Mentorship of Junior Surgical Faculty Across Academic Programs in Surgery.

Importance: Because mentorship is critical for professional development and career advancement, it is essential to examine the status of mentorship and identify challenges that junior surgical faculty (assistant and associate professors) face obtaining effective mentorship. Objective: To evaluate the mentorship experience for junior surgical faculty and highlight areas for improvement. Design, Setting, and Participants: This qualitative study was an explanatory sequential mixed-methods study including an anonymous survey on mentorship followed by semistructured interviews to expand on survey findings. Junior surgical faculty from 18 US academic surgery programs were included in the anonymous survey and interviews. Survey responses between "formal" (assigned by the department) vs "informal" (sought out by the faculty) mentors and male vs female junior faculty were compared using χ2 tests. Interview responses were analyzed for themes until thematic saturation was achieved. Survey responses were collected from November 2022 to August 2023, and interviews conducted from July to December 2023. Exposure: Mentorship from formal and/or informal mentors. Main Outcomes and Measures: Survey gauged the availability and satisfaction with formal and informal mentorship; interviews assessed broad themes regarding mentorship. Results: Of 825 survey recipients, 333 (40.4%) responded; 155 (51.7%) were male and 134 (44.6%) female. Nearly all respondents (319 [95.8%]) agreed or strongly agreed that mentorship is important to their surgical career, especially for professional networking (309 respondents [92.8%]), career advancement (301 [90.4%]), and research (294 [88.3%]). However, only 58 respondents (18.3%) had a formal mentor. More female than male faculty had informal mentors (123 [91.8%] vs 123 [79.4%]; P = .003). Overall satisfaction was higher with informal mentorship than formal mentorship (221 [85.0%] vs 40 [69.0%]; P = .01). Most male and female faculty reported no preferences in gender or race and ethnicity for their mentors. When asked if they had good mentor options if they wanted to change mentors, 141 (47.8%) responded no. From the interviews (n = 20), 6 themes were identified, including absence of mentorship infrastructure, preferred mentor characteristics, and optimizing mentorship. Conclusions and Relevance: Academic junior surgical faculty agree mentorship is vital to their careers. However, this study found that few had formal mentors and almost half need more satisfactory options if they want to change mentors. Academic surgical programs should adopt a framework for facilitating mentorship and optimize mentor-mentee relationships through alignment of mentor-mentee goals and needs.

Fragmentation of care in breast cancer: greater than the sum of its parts.

INTRODUCTION: Fragmentation of care (FC, the receipt of care at > 1 institution) has been shown to negatively impact cancer outcomes. Given the multimodal nature of breast cancer treatment, we sought to identify factors associated with FC and its effects on survival of breast cancer patients. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed of surgically treated, stage I-III breast cancer patients in the 2004-2020 National Cancer Database, excluding neoadjuvant therapy recipients. Patients were stratified into two groups: FC or non-FC care. Treatment delay was defined as definitive surgery > 60 days after diagnosis. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify factors predictive of FC, and survival was compared using Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox proportional hazards methods. RESULTS: Of the 531,644 patients identified, 340,297 (64.0%) received FC. After adjustment, FC (OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.25-1.29) was independently associated with treatment delay. Factors predictive of FC included Hispanic ethnicity (OR 1.04, 95% CI: 1.01-1.07), treatment at comprehensive community cancer programs (OR 1.06, 95% CI: 1.03-1.08) and integrated network cancer programs (OR 1.55, 95% CI: 1.51-1.59), AJCC stage II (OR 1.06, 95% CI 1.05-1.07) and stage III tumors (OR 1.06, 95% CI: 1.02-1.10), and HR + /HER2 + tumors (OR 1.05, 95% CI: 1.02-1.07). Treatment delay was independently associated with increased risk of mortality (HR 1.23, 95% CI 1.20-1.26), whereas FC (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.86-0.88) showed survival benefit. CONCLUSIONS: While treatment delay negatively impacts survival in breast cancer patients, our findings suggest FC could be a marker for multispecialty care that may mitigate some of these effects.

Oncologic outcomes and survival of modern surgical approaches for gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST).

BACKGROUND: Studies have demonstrated comparable outcomes between laparoscopic and open resection of gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST). We sought to compare outcomes among robotic, laparoscopic, and open resection of gastric GIST in the era of expanding minimally invasive surgery. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed of adult patients with gastric GIST undergoing definitive surgery using the National Cancer Database from 2010 to 2020, excluding cases converted to open. Patients were stratified into minimally invasive surgery (MIS), (combined robotic (R) and laparoscopic (L)), and open (O). Hospital length of stay (LOS), 30-day mortality, 90-day mortality, and margin status were assessed. Subgroup analysis was performed to evaluate outcomes between R and L cohorts. Entropy balancing was used to adjust for intergroup differences. Kaplan-Meier survival estimates were used to compare unadjusted 5-year survival. RESULTS: Of the 15,022 patients (R = 10.4%, L = 44.3%, O = 45.3%), 63.2% were stage I and 70.6% underwent partial gastrectomy. MIS approach was associated with shorter hospital LOS (ß: - 2.58; 95% CI: - 2.82 to - 2.33) and lower odds of 30-day (OR 0.45; 95% CI: 0.30-0.68) and 90-day mortality (OR 0.54; 95% CI: 0.39-0.74) compared to O. Likelihood of R0 resection similar between groups (OR 1.00; 95% CI: 0.88-1.14). Hospital LOS (ß: + 0.25; 95% CI: - 0.14-0.64), odds of 30-day (OR 0.99; 95% CI: 0.40-2.46) and 90-day mortality (OR 0.89; 95% CI: 0.47-1.70), and rate of R0 resection (OR 1.02; 95% CI: 0.82-1.27) were comparable between R and L cohorts. Compared to O, MIS approach was associated with improved 5-year OS (log rank p < 0.001). Overall survival was not significantly different between R and L (log rank p = 0.44). CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that MIS approach may be considered for resection of gastric GIST in select patients. Among patients receiving an MIS approach, the robotic technique can be considered an oncologically safe alternative to laparoscopic surgery.

Expanded Indications for Neoadjuvant Endocrine Therapy in Early-Stage Breast Cancer During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Pandemic Breast Cancer Consortium (PBCC) published recommendations for triage of breast cancer patients. The recommendations included neoadjuvant treatment of early-stage breast cancer patients experiencing delays in surgery. This study evaluated national patterns of neoadjuvant treatment according to triage guidelines. METHODS: Patients treated with surgery (upfront or post-neoadjuvant) in 2018-2020 were collected from the National Cancer Database. The proportions of patients treated according to the PBCC triage guidelines were calculated in 2020 and compared with similar cohorts in 2018-2019. Patient and hospital factors were evaluated for association with treatment. RESULTS: Among cT1N0 ER+/PR+/HER2- patients, those treated in 2020 were more likely to receive neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET) compared with those before that time (odds ratio [OR], 3.08; range, 2.93-3.24). Among the patients with cT2N0 or cT1N1 disease, NET was more common in 2020 (OR, 1.76; range, 1.65-1.88). Academic facility, black or Asian race, more comorbidities, and the New England/Middle Atlantic region were associated with NET use. CONCLUSIONS: During the COVID-19 pandemic, expanded utilization of neoadjuvant therapy for surgical breast cancer patients was observed. Health care system limitations during the pandemic contributed to expanded adoption of neoadjuvant therapy for early breast cancer, contrary to usual practice. Long-term outcomes for patients treated according to PBCC recommendations should be closely monitored.

Adjuvant Radiotherapy for Surgically Resected Stage III Merkel Cell Carcinoma.

This case-control study evaluates whether adjuvant radiotherapy is associated with overall survival among patients with surgically resected stage III Merkel cell carcinoma.

Identification of Populations at Risk for "Choosing Un-Wisely": A SEER Population-Based Study.

BACKGROUND: Since 2016, the Choosing Wisely campaign has recommended against routine axillary surgery in elderly patients with early stage, hormone receptor positive (ER+) breast cancer. The objective was to evaluate factors associated with axillary surgery in breast cancer patients meeting criteria for sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) omission and identify potential disparities. METHODS: Female patients age ≥70 years with cT1-2N0M0, ER+, HER2-negative breast cancer diagnosed after publication of the Choosing Wisely recommendations, between 2016 and 2019, were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Patient demographics and tumor characteristics associated with axillary surgery were analyzed. RESULTS: Of the 31 756 patients meeting omission criteria, 25 771 (81.2%) underwent axillary surgery. Hispanic ethnicity, median household income between $35,000 and $70,000, treatment in rural areas, poor differentiation, lobular and mixed lobular with ductal histology, T2 tumors, radiation therapy, and systemic therapy were factors associated with receiving axillary surgery on multivariable analysis. In the axillary surgery cohort, a median of 2 (IQR = 2) nodes were examined and 529 (2.1%) patients were found to have 1 or more positive lymph nodes. DISCUSSION: Among elderly patients meeting Choosing Wisely criteria for SLNB omission, particular racial, ethnic, socioeconomic, and geographic populations may be at increased risk for potential over treatment. Identification of these factors provides specific opportunities for education and implementation of de-escalation of unnecessary procedures.

Operating Room Lockers and Gender Equity in the Surgical Workforce.

This study assesses gender parity in operating room locker room conditions.

Omission of Radiation in Conservative Treatment for Breast Cancer: Opportunity for De-escalation of Care.

INTRODUCTION: De-escalation of breast cancer treatment aims to reduce patient and financial toxicity without compromising outcomes. Level I evidence and National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines support omission of adjuvant radiation in patients aged >70 y with hormone-sensitive, pT1N0M0 invasive breast cancer treated with endocrine therapy. We evaluated radiation use in patients eligible for guideline concordant omission of radiation. METHODS: Subgroup analysis of patients eligible for radiation omission from two pooled randomized controlled trials, which included stage 0-III breast cancer patients undergoing breast conserving surgery, was performed to evaluate factors associated with radiation use. RESULTS: Of 631 patients, 47 (7.4%) met radiation omission criteria and were treated by 14 surgeons at eight institutions. The mean age was 75.3 (standard deviation + 4.4) y. Majority of patients identified as White (n = 46; 97.9%) and non-Hispanic (n = 44; 93.6%). The mean tumor size was 1.0 cm; 37 patients (88.1%) had ductal, 4 patients (9.5%) had lobular, and 17 patients (40.5%) had low-grade disease. Among patients eligible for radiation omission, 34 (72.3%) patients received adjuvant radiation. Those who received radiation were significantly younger than those who did not (74 y, interquartile range = 4 y, versus 78 y, interquartile range = 11 y, P = 0.03). There was no difference in radiation use based on size (P = 0.4), histology (P = 0.5), grade (P = 0.7), race (P = 1), ethnicity (P = 0.6), institution (P = 0.1), gender of the surgeon (P = 0.7), or surgeon (P = 0.1). CONCLUSIONS: Fewer than 10% of patients undergoing breast conservation met criteria for radiation omission. Nearly three-quarters received radiation therapy with younger age being a driver of radiation use, suggesting ample opportunity for de-escalation, particularly among younger eligible patients.

Are we choosing wisely? Drivers of preoperative MRI use in breast cancer patients.

INTRODUCTION: Factors contributing to the use of preoperative MRI remain poorly understood. METHODS: Data from a randomized controlled trial of stage 0-3 breast cancer patients undergoing breast conserving surgery between 2016 and 2018 were analyzed. RESULTS: Of the 396 patients in this trial, 32.6% had a preoperative MRI. Patient age, race, ethnicity, tumor histology, and use of neoadjuvant therapy were significant predictors of MRI use. On multivariate analysis, younger patients with invasive lobular tumors were more likely to have a preoperative MRI. Rates also varied significantly by individual surgeon (p < 0.001); in particular, female surgeons (39.9% vs. 24.0% for male surgeons, p = 0.001) and those in community practice (58.9% vs. 14.2% for academic, p < 0.001) were more likely to order preoperative MRI. Rates declined over the two years of the study, particularly among female surgeons. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative MRI varies with patient age and tumor histology; however, there remains variability by individual surgeon.

Factors Affecting Time to Surgery in Breast Cancer Patients.

BACKGROUND: We sought to determine factors affecting time to surgery (TTS) to identify potential modifiable factors to improve timeliness of care. METHODS: Patients with clinical stage 0-3 breast cancer undergoing partial mastectomy in 2 clinical trials, conducted in ten centers across the US, were analyzed. No preoperative workup was mandated by the study; those receiving neoadjuvant therapy were excluded. RESULTS: The median TTS among the 583 patients in this cohort was 34 days (range: 1-289). Patient age, race, tumor palpability, and genomic subtype did not influence timeliness of care defined as TTS ≤30 days. Hispanic patients less likely to have a TTS ≤30 days (P = .001). There was significant variation in TTS by surgeon (P < .001); those practicing in an academic center more likely to have TTS ≤30 days than those in a community setting (55.1% vs 19.3%, P < .001). Patients who had a preoperative ultrasound had a similar TTS to those who did not (TTS ≤30 days 41.9% vs 51.9%, respectively, P = .109), but those who had a preoperative MRI had a significantly increased TTS (TTS ≤30 days 25.0% vs 50.9%, P < .001). On multivariate analysis, patient ethnicity was no longer significantly associated with TTS ≤30 (P = .150). Rather, use of MRI (OR: .438; 95% CI: .287-.668, P < .001) and community practice type (OR: .324; 95% CI: .194-.541, P < .001) remained independent predictors of lower likelihood of TTS ≤30 days. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative MRI significantly increases time to surgery; surgeons should consider this in deciding on its use.

Factors Associated With General Surgery Residents' Operative Experience During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Importance: The suspension of elective operations in March 2020 to prepare for the COVID-19 surge posed significant challenges to resident education. To mitigate the potential negative effects of COVID-19 on surgical education, it is important to quantify how the pandemic influenced resident operative volume. Objective: To examine the association of the pandemic with general surgical residents' operative experience by postgraduate year (PGY) and case type and to evaluate if certain institutional characteristics were associated with a greater decline in surgical volume. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective review included residents' operative logs from 3 consecutive academic years (2017-2018, 2018-2019, and 2019-2020) from 16 general surgery programs. Data collected included total major cases, case type, and PGY. Faculty completed a survey about program demographics and COVID-19 response. Data on race were not collected. Operative volumes from March to June 2020 were compared with the same period during 2018 and 2019. Data were analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis test adjusted for within-program correlations. Main Outcome and Measures: Total major cases performed by each resident during the first 4 months of the pandemic. Results: A total of 1368 case logs were analyzed. There was a 33.5% reduction in total major cases performed in March to June 2020 compared with 2018 and 2019 (45.0 [95% CI, 36.1-53.9] vs 67.7 [95% CI, 62.0-72.2]; P < .001), which significantly affected every PGY. All case types were significantly reduced in 2020 except liver, pancreas, small intestine, and trauma cases. There was a 10.2% reduction in operative volume during the 2019-2020 academic year compared with the 2 previous years (192.3 [95% CI, 178.5-206.1] vs 213.8 [95% CI, 203.6-223.9]; P < .001). Level 1 trauma centers (49.5 vs 68.5; 27.7%) had a significantly lower reduction in case volume than non-level 1 trauma centers (33.9 vs 63.0; 46%) (P = .03). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study of operative logs of general surgery residents in 16 US programs from 2017 to 2020, the first 4 months of the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with a significant reduction in operative experience, which affected every PGY and most case types. Level 1 trauma centers were less affected than non-level 1 centers. If this trend continues, the effect on surgical training may be even more detrimental.

A multi-institutional study assessing general surgery faculty teaching evaluations.

BACKGROUND: Resident evaluation of faculty teaching is an important metric in general surgery training, however considerable variability in faculty teaching evaluation (FE) instruments exists. STUDY DESIGN: Twenty-two general surgery programs provided their FE and program demographics. Three clinical education experts performed blinded assessment of FEs, assessing adherence 2018 ACGME common program standards and if the FE was meaningful. RESULTS: Number of questions per FE ranged from 1 to 29. The expert assessments demonstrated that no evaluation addressed all 5 ACGME standards. There were significant differences in the FEs effectiveness of assessing the 5 ACGME standards (p < 0.001), with teaching abilities and professionalism rated the highest and scholarly activities the lowest. CONCLUSION: There was wide variation between programs regarding FEs development and adhered to ACGME standards. Faculty evaluation tools consistently built around all suggested ACGME standards may allow for a more accurate and useful assessment of faculty teaching abilities to target professional development.

Resection of Cavity Shave Margins in Stage 0-III Breast Cancer Patients Undergoing Breast Conserving Surgery: A Prospective Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: Single-center studies have demonstrated that resection of cavity shave margins (CSM) halves the rate of positive margins and re-excision in breast cancer patients undergoing partial mastectomy (PM). We sought to determine if these findings were externally generalizable across practice settings. METHODS: In this multicenter randomized controlled trial occurring in 9 centers across the United States, stage 0-III breast cancer patients undergoing PM were randomly assigned to either have resection of CSM ("shave" group) or not ("no shave" group). Randomization occurred intraoperatively, after the surgeon had completed their standard PM. Primary outcome measures were positive margin and re-excision rates. RESULTS: Between July 28, 2016 and April 13, 2018, 400 patients were enrolled in this trial. Four patients (2 in each arm) did not meet inclusion criteria after randomization, leaving 396 patients for analysis: 196 in the "shave" group and 200 to the "no shave" group. Median patient age was 65 years (range; 29-94). Groups were well matched at baseline for demographic and clinicopathologic factors. Prior to randomization, positive margin rates were similar in the "shave" and "no shave" groups (76/196 (38.8%) vs. 72/200 (36.0%), respectively, P = 0.604). After randomization, those in the "shave" group were significantly less likely than those in the "no shave" group to have positive margins (19/196 (9.7%) vs. 72/200 (36.0%), P < 0.001), and to require re-excision or mastectomy for margin clearance (17/196 (8.7%) vs. 47/200 (23.5%), P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Resection of CSM significantly reduces positive margin and re-excision rates in patients undergoing PM.

Investigating Association Between Sex and Faculty Teaching Evaluation in General Surgery Residency Programs: A Multi-Institutional Study.

BACKGROUND: In specialties with gender imbalance, such as general surgery, women faculty frequently receive lower teaching evaluation scores compared with men, which can affect academic advancement. STUDY DESIGN: We collected 1 year of anonymous resident-derived faculty teaching evaluations from 21 general surgery programs, along with resident, faculty, and department leadership gender complement. A composite evaluation score was calculated for each faculty. After accounting for within-program correlations, we compared male and female scores using the cluster-adjusted t-test to describe the respective mean differences with a 95% CI. Programs were divided into quartiles based on percent female faculty, female residents, and combined total females to detect associations between female representation and faculty teaching evaluation scores. RESULTS: The 21 programs yielded 20,187 teaching evaluations of 1,177 faculty. Women comprised 28% of the faculty, 47% of residents, 43% of program directors, and 19% of department chairs. Overall, women faculty had significantly higher evaluation scores than men (90.6% vs 89.5%, p < 0.05). Female gender was associated with higher teaching evaluation scores compared with male faculty in the lowest quartiles for all combinations of women representation. CONCLUSIONS: This multi-institutional analysis of general surgical resident evaluations of faculty identified that female gender was associated with higher evaluation scores than men (although the difference was small). This unanticipated finding might reflect the slowly changing gender balance within general surgery and attitudes towards female faculty in a traditionally male-dominated field. Contrary to our hypothesis, female gender was associated with higher faculty evaluation scores at programs with fewer women faculty and fewer women residents.

Gastric Cancer Peritoneal Carcinomatosis Risk Score.

BACKGROUND: Gastric cancer (GC) peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) is associated with a poor prognosis. Although grade, histology, and stage are associated with PC, the cumulative risk of PC when multiple risk factors are present is unknown. This study aimed to develop a cumulative GCPC risk score based on individual demographic/tumor characteristics. METHODS: Patient-level data (2004-2014) from the California Cancer Registry were reviewed by creating a keyword search algorithm to identify patients with gastric PC. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess demographic/tumor characteristics associated with PC in a randomly selected testing cohort. Scores were assigned to risk factors based on beta coefficients from the logistic regression result, and these scores were applied to the remainder of the subjects (validation cohort). The summed scores of each risk factor formed the total risk score. These were grouped, showing the percentages of patients with PC. RESULTS: The study identified 4285 patients with gastric adenocarcinoma (2757 males, 64.3%). The median age of the patients was 67 years (interquartile range [IQR], 20 years). Most of the patients were non-Hispanic white (n = 1748, 40.8%), with proximal (n = 1675, 39.1%) and poorly differentiated (n = 2908, 67.9%) tumors. The characteristics most highly associated with PC were T4 (odds ratio [OR], 3.12; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.19-4.44), overlapping location (OR 2.27; 95% CI 1.52-3.39), age of 20-40 years (OR 3.42; 95% CI 2.24-5.21), and Hispanic ethnicity (OR 1.86; 95% CI 1.36-2.54). The demographic/tumor characteristics used in the risk score included age, race/ethnicity, T stage, histology, tumor grade, and location. Increasing GCPC score was associated with increasing percentage of patients with PC. CONCLUSION: Based on demographic/tumor characteristics in GC, it is possible to distinguish groups with varying odds for PC. Understanding the risk for PC based on the cumulative effect of high-risk features can help clinicians to customize surveillance strategies and can aid in early identification of PC.

Improved Survival with Immunotherapy but Lack of Synergistic Effect with Radiation for Stage IV Melanoma of the Head and Neck.

Prospective randomized studies have demonstrated a survival benefit of immunotherapy in stage IV cutaneous melanoma. Some retrospective studies have hypothesized a synergistic effect of radiation and immunotherapy. Our objective was to identify whether there is a survival benefit for patients treated with radiation and immunotherapy in stage IV cutaneous melanoma of the head and neck (CMHN). The National Cancer Database was used to identify patients with stage IV CMHN between 2012 and 2014. These patients were stratified based on receipt of radiation and immunotherapy. Adjusted Cox regression was used to analyze overall survival. A total of 542 patients were identified with stage IV CMHN, of whom 153 (28%) patients received immunotherapy. Receipt of immunotherapy (hazard ratio [HR] 0.69, P = 0.02) and negative LNs (HR 0.50, P = 0.002) were independently associated with improved survival, whereas radiation conferred no survival benefit (HR 1.17, P = 0.26). Patients who received immunotherapy without radiation were associated with significantly improved survival compared with those who received immunotherapy with radiation (P < 0.0001). However, of patients who received radiation, the addition of immunotherapy did not seem to improve survival (P = 0.979). In stage IV CMHN, immunotherapy confers a 32 per cent survival benefit. The use of immunotherapy in patients who require radiation, however, is not associated with improved survival.

From Evidence to Practice: Are Low-Risk Breast Cancer Patients still Enduring Unnecessary Costs of Radiation?

Radiation is routinely recommended after conservative surgery for breast cancer, despite long-standing Level I evidence showing no survival benefit for elderly patients with favorable disease using endocrine therapy. We sought to evaluate radiation use and costs in patients eligible for omission of radiation. A retrospective single-institution review from 2005 to 2017 was performed of women aged ≥70 years, with cT1N0M0, who were ER/PR positive and HER-2 negative, and receiving breast-conserving surgery. Patient, tumor, and treatment characteristics were compared by use of radiation. Cost estimates used Medicare's 2019 fee schedule. Of 84 patients meeting the study criteria, 72.6 per cent received radiation and 56 per cent received endocrine therapy, with four recurrences (4.9% radiated and 4.4% not radiated, P = 0.9). Early and late grade I radiation toxicities occurred in 67.2 per cent and 26.2 per cent of radiated patients, respectively. Younger age (P = 0.01), receipt of endocrine therapy (P < 0.0001), and axillary surgery (P < 0.0001) were significantly associated with radiation use. There were no significant differences in radiation use based on race/ethnicity, language, comorbidities, BMI, or pathologic tumor size. Estimated total radiation cost was $646,426. Radiation remains overused and endocrine therapy, underused in breast cancer patients eligible to avoid radiation. As gatekeepers for radiation oncology referrals, surgeons can diminish both physical and financial costs of radiation in eligible patients.

Role of lymph node ratio in selection of adjuvant treatment (chemotherapy vs. chemoradiation) in patients with resected gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: Recent randomized controlled trials have failed to show a survival difference between adjuvant chemotherapy (CT) and adjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) in patients with resected gastric cancer (GC). However, a subset of patients with lymph node (LN) positive disease may still benefit from CRT. Additional evidence is needed to help guide physicians in identifying patients in whom CRT should be considered. Our objective was then to compare survival outcomes based on lymph node ratio (LNR) (ratio of metastatic to harvested LNs) for patients with gastric and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma treated with surgery and either CT or CRT. METHODS: This retrospective population-based study used California Cancer Registry (CCR) data from 2004 to 2013. It included 1,493 patients diagnosed with stage IB-III gastric/GEJ adenocarcinoma and treated with CT or CRT following total or partial gastrectomy. Overall survival (OS) was the primary outcome and GC-specific survival was secondary. Mortality hazards ratios (HR) for these outcomes were computed using propensity score weighted Cox regression models, stratified by LNR strata categories as 0%, 1-9%, 10-25% and >25%. RESULTS: Out of 1,493 patients that met inclusion criteria, 462 were treated with CT while 1,031 received CRT. Median follow-up for all subjects was 76 months and median survival was 54 months for CRT and 35 for the CT cohort, P<0.001. Compared to CT, CRT was associated with improved survival among patients with LNR of 10-25% [HR =0.62 (95% CI, 0.46-0.83)] and >25% [HR =0.67 (95% CI, 0.56-0.80)]. Similar findings were observed for GC-specific survival and for analyses limited to patients that had at least 15 LNs evaluated. CONCLUSIONS: LNR appears to be a simple and readily available measure that could be used in treatment planning for resected GC. CRT offers significant survival advantage over CT among patients with high LN disease burden (LNR of ≥10%).