NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Gastric Cancer recommend adjuvant chemotherapy with or without radiotherapy following after resection of gastric adenocarcinoma (GA) for patients who have not received neoadjuvant therapy. Despite frequent noncompliance with NCCN Guidelines nationally, risk factors underlying adjuvant therapy omission (ATom) have not been well characterized. We developed an internally validated preoperative instrument stratifying patients by incremental risk of ATom. The National Cancer Data Base was queried for patients with stage IB–III GA undergoing gastrectomy; those receiving neoadjuvant therapy were excluded. Multivariable models identified factors associated with ATom between 2006 and 2011. Internal validation was performed using bootstrap analysis; model discrimination and calibration were assessed using k-fold cross-validation and Hosmer-Lemeshow procedures, respectively. Using weighted β-coefficients, a simplified Omission Risk Score (ORS) was created to stratify ATom risk. The impact of ATom on overall survival (OS) was examined in ORS risk-stratified cohorts. In 4,728 patients (median age, 70 years; 64.8% male), 53.7% had ATom. The bootstrap-validated model identified advancing age, comorbidity, underinsured/uninsured status, proximal tumor location, and clinical T1/2 and N0 tumors as independent ATom predictors, demonstrating good discrimination. The simplified ORS, stratifying patients into low-, moderate-, and high-risk categories, predicted incremental risk of ATom (30% vs 53% vs 80%, respectively) and progressive delay to adjuvant therapy initiation (median time, 51 vs 55 vs 61 days, respectively). Patients at moderate/high-risk of ATom demonstrated worsening risk-adjusted mortality compared with low-risk patients (median OS, 26.4 vs 29.2 months). This ORS may aid in rational selection of multimodality treatment sequence in GA.
Jashodeep Datta, Matthew T. McMillan, Eric K. Shang, Ronac Mamtani, Russell S. Lewis Jr, Rachel R. Kelz, Ursina Teitelbaum, John P. Plastaras, Jeffrey A. Drebin, Douglas L. Fraker, Giorgos C. Karakousis and Robert E. Roses
Featured Updates to the NCCN Guidelines
P. Kumar Rao, Christopher Barker, Daniel G. Coit, Richard W. Joseph, Miguel Materin, Ramesh Rengan, Jeffrey Sosman, John A. Thompson, Mark R. Albertini, Genevieve Boland, William E. Carson III, Carlo Contreras, Gregory A. Daniels, Dominick DiMaio, Alison Durham, Ryan C. Fields, Martin D. Fleming, Anjela Galan, Brian Gastman, Kenneth Grossman, Valerie Guild, Douglas Johnson, Giorgos Karakousis, Julie R. Lange, ScM, Kim Margolin, Sameer Nath, Anthony J. Olszanski, Patrick A. Ott, Merrick I. Ross, April K. Salama, Joseph Skitzki, Susan M. Swetter, Evan Wuthrick, Nicole R. McMillian and Anita Engh
The NCCN Guidelines for Uveal Melanoma include recommendations for staging, treatment, and follow-up of patients diagnosed with uveal melanoma of the choroid or ciliary body. In addition, because distinguishing between uveal melanoma and benign uveal nevi is in some cases difficult, these guidelines also contain recommendations for workup of patients with suspicious pigmented uveal lesions, to clarify the tests needed to distinguish between those who should have further workup and treatment for uveal melanoma versus those with uncertain diagnosis and low risk who should to be followed and later reevaluated. These NCCN Guidelines Insights describe recommendations for treatment of newly diagnosed nonmetastatic uveal melanoma in patients who have already undergone a complete workup.