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.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of 3D-printing in otolaryngology education.

INTRODUCTION: Three-dimensional (3D) printing has received increased attention in recent years and has many applications. In the field of otolaryngology surgery, 3D-printed models have shown potential educational value and a high fidelity to actual tissues. This provides an opportunity for trainees to gain additional exposure, especially as conventional educational tools, such as cadavers, are expensive and in limited supply. The purpose of this study was to perform a meta-analysis of the uses of 3D-printing in otolaryngology education. The primary outcomes of investigation were surgical utility, anatomical similarity, and educational value of 3D-printed models. Secondary outcomes of interest included country of implementation, 3D-printer materials and costs, types of surgical simulators, and the levels of training of participants. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Google Scholar and previous reviews were searched from inception until June 2021 for eligible articles. Title, abstract, and data extraction were performed in duplicate. Data were analyzed using random-effects models. The National Institute of Health Quality Assessment Tool was used to rate the quality of the evidence. RESULTS: A total of 570 abstracts were identified and screened by 2 independent reviewers. Of the 274 articles reviewed in full text, 46 articles met the study criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. Surgical skill utility was reported in 42 studies (563 participants) and had a high degree of acceptance (84.8%, 95% CI: 81.1%-88.4%). The anatomical similarity was reported in 39 studies (484 participants) and was received positively at 80.6% (95% CI: 77.0%-84.2%). Educational value was described in 36 studies (93 participants) and had the highest approval rating by participants at 90.04% (87.20%-92.88%). A subgroup analysis by year of publication demonstrated that studies published after 2015 had higher ratings across all outcomes compared to those published prior to 2015. CONCLUSION: This study found that 3D-printing interventions in otolaryngology demonstrated surgical, anatomical, and educational value. In addition, the approval ratings of 3D-printed models indicate a positive trend over time. Future educational programs may consider implementing 3D-printing on a larger scale within the medical curriculum to enhance exposure to otolaryngology.