Citations

Summary: Despite concerns from 1980s case reports, oral isotretinoin, a derivative of vitamin A, has largely proven to be safe in surgical procedures, with the exception of deep skin resurfacing. Isotretinoin modulates thinning skin and internal scarring in select rhinoplasty patients who may otherwise have poor definition and excessive scarring. A review of patients undergoing surgical interventions, including rhinoplasty, in the setting of concomitant isotretinoin use was performed to examine safety and therapeutic potential. A total of 49 studies were reviewed. Isotretinoin use appears to be safe in a wide variety of surgical procedures relying on internal scar formation. In rhinoplasty, oral isotretinoin was used to thin skin and improve appearance, and resulted in patient and surgeon satisfaction. As such, the clinical potential for using oral isotretinoin in select rhinoplasty candidates—such as those with thick, glaborous, sebaceous skin; male sex; certain races or ethnicities; or revision cases—could mitigate internal scarring processes. Further studies examining the optimal dosing regimen and long-term benefits are warranted.

Abstract Introduction: Although Hispanic White (HW) females have a lower incidence of breast cancer than non-Hispanic White (NHW) females, breast cancer risk is unclear for HW females after benign breast disease (BBD). Methods: We compared BBD characteristics and subsequent breast cancer risk among HW and NHW females in New Mexico using a population-based collection of benign breast biopsies (1996–2007). BBD was categorized as nonproliferative disease (NPD), proliferative disease without atypia (PDWA), or atypical hyperplasia (AH). Breast cancer risk was assessed as absolute risk (AR) using cumulative incidence and RR by comparing the number of breast cancer events in BBDs to non-BBD. Results: This study included 3,684 HW and 6,587 NHW females with BBD. HW females had similar proportions of NPD (58.6% vs. 54.3%), PDWA (21.4% vs. 23.5%), and AH (3.6% vs. 3.3%) as NHW females. Breast cancer risk among all females with BBD was higher than population-based expected rates (RR, 1.87) and was similar for HW and NHW subgroups (RR = 1.99 vs. 1.84). As expected, breast cancer risk increased with increasing BBD severity, both overall [RR, 1.81 (NPD), 1.85 (PDWA), and 3.10 (AH)] and in the HW and NHW subgroups. Adjusted AR of breast cancer at 5 years also increased with the severity of BBD (HW vs. NHW; NPD: 1.4% vs. 2.1%; PDWA: 1.5% vs. 2.7%; AH: 6% vs. 4.8%). Conclusions: We found similar breast cancer RRs and ARs in HW and NHW. Risk counseling should ensure that HW females receive breast cancer clinical management warranted by their similar absolute risks. Impact: The present population-based provides evidence for the clinical management of HW females with BBD for the prevention of breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Narrative operative reports may omit or obscure data from an operation. OBJECTIVE: To develop a synoptic operative report for rectal prolapse that includes core descriptors as developed by an international consensus of expert pelvic floor surgeons. DESIGN: Descriptors for patients undergoing rectal prolapse surgery were generated through review. Members of the Pelvic Floor Disorders Consortium were recruited to participate in a 3-round Delphi process using a 9-point Likert scale. Descriptors that achieved 70% agreement were kept from the first round, and descriptors scoring 40% to 70% agreement were recirculated in subsequent rounds. A final list of operative descriptors was determined at a consensus meeting, with a final consensus meeting more than 70% agreement. SETTINGS: This survey was administered to members of the Pelvic Floor Disorders Consortium. PATIENTS: No patient data are included in this study. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Descriptors meeting greater than 70% agreement were selected. RESULTS: One hundred seventy-six surgeons representing colorectal surgeons, urogynecologists, and urologists distributed throughout North America (56%), Latin America (4%), Western Europe (29%), Asia (4%), and Africa (1%) participated in the first round of Delphi voting. After 2 additional rounds and a final consensus meeting, 16 of 30 descriptors met 70% consensus. Descriptors that met consensus were surgery type, posterior dissection, ventral dissection, mesh used, type of mesh used, mesh location, sutures used, suture type, pouch of Douglas and peritoneum reclosed, length of rectum imbricated, length of bowel resected, levatoroplasty, simultaneous vaginal procedure, simultaneous gynecologic procedure, simultaneous enterocele repair, and simultaneous urinary incontinence procedure. LIMITATIONS: The survey represents the views of members of the Delphi panel and may not represent the viewpoints of all surgeons. CONCLUSIONS: This Delphi survey establishes international consensus descriptors for intraoperative variables that have been used to produce a synoptic operative report. This will help establish defined operative reporting to improve clinical communication, quality measures, and clinical research. See Video Abstract. DESARROLLO DE UN PROTOCOLO OPERATORIO SINÓPTICO DERIVADO DE CONSENSO PARA EL PROLAPSO RECTAL: UN INFORME DEL CONSORCIO DE TRASTORNOS DEL PISO PÉLVICO ANTECEDENTES: Los protocolos operativos narrativos frecuentemente pueden omitir u oscurecer datos de un procedimiento. OBJETIVO: Nuestro objetivo es desarrollar un protocolo operatorio sinóptico para el prolapso rectal que incluya descriptores básicos desarrollados por un consenso internacional de cirujanos expertos en piso pélvico. DISEÑO: Los descriptores para pacientes sometidos a cirugía de prolapso rectal se generaron mediante revisión. Se reclutó a miembros del Consorcio de Trastornos del Piso Pélvico para participar en un proceso Delphi de 3 rondas utilizando una escala Likert de 9 puntos. Los descriptores que lograron un 70% de acuerdo se mantuvieron en la primera ronda, los descriptores que obtuvieron un 40-70% de acuerdo se recircularon en rondas posteriores. Se determinó una lista final de descriptores operativos en una reunión de consenso, con una reunión de consenso final de más del 70% de acuerdo. ESCENARIO: Esta fue una encuesta administrada a miembros del Consorcio de Trastornos del Piso Pélvico. PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO: Se seleccionaron los descriptores que cumplieron más del 70% de acuerdo. RESULTADOS: Ciento setenta y seis cirujanos en representación de cirujanos colorrectales, uroginecólogos y urólogos distribuidos en América del Norte (56%), América Latina (4%), Europa Occidental (29%), Asia (4%) y África (1%) participaron en la primera ronda de votación Delphi. Después de dos rondas adicionales y una reunión de consenso final, 16 de 30 descriptores alcanzaron un 70% de consenso. Los descriptores que alcanzaron consenso fueron: tipo de cirugía, disección posterior, disección ventral, malla utilizada, tipo de malla utilizada, ubicación de la malla, suturas utilizadas, tipo de sutura, cierre del fondo de saco de Douglas y peritoneo, longitud del recto superpuesto, longitud del intestino resecado, plastía de los elevadores , procedimiento vaginal simultáneo, procedimiento ginecológico simultáneo, reparación simultánea de enterocele y procedimiento simultáneo de incontinencia urinaria. LIMITACIONES: La encuesta representa las opiniones de los miembros del panel Delphi y puede no representar los puntos de vista de todos los cirujanos. CONCLUSIONES/DISCUSIÓN: Esta encuesta Delphi establece descriptores de consenso internacional para las variables intraoperatorias que se han utilizado para producir un protocolo operatorio sinóptico. Esto ayudará a establecer protocolos operativos definidos para mejorar la comunicación clínica, las medidas de calidad y la investigación clínica. (Traducción—Dr. Felipe Bellolio)

e23533 Background: Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) has shown promise as a biomarker for cancer detection and tracking in multiple malignancies like melanoma, colon and lung. Due to the heterogeneity of sarcoma, there has been limited research on ctDNA as a tool for measuring minimal residual disease (MRD). Differences in baseline in ctDNA for STS in racial minorities have been poorly studied. To identify potential racial differences in the efficacy of this tool, this study compares the quantitative values of baseline ctDNA between non-Hispanic white (NHW) and Hispanic (H) patients with soft tissue sarcoma (STS). Methods: The medical records of 33 STS patients who had ctDNA analysis from Natera™ were examined retrospectively at Dignity Health Cancer Institute.There were 19 H patients and 14 NHW patients in the group. All Black (B), Asian (A), and Other (O) racial groups were excluded due to lower numbers. GraphPad Prism software was used to examine the baseline ctDNA levels. Using continuous measures for statistical analysis, we conducted descriptive statistics and determined the mean, standard deviation, and median ctDNA levels for each group. The ctDNA levels were compared between groups using a two-tailed t-test with a significance level of p < 0.05. Results: The average ctDNA levels were 416.675 (standard deviation = 1349.394) in NHW and 300.305 (standard deviation = 1000.543) in H. The median levels were 0 for both groups. The statistical analysis showed that there was no significant differences in the baseline ctDNA levels between the two groups (p = 0.73). Furthermore, the gender distribution among NHW and Hs in the cohort was comparable, with a p-value of 1.00. Conclusions: This study establishes that there is no substantial differences in baseline levels of ctDNA between H and NHW patients with STS. These findings indicate that ctDNA levels in these populations can be equally utilized for diagnostic and monitoring reasons in clinical settings. Nevertheless, to gain a comprehensive understanding of the racial disparities in ctDNA utility and its implications in customized treatment for STS, it is necessary to conduct more extensive research with larger sample sizes and incorporate additional variables.

e23526 Background: Racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic factors have been implicated in the variability of survival rates among soft tissue sarcoma (STS). These disparities are multifactorial and may reflect differences in disease biology, access to care, treatment responses, and others. In situations where different racial groups have equitable access to healthcare, healthcare disparities can decrease, and survival gaps can narrow. Differences in survival in STS in racial minorities have been poorly studied. Recognizing the potential impact of such disparities, our study thereby contributes to the ongoing discourse on healthcare equity in STS outcomes. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of 30 STS patients, stratifying them into Hispanic (H) and non-Hispanic white (NHW) groups at Dignity Health Cancer Institute in Phoenix, Arizona. The Mann-Whitney U test was chosen to compare survival distributions, given the non-normal distribution of our sample. Survival analysis was performed using the Kaplan-Meier method, and the log-rank test was applied to determine statistical significance. All analyses were executed in GraphPad Prism software. Results: Our cohort comprised 13 (43%) NHW and 17 (57%) H patients. The mean ages were 57.2 years for NHW and 48.9 years for H, with a balanced gender distribution across groups. The most common subtypes of STS in NHW were liposarcoma (n = 3, 23.1%), and spindle cell carcinoma (n = 2,15.4%). Comparatively, the most common subtypes of STS in H were liposarcoma (n = 5, 29.4%) and leiomyosarcoma (n = 3, 17.6%). All patients were diagnosed with Stage 4 STS. Treatment modalities differed marginally, with NHW patients undergoing more surgical interventions, while H patients were more frequently administered chemotherapy. Median overall survival from the start of first-line therapy was 412 days for NHW and 500 days for H patients. Despite the longer median overall survival observed in Hispanics, the intergroup difference did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.68). Conclusions: The similar survival times between H and NHW STS patients at our institution may hint at an equitable provision of care across racial demographics in a relatively controlled single-center experience. However, the trend of extended survival in the Hispanic group, while not statistically confirmed, raises questions that merit further inquiry. This study serves as a preliminary exploration into racial disparities in STS, advocating for larger-scale research with more diverse patient populations. Further studies are essential to understand these findings and identify and optimize factors contributing to narrowing the survival gap in minorities, with the goal of enhancing STS prognosis for all racial groups.

OBJECTIVE The placement of flow-diverting devices has become a common method of treating unruptured intracranial aneurysms of the internal carotid artery. The progressive improvement of aneurysm occlusion after treatment—with low complication and rupture rates—has led to a dilemma regarding the management of aneurysms in which occlusion has not occurred within 6–24 months. The authors aimed to identify clinical consensus regarding management of intracranial aneurysms displaying persistent filling 6–24 months after flow diversion and to ascertain questions that may drive future investigation. METHODS An international panel of 67 experts was invited to participate in a multistep Delphi consensus process on the treatment of intracranial aneurysms after failed flow diversion. RESULTS Of the 67 experts invited, 23 (34%) participated. Qualitative analysis of an initial survey with open-ended questions resulted in 51 statements regarding management of aneurysms showing persistent filling after flow diversion. The statements were grouped into 8 categories, and in the second round, respondents rated the degree of their agreement with each statement on a 5-point Likert scale. Flow diverters with surface modifiers did not influence administration of dual-antiplatelet therapy according to 83%. Consensus was also reached regarding the definition of treatment failure at specific time points, including at 6 months if there is aneurysm growth or persistent rapid flow through the entirety of the aneurysm (96%), at 12 months if there is aneurysm growth or symptom onset (78%), and at 24 months if there is persistent filling regardless of size and filling characteristics (74%). Although experts agreed that the degree of intimal hyperplasia or in-device stenosis could not be ascertained by noninvasive imaging alone (83%), only 65% chose digital subtraction angiography as the preferred modality. At 6 and 12 months, retreatment is preferred if there is persistent filling with aneurysm growth (96%, 96%), device malposition (48%, 87%), or a history of subarachnoid hemorrhage (65%, 70%), respectively, and at 24 months if there is persistent filling without reduction in aneurysm size (74%). Experts favored treatment with an additional flow diverter (87%) over aneurysm clipping, applying the same principles for follow-up (83%) and treatment failure (91%) as for the first flow diverter. CONCLUSIONS The authors present the consensus practices of experts in the management of intracranial aneurysms without occlusion 6–24 months after treatment with a flow-diverting device.

Purpose: To identify demographic and clinical factors associated with delayed diagnosis in patients with primary vitreoretinal lymphoma (VRL). Methods: Retrospective, tertiary referral center-based cohort study of all patients at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, with a biopsy-proven diagnosis of VRL from January 1, 2000, to October 31, 2022. Results: There were 87 patients included during the 22-year study period with 73 patients (83.9%) diagnosed with VRL upon initial evaluation at the tertiary center, with the other 14 patients (16.1%) diagnosed later. The median referral time was 4.8 months (range: 0–113 months). Patients who received an initial diagnosis of inflammatory uveitis or another incorrect diagnosis elsewhere were referred slower than those initially diagnosed with VRL (P = 0.04). The most common incorrect initial diagnosis from an outside institution was inflammatory uveitis (n = 35, 40.2%). When patients were split into four groups based on referral time, prior use of corticosteroids was associated with a significant delay in referral (P = 0.03). Conclusion: Diagnosing VRL continues to be challenging, as months-long delays from initial evaluation to expert referral center evaluation are common. Prior use of corticosteroids was associated with delay in diagnosis and referral time, underscoring the need to increase awareness regarding differences between VRL and uveitis.

Regular, long-term aspirin use may act synergistically with genetic variants, particularly those in mechanistically relevant pathways, to confer a protective effect on colorectal cancer (CRC) risk. We leveraged pooled data from 52 clinical trial, cohort, and case-control studies that included 30,806 CRC cases and 41,861 controls of European ancestry to conduct a genome-wide interaction scan between regular aspirin/nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) use and imputed genetic variants. After adjusting for multiple comparisons, we identified statistically significant interactions between regular aspirin/NSAID use and variants in 6q24.1 (top hit rs72833769 ), which has evidence of influencing expression of TBC1D7 (a subunit of the TSC1-TSC2 complex, a key regulator of MTOR activity), and variants in 5p13.1 (top hit rs350047 ), which is associated with expression of PTGER4 (codes a cell surface receptor directly involved in the mode of action of aspirin). Genetic variants with functional impact may modulate the chemopreventive effect of regular aspirin use, and our study identifies putative previously unidentified targets for additional mechanistic interrogation.

TPS622 Background: Approximately 50% of newly diagnosed invasive breast cancers are stage 1, with the majority being ER/PR-positive, HER2-negative. Genomic assays such as the Oncotype DX have identified patients (pts) with reduced risk of distant metastasis and without benefit from chemotherapy added to endocrine therapy, freeing them from excess toxicity. Genomic assays are also recognized as prognostic for in-breast recurrence (IBR) after BCS and could similarly allow de-escalation of adjuvant radiotherapy (RT). Reducing overtreatment is of interest to pts, providers, and payers. Methods: We hypothesize that breast-conserving surgery (BCS) alone is non-inferior to BCS plus RT for IBR and breast preservation in women intending endocrine therapy (ET) for stage 1 invasive breast cancer (ER and/or PR-positive, HER2-negative with an Oncotype DX Recurrence Score [RS] of ≤18). Stratification is by age (<60; ≥60), tumor size (≤1 cm; >1-2cm), and RS (≤11, >11-18/MammaPrint Low). Pts are randomized post-BCS to Arm 1 with breast RT using standard methods (moderate or ultra hypo- or conventional-fractionated whole breast RT with/without boost, or APBI) with ≥5 yrs of ET (tamoxifen or AI) or Arm 2 with ≥5 yrs of ET (tamoxifen or AI) alone. The specific regimen of ET in both arms is at the treating physician’s discretion. Eligible pts are stage 1: pT1 (≤2 cm), pN0, age ≥50 to <70 yrs, s/p BCS with negative margins (no ink on tumor), s/p axillary nodal staging (SNB or ALND), ER and/or PR-positive (ASCO/CAP), HER2-negative (ASCO/CAP), and Oncotype DX RS ≤18 (diagnostic core biopsy or resected specimen); (a “low risk” MammaPrint is permissible if completed as part of usual care prior to screening). Primary endpoint is IBR (invasive breast cancer or DCIS). Secondary endpoints are breast conservation rate, invasive in-breast recurrence, relapse-free interval, distant disease-free survival, overall survival, patient-reported breast pain, patient-reported worry about recurrence, and adherence to ET. We assume a clinically acceptable difference in IBR of 4% at 10 yrs to judge omission of RT as non-inferior (10-yr event-free survival for RT group is 95.6% v 91.6% for the omission-of-RT group). BR007 is powered to detect non-inferiority with 80% power and a one-sided α=0.025, assuming that there would be a ramp-up in accrual in the first two years (leveling off in yrs 3-5); 1,670 pts (835 per arm) are required for randomization. Conservative loss to follow-up is 1%/yr. Some T1a pts screened may have Oncotype DX scores >18, making them ineligible for the study. In the accrual process, 1,714 pts will be required to register to ensure that our final randomized cohort is 1,670 pts. Current accrual (02-05-2024) is 805 screened and 716 randomly assigned. Clinical trial information: NCT04852887 .

TPS612 Background: The TAILORx and RxPONDER trials demonstrated that RS identifies many postmenopausal pts with node-neg and node-pos BC and RS ≤25, who do not benefit from addition of ACT to endocrine therapy (ET). Both trials also showed that certain subsets of premenopausal pts (node-neg/high clinical risk/RS 16-20, node-neg/RS 21-25, and node-pos/RS ≤25) benefited from adding ACT to ET. Most premenopausal pts in these trials did not receive ovarian function suppression (OFS) as part of their ET regimen. Given the observed benefit from OFS in high-risk premenopausal pts with HR+/HER2- BC in the SOFT/TEXT trials, many questioned whether all or part of the observed ACT benefit in the TAILORx/RxPONDER trials may have been the result of chemotherapy-induced OFS. To address this question, we developed OFSET, a phase III, multicenter clinical trial comparing OFS+ET v ACT+OFS+ET. Methods: We hypothesize that addition of ACT to OFS+ET is superior to OFS+ET in improving invasive breast cancer-free survival (IBCFS) among premenopausal, early-stage BC pts with HR+/HER2- tumors, and a 21-gene RS between 16-25 (for pN0 pts) and 0-25 (for pN1 pts). Secondary objectives include invasive disease-free survival, overall survival, distant recurrence-free interval, breast cancer-free interval, and health-related quality of life (HRQOL). Pts must be node-neg with RS 16-20 (plus high clinical risk), or RS 21-25, or have 1-3 positive nodes with RS ≤25. Stratification is by nodal status/RS status (pN0 RS 16-25 v pN1 RS 0-15 and pN1 RS 16-25), intent to receive CDK4/6 inhibitor (yes; no), and age (18-39 v ≥40). Pts are randomized after surgery to either OFS+ET or ACT+OFS+ET. ET is an aromatase inhibitor (AI). Choice is per investigator discretion; tamoxifen is allowed if AI is not tolerated or if OFS is incomplete. Radiotherapy will be administered per investigator discretion per protocol guidelines. The HRQOL substudy will assess differences in severe menopausal symptoms, measured by the FACT ESS-19 score between arms, as well as increased pain severity (PROMIS). Blood and tumor specimens will be collected for future research. Accrual of 3,960 pts is anticipated to be completed in 7 yrs, 7 mos. Per NSABP B-28 and RxPONDER data, 5yr IBCFS of pN1 pts on the ACT+OFS+ET arm is estimated at 92.3%. Based on TAILORx data, 5yr IBCFS of pN0 pts on the ACT arm is ~95%. Assuming 56% of pts to be pN0 and 44% pN1, and a 0.5% annual loss-to-follow-up rate, the definitive analyses to detect a hazard ratio: 0.75 with ACT+OFS+ET v OFS+ET, with one-sided α of 0.025 and 80% power, will require 380 IBCFS events, expected to occur~11 yrs after study initiation. OFSET was activated Aug 2023. Clinical trial information: NCT05879926 .