Citations

ImportancePostoperative radiation therapy for close surgical margins in low- to intermediate-grade salivary carcinomas lacks multi-institutional supportive evidence.ObjectiveTo evaluate the oncologic outcomes for low- and intermediate-grade salivary carcinomas with close and positive margins.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThe American Head and Neck Society Salivary Gland Section conducted a retrospective cohort study from 2010 to 2019 at 41 centers. Margins were classified as R0 (negative), R1 (microscopically positive), or R2 (macroscopically positive). R0 margins were subclassified into clear (>1 mm) or close (≤1 mm). Data analysis was performed from June to October 2023.Main Outcomes and MeasuresMain outcomes were risk factors for local recurrence.ResultsA total of 865 patients (median [IQR] age at surgery, 56 [43-66] years; 553 female individuals [64%] and 312 male individuals [36%]) were included. Of these, 801 (93%) had parotid carcinoma and 64 (7%) had submandibular gland carcinoma, and 748 (86%) had low-grade tumors and 117 (14%) had intermediate-grade tumors, with the following surgical margins: R0 in 673 (78%), R1 in 168 (19%), and R2 in 24 (3%). Close margins were found in 395 of 499 patients with R0 margins (79%), for whom margin distances were measured. A total of 305 patients (35%) underwent postoperative radiation therapy. Of all 865 patients, 35 (4%) had local recurrence with a median (IQR) follow-up of 35.3 (13.9-59.1) months. In patients with close margins as the sole risk factor for recurrence, the local recurrence rates were similar between those who underwent postoperative radiation therapy (0 of 46) or observation (4 of 165 [2%]). Patients with clear margins (n = 104) had no recurrences. The local recurrence rate in patients with R1 or R2 margins was better in those irradiated (2 of 128 [2%]) compared to observed (13 of 64 [20%]) (hazard ratio [HR], 0.05; 95% CI, 0.01-0.24). Multivariable analysis for local recurrence found the following independent factors: age at diagnosis (HR for a 10-year increase in age, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.06-1.67), R1 vs R0 (HR, 5.21; 95% CI, 2.58-10.54), lymphovascular invasion (HR, 4.47; 95% CI, 1.43-13.99), and postoperative radiation therapy (HR, 0.10; 95% CI, 0.04-0.29). The 3-year local recurrence-free survivals for the study population were 96% vs 97% in the close margin group.Conclusions and RelevanceIn this cohort study of patients with low- and intermediate-grade major salivary gland carcinoma, postoperative radiation therapy for positive margins was associated with decreased risk of local recurrence. In isolation from other risk factors for local recurrence, select patients with close surgical margins (≤1 mm) may safely be considered for observation.

ABSTRACT Post-transplantation diabetes mellitus (PTDM) remains a leading complication after solid organ transplantation. Previous international PTDM consensus meetings in 2003 and 2013 provided standardized frameworks to reduce heterogeneity in diagnosis, risk stratification and management. However, the last decade has seen significant advancements in our PTDM knowledge complemented by rapidly changing treatment algorithms for management of diabetes in the general population. In view of these developments, and to ensure reduced variation in clinical practice, a 3rd international PTDM Consensus Meeting was planned and held from 6–8 May 2022 in Vienna, Austria involving global delegates with PTDM expertise to update the previous reports. This update includes opinion statements concerning optimal diagnostic tools, recognition of prediabetes (impaired fasting glucose and/or impaired glucose tolerance), new mechanistic insights, immunosuppression modification, evidence-based strategies to prevent PTDM, treatment hierarchy for incorporating novel glucose-lowering agents and suggestions for the future direction of PTDM research to address unmet needs. Due to the paucity of good quality evidence, consensus meeting participants agreed that making GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations) recommendations would be flawed. Although kidney-allograft centric, we suggest that these opinion statements can be appraised by the transplantation community for implementation across different solid organ transplant cohorts. Acknowledging the paucity of published literature, this report reflects consensus expert opinion. Attaining evidence is desirable to ensure establishment of optimized care for any solid organ transplant recipient at risk of, or who develops, PTDM as we strive to improve long-term outcomes.