Citations

The NCCN Guidelines for Ovarian Cancer/Fallopian Tube Cancer/Primary Peritoneal Cancer provide multidisciplinary diagnostic workup, staging, and treatment recommendations for this disease. These NCCN Guidelines Insights detail how the evolution of the use of PARP inhibitors as maintenance and single-agent regimens for the treatment of ovarian cancer informed panel recommendations in the guidelines.

Goals: To determine long-term efficacy and safety of tCS for treatment of EoE. Background: Maintenance therapy with topical corticosteroids (tCS) is recommended for eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), but data for long-term use are still needed. Study: This retrospective cohort study assessed newly diagnosed patients with EoE who were treated with a tCS and had a follow-up endoscopy with biopsy after at least 5 years. Histologic symptomatic and endoscopic responses were extracted from medical records. Patients who did and did not have long-term tCS treatment were compared at baseline, and outcomes for patients were assessed at their last endoscopy while on tCS. Results: Of 431 patients with EoE treated with tCS, 104 met inclusion criteria for long-term use. For patients with long-term tCS use, the median time (IQR) on tCS was 6.5 years (5.4 to 8.8 y). At the last endoscopy, 54% had histologic response (<15 eos/hpf), but those with excellent adherence had a histologic response of 64%. Endoscopic severity also decreased with improved adherence which was strongly associated with EREFS (1.7 vs. 2.8 vs. 4.0 for excellent, good, and poor adherence; P<0.001). Symptomatic response was 68% overall, but only 40% in those with poor adherence (P=0.07). Complications of taking tCS were uncommon (adrenal insufficiency: 1%; osteopenia: 1%; and esophageal candidiasis: 4% at final endoscopy). Conclusions: Long-term tCS (median 6.5 y) were generally effective, especially with better adherence, and also safe, with only rare serious complications. These data can be used to help patients make clinical decisions about chronic tCS use in EoE.

Summary Cannabis use is becoming increasingly common, both for recreational and medical purposes. However, there is a paucity of data regarding cannabis use in the context of eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). We aimed to determine the impact of cannabis use on presentation and treatment response in EoE. To this end, we conducted a retrospective cohort study at a large academic medical center of newly diagnosed EoE patients age ≥ 12 years. Self-reported cannabis use status, baseline characteristics, and treatment response to topical corticosteroids and dietary therapy data were extracted. Bivariate and multivariable analyses were used to compare cannabis users and non-users at time of EoE diagnosis and to assess treatment response. Of 983 EoE patients, 80 reported using cannabis, with the majority reporting daily use and administration by inhalation. Baseline symptoms and peak eosinophil count were similar between cannabis users and non-users; cannabis users were less likely to have baseline endoscopic findings of exudates, edema, and stricture, and lower total Endoscopic Reference Score. On multivariable analysis, younger age, male sex, non-White race, and psychiatric diagnosis were independently associated with history of cannabis use at EoE presentation and stricture was independently associated with cannabis non-use. Post-treatment symptom and histologic responses were similar between cannabis users and non-users though there was a higher odds of post-treatment endoscopic inflammatory features with cannabis use. In conclusion, despite presenting with milder initial endoscopic findings, cannabis users exhibited greater inflammatory findings after treatment, highlighting a potential negative influence of cannabis use on EoE management.

Background: Bar stabilization during minimally invasive pectus excavatum repair (MIRPE) is critical to avoid dislodgement. Multiple techniques are described including stabilizers, wires, and sutures. This retrospective study compared bar movement and outcomes between existing techniques and ZipFix™, a biocompatible cable tie. Methods: Patients ≤20 years of age who underwent MIRPE with ZipFix between January 2021 and September 2022 were compared with historical controls who underwent repair by same surgeons between January 2018 and December 2020 using stabilizers or polydioxanone suture (PDS). Demographics, clinical details, and outcomes were compared using Kruskal–Wallis and chi-square tests. Results: Of the 116 patients who underwent repair, 45 had bars secured with ZipFix (39%) and 71 (61%) were historical controls (35 stabilizer, 36 PDS). Median (interquartile range) age was 15 (14–16) years and Haller index was 3.9 (3.6–4.5). Nine (8%) patients required two bars. Haller index and use of second bar were comparable between stabilization techniques ( P > .05). In total, 49 patients (40%) reported any pain at 1 month and this was similar between stabilization techniques ( P = .45). Median bar movement was greater for bars secured with PDS than with ZipFix or stabilizers at 1 month (5.5 versus 2.3 versus 3.3°, P = .010) and last follow-up (6.5 versus 2.1 versus 3.6°, P < .001). One patient whose bar was secured with PDS required revision for dislodgement. Conclusion: Pectus bar stabilization with ZipFix is a safe alternative to metal stabilizers and both techniques are superior to suture stabilization alone. The use of ZipFix may be preferred given its lower cost and ease of use.

Histology is an important predictor of the behavior of breast cancer. We aim to study the impact of histology on the overall survival (OS) of breast cancer patients. We studied 11,085 breast cancer patients diagnosed with T1–T2 tumors, clinically node-negative and non-metastatic, from 2004 to 2019 included in the National Cancer Database. Kaplan–Meier curves, log-rank tests and Cox regression models were used to study the impact of histology and other variables on OS. In our patient population, 8678 (78.28%) had ductal cancer (IDC), while 2407 (21.71%) had lobular cancer (ILC). ILC patients were significantly more likely to be older, Caucasian, have a lower grade at diagnosis and be hormone receptor-positive compared to IDC patients. There was no statistically significant difference in the 5-year OS of early stage ductal (16.8%) and lobular cancer patients (16.7%) (p = 0.200). Patients of Hispanic and African American origin had worse OS rates compared to non-Hispanic and Caucasian patients, respectively. For node-positive disease, HER2+ tumors and triple-negative tumors, chemotherapy had a positive influence on OS (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.77–0.93, p = 0.0012). Histology did not have a significant impact on the 5-year OS of early stage breast cancer patients.