Prognostic Impact of Para-Aortic Lymph Node Metastasis in Resected Non-Pancreatic Periampullary Cancers.

BACKGROUND: Surgery remains debatable in para-aortic lymph node (PALN, station 16b1) metastasis in non-pancreatic periampullary cancer (NPPAC). This study examined the impact of PALN metastasis on outcomes following pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) in NPPAC. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of patients with NPPAC who were explored for PD with PALN dissection was performed. Based on the extent of nodal involvement on final histopathology, they were stratified as node-negative (N0), regional node involved (N+) and metastatic PALN (N16+) and their outcomes were compared. RESULTS: Between 2011 and 2022, 153/887 PD patients underwent a PALN dissection, revealing N16+ in 42 patients (27.4%), of whom 32 patients underwent resection. The 3-years overall survival (OS) for patients with N16+ was 28% (95% confidence interval [CI] 13-60%), notably lower than the 67% (95% CI 53-83.5%; p = 0.007) for those without PALN metastasis. Stratified by nodal involvement, the median OS for N+ and N16+ patients was similar (28.4 months and 26.2 months, respectively). The N0 subgroup had a significantly longer 3-years OS of 87.5% (95% CI 79-96.7%; p = 0.0051). Interestingly, 10 patients not offered resection following N16+ identified on frozen section had a median survival of only 9 months. The perioperative morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing PD with PALN dissection were similar to standard resections. CONCLUSION: In a select group of patients with NPPAC, PD in isolated PALN metastasis was associated with improved OS. The survival in this group of patients was comparable with regional node-positive patients and significantly better than palliative treatment alone.

Impact of pCR after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radical D2 dissection in locally advanced gastric cancers: Analysis of 1001 cases.

BACKGROUND: Advances in perioperative chemotherapy have improved outcomes in patients with gastric cancers (GC). This strategy leads to tumour downstaging and may result in a pathologic complete response (pCR). The study aimed to evaluate the predictors of pCR and determine the impact of pCR on long-term survival. METHODS: At the Department of Gastrointestinal and HPB Oncology at the Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, 1001 consecutive patients with locally advanced GCs undergoing radical resection following neoadjuvant chemotherapy from January 2005 to June 2022 were included. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 61 months, the median OS was 53 months with a 5-year OS of 46.8 %. Ninety-five patients (9.49 %) realized pCR. Non-signet and well-differentiated histology were associated with pCR. pCR was significantly associated with improved OS, 5-year OS 79.2 % vs 43.2 % (HR 0.30, p < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, the realization of pCR and completion of adjuvant chemotherapy had superior OS. Whereas, signet-ring histology, linitis-like tumours, and high lymph node ratio had adverse outcomes. CONCLUSION: Tumour grade and signet-ring histology predict achievement of pCR in locally advanced GCs after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Patients with pCR have significantly improved survival. Future neoadjuvant strategies should focus on enhancing pCR rates to improve overall outcomes.

Utility and limitations of intraoperative frozen section diagnosis to determine optimal surgical strategy in suspected gallbladder malignancy.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative diagnosis of gallbladder cancer (GBC) remains a challenge. Unwarranted extensive surgery for benign disease and undertreatment for GBC pose challenges. We aimed to analyze the utility, diagnostic accuracy, and limitations of intraoperative frozen section (FS), for primary diagnosis of suspected gallbladder malignancy. METHODS: Patients with suspected GBC underwent a cystic-plate cholecystectomy and FS for primary diagnosis. The procedure was considered adequate if FS suggested a benign pathology. A radical cholecystectomy was performed if FS favoured GBC, or in patients with high intra-operative suspicion of malignancy. All FS records were compared with final histopathology. RESULTS: FS guided the surgical strategy in 491 of 575 resections (85.4%). FS had a sensitivity of 88.3%, specificity of 99.6%, a positive predictive value of 99.4% and a negative predictive value of 92.7%. The diagnostic accuracy of FS was 95.1%. With routine use of intraoperative FS, only 10 out of 491 patients (2%) required a revised surgical strategy. CONCLUSIONS: For radiologically suspected GBC it is prudent to confirm the histological diagnosis by use of intraoperative FS before undertaking radical resections. This study emphasizes the safety and accuracy of FS as an adjunct for directing optimal surgical strategy in suspected GBC.

Cancer or COVID-19? A Review of Recommendations for COVID-19 Vaccination in Cancer Patients.

OPINION STATEMENT: While emergency use is authorized for numerous COVID-19 vaccines and the high-risk population including cancer patients or those with immunosuppression due to disease or therapy is prioritized, data on this group's specific safety and efficacy of these vaccines remains limited. Safety data from clinical trials and population data may be extrapolated, and these vaccines may be used for cancer patients. However, concerns of efficacy due to the variable immune response in patients with active cancers undergoing active therapy and cancer survivors with chronic immunosuppression remain. The authors aim to discuss the current recommendations for use of COVID-19 vaccination in patients with cancer.

Cancer or COVID-19? A Review of Guidelines for Safe Cancer Care in the Wake of the Pandemic.

In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, due to reasons beyond control, health care workers have struggled to deliver treatment for the patients with cancer. The concern for otherwise healthy patients with curable cancers that require timely intervention or therapy is the risk of contracting COVID-19 may outweigh the benefits of cancer treatment. Lack of international guidelines leaves health care providers with a case-to-case approach for delivering optimal cancer care in the wake of the pandemic. Transition to telemedicine has somewhat bridged the gap for in-office visits, but there is a continuing challenge of delays in cancer screening or significant decline of new diagnoses of cancers due to the pandemic. We aim to propose a balance in risk from treatment delay versus risks from COVID-19 with emphasis on treatment modality (surgery, radiation, and systemic therapy) as well as supportive care for cancer patients, and therefore have reviewed the publications and recommendations from international societies and study groups available as of October 2020.