Introduction: Patients undergoing oncologic surgery are at risk for persistent postoperative opioid use. As a quality improvement initiative, we sought to characterize provider perceptions regarding opioid prescribing after oncologic procedures.Methods: Surgical oncology attending physicians, clinical fellows, and advanced practice providers (APPs) at a high-volume cancer center were surveyed before and after educational sessions focusing on the opioid epidemic with review of departmental data.Results: Pre-education response rates were 72/103 (70%): 22/34 (65%) attendings, 19/21 (90%) fellows, 31/48 (65%) APPs. For 5 index operations (open abdominal resection, laparoscopic colectomy, wide local excision, thyroidectomy, port), fellows answered that patients should be off opioids sooner than attendings/APPs. For 4/5 procedures, APPs recommended higher discharge opioid prescriptions than attendings/fellows. Forty-six providers (45%) responded to both pre-and post-education surveys. After the intervention, providers recommended lower numbers of opioid pills and indicated that patients should be off opioids sooner for all procedures. Compared to preeducation, more providers agreed that discharge opioid prescriptions should be based on a patient's last 24 hours of inpatient opioid use (83% vs. 91%, p=0.006). Providers who did not attend a session showed no difference in perceptions or recommendations on repeat assessment.Conclusions: Variation exists in perioperative opioid prescribing among provider types, with those most involved in daily care and discharge processes generally recommending more opioids. After education, providers lowered discharge opioid recommendations and felt patients should be off opioids sooner. Next steps include assessing for quantitative changes in opioid prescribing and implementing standardized opioid prescription algorithms.
IntroductionOur efforts to prevent and treat breast cancer are significantly impeded by a lack of knowledge of the biology and developmental genetics of the normal mammary gland. In order to provide the specimens that will facilitate such an understanding, The Susan G. Komen for the Cure Tissue Bank at the IU Simon Cancer Center (KTB) was established. The KTB is, to our knowledge, the only biorepository in the world prospectively established to collect normal, healthy breast tissue from volunteer donors. As a first initiative toward a molecular understanding of the biology and developmental genetics of the normal mammary gland, the effect of the menstrual cycle and hormonal contraceptives on DNA expression in the normal breast epithelium was examined.MethodsUsing normal breast tissue from 20 premenopausal donors to KTB, the changes in the mRNA of the normal breast epithelium as a function of phase of the menstrual cycle and hormonal contraception were assayed using next-generation whole transcriptome sequencing (RNA-Seq).ResultsIn total, 255 genes representing 1.4% of all genes were deemed to have statistically significant differential expression between the two phases of the menstrual cycle. The overwhelming majority (221; 87%) of the genes have higher expression during the luteal phase. These data provide important insights into the processes occurring during each phase of the menstrual cycle. There was only a single gene significantly differentially expressed when comparing the epithelium of women using hormonal contraception to those in the luteal phase.ConclusionsWe have taken advantage of a unique research resource, the KTB, to complete the first-ever next-generation transcriptome sequencing of the epithelial compartment of 20 normal human breast specimens. This work has produced a comprehensive catalog of the differences in the expression of protein-coding genes as a function of the phase of the menstrual cycle. These data constitute the beginning of a reference data set of the normal mammary gland, which can be consulted for comparison with data developed from malignant specimens, or to mine the effects of the hormonal flux that occurs during the menstrual cycle.
Background and Objectives A department‐wide opioid reduction education program resulted in a 1‐month change in perceptions of opioid needs and prescribing recommendations for surgical oncology patients. This study's aim was to re‐evaluate if early trends were retained 1 year later. Methods Surgical Oncology attendings, fellows, and advanced practice providers at a Comprehensive Cancer Center were surveyed 1‐year after an August 2018 opioid reduction education program, to compare departmental and individual opioid prescribing habits. Results The September 2019 response rate was 54/93 (58%), with 41 completing both the post‐education and 1‐year follow‐up surveys. The departmental and matched cohort continued to recommend a lower quantity of discharge opioids for all five index operations (by >50%) and expected less postoperative days to zero opioid needs, when compared to pre‐education perceptions. Providers continued to agree that discharge opioid prescriptions should be based on a patient's last 24 hours of inpatient opioid use. There was universal agreement that each respondent's opioid administration had decreased in the past year. Conclusions The initial 1‐month improvements in perioperative opioid prescribing perceptions were retained 1 year later by Surgical Oncology providers who recommended fewer discharge opioids, faster weaning to zero opioids, and standardized patient‐specific discharge opioid volume calculations.
Objective: To evaluate trends over time in perioperative outcomes for patients undergoing hepatectomy. Background: As perioperative care and surgical technique for hepatectomy have improved, the indications for and complexity of liver resections have evolved. However, the resulting effect on the short-term outcomes over time has not been well described. Methods: Consecutive patients undergoing hepatectomy during 1998-2015 at one institution were analyzed. Perioperative outcomes, including the comprehensive complication index (CCI), were compared between patients who underwent hepatectomy in the
Triple-negative breast cancers (TNBCs) are a heterogeneous set of tumors defined by an absence of actionable therapeutic targets (ER−,PR−,HER2−). Microdissected normal ductal epithelium from healthy volunteers represents a novel comparator to reveal insights into TNBC heterogeneity and to inform drug development. Using RNA-sequencing data from our institution and The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) we compared the transcriptomes of 94 TNBCs, 20 microdissected normal breast tissues from healthy volunteers from the Susan G. Komen for the Cure Tissue Bank, and 10 histologically normal tissues adjacent to tumor. Pathway analysis comparing TNBCs to optimized normal controls of microdissected normal epithelium versus classic controls composed of adjacent normal tissue revealed distinct molecular signatures. Differential gene expression of TNBC compared with normal comparators demonstrated important findings for TNBC-specific clinical trials testing targeted agents; lack of over-expression for negative studies and over-expression in studies with drug activity. Next, by comparing each individual TNBC to the set of microdissected normals, we demonstrate that TNBC heterogeneity is attributable to transcriptional chaos, is associated with non-silent DNA mutational load, and explains transcriptional heterogeneity in addition to known molecular subtypes. Finally, chaos analysis identified 146 core genes dysregulated in >90% of TNBCs revealing an over-expressed central network. In conclusion, Use of microdissected normal ductal epithelium from healthy volunteers enables an optimized approach for studying TNBC and uncovers biological heterogeneity mediated by transcriptional chaos.
Colorectal liver metastases (CLM) are not always resectable at the time of diagnosis. An insufficient future liver remnant is a factor excluding patients from curative intent resection. To deal with this issue, two‐stage hepatectomy was introduced approximately 20 years ago. It is a sequential treatment strategy for bilateral CLM, which consists of preoperative chemotherapy, portal vein embolization, and planned first and second liver resections. This study reviews current evidence supporting use of two‐stage hepatectomy.
Background: The optimal surveillance strategy after resection of colorectal liver metastases (CLM) is unknown. We evaluated changes in recurrence risk after CLM resection and developed a surveillance algorithm. Methods: Patients undergoing CLM resection during 1998 to 2015 were identified from a prospectively compiled database and analyzed if they had the potential for follow-up longer than the longest observed time to recurrence in this cohort. Changes in recurrence risk and risk factors for recurrence were evaluated. All statistical tests were 2-sided. Results: Among 2,105 patients who were initially identified and underwent CLM resection, the latest recurrence was observed at 87 months; 1,221 consecutive patients from 1998 through 2011 with the potential for at least 87 months of follow-up were included. The risk of recurrence was highest at 0 to 2 years after CLM resection, lower at 2 to 4 years after CLM resection, and steadily lower after 4 years after CLM resection. Factors associated with increased recurrence risk at the time of surgery were primary lymph node metastasis (hazard ratio [HR], 1.54; 95% CI, 1.21–1.97; P<.001), multiple CLM (HR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.06–1.63; P=.015), largest liver metastasis diameter >5 cm (HR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.23–2.19; P<.001), and RAS mutation (HR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.04–1.59; P=.020). In patients without recurrence at 2 years, the only factor still associated with increased recurrence risk was RAS mutation. In those patients, the recurrence rate at 4 years was 59.3% in patients with RAS mutation versus 27.8% in patients with RAS wild-type (P=.019). Conclusions: For patients who have undergone CLM resection, we propose surveillance every 3 to 4 months during years 0 to 2, every 3 to 4 months (if mutant RAS) versus every 4 to 6 months (if RAS wild-type) during years 2 to 4, and every 6 to 12 months if recurrence-free at 4 years.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
334 Leonard St
Brooklyn, NY 11211
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.