Search

Readmissions following major oncologic operation are common-affecting patient treatment, outcome, and hospital resources. The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services mandates reporting of certain disease-specific readmissions and Congress is considering using individual hospital readmission rates as a performance measure. Studies using administrative data demonstrate that readmission rates following major cancer surgery are high. Administrative data cannot determine causes. Single-institution studies demonstrate length of hospital stay and comorbidities as risk factors. Discharge processes and outpatient healthcare utilization can be improved. Until studies on readmission rate are conducted, using readmission rates as a measure of quality should be pursued cautiously., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Patients frequently voice concerns regarding wait times for cancer treatment; however, little is known about the length of wait times from diagnosis to surgery in the United States. Our objectives were (1) to assess changes in wait times over the past decade and (2) to identify patient, tumor, and hospital factors associated with prolonged wait times for initial cancer treatment., Methods: Using the National Cancer Data Base (1995-2005), 1,228,071 patients were identified who underwent resection for nonmetastatic breast, colon, esophageal, gastric, liver, lung, pancreatic, and rectal cancer at 1443 hospitals. Multivariable models were developed to assess factors associated with time to treatment., Results: From 1995 to 2005, the median time from diagnosis to treatment increased for all cancers (P < 0.0001). The time from diagnosis to treatment was significantly longer at National Cancer Institute Comprehensive Cancer Centers and Veterans' Administration institutions versus community hospitals (P < 0.0001). On multivariable analysis, patients were significantly more likely to undergo initial treatment > 30 days from diagnosis if older (6 of 8 cancers), black (5 of 8 cancers), had more comorbidities (6 of 8 cancers), had Stage I disease (7 of 8 cancers), or were treated at National Cancer Institute Comprehensive Cancer Centers or Veterans' Affairs institutions (all cancers)., Conclusions: Wait times for cancer treatment have increased over the last decade. As case loads increase, wait times for treatment are likely to continue increasing, potentially resulting in additional treatment delay. Additional resources and strategies are needed to reduce wait times for cancer treatment in the United States.

Background: Colonoscopic screening has increased detection of malignant colonic polyps (MPs). The goal of this study was to analyze trends and patterns in the surgical treatment of MPs and to assess outcomes as measured by lymph node retrieval and patient survival., Methods: The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) registry was queried to identify 19,743 patients with MPs from 1988 to 2003., Results: The majority of MPs were present in the sigmoid and descending colon (54%), and 38% were tubular, 40% were tubulovillous, and 22% were villous. During the study period, the incidence of MPs increased from 29% to 42% and surgical resection (SR) was increasingly used for treatment, from 54% to 70%. Predictors of SR were aged <70 years (odds ratio [OR], 1.3; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.2-1.4), high-grade tumors (OR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.2-1.9), diagnosis in 1999 through 2003 (OR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.5-1.9), villous subtype (OR, 2.3; 95% CI, 2.0-2.6), and right colon location (OR, 8.1; 95% CI, 7.0-9.4). In patients undergoing SR, the mean and median number of lymph nodes was only 4 and 1, respectively. A significant percentage of patients (49%) had no lymph nodes retrieved and a worse overall survival at 5 years compared with patients who had at least 1 lymph node examined (64% vs 74%; P <.001)., Conclusions: MPs appear to be increasing in incidence, and there is a trend toward increased use of SR for treatment. However, patients undergoing SR for MPs undergo suboptimal assessment of lymph nodes, with a detrimental impact on survival. Adequate lymphadenectomy and lymph node evaluation are crucial to improve outcomes in patients with these potentially curable lesions. Cancer 2011. © 2010 American Cancer Society., (Copyright © 2010 American Cancer Society.)

Evaluation of 12 lymph nodes has been mandated to prevent colon cancer understaging. Given that the probability of node metastases is largely associated with T-stage, are <12 nodes substandard for T1 and T2 lesions? We evaluated if survival for T1 and T2 tumors varies by nodes examined. In SEER, 61,237 patients undergoing colon cancer resection were identified. For each T-stage, 5-year survival rates were compared for node-negative cancers by using stepwise node cut-point comparisons (4 nodes, <4, etc.). Survival impact was determined by log-rank test and hazard regression. For T1 tumors, 4 nodes had 24% lower hazard of death compared to <4. For T2 tumors, 10 nodes had the biggest survival impact, 15% lower hazard of death. In conclusion, the number of nodes to stage T1 and T2 lesions may be <12.

Objective: To determine the optimal number of lymph nodes to examine for accurate staging of node-negative pancreatic adenocarcinoma after pancreaticoduodenectomy., Design, Setting, and Patients: Data from the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program (1988-2002) were used to identify 3505 patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy for adenocarcinoma of the pancreas, including 1150 patients who were pathologically node negative (pN0) and 584 patients with a single positive node (pN1a). Perioperative deaths were excluded. Univariate and multivariate survival analyses were performed., Main Outcome Measure: Examination of 15 lymph nodes appears to be optimal for accurate staging of node-negative adenocarcinoma of the pancreas after pancreaticoduodenectomy., Results: The number of nodes examined ranged from 1 to 54 (median, 7 examined nodes). Univariate survival analysis demonstrated that dichotomizing the pN0 cohort on 15 or more examined lymph nodes resulted in the most statistically significant survival difference (log-rank chi(2) = 14.49). Kaplan-Meier survival curves demonstrated a median survival difference of 8 months (P < .001) in favor of the patients who had 15 or more examined nodes compared with patients with fewer than 15 examined nodes. Multivariate analysis validated that having 15 or more examined nodes was a statistically significant predictor of survival (hazard ratio, 0.63; 95% confidence interval, 0.49-0.80; P < .0001). Furthermore, a multivariate model based on the survival benefit of each additional node evaluated in the pN0 cohort demonstrated only a marginal survival benefit for analysis of more than 15 nodes. Approximately 90% of the pN1a cohort was identified with examination of 15 nodes., Conclusions: Examination of 15 lymph nodes appears to be optimal to accurately stage node-negative adenocarcinoma of the pancreas after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Furthermore, evaluation of at least 15 lymph nodes of a pancreaticoduodenectomy specimen may serve as a quality measure in the treatment of pancreatic adenocarcinoma.