Survival of Patients With Head and Neck Merkel Cell Cancer: Findings From the Pan-Canadian Merkel Cell Cancer Collaborative.

Importance: Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) is an aggressive cutaneous neuroendocrine carcinoma. Due to its relatively low incidence and limited prospective trials, current recommendations are guided by historical single-institution retrospective studies. Objective: To evaluate the overall survival (OS) of patients in Canada with head and neck MCC (HNMCC) according to American Joint Committee on Cancer 8th edition staging and treatment modalities. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective cohort study of 400 patients with a diagnosis of HNMCC between July 1, 2000, and June 31, 2018, was conducted using the Pan-Canadian Merkel Cell Cancer Collaborative, a multicenter national registry of patients with MCC. Statistical analyses were performed from January to December 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was 5-year OS. Multivariable analysis using a Cox proportional hazards regression model was performed to identify factors associated with survival. Results: Between 2000 and 2018, 400 patients (234 men [58.5%]; mean [SD] age at diagnosis, 78.4 [10.5] years) with malignant neoplasms found in the face, scalp, neck, ear, eyelid, or lip received a diagnosis of HNMCC. At diagnosis, 188 patients (47.0%) had stage I disease. The most common treatment overall was surgery followed by radiotherapy (161 [40.3%]), although radiotherapy alone was most common for stage IV disease (15 of 23 [52.2%]). Five-year OS was 49.8% (95% CI, 40.7%-58.2%), 39.8% (95% CI, 26.2%-53.1%), 36.2% (95% CI, 25.2%-47.4%), and 18.5% (95% CI, 3.9%-41.5%) for stage I, II, III, and IV disease, respectively, and was highest among patients treated with surgery and radiotherapy (49.9% [95% CI, 39.9%-59.1%]). On multivariable analysis, patients treated with surgery and radiotherapy had greater OS compared with those treated with surgery alone (hazard ratio [HR], 0.76 [95% CI, 0.46-1.25]); however, this was not statistically significant. In comparison, patients who received no treatment had significantly worse OS (HR, 1.93 [95% CI, 1.26-2.96)]. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of the largest Canada-wide evaluation of HNMCC survival outcomes, stage and treatment modality were associated with survival. Multimodal treatment was associated with greater OS across all disease stages.

The Choosing Wisely Oncology Canada Cancer List: An Update.

BACKGROUND: Choosing Wisely (CW) Canada is a national campaign to identify unnecessary or harmful services that are frequently used in Canada. The original CW Oncology Canada Cancer list was developed in 2014. A CW Oncology Canada working group was established to review new evidence and guidelines and to update the current CW Oncology Canada Cancer List. METHODS: Between January and March 2022, we conducted a survey of members of the Canadian Association of Medical Oncology (CAMO), Canadian Association of Radiation Oncology (CARO) and the Canadian Society of Surgical Oncology (CSSO). We took the feedback from the survey, including potential new recommendations as well as those that were thought to be no longer relevant and up to date, and conducted a literature review with the assistance of the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technology in Health (CADTH). The final updated list of recommendations was made by the CW Oncology Canada working group based on a consensus process. RESULTS: We reviewed two potential recommendations to add and two potential recommendations to remove from the existing CW Oncology Canada Cancer List. The recommendation "Do not prescribe whole brain radiation over stereotactic radiosurgery for patient with limited brain metastases (≤4 lesions)" was supported by several evidence-based guidelines with the strength of recommendations ranging from strong to moderate and the quality of evidence ranging from level 1 to level 3. After reviewing the evidence, the working group felt that the other potential recommendation to add and the two potential recommendations to remove did not have sufficient strength and quality of evidence at this time to be added or removed from the list. CONCLUSION: The updated Choosing Wisely Oncology Canada Cancer List consists of 11 items that oncologists should question in the treatment of patients with cancer. This list can be used to design specific interventions to reduce low value care.

Are the Choosing Wisely Canada Cancer recommendations relevant and up to date with the current evidence?

INTRODUCTION: The Choosing Wisely (CW) Canada campaign was launched in 2012 to identify low-value, unnecessary and/or harmful services that are frequently used. The CW Canada Cancer list was developed in 2014 by a task force convened by the Canadian Partnership Against Cancer. The list outlines ten harmful or low-value practices that oncologists should avoid. We conducted a study of oncologists to understand the familiarity with the current recommendations and whether these continue to be relevant and up to date. METHODS: An electronic survey was developed by the members of the CW Oncology Working Group and distributed to practicing oncologists. The survey consisted of questions on 1) the familiarity of the existing CW Canada Cancer list 2) the relevance of the current list to current evidence and 3) any recommendation(s) that could be added or removed from the existing list. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze responses and narrative analysis was used to identify themes in open-ended questions. RESULTS: Between January 14 and May 3, 2022, 151 survey responses were received (overall response rate of 20 %) from 68 medical oncologists (45 % of study cohort, response rate 32 %), 54 radiation oncologists (36 % of study cohort, response rate 14 %) and 29 surgical oncologists (19 % of study cohort, response rate 18 %). Seventy-nine percent (120/151) of respondents were familiar with the current list and 65 % (78/119) said they implemented the recommendations "always" or "most of the time". Eight recommendations had > 80 % agreement that they were relevant and up to date with current evidence. There was interest in adding a new recommendation to avoid whole brain radiation and consider stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) in patients with ≤ 4 brain metastases. CONCLUSIONS: There is excellent familiarity with the CW Canada Cancer list amongst the survey respondents and most recommendations continue to be relevant and up to date with current evidence. There is an opportunity to educate physicians about the intent of the campaign and to add a new recommendation on the use of SRS for patients with a limited number of brain metastases. There is also an opportunity to identify barriers at the patient, provider and institution level that are hindering adoption of the CW Canada Cancer list POLICY SUMMARY: This survey will impact implementation and publication of an updated CW Canada Cancer list.

Extent of Groin Dissection in Melanoma: A Mixed-Methods, Population-Based Study of Practice Patterns and Outcomes.

Melanoma metastases to the groin are frequently managed by therapeutic lymph node dissection. Evidence is lacking regarding the extent of dissection required. Thus, we sought to describe practice patterns for the use of inguinal vs. ilioinguinal dissection, as well as the perioperative/oncologic outcomes of each procedure. A mixed-methods approach was employed to evaluate surgical practice patterns. A retrospective review of three multi-site databases was carried out, together with semi-structured interviews of melanoma surgeons. A total of 347 patients who underwent dissection were reviewed. The main indications stated for adding a "deep" ilioinguinal dissection were palpable or radiologically positive disease. There was no significant difference in complications, length of stay or lymphedema between patients having inguinal vs. ilioinguinal dissection, irrespective of method of diagnosis. There was also no significant difference in recurrence, cancer-specific survival or overall survival between groups. In conclusion, ilioinguinal dissection is a safe and well-tolerated procedure, with no significant added morbidity relative to an inguinal dissection. The indications for ilioinguinal dissection currently in use produce an appropriate deep node positivity rate and ilioinguinal dissection should continue to be used selectively. Randomized data are needed to clarify the impact of ilioinguinal dissection on regional control and survival.

Associations Between the Density of Oil and Gas Infrastructure and the Incidence, Stage and Outcomes of Solid Tumours: A Population-Based Geographic Analysis.

BACKGROUND: We hypothesized that there are geographic areas of increased cancer incidence in Alberta, and that these are associated with high densities of oil and gas(O+G) infrastructure. Our objective was to describe the relationship between O+G infrastructure and incidence of solid tumours on a population level. METHODS: We analyzed all patients >=18 years old with urological, breast, upper GI, colorectal, head and neck, hepatobiliary, lung, melanoma, and prostate cancers identified from the Alberta Cancer Registry from 2004-2016. Locations of active and orphan O+G sites were obtained from the Alberta Energy Regulator and Orphan Well Association. Orphan sites have no entity responsible for their maintenance. ArcGIS (ESRI, Toronto, Ontario) was used to calculate the distribution of O+G sites in each census distribution area (DA). Patient residence at diagnosis was defined by postal code. Incidence of cancer per DA was calculated and standardized. Negative binomial regression was done on O+G site density as a categorical variable with cutoffs of 1 and 30 wells/100km2, compared to areas with 0 sites. RESULTS: 125,316 patients were identified in the study timeframe;58,243 (46.5%) were female, mean age 65.6 years. Breast (22%) and prostate (19.8%) cancers were most common. Mortality was 36.5% after a median of 30 months follow up (IQR 8.4 - 68.4). For categorical density of active O+G sites, RR was 1.02 for 1-30 sites/100km2 (95% CI=0.95-1.11) and 1.15 for >30 sites/100km2 (p<0.0001, 95%CI=1.11-1.2). For orphan sites, 1-30 sites RR was 1.25 (p<0.0001, 95%CI=1.16-1.36) and 1.01 (p=0.97, 95%CI=0.7-1.45) for >30 sites. For all O+G sites, RR for 1-30 sites was 1.03 (p=0.4328, 95%CI=0.95-1.11) and 1.15 (p<0.0001, 95%CI=1.11-1.2) for >30 sites. CONCLUSION: We report a statistically significant correlation between O+G infrastructure density and solid tumour incidence in Alberta. To our knowledge this is the first population-level study to observe that active and orphan O+G sites are associated with increased risk of solid tumours. This finding may inform policy on remediation and cancer prevention.

Preoperative imaging of gastric GISTs underestimates pathologic tumor size: A retrospective, single institution analysis.

BACKGROUND: How well imaging size agrees with pathologic size of gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) is unknown. GIST risk stratification is based on pathologic size, location, and mitotic rate. To inform decision making, the size discrepancy between imaging and pathology for gastric GISTs was investigated. METHODS: Imaging and pathology reports were reviewed for 113 patients. Bland-Altman analyses and intraclass correlation (ICC) assessed agreement of imaging and pathology. Changes in clinical risk category due to size discrepancy were identified. RESULTS: Computed tomography (CT) (n = 110) and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) (n = 50) underestimated pathologic size for gastric GISTs by 0.42 cm, 95% confidence interval (CI): (0.11, 0.73), p = 0.008 and 0.54 cm, 95% CI: (0.25, 0.82), p < 0.001, respectively. ICCs were 0.94 and 0.88 for CT and EUS, respectively. For GISTs ≤ 3 cm, size underestimation was 0.24 cm for CT (n = 28), 95% CI: (0.01, 0.47), p = 0.039 and 0.56 cm for EUS (n = 26), 95% CI: (0.27, 0.84), p < 0.0001. ICCs were 0.72 and 0.55 for CT and EUS, respectively. Spearman's correlation was ≥0.84 for all groups. For GISTs ≤ 3 cm, 6/28 (21.4% p = 0.01) on CT and 7/26 (26.9% p = 0.005) on EUS upgraded risk category using pathologic size versus imaging size. No GISTs ≤ 3 cm downgraded risk categories. Size underestimation persisted for GISTs ≤ 2 cm on EUS (0.39 cm, 95% CI: [0.06, 0.72], p = 0.02, post hoc analysis). CONCLUSION: Imaging, particularly EUS, underestimates gastric GIST size. Caution should be exercised using imaging alone to risk-stratify gastric GISTs, and to decide between surveillance versus surgery.

Personalizing surgical margins in retroperitoneal sarcomas: an update.

Introduction: Tumor biology, as well as completeness of surgical resection, are two important prognostic factors when treating retroperitoneal sarcoma (RPS). A frontline extended surgical approach is associated with improved local control and possibly improved survival. However, this approach has to be tailored to each histological subtype, as the patterns of growth and recurrence risks vary significantly among them. Areas covered: We provide a review of the literature in RPS, describing the behavior of each of the five main histologic subtypes: well-differentiated liposarcoma (WDLPS), dedifferentiated liposarcoma (DDLPS), leiomyosarcoma (LMS), solitary fibrous tumor (SFT) and malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor (MPNST). The prognostic factors relevant to oncologic outcomes of RPS, the role of margins and the importance of local control are discussed. Finally, a histologic specific surgical approach to RPS is provided in detail. Expert opinion: While tumor-related factors are paramount, the only intervenable predictive factor is extent and quality of surgery. The extended surgical approach has been advocated for previously and again we describe it in more detail, tailored specifically to the tumor subtype. The aim of this approach is to maximize the possibility of achieving a complete resection through a standardized approach based on histologic behavior and site of origin.

Tourniquet use for peripheral vascular injuries in the civilian setting.

BACKGROUND: Haemorrhage in peripheral vascular injuries may cause life-threatening exsanguination. Tourniquets are used extensively by the military, with increased interest in the civilian setting to prevent deaths. This is a retrospective study of trauma patients at two large Canadian trauma centres with arterial injury after isolated extremity trauma. We hypothesized that tourniquet use may decrease mortality rate and transfusion requirements if applied early. METHODS: The study group was all adult patients at two Level 1 Trauma Centres in two Canadian cities in Canada, who had arterial injuries from extremity trauma. The study period was from January 2001 to December 2010. We excluded patients with significant associated injuries. The intervention in this study was prehospital tourniquet use. The main outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were length of stay, compartment syndrome, amputation, and blood product transfusion. RESULTS: 190 patients were included in the study, and only 4 patients had a prehospital tourniquet applied. They arrived directly from the scene of injury, had improvised tourniquets by police or bystanders, and showed a trend to be more hypotensive and acidotic. Four other patients had tourniquets applied in the trauma bay within 1h of injury. There were no differences in age, sex, injury severity or physiologic presentation between patients who had an early tourniquet applied and those who died without a tourniquet. However, six patients died without a tourniquet, and all bled to death. Of the eight patients who had early tourniquets applied, none died. CONCLUSIONS: Tourniquets may prevent exsanguination in the civilian setting for patients suffering either blunt or penetrating trauma to the extremity. Future studies will help determine the utility of deploying tourniquets in the civilian setting, given the rarity of exsanguinating haemorrhage from isolated extremity trauma in this setting.