients who received extended VTE prophylaxis had higher incidences of clinically significant VTE and bleeding compared with those who did not, likely reflecting patient selection and surveillance bias after surgery. In light of these findings, national guidelines recommending postoperative extended VTE prophylaxis, and its use as a surrogate for quality of care, should continue to be re-examined.

Background: Upfront resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is defined by the NCCN as disease with ≤180° portomesenteric vein (PMV) abutment. However, the clinical significance of PMV abutment in this cohort remains unexplored, and we sought to investigate its impact. Methods: This multi-institutional study included patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) for upfront resectable PDAC from 2002 to 2023. Patients with PDAC with ≤180° PMV abutment were compared with those without. Overall survival (OS) was compared and stratified based on whether patients underwent upfront surgery or neoadjuvant therapy (NAT). Results: Among 1,446 patients included, 521 (36.0%) had PMV abutment. Median OS for patients with PMV abutment was 28.8 months compared with 31.2 months for those without ( P =.17). In a stratified analysis of patients who underwent upfront surgery, patients with PMV abutment had worse OS (19.2 vs 27.6 months; P <.05) and lower R0 resection rates (63.1% vs 87.2%; P <.05) compared with those without. However, in patients who underwent NAT, this difference in R0 resection rate was not observed (91.4% vs 94.0%, respectively; P =.27). Furthermore, there was no significant difference in median OS with NAT (42.5 vs 51.6 months, respectively; P =.48). Conclusions: In this largest cohort to date of patients with upfront resectable PDAC, PMV abutment was associated with worse OS compared with no PMV abutment when an upfront resection strategy was used. The use of NAT in patients with PMV abutment mitigated this survival difference with increased R0 resection rates. These findings suggest that patients with upfront resectable PDAC with PMV abutment benefit from a NAT approach for optimal survival outcomes, and that the current criteria guidelines need to be redefined.

PURPOSE Neoadjuvant immune checkpoint inhibitors (nICIs) have demonstrated high response rates in deficient mismatch repair/microsatellite instability–high (dMMR/MSI-H) gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma (GEA). The NEONIPIGA and INFINITY trials demonstrated high rates of pathologic complete response (pCR) in this patient population. Furthermore, the INFINITY trial explored the feasibility of managing these patients nonoperatively, demonstrating promising results. This study aimed to evaluate clinical outcomes of nICIs in resectable dMMR/MSI-H GEA, with a focus on the feasibility of nonoperative management (NOM). MATERIALS AND METHODS This retrospective cohort study included patients with resectable dMMR/MSI-H GEA and treated with nICIs ± surgery at the Mayo Clinic. Patients were identified from institutional records, and clinical data were retrospectively reviewed. Primary outcomes were clinical complete response (cCR) and pCR. Secondary outcomes included event-free survival (EFS), radiologic complete response (rCR), and immune-related adverse events (irAEs). RESULTS A total of 26 patients treated between April 1, 2017, and July 30, 2025, were identified. Nine patients (34.6%) underwent surgery, of whom six (66.7%) achieved pCR. Seventeen patients (65.4%) pursued NOM, with 10 (71.4%) of 14 evaluable patients achieving cCR and 14 (82.4%) of 17 evaluable achieving rCR. One patient who initially achieved cCR had a local recurrence on surveillance endoscopy and underwent salvage endoscopic resection. At a median follow-up of 19.3 months, 15 (88.2%) of 17 patients in the NOM cohort were alive and metastasis-free, with EFS rates of 87.3% at 12 and 24 months for all patients. irAEs occurred in nine patients (34.6%), with no grade ≥3 toxicities. CONCLUSION In this retrospective cohort study, nICIs led to high cCR and pCR rates in resectable dMMR/MSI-H GEA, supporting the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors in this setting and the feasibility of NOM in select patients.

Importance Contemporary guidelines recommend sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) for patients with melanoma with predicted risk of SLN metastasis greater than 10% and consideration of SLNB when the risk is 5% to 10%. A gene expression profile (GEP)–based test that can accurately identify patients with a low risk of SLN metastasis would refine selection for SLNB. Objective To establish the predictive capability of the combined clinicopathological factors and GEP (CP-GEP) test to identify patients with primary cutaneous melanoma who can safely forgo SLNB and to investigate the prognostic value of CP-GEP regarding the outcome in patients with cutaneous melanoma after a negative SLNB (not reported herein). Design, Setting, and Participants This prognostic study was conducted from September 2021 to June 2024 at 9 academic medical centers with experienced melanoma surgeons. Included were patients with biopsy-proven invasive cutaneous melanoma with T1 to T3 tumors and clinically negative regional LNs. All patients were deemed candidates for SLNB using standard clinical criteria. GEP was performed on formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue from the primary melanoma biopsy. Analyses were performed from December 2024 to August 2025. Intervention CP-GEP testing to determine risk of having a positive SLNB in patients with T1 to T3 cutaneous melanoma who were considered appropriate candidates for the procedure based on standard clinical parameters. Main Outcomes and Measures CP-GEP results were reported as low risk or high risk; the primary outcome measure was negative predictive value (NPV) in low-risk cases. Analyses included NPV assessment by tumor (T) subcategory, primary site, and age. Results A total of 1761 patients (median [IQR] age, 64 [53-72] years; 997 male [56.6%]) underwent SLNB (310 [17.6%] SLN positive) and had a successful CP-GEP test; GEP was successful in 97.7% of samples. A total of 651 patients (37.0%) were considered low risk by CP-GEP. Among low-risk cases, 46 (7.1%) were SLN positive, and NPV was 92.9% (95% CI, 90.7%-94.8%). High-risk cases had a 23.8% (264 of 1110) SLN-positive rate. The percentage of cases with low-risk CP-GEP declined with increasing T category (T1 = 346 of 507 [68.2%]; T2 = 295 of 897 [32.9%]; T3 = 10 of 357 [2.8%]). CP-GEP results were consistent in discriminating SLN-positive rates across primary sites, histologic subtypes, and mitotic count categories. In 2 large subsets, clinical stage IB (n = 1187) and patients 65 years and older (n = 832), 6.5% (95% CI, 4.6%-8.8%) of low-risk clinical stage IB cases and 6.6% (95% CI, 4.2%-9.7%) of all low-risk cases in patients 65 years and older were SLN positive vs 18.3% (95% CI, 15.3%-21.6%) and 20.3% (95% CI, 16.8%-24.2%) for high-risk cases, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance In this multicenter, prospective, blinded, prognostic study, the CP-GEP test reliably identified patients with melanoma with less than 10% SLN metastasis risk. SLN metastasis rates were approximately 3-fold greater for high-risk vs low-risk CP-GEP cases. In appropriately selected patients, the CP-GEP test may add value for shared patient-surgeon decision-making.

This study examines the relevance of minimum case volume recommendations in contemporary practice.