Objective: The aim of this study was to define robust benchmark values for the surgical treatment of perihilar cholangiocarcinomas (PHC) to enable unbiased comparisons. Background: Despite ongoing efforts, postoperative mortality and morbidity remains high after complex liver surgery for PHC. Benchmark data of best achievable results in surgical PHC treatment are however still lacking. Methods: This study analyzed consecutive patients undergoing major liver surgery for PHC in 24 high-volume centers in 3 continents over the recent 5-year period (2014–2018) with a minimum follow-up of 1 year in each patient. Benchmark patients were those operated at high-volume centers (≥50 cases during the study period) without the need for vascular reconstruction due to tumor invasion, or the presence of significant co-morbidities such as severe obesity (body mass index ≥35), diabetes, or cardiovascular diseases. Benchmark cutoff values were derived from the 75th or 25th percentile of the median values of all benchmark centers. Results: Seven hundred eight (39%) of a total of 1829 consecutive patients qualified as benchmark cases. Benchmark cut-offs included: R0 resection ≥57%, postoperative liver failure (International Study Group of Liver Surgery): ≤35%; in-hospital and 3-month mortality rates ≤8% and ≤13%, respectively; 3-month grade 3 complications and the CCI: ≤70% and ≤30.5, respectively; bile leak-rate: ≤47% and 5-year overall survival of ≥39.7%. Centers operating mostly on complex cases disclosed better outcome including lower post-operative liver failure rates (4% vs 13%; P = 0.002). Centers from Asia disclosed better outcomes. Conclusion: Surgery for PHC remains associated with high morbidity and mortality with now the availability of benchmark values covering 21 outcome parameters, which may serve as key references for comparison in any future analyses of individuals, group of patients or centers.

Objective: To define benchmark values for liver transplantation (LT) in patients with perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (PHC) enabling unbiased comparisons. Background: Transplantation for PHC is used with reluctance in many centers and even contraindicated in several countries. Although benchmark values for LT are available, there is a lack of specific data on LT performed for PHC. Methods: PHC patients considered for LT after Mayo-like protocol were analyzed in 17 reference centers in 2 continents over the recent 5-year period (2014)(2015)(2016)(2017)(2018). The minimum follow-up was 1 year. Benchmark patients were defined as operated at high-volume centers ( ≥ 50 overall LT/year) after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, with a tumor diameter <3 cm, negative lymph nodes, and with the absence of relevant comorbidities. Benchmark cutoff values were derived from the 75th to 25th percentiles of the median values of all benchmark centers. Results: One hundred thirty-four consecutive patients underwent LT after completion of the neoadjuvant treatment. Of those, 89.6% qualified as benchmark cases. Benchmark cutoffs were 90-day mortality ≤ 5.2%; comprehensive complication index at 1 year of ≤ 33.7; grade ≥ 3 complication rates ≤ 66.7%. These values were better than benchmark values for other indications of LT. Five-year disease-free survival was largely superior compared with a matched group of nodal negative patients undergoing curative liver resection (n = 106) (62% vs 32%, P < 0.001). Conclusion: This multicenter benchmark study demonstrates that LT offers excellent outcomes with superior oncological results in early stage PHC patients, even in candidates for surgery. This provocative observation should lead to a change in available therapeutic algorithms for PHC.

Background Multimodal treatment, including systemic treatment and surgery, improved the prognosis of peritoneal metastasis (PM). Despite all efforts, recurrence rates remain high, and only little data is available about clinical behavior or molecular patterns of PM in comparison to hematogenous metastasis. Here, we aimed to analyze recurrence patterns after multimodal treatment for PM from colorectal cancer. Methods Patients with colorectal PM undergoing multimodal treatment including systemic chemotherapy and cytoreductive surgery plus hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS/HIPEC) between 2005–2017 at four centers were analyzed retrospectively. Results A total of 505 patients undergoing CRS/HIPEC were analyzed. 82.1% of patients received preoperative chemotherapy. Median peritoneal cancer index (PCI) was 6 (IQR = 3–11). Median disease-free and overall survival was 12 months (95% confidence interval [CI] = 11 to 14 months) and 51 months (95% CI = 43 to 62 months) respectively. Disease recurred in 361 (71.5%) patients, presenting as isolated peritoneal recurrence in 24.6%, isolated hematogenous recurrence in 28.3%, and mixed recurrence in 13.9% of patients. Recurrence to the peritoneum was associated with an impaired time from recurrence to death of 21 months (95% CI = 18 to 31 months) for isolated peritoneal, and 22 months (95% CI = 16 to 30 months) for mixed recurrence, compared to 43 months (95% CI = 31 to &gt; 121 months) for hematogenous recurrence (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.79, 95% CI = 1.27 to 2.53, p = .001 and HR = 2.44, 95% CI = 1.61 to 3.79, p &lt; .001). On multiple logistic regression analysis, RAS mutational status (OR = 2.42, 95% CI = 1.11 to 5.47, p = .03) and positive nodal stage of the primary (OR = 3.88, 95% CI = 1.40 to 11.86, p = .01) were identified as predictive factors for peritoneal recurrence. Conclusions This study highlights the heterogeneity of peritoneal metastasis in patients with colorectal cancer. Recurrent peritoneal metastasis after radical treatment represents a more aggressive subset of metastatic colorectal cancer.

IntroductionIn one third of all patients with epilepsy, seizure freedom is not achieved through anti-seizure medication (ASM). These patients have an increased risk of earlier death, poorer cognitive development, and reduced quality of life. Cenobamate (CNB) has recently been approved as a promising novel ASM drug for the treatment of adults with focal-onset epilepsy. However, there is little experience for its application in pediatric patients.MethodsIn a multicenter study we evaluated retrospectively the outcome of 16 pediatric patients treated “off label” with CNB.ResultsIn 16 patients with a mean age of 15.38 years, CNB was started at an age of 15.05 years due to DRE. Prior to initiation of therapy, an average of 10.56 (range 3–20) ASM were prescribed. At initiation, patients were taking 2.63 (range 1–4) ASM. CNB was increased by 0.47 ± 0.27mg/kg/d every 2 weeks with a mean maximum dosage of 3.1 mg/kg/d (range 0.89–7) and total daily dose of 182.81 mg (range 50–400 mg). Seizure freedom was achieved in 31.3% and a significant seizure reduction of &gt;50% in 37.5%. Adverse events occurred in 10 patients with fatigue/somnolence as the most common. CNB is taken with high adherence in all but three patients with a median follow-up of 168.5 daysConclusionCenobamate is an effective ASM for pediatric patients suffering from drug-resistant epilepsy. In addition to excellent seizure reduction or freedom, it is well-tolerated. Cenobamate should be considered as a novel treatment for DRE in pediatric patients.

Peritoneal metastasis (PM) originating from gastrointestinal cancer was considered a terminal disease until recently. The advent of better systemic treatment, a better understanding of prognostic factors, and finally, the advent of novel loco-regional therapies, has opened the door for the multimodal treatment of PM. These strategies, including radical surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) showed surprisingly good results, leading to the prolonged survival of patients with peritoneal metastasis. This has triggered a significant body of research, leading to the molecular characterization of PM, which may further help in the development of novel treatments. This review summarizes current evidence on peritoneal metastasis and explores potential novel mechanisms and therapeutic approaches to treat patients with peritoneal metastasis.