Comparative Effectiveness of a Lymph Node Collection Kit Versus Heightened Awareness on Lung Cancer Surgery Quality and Outcomes

Introduction: The adverse prognostic impact of poor pathologic nodal staging has stimulated efforts to heighten awareness of the problem through guidelines, without guidance on processes to overcome it. We compared heightened awareness (HA) of nodal staging quality versus a lymph node collection kit. Methods: We categorized curative-intent lung cancer resections from 2009 to 2020 in a population-based, nonrandomized stepped-wedge implementation study of both interventions, into preintervention baseline, HA, and kit subcohorts. We used differences in proportion and hazard ratios across the subcohorts to estimate the effect of the interventions on poor quality (nonexamination of nodes [pNX] or nonexamination of mediastinal lymph nodes) and attainment of quality recommendations of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network, the Commission on Cancer, and the proposed complete resection definition of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer across the three cohorts. Results: Of 3734 resections, 39% were preintervention, 40% kit, and 21% HA cases. Cohort proportions were the following: pNX, 11% (baseline) versus 0% (kit) versus 9% (HA); nonexamination of mediastinal lymph nodes, 27% versus 1% versus 22%; Commission on Cancer benchmark attainment, 14% versus 77% versus 30%; International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer-defined complete resection, 11% versus 58% versus 24%; National Comprehensive Cancer Network attainment, 23% versus 79% versus 35% (p \u3c 0.001 for all, except pNX rate baseline versus HA). Survival rate was significantly higher for both interventions compared with baseline (p \u3c 0.0001). Conclusions: Resections with HA or the kit significantly improved surgical quality and outcomes, but the kit was more effective. We propose to conduct a prospective, institutional cluster-randomized clinical trial comparing both interventions

Impact of a Lymph Node Specimen Collection Kit on the Distribution and Survival Implications of the Proposed Revised Lung Cancer Residual Disease Classification: A Propensity-Matched Analysis

Importance: The International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC) has proposed a revision of the residual disease (R-factor) classification, to R0, ‘R-uncertain’, R1 and R2. We previously demonstrated longer survival after surgical resection with a lymph node specimen collection kit, and now evaluate R-factor redistribution as the mechanism of its survival benefit. Objective: We retrospectively evaluated surgical resections for lung cancer in the population-based observational ‘Mid-South Quality of Surgical Resection’ cohort from 2009-2019, including a full-cohort and propensity-score matched analysis. Results: Of 3,505 resections, 34% were R0, 60% R-uncertain, and 6% R1 or R2. The R0 percentage increased from 9% in 2009 to 56% in 2019 (p \u3c 0.0001). Kit cases were 66% R0 and 29% R-uncertain, compared to 14% R0 and 79% R-uncertain in non-kit cases (p \u3c 0.0001). Compared with non-kit resections, kit resections had 12.3 times the adjusted odds of R0 versus R-uncertainty. Of 2,100 R-uncertain resections, kit cases had lower percentages of non-examination of lymph nodes, 1% vs. 14% (p \u3c 0.0001) and non-examination of mediastinal lymph nodes, 8% vs. 35% (p \u3c 0.0001). With the kit, more R-uncertain cases had examination of stations 7 (43% vs. 22%, p \u3c 0.0001) and 10 (67% vs. 45%, p \u3c 0.0001). The adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) for kit cases versus non-kit cases was 0.75 (confidence interval [CI]: 0.66–0.85, p \u3c 0.0001). In 2,100 subjects with R-uncertain resections, kit cases had an aHR of 0.79 versus non-kit cases ([CI: 0.64–0.99], p=0.0384); however, in the 1,199 R0 resections the survival difference was not significant (aHR: 0.85[0.68–1.07], p = 0.17). Conclusions and Relevance: A lymph node kit increased overall survival by increasing R0, reducing the probability of R-uncertain resections, and diminishing extreme R-uncertainty

Beyond Margin Status: Population-Based Validation of the Proposed International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer Residual Tumor Classification Recategorization

Introduction: The International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer\u27s (IASLC\u27s) proposal to recategorize the residual tumor (R) classification for resected NSCLC needs validation. Methods: Using a 2009 to 2019 population-based multi-institutional NSCLC resection cohort from the United States, we classified resections by Union for International Cancer Control (UICC) and IASLC R criteria and compared the distribution of R classification variables and their survival associations. Results: Of 3361 resections, 95.3% were R0, 4.3% were R1, and 0.4% were R2 by UICC criteria; 33.3% were R0, 60.8% were R-uncertain, and 5.8% were R1/2 by IASLC criteria; 2044 patients (63.8%) migrated from UICC R0 to IASLC R-uncertain. Median survival was not reached, 69 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 64–77), and 25 (95% CI: 18–36) months, respectively, for patients with IASLC R0, R-uncertain, and R1 or R2 resections. Failure to achieve nodal dissection criteria caused 98% of migration to R-uncertainty, metastasis to the highest mediastinal node station, 5.8%. Compared with R0, R-uncertain resections with mediastinal nodes, no mediastinal nodes, and no nodes had adjusted hazard ratios of 1.28 (95% CI: 1.10–1.48), 1.47 (95% CI: 1.24–1.74), and 1.74 (95% CI: 1.37–2.21), respectively, suggesting a dose-response relationship between nodal R-uncertainty and survival. Accounting for mediastinal nodal involvement, the highest mediastinal station involvement was not independently prognostic. The incomplete resection variables were uniformly prognostic. Conclusions: The proposed R classification recategorization variables were mostly prognostic, except the highest mediastinal nodal station involvement. Further categorization of R-uncertainty by severity of nodal quality deficit should be considered

Effectiveness of Implemented Interventions on Pathologic Nodal Staging of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Background: Accurate pathologic nodal staging improves early stage non-small cell lung cancer survival. In an ongoing implementation study, we measured the impact of a surgical lymph node specimen collection kit and a more thorough pathologic gross dissection method on attainment of guideline-recommended pathologic nodal staging quality. Methods: We prospectively collected data on curative intent non-small cell lung cancer resections from 2009 to 2016 from 11 hospitals in four contiguous Dartmouth Hospital referral regions. We categorized patients into four groups based on exposure to the two interventions in our staggered implementation study design. We used χ2 tests to examine the differences in demographic and disease characteristics and surgical quality criteria across implementation groups. Results: Of 2,469 patients, 1,615 (65%) received neither intervention; 167 (7%) received only the pathology intervention; 264 (11%) received only the surgery intervention; and 423 (17%) had both. Rates of nonexamination of lymph nodes reduced sequentially in the order of no intervention, novel dissection, kit, and combined interventions, including nonexamination of any lymph nodes and hilar/intrapulmonary and mediastinal nodes (p \u3c 0.001 for all comparisons). The rates of attainment of National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Commission on Cancer, American Joint Committee on Cancer, and American College of Surgeons Oncology Group guidelines increased significantly in the same sequential order (p \u3c 0.001 for all comparisons). Conclusions: The combined effect of two interventions to improve pathologic lymph node examination has a greater effect on attainment of a range of surgical quality criteria than either intervention alone

Surgeon Quality and Patient Survival after Resection for Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer

PURPOSEThe quality and outcomes of curative-intent lung cancer surgery vary in populations. Surgeons are key drivers of surgical quality. We examined the association between surgeon-level intermediate outcomes differences, patient survival differences, and potential mitigation by processes of care.PATIENTS AND METHODSUsing a baseline population-based surgical resection cohort, we derived surgeon-level cut points for rates of positive margins, nonexamination of lymph nodes, nonexamination of mediastinal lymph nodes, and wedge resections. Applying the baseline cut points to a subsequent cohort from the same population-based data set, we assign surgeons into three performance categories in reference to each metric: 1 (\u3c25th percentile), 2 (25th-75th percentile), and 3 (\u3e75th percentile). The sum of performance scores created three surgeon quality tiers: 1 (4-6, low), 2 (7-9, intermediate), and 3 (10-12, high). We used chi-squared, Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney, and Kruskal-Wallis tests to compare patient characteristics between the baseline and subsequent cohorts and across surgeon tiers. We applied Cox proportional hazards models to examine the association between patient survival and surgeon performance tier, sequentially adjusting for clinical stage, patient characteristics, and four specific processes.RESULTSFrom 2009 to 2021, 39 surgeons performed 4,082 resections across the baseline and subsequent cohorts. Among 31 subsequent cohort surgeons, five were tier 1, five were tier 2, and 21 were tier 3. Tier 1 and 2 surgeons had significantly worse outcomes than tier 3 surgeons (hazard ratio [HR], 1.37; 95% CI, 1.10 to 1.72 and 1.19; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.43, respectively). Adjustment for specific processes mitigated the surgeon-Tiered survival differences, with adjusted HRs of 1.02 (95% CI, 0.8 to 1.3) and 0.93 (95% CI, 0.7 to 1.25), respectively.CONCLUSIONReadily accessible intermediate outcomes metrics can be used to stratify surgeon performance for targeted process improvement, potentially reducing patient survival disparities

Prognostic Value of National Comprehensive Cancer Network Lung Cancer Resection Quality Criteria

Background The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) surgical resection guidelines for non-small cell lung cancer recommend anatomic resection, negative margins, examination of hilar/intrapulmonary lymph nodes, and examination of three or more mediastinal nodal stations. We examined the survival impact of these criteria. Methods A population-based observational study was done using patient-level data from all curative-intent, non-small cell lung cancer resections from 2004 to 2013 at 11 institutions in four contiguous Dartmouth Hospital referral regions in three US states. We used an adjusted Cox proportional hazards model to assess the overall survival impact of attaining NCCN guidelines. Results Of 2,429 eligible resections, 91% were anatomic, 94% had negative margins, 51% sampled hilar nodes, and 26% examined three or more mediastinal nodal stations. Only 17% of resections met all four criteria; however, there was a significant increasing trend from 2% in 2004 to 39% in 2013 (p \u3c 0.001). Compared with patients whose surgery missed one or more criteria, the hazard ratio for patients whose surgery met all four criteria was 0.71 (95% confidence interval: 0.59 to 0.86, p \u3c 0.001). Margin status and the nodal staging criteria were most strongly linked with survival. Conclusions Attainment of NCCN surgical quality guidelines was low, but improving, over the past decade in this cohort from a high lung cancer mortality region of the United States. The NCCN quality criteria, especially the nodal examination criteria, were strongly associated with survival. The quality of nodal examination should be a focus of quality improvement in non-small cell lung cancer care

Interest in Cessation Treatment Among People Who Smoke in a Community-Based Multidisciplinary Thoracic Oncology Program

Introduction: To evaluate the need for tobacco cessation services within a multidisciplinary clinic (MDC), we surveyed patients on their smoking status, interest in quitting, and willingness to participate in a clinic-based cessation program. We further evaluated the association between interest in cessation or willingness to participate in a cessation program and overall survival (OS). Methods: From 2014 to 2019, all new patients with lung cancer in the MDC at Baptist Cancer Center (Memphis, TN) were administered a social history questionnaire to evaluate their demographic characteristics, smoking status, tobacco dependence, interest in quitting, and willingness to participate in a cessation program. We used chi-square tests and logistic regression to compare characteristics of those who would participate to those who would not or were unsure and Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression to evaluate the association between cessation interest or willingness to quit and OS. Results: Of 641 total respondents, the average age was 69 years (range: 32–95), 47% were men, 64% white, 34% black, and 17% college graduates. A total of 90% had ever smoked: 34% currently and 25% quit within the past year. Among the current smokers, 60% were very interested in quitting and 37% would participate in a cessation program. Willingness to participate in a cessation program was associated with greater interest in quitting (p \u3c 0.0001), better OS (p = 0.02), and reduced hazard of death (hazard ratio = 0.52, 95% confidence interval: 0.30–0.88), but no other characteristics. Conclusions: Patients with lung cancer in an MDC expressed considerable interest in tobacco cessation services; patients willing to participate in a clinic-based cessation program had improved survival

Trends in Accuracy and Comprehensiveness of Pathology Reports for Resected NSCLC in a High Mortality Area of the United States

Introduction: Complete and accurate pathology reports are vital to postoperative prognostication and management. We evaluated the impact of three interventions across a diverse group of hospitals on pathology reports of postresection NSCLC. Methods: We evaluated pathology reports for patients who underwent curative-intent surgical resection for NSCLC, at 11 institutions within four contiguous Dartmouth Hospital Referral Regions in Arkansas, Mississippi, and Tennessee from 2004 to 2020, for completeness and accuracy, before and after the following three quality improvement interventions: education (feedback to heighten awareness); synoptic reporting; and a lymph node specimen collection kit. We compared the proportion of pathology reports with the six most important items for postoperative management (specimen type, tumor size, histologic type, pathologic [p] T-category, pN-category, margin status) across the following six patient cohorts: preintervention control, postintervention with four different combinations of interventions, and a contemporaneous nonintervention external control. Results: In the postintervention era, the odds of reporting all key items were eight times higher than those in the preintervention era (OR = 8.3, 95 % confidence interval [CI]: 6.7–10.2, p \u3c 0.0001). There were sixfold and eightfold increases in the odds of accurate pT- and pN-category reporting in the postintervention era compared with the preintervention era (pT OR = 5.7, 95 % CI: 4.7–6.9; pN OR = 8.0, 95 % CI: 6.5–10.0, both p \u3c 0.0001). Within the intervention groups, the odds of reporting all six key items, accurate pT category, and accurate pN-category were highest in patients who received all three interventions. Conclusions: Gaps in the quality of NSCLC pathologic reportage can be identified, quantified, and corrected by rationally designed interventions