Citations

BACKGROUNDSurgeon and hospital factors are associated with the survival of patients treated for rectal cancer. The relative contribution of each of these factors toward determining outcomes is poorly understood.METHODSWe used data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results–Medicare database to analyze the outcomes of patients aged 65 years and older undergoing operative treatment for nonmetastatic rectal cancer, diagnosed in the United States between 1998 and 2007. These data were linked to a registry to identify whether the treating surgeon was a board‐certified colorectal surgeon versus a noncolorectal surgeon. Hospital volume and hospital certification as a National Cancer Institute–designated Comprehensive Cancer Centers were also analyzed. The primary outcome of interest was long‐term survival.RESULTSOur data source yielded 6432 patients. Initial analysis demonstrated improved long‐term survival in patients treated by higher‐volume colorectal surgeons, higher‐volume hospitals, teaching hospitals, and National Cancer Institute (NCI)–designated Comprehensive Cancer Centers. Based on an iterative approach to modeling the interactions between these various factors, we found a robust effect of surgeon subspecialty status, hospital volume, and NCI designation. Surgeon volume was not distinctly associated with long‐term survival.CONCLUSIONSPatients treated for rectal cancer by board‐certified colorectal surgeons in centers that are higher volume and/or NCI‐designated Comprehensive Cancer Centers experience better overall survival. These differences persist after adjustment for a broad range of patient and contextual risk factors, including surgeon volume. Patients and payers can use these results to identify surgeons and hospitals where outcomes are most favorable. Cancer 2014;120:2472–2481. © 2014 American Cancer Society.

The practice of headache medicine is challenging, and excluding secondary causes of headaches is essential for proper diagnosis and treatment. The evaluation of secondary headaches often leads to investigations involving organ systems other than the nervous system. As such, headache, which is typically thought to be neurologic in origin, can be a manifestation of cardiac pathology in the form of cardiac cephalalgia. Conversely, chest pain, which is typically thought to be cardiac in origin, could be a manifestation of a neurologic disease process in the form of atypical migraine aura. In the presented cases, we demonstrate headaches that involve cardiac and neurologic pathology with atypical presentations.

SummaryPurposeThe distinction between corticotropin (ACTH)‐producing pituitary adenomas and occult ectopic ACTH neoplasms is a challenge and frequently complicated by the detection of nonfunctioning pituitary adenomas on dynamic magnetic resonance imaging (DMRI). Herein, we explored quantitative differences in DMRI measures from ACTH‐producing pituitary adenomas.Materials and methodsFifty‐five patients with pathology confirmed ACTH‐producing and 44 with nonfunctioning pituitary adenomas were analysed in this retrospective pilot study. The intensities of adenomas and of adjacent pituitary tissue were measured by drawing a region of interest. Time–intensity curves were then constructed, and quantitative analysis included: enhancement time, enhancement peak and prepeak slope (PPS). Multivariable logistic analysis and receiver operating characteristic curves (ROC) were used to evaluate the parameters.ResultsQuantitative analysis showed that tumour PPS in ACTH‐producing adenomas was markedly lower than that in nonfunctioning adenomas (P = 0·0042) and that the PPS of the adjacent pituitary gland was not different (P = 0·2441). The PPS was >3·0 in 59·1% of nonfunctioning adenomas and ≤3·0 in 69·1% of ACTH‐producing adenomas (P = 0·0049). Logistic analysis revealed lower tumour PPS levels (P = 0·0123, OR 1·24, 95% CI: 1·05–1·52) were associated with ACTH‐producing adenomas. The optimal PPS cut‐off determined by ROC analysis was 2·89, with a sensitivity of 69% and specificity of 70%. No significant difference was found between the two groups in enhancement time or enhancement peak.ConclusionEnhancement parameters in DMRI can help distinguishing ACTH producing from nonfunctioning pituitary adenomas, which could be useful in the differential diagnosis between ACTH‐producing pituitary adenomas and ectopic ACTH syndrome complicated with nonfunctioning pituitary adenoma.

BACKGROUNDWith the advent of limits to resident duty hours and the size of teaching services, many academic institutions have introduced nonteaching services, often triaging perceived better teaching cases to the resident services.OBJECTIVETo compare resident versus faculty perceptions of ideal cases for teaching services and compare these perceptions with actual triage decisions made by faculty who assigned patients to either teaching or nonteaching services.DESIGNResidents and hospitalist faculty were surveyed about their perceptions of ideal and actual teaching admissions, first with qualitative, open‐ended questions and then with quantitative, specific questions generated from responses to the first survey. Characteristics of patients admitted to teaching and nonteaching services were analyzed retrospectively and compared with resident and faculty perceptions.RESULTSResidents and faculty agreed that rare cases, patients with unique physical findings, and a variety of pathology were ideal for teaching services and that social admissions, benefactors, and patients with chronic or functional pain were not. Residents believed that traditional (“bread and butter”) medicine cases were under‐represented on the teaching services. Although residents perceived that they received a disproportionate number of older patients, outside transfers, patients with chronic pain, and patients with cancer, the only statistically significant difference was in patient age, with the teaching service actually receiving younger patients (66.7 vs 69.3 years; P = 0.008).CONCLUSIONSResidents and faculty have similar views about ideal teaching cases, but a triage system based on perceived educational merit creates the possibility of resident misperceptions about their case mix, even if patients are distributed relatively equitably. Journal of Hospital Medicine 2014;9:508–514. © 2014 Society of Hospital Medicine

Purpose To provide formal expert consensus–based recommendations to practicing oncologists and others on the management of brain metastases for patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) –positive advanced breast cancer. Methods The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) convened a panel of medical oncology, radiation oncology, guideline implementation, and advocacy experts and conducted a systematic review of the literature. When that failed to yield sufficiently strong quality evidence, the Expert Panel undertook a formal expert consensus–based process to produce these recommendations. ASCO used a modified Delphi process. The panel members drafted recommendations, and a group of other experts joined them for two rounds of formal ratings of the recommendations. Results No studies or existing guidelines met the systematic review criteria; therefore, ASCO conducted a formal expert consensus–based process. Recommendations Patients with brain metastases should receive appropriate local therapy and systemic therapy, if indicated. Local therapies include surgery, whole-brain radiotherapy, and stereotactic radiosurgery. Treatments depend on factors such as patient prognosis, presence of symptoms, resectability, number and size of metastases, prior therapy, and whether metastases are diffuse. Other options include systemic therapy, best supportive care, enrollment onto a clinical trial, and/or palliative care. Clinicians should not perform routine magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to screen for brain metastases, but rather should have a low threshold for MRI of the brain because of the high incidence of brain metastases among patients with HER2-positive advanced breast cancer.

Purpose To provide an overview of rehabilitation medicine– and physical modality–based approaches to cancer pain management, and to highlight the fact that these approaches are generally used in conjunction and that a majority are focused on minimizing pain during periods of mobility and the performance of activities of daily living. Methods We performed a nonsystematic literature review and provide a description of the current standard of care. Results Rehabilitative and physical modalities used to manage pain can be grouped into four categories: those that modulate nociception, stabilize or unload painful structures, influence physiological processes that indirectly influence nociception, or alleviate pain arising from the overloading of muscles and connective tissues that often occurs after surgery or with sarcopenia in late-stage cancer. Most modalities have been pragmatically refined over the years, and many have an evidence base, although few have been explicitly validated in the oncologic setting. With few exceptions, they are patient controlled and free of adverse effects. Conclusion Physical modalities and rehabilitation medicine offer a range of pain management approaches that may serve as beneficial adjuncts to the conventional systemic and interventional analgesic strategies used to control cancer-related pain. These approaches may be particularly beneficial to patients with movement-associated pain and those who are ambivalent regarding pharmacoanalgesia.

Key PointsPrognostic tool for CLL patients with high discriminatory power compared with conventional clinical staging systems. Prognostication on the individual patient level independent of clinical stage.

AbstractBACKGROUNDMeasurement of IgG subclasses is a useful tool for investigation of humoral immune deficiency in the presence of total IgG within reference intervals and IgG4-related disease. Nephelometry has been the method of choice for quantification. We describe an LC-MS/MS method that can multiplex all 4 subclasses along with total IgG by use of either IgG subclass-specific peptide stable isotope–labeled internal standards or a surrogate digest standard for quantification and does not rely on antigen/antibody reactions.METHODSWe combined serum with labeled internal peptide standards and intact purified horse IgG. Samples were denatured, reduced, alkylated, and digested. We analyzed the digested serum by LC-MS/MS for IgG subclasses 1–4 and total IgG.RESULTSWe assayed 112 patient sera by LC-MS/MS and immunonephelometry. The mean of the slopes and R2 values for IgG1, IgG2, IgG3, IgG4, and IgG were 1.18 and 0.93, respectively. Interassay imprecision for the LC-MS/MS method was <15% for total IgG and subclasses and was slightly improved by use of a calibrator peptide from an exogenous horse IgG. Summed total IgG correlated with the measured total IgG within 10%. Reference intervals and analytical measuring range were all similar to our previous validation data for the immunonephelometry assays.CONCLUSIONSTotal IgG and IgG subclasses 1, 2, 3, and 4 can be quantified by LC-MS/MS with performance comparable to nephelometry.