Background: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is standard management for localized gastric cancer (GC). Attrition during NAC due to treatment-related toxicity or functional decline is considered a surrogate for worse biologic outcomes; however, data supporting this paradigm are lacking. We investigated factors predicting attrition and its association with overall survival (OS) in GC. Methods: Patients with nonmetastatic GC initiating NAC were identified from the US Safety-Net Collaborative (2012–2014). Patient/treatment-related characteristics were compared between attrition/nonattrition cohorts. Cox models determined factors associated with OS. Results: Of 116 patients initiating NAC, attrition during prescribed NAC occurred in 24%. No differences were observed in performance status, comorbidities, treatment at safety-net hospital, or clinicopathologic factors between cohorts. Despite absence of distinguishing factors, attrition was associated with worse OS (median: 11 vs. 37 months; p = 0.01) and was an independent predictor of mortality (hazard ratio [HR]: 4.7, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.5–15.2; p = 0.02). Fewer patients with attrition underwent curative-intent surgery (39% vs. 89%; p < 0.001). Even in patients undergoing surgical exploration (n = 89), NAC attrition remained an independent predictor of worse OS (HR: 50.8, 95% CI: 3.6–717.8; p = 0.004) despite similar receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy. Conclusion: Attrition during NAC for nonmetastatic GC is independently associated with worse OS, even in patients undergoing surgery. Attrition during NAC may reflect unfavorable tumor biology not captured by conventional staging metrics.

Background: Hispanic patients have a higher incidence of gastric cancer when compared to non-Hispanics. Outlining clinicodemographic characteristics and assessing the impact of ethnicity on stage-specific survival may identify opportunities to improve gastric cancer care for this population. Methods: Patients with gastric cancer in the US Safety Net Collaborative (2012-2014) were retrospectively reviewed. Demographics, clinicopathologic characteristics, operative details, and outcomes were compared between Hispanic and non-Hispanic patients. Early onset gastric cancer was defined as age <50 years. Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional-hazards models were used to identify the impact of ethnicity on disease-specific survival (DSS). Results: Seven hundred and ninety-seven patients were included, of which 219 (28%) were Hispanic. Hispanic patients were more likely to seek care at safety-net hospitals (66 vs 39%) and be uninsured (36 vs 17%), and less likely to have a primary care provider (PCP) (46 vs 75%; all P<0.05). Hispanic patients were twice as likely to present with early onset gastric cancer (28 vs 15%) and were more frequently diagnosed in the emergency room (54 vs 37%) with both abdominal pain and weight loss (44 vs 31%; all P <0.05). Treatment paradigms, operative outcomes, and DSS were similar between Hispanic and non-Hispanic patients when accounting for cancer stage. Cancer stage, pathologically positive nodes, and negative surgical margins were independently associated with DSS. Conclusions: A diagnosis of gastric cancer must be considered in previously healthy Hispanic patients who present to the emergency room with both abdominal pain and weight loss. Fewer than 50% of Hispanic patients have a PCP, indicating poor outpatient support. Efforts to improve outpatient support and screening may improve gastric cancer outcomes in this vulnerable population.

Background: Gastrointestinal (GI) cancers represent a diverse group of diseases. We assessed differences in geographic and racial disparities in cancer-specific mortality across subtypes, overall and by patient characteristics, in a geographically and racially diverse US population. Methods: Clinical, sociodemographic, and treatment characteristics for patients diagnosed during 2009–2014 with colorectal cancer (CRC), pancreatic cancer, hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), or gastric cancer in Georgia were obtained from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program database. Patients were classified by geography (rural or urban county) and race and followed for cancer-specific death. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were used to calculate stratified hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for associations between geography or race and cancer-specific mortality. Results: Overall, 77% of the study population resided in urban counties and 33% were non-Hispanic Black (NHB). For all subtypes, NHB patients were more likely to reside in urban counties than non-Hispanic White patients. Residing in a rural county was associated with an overall increased hazard of cancer-specific mortality for HCC (HR = 1.15, 95% CI = 1.02–1.31), pancreatic (HR = 1.11, 95% CI = 1.03–1.19), and gastric cancer (HR = 1.17, 95% CI = 1.03–1.32) but near-null for CRC. Overall racial disparities were observed for CRC (HR = 1.18, 95% CI = 1.11–1.25) and HCC (HR = 1.12, 95% CI = 1.01–1.24). Geographic disparities were most pronounced among HCC patients receiving surgery. Racial disparities were pronounced among CRC patients receiving any treatment. Conclusion: Geographic disparities were observed for the rarer GI cancer subtypes, and racial disparities were pronounced for CRC. Treatment factors appear to largely drive both disparities.

Background: Diagnostic laparoscopy (DL) is a key component of staging for locally advanced gastric adenocarcinoma (GA). We hypothesized that utilization of DL varied between safety net (SNH) and affiliated tertiary referral centers (TRCs). Methods: Patients diagnosed with primary GA eligible for DL were identified from the US Safety Net Collaborative database (2012–2014). Clinicopathologic factors were analyzed for association with use of DL and findings on DL. Overall survival (OS) was analyzed by Kaplan–Meier method. Results: Among 233 eligible patients, 69 (30%) received DL, of which 24 (35%) were positive for metastatic disease. Forty percent of eligible SNH patients underwent DL compared to 21.5% at TRCs. Lack of insurance was significantly associated with decreased use of DL (OR 0.48, p < 0.01), while African American (OR 6.87, p = 0.02) and Asian race (OR 3.12, p ≤ 0.01), signet ring cells on biopsy (OR 3.14, p < 0.01), and distal tumors (OR 1.62, p < 0.01) were associated with increased use. Median OS of patients with a negative DL was better than those without DL or a positive DL (not reached vs. 32 vs. 12 months, p < 0.005, Figure 1). Conclusions: Results from DL are a strong predictor of OS in GA; however, the procedure is underutilized. Patients from racial minority groups were more likely to undergo DL, which likely accounts for higher DL rates among SNH patients.

Background: The path of the biliopancreatic limb for reconstruction of the pancreatic anastomosis during pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma can be trans-mesocolon or through the ligament of Treitz. Even after curative intent pancreatoduodenectomy, incidence of recurrence in the surgical bed remains high and may lead to obstruction of the biliopancreatic limb. However, the association between path of jejunal limb and incidence of biliopancreatic limb obstruction has not been studied. Primary aim was to determine whether path of reconstruction predisposes to biliopancreatic limb obstruction in the setting of local recurrence. Methods: Patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (2008–2018) from a single institution were identified. As disease recurrence is the predominant cause of biliopancreatic limb obstruction, analysis was limited to patients with known recurrence at date of last follow-up. Given a known median time to recurrence of 8 to 10 months after resection for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, analysis was further limited to patients with at least 8 months of follow-up. Primary outcome was incidence of biliopancreatic limb obstruction. Results: Among the 517 patients identified, 182 were included. Median age was 65 years; 51% were male. Median follow-up was 22 months. Path of reconstruction was trans-mesocolon in 35% (n = 64) and through ligament of Treitz in 65% (n = 118). There was no difference between the two groups in clinicopathologic factors including age, tumor differentiation, grade, T-stage, N-stage, LVI, or PNI (all p > 0.05). Importantly, there was no difference in retroperitoneal margin positivity between groups (trans-mesocolon 8% vs ligament of Treitz 10%, p = 0.79). Both groups had similar post-operative outcomes including median length-of-stay (trans-mesocolon 6 days vs ligament of Treitz 6 days, p = 0.89) and median follow-up (trans-mesocolon 21 months vs ligament of Treitz 23 months, p = 0.68). Biliopancreatic limb obstruction was detected in 8% (n = 14) of which 14% (n = 2) were in the trans-mesocolon group and 86% (n = 12) were in the ligament of the Treitz group. Therefore, incidence of biliopancreatic limb obstruction was 3.1% in the trans-mesocolon group and 10.4% in the ligament of the Treitz group resulting in an absolute risk increase of 7.3%, risk ratio of 3.4, and relative risk increase of 2.3. There was no difference in median time to biliopancreatic limb obstruction between the groups (17.6 months vs 18.5 months, p = 1.0). Biliopancreatic limb obstruction was caused by locally recurrent pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in 93% (n = 13) and kinking of the duodenojejunal anastomosis in 7% (n = 1). Intervention was performed in 71% (n = 10) and included surgical bypass in 29% (n = 4), percutaneous drain in 21% (n = 3), and endoscopic/surgical decompression in 21% (n = 3). Conclusion: Biliopancreatic limb obstruction is a known complication after pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma due to local recurrence in the surgical bed. This study shows that path of jejunal limb through the ligament of Treitz may be associated with a higher incidence of biliopancreatic limb obstruction compared with trans-mesocolon as the position of the biliopancreatic limb in the surgical bed may be more predisposed to obstruction after local recurrence. Larger studies are needed; however, given this potential risk of subsequent obstruction, these data suggest that the reconstruction paths may not be equivalent when performing pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

Background and Objectives: Perioperative therapy is a favored treatment strategy for gastric cancer. We sought to assess utilization of this approach at safety net hospitals (SNH) and tertiary referral centers (TRC). Materials and Methods: Patients in the US Safety Net Collaborative (2012–2014) with resectable gastric cancer across five SNH and their sister TRC were included. Primary outcomes were receipt of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) and perioperative therapy. Results: Of 284 patients, 36% and 64% received care at SNH and TRC. The distribution of Stage II/III resectable disease was similar across facilities. Receipt of NAC at SNH and TRC was similar (56% vs. 46%, p = 0.27). Compared with overall clinical stage, 38% and 36% were pathologically downstaged at SNH and TRC, respectively. Among patients who received NAC, those who also received adjuvant chemotherapy at SNH and TRC were similar (66% vs. 60%, p = 0.50). Asian race and higher clinical stage were associated with receipt of perioperative therapy (both p < 0.05) while treatment facility type was not. Conclusions: There was no difference in utilization of a perioperative treatment strategy between facility types for patients with gastric cancer. Pathologic down-staging from NAC was similar across treatment facilities, suggesting similar quality and duration of therapy. Treatment at an SNH is not a barrier to receiving standard-of-care perioperative therapy for gastric cancer.

Background: Both minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and open approaches for distal pancreatectomy are acceptable. MIS options include total laparoscopic/robotic (TLR) and hand-assist laparoscopy (HAL). When considering safety profile and specimen quality, the optimal approach is unknown. Methods: Patients who underwent distal pancreatectomy from 2010-2018 at two major academic institutions were included. Converted procedures were categorized into final approach. Ninety-day perioperative/pathologic outcomes of MIS and open were compared. Subset analyses between TLR vs HAL and HAL vs open were performed. Intent-to-treat analysis was performed. Results: Among 1006 patients, resection was performed by MIS in 35% (n = 352), open in 65% (n = 654). MIS had similar patient comorbidity profile as open but had increased operative time (183 vs 162 min; p < 0.01), lower estimated-blood-loss (EBL; 131 vs 341 mL; p < 0.01), fewer intraoperative blood transfusions (1.4 vs 5%; p < 0.01), shorter LOS (5.2 vs 7.2 days; p < 0.01). Tumor size was smaller (3.2 vs 4.4 cm; p < 0.01) with lower lymph node (LN) yield (14 vs 16; p < 0.01). When comparing HAL (n = 109) to TLR (n = 243), despite increased prior abdominal operations (60 vs 43%; p = 0.008), HAL had shorter operative time (167 vs 191 min; p < 0.01), similar length-of-stay (LOS; 5.4 vs 5.1 days; p = 0.27), and readmission rate (15 vs 13%; p = 0.47). When comparing HAL to open, the advantages of TLR approach persisted including lower EBL (171 vs 342 mL; p < 0.01), and shorter LOS (5.4 vs 7.2 days; p < 0.01). Although HAL had smaller tumors, it had a similar LN yield (16 vs 16; p = 0.80), and higher R0-rate (97 vs 83%; p < 0.01). Conclusion: Hand-assist laparoscopy is safe and feasible for distal pancreatectomy as operative time, complication profile, lymph node yield, and R0-rates are similar to open procedures, while maintaining the associated the advantages of a total laparoscopic/robotic approach with reduced blood loss and shorter length-of-stay.

Background: While parenchymal hepatic metastases were previously considered a contraindication to cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), liver resection (LR) is increasingly performed with CRS/HIPEC. Methods: Patients from the US HIPEC Collaborative (2000–2017) with invasive appendiceal or colorectal adenocarcinoma undergoing primary, curative intent CRS/HIPEC with CC0-1 resection were included. LR was defined as a formal parenchymal resection. Primary endpoints were postoperative complications and overall survival (OS). Results: A total of 658 patients were included. About 83 (15%) underwent LR of colorectal (58%) or invasive appendiceal (42%) metastases. LR patients had more complications (81% vs. 60%; p =.001), greater number of complications (2.3 vs. 1.5; p <.001) per patient and required more reoperations (22% vs. 11%; p =.007) and readmissions (39% vs. 25%; p =.014) than non-LR patients. LR patients had decreased OS (2-year OS 62% vs. 79%, p <.001), even when accounting for peritoneal carcinomatosis index and histology type. Preoperative factors associated with decreased OS on multivariable analysis in LR patients included age < 60 years (HR, 3.61; 95% CI, 1.10–11.81), colorectal histology (HR, 3.84; 95% CI, 1.69–12.65), and multiple liver tumors (HR, 3.45; 95% CI, 1.21–9.85) (all p <.05). When assigning one point for each factor, there was an incremental decrease in 2-year survival as the risk score increased from 0 to 3 (0: 100%; 1: 91%; 2: 58%; 3: 0%). Conclusions: As CRS/HIPEC + LR has become more common, we created a simple risk score to stratify patients considered for CRS/HIPEC + LR. These data aid in striking the balance between an increased perioperative complication profile with the potential for improvement in OS.

Background: Widespread HCV treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients remains limited. Our aim was to evaluate the association of HCV treatment with survival and assess barriers to treatment. Methods: Patients in the U.S. Safety Net Collaborative with HCV and HCC were included. Primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes were recurrence-free survival (RFS) and barriers to receiving HCV treatment. Results: Of 941 patients, 57% received care at tertiary referral centers (n=533), 74% did not receive HCV treatment (n=696), 6% underwent resection (n=54), 17% liver transplant (n=163), 50% liver-directed therapy (n=473), and 7% chemotherapy (n=60). HCV treatment was associated with improved OS compared to no HCV treatment (70 vs 21 months, p<0.01), persisting across clinical stages, HCC treatment modalities, and treatment facilities (all p<0.01). Surgical patients who received HCV treatment had improved RFS compared to those who did not (91 vs 80 months, p=0.03). On MVA, HCV treated patients had improved OS and RFS. On MVA, factors associated with failure to receive HCV treatment included Black race, higher MELD, and advanced clinical stage (all p<0.05). Conclusion: HCV treatment for HCC patients portends improved survival, regardless of clinical stage, HCC treatment, or facility type. Efforts must address barriers to HCV treatment.

Background: Although consensus guidelines generally discourage any surgical management (ASM; i.e., resection and/or transplantation) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and portal vein thrombosis (PVT), recent series from Asia have challenged this paradigm. Methods: Patients from the US Safety Net Collaborative database (2012–2014) with localized HCC and radiographically confirmed PVT were propensity-score matched based on demographic and clinicopathologic factors associated with receipt of ASM and overall survival (OS). OS was compared between patients undergoing ASM and those not selected for surgery. Results: Of 1910 HCC patients, 207 (14.5%) had localized disease and PVT. The majority received either liver-directed therapies (LDTs; 34%) and/or targeted systemic therapies (36%). Twenty-one patients (10.1%) underwent ASM (resection [n = 11], transplantation [n = 10]); a third experienced any complication with no 30-day mortalities. Independent predictors of undergoing ASM were younger age, recent hepatology consultation, and lower model of end-stage liver disease (MELD) score. After matching for age, comorbidities, MELD, tumor size, receipt of LDT, or systemic therapy, OS was significantly longer for patients selected for ASM versus non-ASM patients (median not reached vs. 5.8 months, p <.001). Conclusion: In a large North American multi-institutional cohort, a minority of HCC patients with PVT were selected for ASM. Resection or transplantation was associated with improved survival and may have a role in the multimodality management in selected patients.