Surgical Fixation Method in Lower Extremity Intercalary Allograft Reconstruction After Oncologic Resection: A Comparison of Plates and Nails.

INTRODUCTION: Fixation in intercalary allograft reconstruction includes plates and intramedullary nails. The purpose of this study was to examine rates of nonunion, fracture, the overall need for revision surgery, and allograft survival based on the surgical fixation method in lower extremity intercalary allografts. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed on 51 patients with intercalary allograft reconstruction in the lower extremity. Fixation methods compared were intramedullary fixation with nails (IMN) and extramedullary fixation with plates (EMP). Complications compared were nonunion, fracture, and wound complications. The alpha was set at 0.05 for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Nonunion incidence at all allograft-to-native bone junction sites was 21% (IMN) and 25% (EMP) ( P = 0.8). Fracture incidence was 24% (IMN) and 32% (EMP) ( P = 0.75). Median fracture-free allograft survival was 7.9 years (IMN) and 3.2 years (EMP) ( P = 0.04). Infection was seen in 18% (IMN) and 12% (EMP) ( P = 0.7). The overall need for revision surgery was 59% (IMN) and 71% (EMP) ( P = 0.53). Allograft survival at the final follow-up was 82% (IMN) and 65% (EMP) ( P = 0.33). When the EMP group was subdivided into single plate (SP) and multiple plate (MP) groups and compared with the IMN groups, fracture rates were 24% (IMN), 8% (SP), and 48% (MP) ( P = 0.04). Rates of revision surgery were 59% (IMN), 46% (SP), and 86% (MP) ( P = 0.04). Allograft survival at the final follow-up was 88% (IMN), 92% (SP), and 52% (MP) ( P = 0.05). DISCUSSION: Median fracture-free allograft survival was notably longer for the IMN group than the EMP group; otherwise, there were no notable differences between the intramedullary and extramedullary groups. When the EMP group was subdivided into the SP and MP groups, patients with MPs had higher rates of fracture, higher rates of revision surgery, and lower overall allograft survival. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III, Therapeutic Study, Retrospective Comparative Study.

Effectiveness of immunological agents in non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) continues to claim millions of lives worldwide. Although its poor prognosis is largely attributed to the lack of adequate and precise detection technologies, cancer cells' suppression of the immune system adds on to the difficulty of identifying abnormal NSCLC tumors in their early stages. Therefore, cancer immunotherapy, which activates the immune system and helps it fight tumors, has recently become the most sought-after technique, especially in the advanced stages of NSCLC, where surgery or chemotherapy may or may not bring about the desired survival benefits in patients. METHODS: This review focuses on the various immunotherapeutic interventions and their efficacy in advanced NSCLC clinical trials. Monoclonal antibodies like anti-PD-1/PD-L1 agents and anti-CTLA-4 antibodies, cancer vaccines, oncolytic viruses and adoptive T cell therapy have been discussed in brief. Furthermore, the effects of gender, age, and race on the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors and suggest plausible future approaches in the realm of immuno-oncology. RESULTS: Immunotherapy is used alone or in combination either with other immunological agents or with chemotherapy. However, the efficacy of these strategies depends extensively on various demographic variables, as some patients respond perfectly well to immunotherapy, while others do not benefit at all or experience disease progression. By targeting a "hallmark" of cancer (immune evasion), immunotherapy has transformed NSCLC management, though several barriers prevent its complete effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: All these immunological strategies should be interpreted in the current setting of synergistic treatment, in which these agents can be combined with chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and, or surgery following patient and tumor characteristics to proportionate the best-individualized treatment and achieve superior results. To better pursue this goal, further investigations on cost-effectiveness and sex-gender, race, and age differences in immunotherapy are needed.

Racial and Treatment Center Differences on Time to Treatment Initiation for Nonsmall Cell Lung Cancer Patients Receiving Radiation Therapy As an Initial Treatment.

Objective: Because time to treatment has been shown to be associated with increase in the risk of death for Non Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) patients, we examined the prevalence and magnitude of racial disparities in mean time to radiation therapy (TTRT) for Stage I-III non-small cell lung cancer patients across a variety of treatment facilities. Methods: Utilizing the United States National Cancer Database (NCDB), we determined differences in TTRT between different races and different treatment facilities. Results: Concordant with past research, we found that non-White patients and patients treated at academic facilities, regardless of race, have longer mean TTRT, and that racial disparities in TTRT extend across all treatment facilities (all p<0.05). Conclusions: These findings shed light on the potential presence of and impact of structural racism on patients seeking cancer treatment, and the need for further investigation behind the reasonings behind longer TTI for non-White patients. To elucidate the real-world applicability of these results, further investigation into the societal determinants that perpetuate disparity in time to radiation therapy, and potential interventions in the clinical setting to improve cultural and racial sensitivity among healthcare professionals is recommended.