Improved Surgical Outcomes for Breast Cancer Patients Receiving Neoadjuvant Aromatase Inhibitor Therapy: Results from a Multicenter Phase II Trial

Background: Neoadjuvant aromatase inhibitor therapy has been reported to improve surgical outcomes for postmenopausal women with clinical stage II or III hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. A multicenter phase II clinical trial was conducted to investigate the value of this approach for US surgical practice. Study Design: One hundred fifteen postmenopausal women with >2 cm, estrogen receptor (ER) or progesterone receptor (PgR)-positive breast cancer were enrolled in a trial of 16 to 24 weeks of letrozole 2.5 mg daily before operation. Results: One hundred six patients were eligible for primary analysis, 96 underwent operations, 7 received chemotherapy after progressive disease, and 3 did not undergo an operation. Baseline surgical status was marginal for breast-conserving surgery (BCS) in 48 (45%), 47 were definitely ineligible for BCS (44%), and 11 were inoperable by standard mastectomy (10%). Overall Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors clinical response rate in the breast was 62%, with 12% experiencing progressive disease. Fifty percent underwent BCS, including 30 of 46 (65%) patients who were initially marginal for BCS and 15 of 39 (38%) patients who were initially ineligible for BCS. All 11 inoperable patients successfully underwent operations, including 3 (27%) who had BCS. Nineteen percent of patients undergoing mastectomy had a pathologic T1 tumor, suggesting that some highly responsive tumors were overtreated surgically. Conclusions: Neoadjuvant aromatase inhibitor improves operability and facilitates BCS, but there was considerable variability in responsiveness. Better techniques to predict response, determine residual tumor burden before operation, and greater willingness to attempt BCS in responsive patients could additionally improve the rate of successful BCS

Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries

Background Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres. Methods This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low–middle-income countries. Results In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of ‘single-use’ consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low–middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia. Conclusion This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high– and low–middle–income countries

Incidence and outcomes of cutaneous angiosarcoma : a SEER population-based study

Background: Cutaneous angiosarcoma (CAS) is a rare, malignant tumor of vascular mesenchymal origin accounting for less than 1% of all sarcomas. Objective: To examine epidemiologic trends and outcomes in CAS. Methods: In this retrospective, population-based study, patients with CAS were identified from the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results database. Age, sex, and race-standardized incidence rates (IRs) were calculated. Survival was assessed with Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazards models. Results: Of 811 patients with CAS, 43% had a prior primary cancer. CAS IR for patients without prior primary cancers dropped from 5.88 per 100,000 in 1973 to 1984 to 2.87 per 100,000 in 2005 to 2014. In those with prior primary cancers, IR rose from 0.03 per 100,000 in 1973 to 1984 to 2.25 per 100,000 in 2005 to 2014. On multivariate analysis, patients older than 70 years of age had a higher risk of death compared with those younger than 50 years (hazard ratio, 2.16; 95% confidence interval 1.33-3.57; P =. 002), and distant disease was associated with increased risk of death compared with localized disease (hazard ratio, 1.50; 95% confidence interval, 1.11-2.03; P =. 008). Receipt of surgery and/or radiation therapy was not associated with survival. Limitations: Potential selection and miscoding bias, retrospective nature. Conclusion: CAS rates are rising among those with other prior primary cancers. Survival is not affected by current therapeutic strategies, highlighting the need for additional treatment options