Annals of surgical oncology
-
Review Meta Analysis
Surrogate End Points for Overall Survival in Metastatic, Locally Advanced, or Unresectable Pancreatic Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 24 Randomized Controlled Trials.
Overall survival (OS) has traditionally been the primary end point in studies evaluating the clinical benefit of first-line chemotherapy in metastatic, locally advanced, or unresectable pancreatic cancer (MLAUPC). Given the prolonged follow-up assessment required to obtain OS and its potential to be confounded by second-line treatments, this study sought to determine whether progression-free survival (PFS), response rate (RR), or disease control rate (DCR) can serve as a reliable surrogate for OS. ⋯ First-line chemotherapy trials for MLAUPC show a robust correlation between OS and PFS, affirming its role as a surrogate of OS.
-
Review Meta Analysis
Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Enucleation Versus Standardized Resection for Small Pancreatic Lesions.
The appropriate surgical strategy in patients with small pancreatic lesions of low malignant potential, such as pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors, remains unknown. Increasing reports suggest limited pancreatic surgery may be a safe option for parenchymal preservation. ⋯ Enucleation appears to be a safe procedure and achieves parenchymal preservation for small pancreatic lesions of low malignant potential. Its oncologic efficacy compared with standardized pancreatic resection with respect to long-term survival and recurrences have not been reported adequately and hence may not be concluded as being comparable.
-
Review Meta Analysis
Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Enucleation Versus Standardized Resection for Small Pancreatic Lesions.
The appropriate surgical strategy in patients with small pancreatic lesions of low malignant potential, such as pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors, remains unknown. Increasing reports suggest limited pancreatic surgery may be a safe option for parenchymal preservation. ⋯ Enucleation appears to be a safe procedure and achieves parenchymal preservation for small pancreatic lesions of low malignant potential. Its oncologic efficacy compared with standardized pancreatic resection with respect to long-term survival and recurrences have not been reported adequately and hence may not be concluded as being comparable.
-
The American Society of Breast Surgeons (ASBrS) sought to provide an evidence-based guideline on the use of neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST) in the management of clinical stage II and III invasive breast cancer. ⋯ Preoperative or NST is emerging as an important initial strategy for the management of invasive breast cancer. From the surgeon's perspective, the primary goal of NST is to increase the resectability of locally advanced breast cancer, increase the feasibility of breast-conserving surgery and sentinel node biopsy, and decrease surgical morbidity. To ensure optimal patient selection and efficient patient care, the guideline recommends: (1) baseline breast and axillary imaging; (2) minimally invasive biopsies of breast and axillary lesions; (3) determination of tumor biomarkers; (4) systemic staging; (5) care coordination, including referrals to medical oncology, radiation oncology, plastic surgery, social work, and genetic counseling, if indicated; (6) initiation of NST; (7) post-NST breast and axillary imaging; and (8) decision for surgery based on extent of disease at presentation, patient choice, clinical response to NST, and genetic testing results, if performed.
-
The failure to translate cancer knowledge into action contributes to regional, national, and international health inequities. Disparities in cancer care are the most severe in low-resource settings, where delivery obstacles are compounded by health infrastructure deficits and inadequate basic services. Global cancer consortiums (GCCs) have developed to strengthen cancer care expertise, advance knowledge on best practices, and bridge the cancer gap worldwide. Within the complex matrix of public health priorities, consensus is emerging on cost-effective cancer care interventions in low- and medium-resource countries, which include the critical role of surgical services. Distinct from traditional health partnerships that collaborate to provide care at the local level, GCCs collaborate more broadly to establish consensus on best practice models for service delivery. To realize the benefit of programmatic interventions and achieve tangible improvements in patient outcomes, GCCs must construct and share evidence-based implementation strategies to be tested in real world settings. ⋯ Implementation research should inform consensus formation, program delivery, and outcome monitoring to achieve the goals articulated by GCCs. Fundamental steps to successful implementation are: (1) to adopt an integrated, multisectoral plan with local involvement; (2) to define shared implementation priorities by establishing care pathways that avoid prescriptive but suboptimal health care delivery; (3) to build capacity through education, technology transfer, and surveillance of outcomes; and (4) to promote equity and balanced collaboration. GCCs can bridge the gap between what is known and what is done, translating normative sharing of clinical expertise into tangible improvements in patient care.