Zaorsky, Nicholas G.

Background: Increased facility surgical treatment volume is sometimes associated with improved survival in patients with cancer; however, published studies evaluating volume are heterogeneous and disparate in their patient inclusion and definition of volume. The purpose of this work was to evaluate uniformly the impact of surgical facility volume on survival in patients with cancer. Methods: The National Cancer Database was searched for patients diagnosed in 2004 through 2013 with the 12 cancers most commonly treated surgically. Facilities were stratified by 4 categories using the overall population (low, intermediate, high, and very high), each including 25% of patients, and then stratified by each individual disease site. Five-year postsurgery survival was estimated using both the Kaplan-Meier method and corresponding log-rank tests for group comparisons. Cox proportional hazard models were used to evaluate the effects of facility volume on 5-year postsurgery survival further, adjusted for multiple covariates. Results: A total of 3,923,618 patients who underwent surgery were included from 1,139 facilities. Of these, 40.4% had breast cancer, 12.8% prostate cancer, and 10.0% colon cancer. Most patients were female (65.0%), White (86.4%), and privately insured (51.6%) with stage 0–III disease (64.8%). For all cancers, the risk of death for patients undergoing surgery at very high-volume facilities was 88% of that for those treated at low-volume facilities. Hazard ratios (HRs) were greatest (very high vs low volume) for cancer of the prostate (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.63–0.69), pancreas (HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.71–0.78), and esophagus (HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.73–0.83), and for melanoma (HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.78–0.84); differences were smallest for uterine and non–small cell lung cancers. Overall survival differences were greatest for cancers of the brain, pancreas, and esophagus. Conclusions: Patients treated surgically at higher-volume facilities consistently had improved overall survival compared with those treated at low-volume centers, although the magnitude of difference was cancer-specific.

Objectives: Metastatic cancer has historically been considered fatal; however, there is a paucity of evidence characterizing the epidemiology of incidence, treatment, and outcomes in these patients. Materials and Methods: Incidence rates, annual percent change (APC), descriptive epidemiological statistics, and odds ratios for survival were calculated using registry data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) and the National Cancer Database (NCDB), 1998 to 2015. Results: There were a total of 1,055,860 patients with metastatic cancer. The most frequent primary cancers were lung (42.6%), colorectal (9.5%), and ovarian (5.5%). Metastatic lung and colorectal cancer incidence decreased, APC: −1.57 (P<0.001) and APC: −1.48 (P<0.001), respectively; metastatic pancreatic cancer incidence increased, APC: 0.62 (P=0.001). The use of local therapies decreased for almost all sites, and the use of systemic therapies increased across multiple sites: single-agent chemotherapy in kidney (2.54% increase/year), female breast (1.14% increase/year), and prostate cancer (1.08% increase/year); multiagent chemotherapy, most notably in pancreas (2.23% increase/year), uterus (1.81% increase/year), and colorectal cancer (1.54% increase/year). Increased utilization of immunotherapy was observed across the majority of sites, most notably in melanoma (2.14% increase/year). Patients diagnosed from 2006 to 2010 had 17.4% higher odds of surviving at least 60 months compared with 1998 to 2002. Conclusions: In this study, metastatic disease has been shown to have unique epidemiological patterns, and survival has improved. Continued research on metastatic disease is important in understanding and addressing the distinct health concerns of this population.

AbstractAlthough cancer is highly heterogeneous, all metastatic cancer is considered American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) Stage IV disease. The purpose of this project was to redefine staging of metastatic cancer. Internal validation of nationally representative patient data from the National Cancer Database (n = 461 357; 2010‐2013), and external validation using the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results database (n = 106 595; 2014‐2015) were assessed using the concordance index for evaluation of survival prediction. A Cox proportional hazards model was used for overall survival by considering identified phenotypes (latent classes) and other confounding variables. Latent class analysis was performed for phenotype identification, where Bayesian information criterion (BIC) and sample‐size‐adjusted BIC were used to select the optimal number of distinct clusters. Kappa coefficients assessed external cluster validation. Latent class analysis identified five metastatic phenotypes with differences in overall survival (P < .0001): (Stage IVA) nearly exclusive bone‐only metastases (n = 59 049, 12.8%; median survival 12.7 months; common in lung, breast and prostate cancers); (IVB) predominant lung metastases (n = 62 491, 13.5%; 11.4 months; common in breast, stomach, kidney, ovary, uterus, thyroid, cervix and soft tissue cancers); (IVC) predominant liver/lung metastases (n = 130 014, 28.2%; 7.0 months; common in colorectum, pancreatic, lung, esophagus and stomach cancers); (IVD) bone/liver/lung metastases predominant over brain (n = 61 004, 13.2%; 5.9 months; common in lung and breast cancers); and (IVE) brain/lung metastases predominant over bone/liver (n = 148 799, 32.3%; 5.7 months; lung cancer and melanoma). Long‐term survivors were identified, particularly in Stages IVA‐B. A pan‐cancer nomogram model to predict survival (STARS: site, tumor, age, race, sex) was created, validated and provides 13% better prognostication than AJCC: 1‐month concordance index of 0.67 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.66‐0.67) vs 0.61 (95% CI: 0.60‐0.61). STARS is simple, uses easily accessible variables, better prognosticates survival outcomes and provides a platform to develop novel metastasis‐directed clinical trials.

Abstract Background We hypothesized that the addition of receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (RTKis, e.g., lapatinib, erlotinib, cetuximab, bevacizumab, panitumumab) to radiotherapy-based treatment for solid tumors does not increase overall survival but may increase toxicity. Methods Population, Intervention, Control, Outcome, Study Design; Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses; and Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology methods were used to identify prospective randomized studies including patients with solid tumor cancers treated with radiotherapy with or without RTKis. Extracted variables included use of radiotherapy vs chemoradiotherapy, RTKi type (antibody vs small molecule), outcomes, and toxicities. The primary endpoint was overall survival; the secondary endpoint was grade 3+ toxicity. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed for each outcome measure. All statistical tests were 2-sided. Results A total of 405 studies met the initial search criteria, of which 13 prospective randomized trials of radiotherapy with or without RTKi met the inclusion criteria, encompassing 5678 patients. The trials included cancers of the head and neck (6 trials, 3295 patients), esophagus (3 trials, 762 patients), lung (2 trials, 550 patients), and brain (2 trials, 1542 patients). Three studies evaluated a small molecule and radiotherapy in 949 patients, and 10 studies evaluated antibodies and radiotherapy in 4729 patients. The addition of RTKis to radiotherapy-based treatment did not improve overall survival (hazard ratio = 1.02, 95% confidence interval = 0.90 to 1.15, P = .76) but increased grade 3+ toxicity (relative risk = 1.18, 95% confidence interval = 1.06 to 1.33, P = .009). Conclusions The addition of RTKis to radiotherapy does not improve survival and worsens toxicity.

Abstract Background The objectives of this study were to characterize (1) epidemiology of brain metastases at the time of primary cancer diagnosis, (2) incidence and trends of synchronous brain metastases from 2010 to 2015, and (3) overall survival (OS) of patients with synchronous brain metastases. Methods A total of 42 047 patients with synchronous brain metastases from 2010 to 2015 were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Descriptive analysis was utilized to analyze demographics and incidence. The Kaplan–Meier method and a Cox proportional hazards model were utilized to evaluate potential prognostic factors for OS. Results The majority of patients were diagnosed from age older than 50 (91.9%). Common primary sites included lung (80%), melanoma (3.8%), breast (3.7%), and kidney/renal pelvis (3.0%). Among pediatric patients, common primaries included kidney/renal pelvis and melanomas. The incidence was roughly 7.3 persons/100 000. Synchronous brain metastases were associated with significantly poorer OS compared to extracranial metastases alone (hazard ratio [HR] =1.56; 95% CI: 1.54–1.58; P &lt; .001). Among patients with brain metastases, male gender (HR = 1.60 vs 1.52), age older than 65 years (HR = 1.60 vs 1.46), synchronous liver, bone, or lung metastases (HR = 1.61 vs 1.49), and earlier year of diagnosis (HR = 0.98 for each year following 2010) were associated with significantly poorer OS. Conclusions The vast majority of brain metastases are from lung primaries. Synchronous brain metastases are associated with poorer OS compared to extracranial metastases alone.

Background The objectives of this study were to characterize the risk of death (1) from the primary cancer vs competing cause of death; and (2) from various causes of death vs the general poplation. The relative risk of death after a pediatric cancer diagnosis versus the general population and the risk of death from a primary cancer diagnosis versus competing causes of death. Methods This retrospective, population‐based study used the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database (1980‐2015) and included patients aged 0 to 19 years at the time of diagnosis. Observed deaths were calculated; the risk of death versus the general population was assessed with standardized mortality ratios (SMRs). Competing risk models for the cause of death were performed. Results There were 58,356 patients who were diagnosed, and the mortality rate was 22.8%. To assess causes of death, 6996 patients who died during the study period were included (45,580 total person‐years at risk): 5128 (73%) died of their primary cancer, and 1868 (27%) died of a competing cause. Among all patients, the rate of death from the index cancer was higher than the rate of death from another cause within the first 5 years after diagnosis. The risk of death from a nonprimary cancer began to supersede the rate of death from the primary cancer 10 years after diagnosis for patients with germ cell tumors, lymphomas, and sarcomas. SMRs for the primary cancer were highest within the first 5 years after diagnosis for all cancers (SMRs, 100‐50,000; P < .0001). The risk of death from competing causes (heart disease, suicide, and sepsis) was elevated (SMR, >100; P < .001). The risk of dying of heart disease was high, especially for patients with astrocytomas (SMR, 47.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 27.87‐76.59) and neuroblastomas (SMR, 98.59; 95% CI, 47.28‐181.32). The risk of dying of suicide was high in most patients, particularly for those with osteosarcomas (SMR, 111.40; 95% CI, 2.82‐620.69), Hodgkin lymphomas (SMR, 62.35; 95% CI, 34.89‐102.83), and gonadal germ cell tumors (SMR, 28.97; 95% CI, 12.51‐57.09). Conclusions The cause of death for patients with gonadal germ cell tumors, lymphomas, and sarcomas is more commonly a secondary cancer or noncancerous cause than the primary disease; their risk of death from competing causes (heart disease, suicide, and sepsis) rises throughout life.