Endosonography With or Without Confirmatory Mediastinoscopy for Resectable Lung Cancer:A Randomized Clinical Trial

PURPOSE:Resectable non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with a high probability of mediastinal nodal involvement requires mediastinal staging by endosonography and, in the absence of nodal metastases, confirmatory mediastinoscopy according to current guidelines. However, randomized data regarding immediate lung tumor resection after systematic endosonography versus additional confirmatory mediastinoscopy before resection are lacking.METHODS:Patients with (suspected) resectable NSCLC and an indication for mediastinal staging after negative systematic endosonography were randomly assigned to immediate lung tumor resection or confirmatory mediastinoscopy followed by tumor resection. The primary outcome in this noninferiority trial (noninferiority margin of 8% that previously showed to not compromise survival, Pnoninferior &lt;.0250) was the presence of unforeseen N2 disease after tumor resection with lymph node dissection. Secondary outcomes were 30-day major morbidity and mortality.RESULTS:Between July 17, 2017, and October 5, 2020, 360 patients were randomly assigned, 178 to immediate lung tumor resection (seven dropouts) and 182 to confirmatory mediastinoscopy first (seven dropouts before and six after mediastinoscopy). Mediastinoscopy detected metastases in 8.0% (14/175; 95% CI, 4.8 to 13.0) of patients. Unforeseen N2 rate after immediate resection (8.8%) was noninferior compared with mediastinoscopy first (7.7%) in both intention-to-treat (Δ, 1.03%; UL 95% CIΔ, 7.2%; Pnoninferior =.0144) and per-protocol analyses (Δ, 0.83%; UL 95% CIΔ, 7.3%; Pnoninferior =.0157). Major morbidity and 30-day mortality was 12.9% after immediate resection versus 15.4% after mediastinoscopy first (P =.4940).CONCLUSION:On the basis of our chosen noninferiority margin in the rate of unforeseen N2, confirmatory mediastinoscopy after negative systematic endosonography can be omitted in patients with resectable NSCLC and an indication for mediastinal staging.</p

Two-year survival and disease recurrence after endosonography with or without confirmatory mediastinoscopy for resectable lung cancer (a short communication of the MEDIASTrial follow-up)

Resectable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with increased risk of mediastinal nodal involvement requires invasive staging prior to surgical resection. The MEDIASTrial was a multicenter non-inferiority trial randomly assigning patients after negative endosonography to immediate lung tumor resection (n = 178) or to mediastinoscopy first (n = 182), only followed by tumor resection after negative mediastinoscopy. The omission of confirmatory mediastinoscopy after negative endosonography led to a clinically negligible and non-inferior increase in unforeseen N2. We report the two-year overall and disease-free survival (OS and DFS) and the health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) gathered with the QLQ-C30 and QLQ-LC13 questionnaires. After randomization seven drop-outs were observed in both groups. Time to 80 % OS was 25 months in the immediate resection group versus 20 months in the mediastinoscopy group (adjusted HR 0.8, 95 % CI: 0.5–1.3). Time to 65 % DFS was 25 months in the immediate resection group versus 25 months in the mediastinoscopy group (adjusted HR 0.9, 95 % CI: 0.6–1.4). The HRQoL scores were comparable among the groups during the two-year follow-up. The loss in diagnostic yield by omitting confirmatory mediastinoscopy after negative systematic endosonography has no impact on two-year OS, DFS and HRQoL in patients with resectable NSCLC and an indication for invasive mediastinal nodal staging.</p

Dutch Oncology COVID-19 consortium:Outcome of COVID-19 in patients with cancer in a nationwide cohort study

Aim of the study: Patients with cancer might have an increased risk for severe outcome of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). To identify risk factors associated with a worse outcome of COVID-19, a nationwide registry was developed for patients with cancer and COVID-19. Methods: This observational cohort study has been designed as a quality of care registry and is executed by the Dutch Oncology COVID-19 Consortium (DOCC), a nationwide collaboration of oncology physicians in the Netherlands. A questionnaire has been developed to collect pseudonymised patient data on patients' characteristics, cancer diagnosis and treatment. All patients with COVID-19 and a cancer diagnosis or treatment in the past 5 years are eligible. Results: Between March 27th and May 4th, 442 patients were registered. For this first analysis, 351 patients were included of whom 114 patients died. In multivariable analyses, age ≥65 years (p < 0.001), male gender (p = 0.035), prior or other malignancy (p = 0.045) and active diagnosis of haematological malignancy (p = 0.046) or lung cancer (p = 0.003) were independent risk factors for a fatal outcome of COVID-19. In a subgroup analysis of patients with active malignancy, the risk for a fatal outcome was mainly determined by tumour type (haematological malignancy or lung cancer) and age (≥65 years). Conclusion: The findings in this registry indicate that patients with a haematological malignancy or lung cancer have an increased risk of a worse outcome of COVID-19. During the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, these vulnerable patients should avoid exposure to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, whereas treatment adjustments and prioritising vaccination, when available, should also be considered

Elective cancer surgery in COVID-19-free surgical pathways during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: An international, multicenter, comparative cohort study

PURPOSE As cancer surgery restarts after the first COVID-19 wave, health care providers urgently require data to determine where elective surgery is best performed. This study aimed to determine whether COVID-19–free surgical pathways were associated with lower postoperative pulmonary complication rates compared with hospitals with no defined pathway. PATIENTS AND METHODS This international, multicenter cohort study included patients who underwent elective surgery for 10 solid cancer types without preoperative suspicion of SARS-CoV-2. Participating hospitals included patients from local emergence of SARS-CoV-2 until April 19, 2020. At the time of surgery, hospitals were defined as having a COVID-19–free surgical pathway (complete segregation of the operating theater, critical care, and inpatient ward areas) or no defined pathway (incomplete or no segregation, areas shared with patients with COVID-19). The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative pulmonary complications (pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, unexpected ventilation). RESULTS Of 9,171 patients from 447 hospitals in 55 countries, 2,481 were operated on in COVID-19–free surgical pathways. Patients who underwent surgery within COVID-19–free surgical pathways were younger with fewer comorbidities than those in hospitals with no defined pathway but with similar proportions of major surgery. After adjustment, pulmonary complication rates were lower with COVID-19–free surgical pathways (2.2% v 4.9%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.62; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.86). This was consistent in sensitivity analyses for low-risk patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists grade 1/2), propensity score–matched models, and patients with negative SARS-CoV-2 preoperative tests. The postoperative SARS-CoV-2 infection rate was also lower in COVID-19–free surgical pathways (2.1% v 3.6%; aOR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.76). CONCLUSION Within available resources, dedicated COVID-19–free surgical pathways should be established to provide safe elective cancer surgery during current and before future SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks

Elective Cancer Surgery in COVID-19-Free Surgical Pathways During the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic: An International, Multicenter, Comparative Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: As cancer surgery restarts after the first COVID-19 wave, health care providers urgently require data to determine where elective surgery is best performed. This study aimed to determine whether COVID-19-free surgical pathways were associated with lower postoperative pulmonary complication rates compared with hospitals with no defined pathway. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This international, multicenter cohort study included patients who underwent elective surgery for 10 solid cancer types without preoperative suspicion of SARS-CoV-2. Participating hospitals included patients from local emergence of SARS-CoV-2 until April 19, 2020. At the time of surgery, hospitals were defined as having a COVID-19-free surgical pathway (complete segregation of the operating theater, critical care, and inpatient ward areas) or no defined pathway (incomplete or no segregation, areas shared with patients with COVID-19). The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative pulmonary complications (pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, unexpected ventilation). RESULTS: Of 9,171 patients from 447 hospitals in 55 countries, 2,481 were operated on in COVID-19-free surgical pathways. Patients who underwent surgery within COVID-19-free surgical pathways were younger with fewer comorbidities than those in hospitals with no defined pathway but with similar proportions of major surgery. After adjustment, pulmonary complication rates were lower with COVID-19-free surgical pathways (2.2% v 4.9%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.62; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.86). This was consistent in sensitivity analyses for low-risk patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists grade 1/2), propensity score-matched models, and patients with negative SARS-CoV-2 preoperative tests. The postoperative SARS-CoV-2 infection rate was also lower in COVID-19-free surgical pathways (2.1% v 3.6%; aOR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.76). CONCLUSION: Within available resources, dedicated COVID-19-free surgical pathways should be established to provide safe elective cancer surgery during current and before future SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks

Head and neck cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic: An international, multicenter, observational cohort study

Background: The aims of this study were to provide data on the safety of head and neck cancer surgery currently being undertaken during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Methods: This international, observational cohort study comprised 1137 consecutive patients with head and neck cancer undergoing primary surgery with curative intent in 26 countries. Factors associated with severe pulmonary complications in COVID-19–positive patients and infections in the surgical team were determined by univariate analysis. Results: Among the 1137 patients, the commonest sites were the oral cavity (38%) and the thyroid (21%). For oropharynx and larynx tumors, nonsurgical therapy was favored in most cases. There was evidence of surgical de-escalation of neck management and reconstruction. Overall 30-day mortality was 1.2%. Twenty-nine patients (3%) tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) within 30 days of surgery; 13 of these patients (44.8%) developed severe respiratory complications, and 3.51 (10.3%) died. There were significant correlations with an advanced tumor stage and admission to critical care. Members of the surgical team tested positive within 30 days of surgery in 40 cases (3%). There were significant associations with operations in which the patients also tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 within 30 days, with a high community incidence of SARS-CoV-2, with screened patients, with oral tumor sites, and with tracheostomy. Conclusions: Head and neck cancer surgery in the COVID-19 era appears safe even when surgery is prolonged and complex. The overlap in COVID-19 between patients and members of the surgical team raises the suspicion of failures in cross-infection measures or the use of personal protective equipment. Lay Summary: Head and neck surgery is safe for patients during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic even when it is lengthy and complex. This is significant because concerns over patient safety raised in many guidelines appear not to be reflected by outcomes, even for those who have other serious illnesses or require complex reconstructions. Patients subjected to suboptimal or nonstandard treatments should be carefully followed up to optimize their cancer outcomes. The overlap between patients and surgeons testing positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 is notable and emphasizes the need for fastidious cross-infection controls and effective personal protective equipment