Screening for synchronous esophageal second primary tumors in patients with head and neck cancer

Patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) have an increased risk of developing esophageal second primary tumors (ESPTs). We aimed to determine the incidence, stage, and outcome of synchronous ESPTs in patients with HNSCC in a Western population. We performed a prospective, observational, and cohort study. Patients diagnosed with HNSCC in the oropharynx, hypopharynx, any other sub-location in combination with alcohol abuse, or patients with two synchronous HNSCCs, between February 2019 and February 2020 underwent screening esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD). ESPT was defined as presence of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) or high grade dysplasia (HGD). Eighty-five patients were included. A lesion suspected for ESPT was detected in 14 of 85 patients, which was pathologically confirmed in five patients (1 ESCC and 4 HGD). The radiotherapy field was extended to the esophagus in two of five patients, HGD was treated with endoscopic resection in three of five patients. None of the ESPTs were detected on MRI and/or CT-scan prior to EGD. Of the remaining nine patients, three had low grade dysplasia on histology whereas the other six patients had benign lesions. Incidence of synchronous ESPT was 5.9% in our cohort of HNSCC patients. All ESPTs were diagnosed at an early stage and treated with curative intent. We recommend that screening for synchronous ESPTs should be considered in a selected group of patients with HNSCC

Development and external validation of a model to predict complex treatment after RFA for Barrett's esophagus with early neoplasia

Background & Aims: Endoscopic eradication therapy for Barrett's esophagus (BE)-related neoplasia is safe and leads to complete eradication in the majority of patients. However, a subgroup will experience a more complex treatment course with a risk for failure or disease progression. Early identification of these patients may improve patient counseling and treatment outcomes. We aimed to develop a prognostic model for a complex treatment course. Methods: We collected data from a nationwide registry that captures outcomes for all patients undergoing endoscopic eradication therapy for early BE neoplasia. A complex treatment course was defined as neoplastic progression, treatment failure, or the need for endoscopic resection during the radiofrequency ablation treatment phase. We developed a prognostic model using logistic regression. We externally validated our model in an independent registry. Results: A total of 1386 patients were included, of whom 78 (6%) had a complex treatment course. Our model identified patients with a BE length of 9 cm or longer with a visible lesion containing high-grade dysplasia/cancer, and patients with less than 50% squamous conversion after radiofrequency ablation were identified as high risk for a complex treatment. This applied to 8% of the study population and included 93% of all treatment failures and 76% of all patients with advanced neoplastic progression. The model appeared robust in multiple sensitivity analyses and performed well in external validation (area under the curve, 0.84). Conclusions: We developed a prognostic model that identified patients with a BE length of 9 cm or longer and high-grade dysplasia/esophageal adenocarcinoma and those with poor squamous regeneration as high risk for a complex treatment course. The good performance in external validation suggests that it may be used in clinical management (Netherlands Trial Register: NL7039)

Dysplastic Recurrence After Successful Treatment for Early Barrett's Neoplasia:Development and Validation of a Prediction Model

Background & Aims: The combination of endoscopic resection and radiofrequency ablation is the treatment of choice for eradication of Barrett's esophagus (BE) with dysplasia and/or early cancer. Currently, there are no evidence-based recommendations on how to survey patients after successful treatment, and most patients undergo frequent follow-up endoscopies. We aimed to develop and externally validate a prediction model for visible dysplastic recurrence, which can be used to personalize surveillance after treatment. Methods: We collected data from the Dutch Barrett Expert Center Registry, a nationwide registry that captures outcomes from all patients with BE undergoing endoscopic treatment in the Netherlands in a centralized care setting. We used predictors related to demographics, severity of reflux, histologic status at baseline, and treatment characteristics. We built a Fine and Gray survival model with least absolute shrinkage and selection operator penalization to predict the incidence of visible dysplastic recurrence after initial successful treatment. The model was validated externally in patients with BE treated in Switzerland and Belgium. Results: A total of 1154 patients with complete BE eradication were included for model building. During a mean endoscopic follow-up of 4 years, 38 patients developed recurrent disease (1.0%/person-year). The following characteristics were independently associated with recurrence (strongest to weakest predictor): a new visible lesion during treatment phase, higher number of endoscopic resection treatments, male sex, increasing BE length, high-grade dysplasia or cancer at baseline, and younger age. External validation showed a C-statistic of 0.91 (95% confidence interval, 0.86–0.94) with good calibration. Conclusions: This is the first externally validated model to predict visible dysplastic recurrence after successful endoscopic eradication treatment of BE with dysplasia or early cancer. On external validation, our model has good discrimination and calibration. This model can help clinicians and patients to determine a personalized follow-up strategy

Diagnosis and treatment of exocrine pancreatic insufficiency in chronic pancreatitis: An international expert survey and case vignette study.

Despite evidence-based guidelines, exocrine pancreatic insufficiency is frequently underdiagnosed and undertreated in patients with chronic pancreatitis. Therefore, the aim of this study is to provide insight into the current opinion and clinical decision-making of international pancreatologists regarding the management of exocrine pancreatic insufficiency. An online survey and case vignette study was sent to experts in chronic pancreatitis and members of various pancreatic associations: EPC, E-AHPBA and DPSG. Experts were selected based on publication record from the past 5 years. Overall, 252 pancreatologists participated of whom 44% had ≥ 15 years of experience and 35% treated ≥ 50 patients with chronic pancreatitis per year. Screening for exocrine pancreatic insufficiency as part of the diagnostic work-up for chronic pancreatitis is performed by 69% and repeated annually by 21%. About 74% considers nutritional assessment to be part of the standard work-up. Patients are most frequently screened for deficiencies of calcium (47%), iron (42%), vitamin D (61%) and albumin (59%). In case of clinically steatorrhea, 71% prescribes enzyme supplementation. Of all pancreatologists, 40% refers more than half of their patients to a dietician. Despite existing guidelines, 97% supports the need for more specific and tailored instructions regarding the management of exocrine pancreatic insufficiency. This survey identified a lack of consensus and substantial practice variation among international pancreatologists regarding guidelines pertaining the management of exocrine pancreatic insufficiency. These results highlight the need for further adaptation of these guidelines according to current expert opinion and the level of available scientific evidence

Effect of Hydrocortisone on Mortality and Organ Support in Patients With Severe COVID-19: The REMAP-CAP COVID-19 Corticosteroid Domain Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Evidence regarding corticosteroid use for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is limited. Objective: To determine whether hydrocortisone improves outcome for patients with severe COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: An ongoing adaptive platform trial testing multiple interventions within multiple therapeutic domains, for example, antiviral agents, corticosteroids, or immunoglobulin. Between March 9 and June 17, 2020, 614 adult patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 were enrolled and randomized within at least 1 domain following admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) for respiratory or cardiovascular organ support at 121 sites in 8 countries. Of these, 403 were randomized to open-label interventions within the corticosteroid domain. The domain was halted after results from another trial were released. Follow-up ended August 12, 2020. Interventions: The corticosteroid domain randomized participants to a fixed 7-day course of intravenous hydrocortisone (50 mg or 100 mg every 6 hours) (n = 143), a shock-dependent course (50 mg every 6 hours when shock was clinically evident) (n = 152), or no hydrocortisone (n = 108). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was organ support-free days (days alive and free of ICU-based respiratory or cardiovascular support) within 21 days, where patients who died were assigned -1 day. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model that included all patients enrolled with severe COVID-19, adjusting for age, sex, site, region, time, assignment to interventions within other domains, and domain and intervention eligibility. Superiority was defined as the posterior probability of an odds ratio greater than 1 (threshold for trial conclusion of superiority >99%). Results: After excluding 19 participants who withdrew consent, there were 384 patients (mean age, 60 years; 29% female) randomized to the fixed-dose (n = 137), shock-dependent (n = 146), and no (n = 101) hydrocortisone groups; 379 (99%) completed the study and were included in the analysis. The mean age for the 3 groups ranged between 59.5 and 60.4 years; most patients were male (range, 70.6%-71.5%); mean body mass index ranged between 29.7 and 30.9; and patients receiving mechanical ventilation ranged between 50.0% and 63.5%. For the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively, the median organ support-free days were 0 (IQR, -1 to 15), 0 (IQR, -1 to 13), and 0 (-1 to 11) days (composed of 30%, 26%, and 33% mortality rates and 11.5, 9.5, and 6 median organ support-free days among survivors). The median adjusted odds ratio and bayesian probability of superiority were 1.43 (95% credible interval, 0.91-2.27) and 93% for fixed-dose hydrocortisone, respectively, and were 1.22 (95% credible interval, 0.76-1.94) and 80% for shock-dependent hydrocortisone compared with no hydrocortisone. Serious adverse events were reported in 4 (3%), 5 (3%), and 1 (1%) patients in the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with severe COVID-19, treatment with a 7-day fixed-dose course of hydrocortisone or shock-dependent dosing of hydrocortisone, compared with no hydrocortisone, resulted in 93% and 80% probabilities of superiority with regard to the odds of improvement in organ support-free days within 21 days. However, the trial was stopped early and no treatment strategy met prespecified criteria for statistical superiority, precluding definitive conclusions. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02735707

Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570

Clinical outcome of endoscopic treatment of symptomatic Hepaticojejunal anastomotic strictures after pancreatoduodenectomy

Background: Hepaticojejunostomy anastomotic stricture (HJAS) is an adverse event after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) which can result in jaundice and/or cholangitis. With endoscopy, HJAS can be managed. However, few studies report the specific success and adverse event rates of endoscopic therapy after PD. Methods: Patients with symptomatic HJAS, who underwent an endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography at the Erasmus MC between 2004-2020, were retrospectively included. Primary outcomes were short-term clinical success defined as no need for re-intervention <3 months and long-term <12 months. Secondary outcome measures were cannulation success and adverse events. Recurrence was defined as symptoms with radiological/endoscopic confirmation. Results: A total of 62 patients were included. The hepaticojejunostomy was reached in 49/62 (79%) of the patients, subsequently cannulated in 42/49 (86%) and in 35/42 patients (83%) an intervention was performed. Recurrence of symptomatic HJAS after technically successful intervention occurred in 20 (57%) patients after median time to recurrence of 7.5 months [95%CI, 7.2–NA]. Adverse events were reported in 4% of the procedures (8% of patients), mostly concerning cholangitis. Discussion: Endoscopic treatment for symptomatic HJAS after PD has a moderate technical success rate and a high recurrence rate. Future studies should optimize endoscopic treatment protocols and compare percutaneous versus endoscopic treatment