Utilization Trends and Volume-outcomes Relationship of Endoscopic Resection for Early Stage Esophageal Cancer

The Effect of Center Esophagectomy Volume on Outcomes in Clinical Stage I to III Esophageal Cancer

OBJECTIVE

To determine the threshold annualized esophagectomy volume that is associated with improved survival, oncologic resection, and postoperative outcomes.

BACKGROUND

Esophagectomy at high-volume centers is associated with improved outcomes; however, the definition of high-volume remains debated.

METHODS

The 2004 to 2016 National Cancer Database was queried for patients with clinical stage I to III esophageal cancer undergoing esophagectomy. Center esophagectomy volume was modeled as a continuous variable using restricted cubic splines. Maximally selected ranks were used to identify an inflection point of center volume and survival. Survival was compared using multivariable Cox proportional hazards methods. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

Overall, 13,493 patients met study criteria. Median center esophagectomy volume was 8.2 (interquartile range: 3.2-17.2) cases per year. On restricted cubic splines, inflection points were identified at 9 and 30 cases per year. A multivariable Cox model was constructed modeling annualized center surgical volume as a continuous variable using 3 linear splines and inflection points at 9 and 30 cases per year. On multivariable analysis, increasing center volume up to 9 cases per year was associated with a substantial survival benefit (hazard ratio: 0.97, 95% confidence interval, 0.95-0.98, P ≤0.001). On multivariable logistic regression, factors associated with undergoing surgery at a high-volume center (>9 cases per year) included private insurance, care at an academic center, completion of high school education, and greater travel distance.

CONCLUSIONS

This National Cancer Database study utilizing multivariable analysis and restricted cubic splines suggests the threshold definition of a high-volume esophagectomy center as one that performs at least 10 operations a year.

Value of EUS in determining infiltration depth of early carcinoma and associated precancerous lesions in the upper gastrointestinal tract

Objective

The objective is to evaluate the value of EUS in the determination of infiltration depth of early carcinoma and precancerous lesions in the upper gastrointestinal tract and to analyze the various factors affecting the accuracy of EUS.

Methods

One hundred and sixty-three patients diagnosed with early gastric cancer or early esophageal cancer, and associated precancerous lesions, who were seen in our hospital in the recent 10 years were selected. These patients received EUS before endoscopic submucosal dissection or surgery. With a pathological diagnosis as the gold standard, the accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and misjudgment rate of EUS in determining the invasion depth were evaluated using the pathological stratification (mucosa, M1/2; muscularis mucosa, M3; submucosa, [SM]; and muscularis propria) or TN stratification (mucosa, T1a; SM, T1b), and the possible causes of miscalculation were analyzed.

Results

Based on the pathological stratification, the overall accuracy of EUS was 78.5%, and the overestimation and underestimation rates were 17.8% and 3.7%, respectively. Based on the TN stratification, the overall accuracy of EUS was 81%, and the overestimation and underestimation rates were 16.6% and 2.5%, respectively. There was a significant difference between the groups in terms of overestimation and underestimation rates (P < 0.05), indicating that EUS was more likely to overestimate the depth. Univariate analysis showed that the factors affecting accuracy included lesion size, macroscopic features, sunken mucosa, mucosa with granular and nodular changes, and ulceration. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that larger lesions, mucosa with granular and nodular changes, and ulceration were independent risk factors for the overestimation of infiltration depth by EUS.

Conclusion

EUS is highly accurate in determining the infiltration depth of early cancer and precancerous lesions in the upper gastrointestinal tract. It also has a good reference value for treatment selection and prognostication. However, attention should be paid to its overestimation, especially accompanied by the aforementioned factors.

A Prognostic Model Based on Nutritional Risk Index in Operative Breast Cancer

Background: The nutritional risk index (NRI) is an independent prognostic factor for overall survival in various cancers, but its prognostic value in breast cancer remains unclear. This study aimed to explore the relationship between the NRI and overall survival (OS) in breast cancer and to develop a predictive nomogram. Methods: We retrospectively enrolled 1347 breast cancer patients who underwent mastectomy or lumpectomy between January 2011 and November 2012. Using a cutoff value of 110.59, patients were divided into a high-NRI group and a low-NRI group. OS was compared between the two groups. Clinicopathological factors independently associated with survival were used to construct a predictive nomogram. Results: Of the 1347 patients, 534 patients were classified as high NRI and 813 as low NRI. OS was significantly shorter in low-NRI patients. The 3- and 5-year OS rates were 87.3% and 73.4%, respectively, in the high-NRI group whereas they were 83.0% and 67.2%, respectively, in the low-NRI group. Cox regression analysis found that histopathological type, tumor size, lymph node status, progesterone receptor (PR) status, Ki-67, and NRI were independently associated with OS. Conclusions: NRI is an independent prognostic factor of OS in breast cancer patients. The proposed nomogram model may be a useful tool for individualized survival prediction.

Pan-Immune-Inflammation Value: A New Prognostic Index in Operative Breast Cancer

Background

To build a predictive scoring model based on simple immune and inflammatory parameters to predict postoperative survival in patients with breast cancer.

Methods

We used a brand-new immuno-inflammatory index-pan-immune-inflammation value (PIV)-to retrospectively evaluate the relationship between PIV and overall survival (OS), and based on the results of Cox regression analysis, we established a simple scoring prediction model based on several independent prognostic parameters. The predictive accuracy of the model was evaluated and independently validated.

Results

A total of 1,312 patients were included for analysis. PIV was calculated as follows: neutrophil count (10⁹/L) × platelet count (10⁹/L) × monocyte count (10⁹/L)/lymphocyte count (10⁹/L). According to the best cutoff value of PIV, we divided the patients into two different subgroups, high PIV (PIV > 310.2) and low PIV (PIV ≤ 310.2), associated with significantly different survival outcomes (3-year OS, 80.26% vs. 86.29%, respectively; 5-year OS, 62.5% vs. 71.55%, respectively). Six independent prognostic factors were identified and used to build the scoring system, which performed well with a concordance index (C-index) of 0.759 (95% CI: 0.715-0.802); the calibration plot showed good calibration.

Conclusions

We have established and verified a simple scoring system for predicting prognosis, which can predict the survival of patients with operable breast cancer. This system can help clinicians implement targeted and individualized treatment strategies.