Quality Over Volume: Modeling Centralization of Gastric Cancer Resections in Italy

Gastrectomies for the treatment of gastric cancer in a reference cancer center present better pathological results and survival compared to non-specialized hospitals

BACKGROUND

Some studies have shown that gastrectomy performed by experienced surgeons in high-volume specialized hospitals with the possibility of complete treatment has better results. This study aimed to compare the results of patients who underwent surgery at a reference center with non-specialized centers.

METHODS

Patients with gastric adenocarcinoma stage as pTNM II and III who underwent curative gastrectomy and were referred for adjuvant chemotherapy between 2009 and 2018 were included. Patients were divided into two groups: patients operated on in a reference center with complete oncological treatment (Reference Group); and those operated on in an external Hospital and referred for adjuvant treatment at the reference center (External Group).

RESULTS

A total of 643 patients were evaluated, 307 in the external group and 336 in the reference group. Patients in the external group were younger (58.9 vs. 62.6 years; p < 0.001) and with fewer comorbidities according to the Charlson-Deyo index (p < 0.001). The pathological result showed more dissected lymph nodes (41.4 vs. 23.5; p < 0.001) and a higher R0 resection rate (98.5% vs. 95.1%; p = 0.013) in the reference group. Patients of the external group underwent more adjuvant radiotherapy (49.5% vs. 33.9%; p < 0.001) with no difference concerning adjuvant chemotherapy (p = 0.066). Peritoneal recurrence was more common in the external group (63.2% vs 38.7%, p < 0.001). The disease-free survival rate was higher in the reference group (p < 0.001) as well as overall survival (p = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Patients who received full oncological treatment at a reference center had better survival outcomes compared to those operated in external services.

Adherence to Guidelines for Diagnosis, Staging, and Treatment for Gastric Cancer in Italy According to the View of Surgeons and Patients

Background: Despite the strong declining trends in incidence and mortality over the last decades, gastric cancer (GC) is still burdened with high mortality, even in high-income countries. To improve GC prognosis, several guidelines have been increasingly published with indications about the most appropriate GC management. The Italian Society of Digestive System Pathology (SIPAD) and Gastric Cancer Italian Research Group (GIRCG) designed a survey for both surgeons and patients with the purpose of evaluating the degree of application and adherence to guidelines in GC management in Italy. Materials and Methods: Between January and May 2022, a questionnaire has been administered to a sample of Italian surgeons and, in a simplified version, to members of the Patient Association "Vivere Senza Stomaco" (patients surgically treated for GC between 2008 and 2021) to investigate the diagnosis, staging, and treatment issues. Results: The survey has been completed by 125 surgeons and 125 patients. Abdominal CT with gastric hydro-distension before treatment was not widespread in both groups (47% and 42%, respectively). The rate of surgeons stating that they do not usually perform minimally invasive gastrectomy was 15%, but the rate of patients who underwent a minimally invasive approach was 22% (between 2011 and 2022). The percentage of surgeons declaring to perform extended lymphadenectomy (>D2) was 97%, although a limited lymph node dissection rate was observed in about 35% of patients. Conclusions: This survey shows several important discrepancies from surgical attitudes declared by surgeons and real data derived from the reports available to the patients, suggesting heterogeneous management in clinical practice and, thus, a not rigorous adherence to the guidelines.

Profiling complete regression after pre-operative therapy in gastric cancer patients using clinical and pathological data

INTRODUCTION

The consistent use of pre-operative treatment before surgery for gastric cancer (GC) has resulted in increased rates of complete response. However, factors associated with response have been scantly investigated.

METHODS

Patients with GCs treated between 2017 and 2022 undergoing pre-operative treatment followed by resection were included. Clinicopathological data were analyzed for the association with tumor regression grades (TRG); secondary outcomes included the short-term overall (OS), disease-free (DFS) and disease specific survival (DSS).

RESULTS

Among 108 patients, 35.1% had an intestinal histotype GC, and 70.4% were treated with FLOT. Complete tumor regression (TRG1) was documented in 6.5% of patients. Univariable analyses documented that a higher pre-operative albumin (p = 0.04) and the expression of HER2 (p = 0.01) were associated to TRG1. In the multinominal regression model, the log-odds of being classified as TRG1 increased with the expression of HER2 by 170.247 times and with higher pre-operative albumin by 34.525 times, while with a higher Charlson Index and a diffuse hystotipe reduced it by 25.467 times and 3759.126 times, respectively. Among 49 patients (mean follow-up: 17.1 months), TRG1-2 was associated to better OS, DFS and DSS curves compared to TRG 3-5 (respectively p < 0.01, p 0.007 and p < 0.01), altogether with the reported negative impact of comorbidities in OS and DSS multivariable analyses (respectively p 0.04 and p 0.006). The random survival forest further confirmed the impact of HER2 and comorbidity on DSS.

CONCLUSION

A better clinical profile, HER2 expression and intestinal histotype significantly correlated with GC regression. A complete-major response was an independent factor for survival.

Does surgeon specialization add value to surgeon volume in gastric cancer surgery?

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to assess the combined impact of surgeon specialization and surgeon volume on both short- and long-term outcomes in patients underwent curative gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

METHODS

Patients with cStage1-3 gastric adenocarcinoma who underwent curative-intent surgery between January 2010 and December 2020 were evaluated. The impact of surgeon specialization and surgeon volume on clinical outcomes was scrutinized, both individually and in combination. For the purpose of assessing the combined effect, surgeons were classified into three groups: Non-specialized low-volume (NS-low), non-specialized high-volume (NS-high), and specialized high-volume (S-high). Postoperative outcomes and survival were evaluated. The adjusted effect sizes were expressed as odds ratio (OR) or hazard ratio (HR) with the corresponding 95% confidence interval.

RESULTS

Total of 537 patients operated by twelve surgeons were included in the analysis. For all cohort, the 30d-, in-hospital and 90d-mortality were 3.5%, 3%, and 6.3%, respectively. High surgeon volume alone had a significant impact (OR: 0.31 [0.10-0.82, p = 0.023]) on 30-day mortality. However, upon evaluating the combined effects of the parameters, while the most favorable 30-day mortality rate was observed in the S-high group, neither the NS-low group (OR: 3.82 [1.10-18.17, p = 0.054]) nor the NS-high group (OR: 1.37 [0.23-8.37, p = 0.724]) demonstrated a statistically significant difference when compared to the S-high group. The NS-low group showed poor results for several types of postoperative outcomes. In terms of overall survival, the S-high group outperformed, while the NS-low and NS-high groups presented with notably worse outcomes (HRs: 2.04 [1.51-2.75, p < 0.001], and 1.75 [1.25-2.44, p = 0.001], respectively).

CONCLUSION

The primary factor influencing short-term outcomes for patients who underwent gastric cancer surgery was found to be surgeon volume, while specialization provided a limited additional value. However, specialization emerges as an independent factor with a greater contribution to long-term survival than the impact attributed to high-volume.

Current Trends in Volume and Surgical Outcomes in Gastric Cancer

Gastric cancer is ranked as the fifth most frequently diagnosed type of cancer. Complete resection with adequate lymphadenectomy represents the goal of treatment with curative intent. Quality assurance is a crucial factor in the evaluation of oncological surgical care, and centralization of healthcare in referral hospitals has been proposed in several countries. However, an international agreement about the setting of "high-volume hospitals" as well as "minimum volume standards" has not yet been clearly established. Despite the clear postoperative mortality benefits that have been described for gastric cancer surgery conducted by high-volume surgeons in high-volume hospitals, many authors have highlighted the limitations of a non-composite variable to define the ideal postoperative period. The textbook outcome represents a multidimensional measure assessing the quality of care for cancer patients. Transparent and easily available hospital data will increase patients' awareness, providing suitable elements for a more informed hospital choice.

Implementation of the ERAS program in gastric surgery: a nationwide survey in Italy

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs have been developed by combining several evidence-based techniques for perioperative care, with the intention of reducing the stress response and organ dysfunction, thus allowing improved clinical results. ERAS programs have been widely adopted for colorectal surgery; however, their adoption for upper gastrointestinal surgery has been challenging even though good results have been reported in the literature. Our intent was to investigate the adoption of ERAS programs for resective gastric surgery in Italy. A survey was conducted among 20 departments of surgery belonging to the Italian Group for Research on Gastric Cancer (GC). Analysis of our survey showed that several evidence-based practices and many items of the ERAS guidelines for gastric surgery are not implemented in real practice in Italian centers dedicated to GC. This situation may be related to the hesitation of surgeons to introduce radical changes to the traditional postoperative management after gastrectomy. A multidisciplinary approach to the perioperative care of these patients is not routinely applied in many Italian centers. A strict collaboration of all clinicians involved in the perioperative care of patients undergoing gastrectomy for GC is key for the future implementation of ERAS in gastric surgery in our departments.