Pathologic response following treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer: Does location matter?

BACKGROUND: Despite advances in the treatment of rectal adenocarcinoma, the management of locally advanced disease remains a challenge. The standard of care for patients with stages II and III rectal cancer includes neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by total mesorectal excision and postoperative chemotherapy. Much effort has been dedicated to the identification of predictive factors associated with pathologic complete response (pCR). The aim of our study was to examine our institutional experience and determine whether any association exists between anatomic tumor location and the rate of pCR. We hypothesized that lesions more than 6 cm from the anal verge are more likely to achieve a pCR. METHODS: Using data from our prospectively maintained tumor registry, a query was completed to identify all patients with locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma who underwent treatment at Fox Chase Cancer Center from 2002 to 2015. Demographics, pretreatment, posttreatment, and final pathologic TNM staging data were collected as well as treatment intervals in days, recurrence status, overall survival, and disease-free survival. Patients with incomplete endoscopic data, staging information, survival, or recurrence status were excluded. The primary outcome measured was the degree of pathologic response. Logistic regression was used to adjust for covariates. RESULTS: Of the 135 patients eligible in the study cohort, 39% were female and 61% were male. Regarding initial clinical stage, 43% were stage II and 57% were stage III. A total of 29% had a pCR, 43% had partial pathologic response, and 28% had no response to neoadjuvant treatment. Tumor location ranged from 0 to 13 cm from the anal verge. Longitudinal tumor length was recorded in 111 patients, facilitating the calculation of mean tumor distance from the anal verge. This ranged from 0 to 15.5 cm. Univariate and multivariable analyses were completed using pCR as a primary outcome. No statistically significant difference was noted based on tumor location, regardless of measurement approach. CONCLUSIONS: Anatomic location of cancer of the rectum does not affect pCR after neoadjuvant therapy and subsequent surgical resection.

Acellular Dermal Matrix Versus Inferior Deepithelialized Flap Breast Reconstruction: Equivalent Outcomes, with Increased Cost.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 250,000 new cases of breast cancer are diagnosed yearly in the U.S. resulting in more postmastectomy breast reconstructions (PMBRs). The acellular dermal matrix (ADM) expander-implant method became popular in the mid-2000s, but newer techniques such as the inferior deepithelialized flap (IDF) has more recently been described. We hypothesize that ADMs and IDFs provide comparable aesthetic outcomes, with no difference in complication rates and operative characteristics. METHODS: A retrospective, single-institution study was performed between July 1, 2012, and June 30, 2014, examining all PMBR's (ADM and IDF). Outcomes were categorized as clinical (e.g., complications requiring surgical intervention) or aesthetic. RESULTS: A total of 65 patients (41 ADM; 24 IDF; mean age, 53.4 ± 10.7 years) were included, with 101 PMBR's evaluated (63 ADM and 38 IDF). Patients who underwent IDFs had higher body mass index (32 versus 25; P < 0.01) and higher grades of breast ptosis. Major complication rates were similar between ADM and IDF groups (22% versus 31.5%; P = 0.34). There were no differences in aesthetic outcomes between groups (rater intraclass correlation, 0.92). The average IDF breast reconstruction took nearly 30 minutes longer per reconstructed side (192 minutes versus 166 minutes; P = 0.02), but operative costs were more expensive for the ADM breast reconstruction. CONCLUSIONS: The IDF procedure took 30 minutes longer for each reconstructed side, without significant differences in complications or aesthetic outcomes between the 2 PMBRs. IDF reconstructions may be more suitable for patients with grade 3 breast ptosis and higher body mass index. Further studies should focus on long-term outcomes and value-based approaches to PMBR.

A surgical perspective report on melanoma management.

Management of melanoma includes wide excision with adequate margins and lymph node biopsy depending on the depth of the lesion, with subsequent completion lymphadenectomy for positive sentinel node. Locally advanced disease can be approached in several different ways depending on a variety of patient and disease-specific factors. These include surgical resection, isolated limb perfusion and infusion and intralesional injection therapy such as talimogene laherparepvec, IL-2 and Bacille Calmette-Guerin. Ongoing controversy exists regarding the utility of completion lymphadenectomy, and trials such as MSLT-2 will attempt to shed light on this issue. The future of melanoma management will likely focus on expanding the use of immunotherapy, allowing for narrower surgical margins, particularly in sensitive anatomic areas, and limiting the number of completion lymphadenectomies.