Prognostic significance of T-cell–inflamed gene expression profile and PD-L1 expression in patients with esophageal cancer

PURPOSE: The ability of the T‐cell–inflamed gene expression profile (GEP) to predict clinical outcome in esophageal cancer (EC) is unknown. This retrospective observational study assessed the prognostic value of GEP and programmed death ligand 1 (PD‐L1) expression in patients with EC treated in routine clinical practice. METHODS: Tumor samples of 294 patients from three centers in Denmark, South Korea, and the United States, collected between 2005 and 2017, were included. T‐cell–inflamed GEP score was defined as non‐low or low using a cutoff of −1.54. A combined positive score (CPS) ≥10 was defined as PD‐L1 expression positivity. Associations between overall survival (OS) and GEP status and PD‐L1 expression were explored by Cox proportional hazards models adjusting for age, sex, histology, stage, and performance status. RESULTS: Median age was 65 years; 63% of patients had adenocarcinoma (AC) and 37% had squamous cell carcinoma (SCC). Thirty‐six percent of tumors were GEP non‐low, with higher prevalence in AC (46%) than SCC (18%). Twenty‐one percent were PD‐L1–positive: 32% in South Korean samples versus 16% in non‐Asian samples and 26% in SCC versus 18% in AC. GEP scores and PD‐L1 CPS were weakly correlated (Spearman’s R = 0.363). OS was not significantly associated with GEP status (non‐low vs low; adjusted hazard ratio, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.69–1.19]) or PD‐L1 expression status. CONCLUSION: Neither GEP nor PD‐L1 expression was a prognostic marker in Asian and non‐Asian patients with EC

Patient blood management knowledge and practice among clinicians from seven European university hospitals : a multicentre survey

Background and Objectives The aim of this survey was to evaluate the knowledge about Patient Blood Management (PBM) principles and practices amongst clinicians working in seven European hospitals participating in a European Blood Alliance (EBA) project. Materials and Methods A web-based questionnaire was sent to 4952 clinicians working in medical, surgery and anaesthesiology disciplines. The responses were analysed, and the overall results as well as a comparison between hospitals are presented. Results A total of 788 responses (16%) were obtained. About 24% of respondents were not aware of a correlation between preoperative anaemia (POA) and perioperative morbidity and mortality. For 22%, treatment of POA was unlikely to favourably influence morbidity and mortality even before surgery with expected blood loss. More than half of clinicians did not routinely treat POA. 29%, when asked which is the best way to treat deficiency anaemia preoperatively, answered that they did not have sufficient knowledge and 5% chose to ‘do nothing’. Amongst those who treated POA, 38% proposed red cell transfusion prior to surgery as treatment. Restrictive haemoglobin triggers for red blood cell transfusion, single unit policy and reduction of number and volumes of blood samples for diagnostic purposes were only marginally implemented. Conclusion Overall, the responses indicated poor knowledge about PBM. Processes to diagnose and treat POA were not generally and homogeneously implemented. This survey should provide further impetus to implement programmes to improve knowledge and practice of PBMpeer-reviewe