Summary Background 80% of individuals with cancer will require a surgical procedure, yet little comparative data exist on early outcomes in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). We compared postoperative outcomes in breast, colorectal, and gastric cancer surgery in hospitals worldwide, focusing on the effect of disease stage and complications on postoperative mortality. Methods This was a multicentre, international prospective cohort study of consecutive adult patients undergoing surgery for primary breast, colorectal, or gastric cancer requiring a skin incision done under general or neuraxial anaesthesia. The primary outcome was death or major complication within 30 days of surgery. Multilevel logistic regression determined relationships within three-level nested models of patients within hospitals and countries. Hospital-level infrastructure effects were explored with three-way mediation analyses. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT03471494 . Findings Between April 1, 2018, and Jan 31, 2019, we enrolled 15 958 patients from 428 hospitals in 82 countries (high income 9106 patients, 31 countries; upper-middle income 2721 patients, 23 countries; or lower-middle income 4131 patients, 28 countries). Patients in LMICs presented with more advanced disease compared with patients in high-income countries. 30-day mortality was higher for gastric cancer in low-income or lower-middle-income countries (adjusted odds ratio 3·72, 95% CI 1·70–8·16) and for colorectal cancer in low-income or lower-middle-income countries (4·59, 2·39–8·80) and upper-middle-income countries (2·06, 1·11–3·83). No difference in 30-day mortality was seen in breast cancer. The proportion of patients who died after a major complication was greatest in low-income or lower-middle-income countries (6·15, 3·26–11·59) and upper-middle-income countries (3·89, 2·08–7·29). Postoperative death after complications was partly explained by patient factors (60%) and partly by hospital or country (40%). The absence of consistently available postoperative care facilities was associated with seven to 10 more deaths per 100 major complications in LMICs. Cancer stage alone explained little of the early variation in mortality or postoperative complications. Interpretation Higher levels of mortality after cancer surgery in LMICs was not fully explained by later presentation of disease. The capacity to rescue patients from surgical complications is a tangible opportunity for meaningful intervention. Early death after cancer surgery might be reduced by policies focusing on strengthening perioperative care systems to detect and intervene in common complications. Funding National Institute for Health Research Global Health Research Unit.

The BODY-Q, developed for BS and BCS, possessed the strongest evidence for quality of measurement properties and has the potential to be recommended in future clinical trials.

Background Biological sex and gender have been reported to impact incidence and overall survival (OS) of curatively treated gastroesophageal cancer. The aim of this study was to compare palliative treatment allocation and OS between women and men with advanced gastroesophageal cancer. Methods Patients with an unresectable (cT4b) or metastatic (cM1) esophageal (including cardia) adenocarcinoma (EAC) or squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), or gastric adenocarcinoma (GAC) diagnosed in 2015-2018 were identified in the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Treatment allocation was compared using chi-squared tests and multivariable logistic regression analyses, and OS using the Kaplan-Meier method with log-rank test and Cox proportional hazard analysis. All statistical tests were 2-sided. Results Of patients with EAC (n = 3,077), ESCC (n = 794) and GAC (n = 1,836), 18.0%, 39.4% and 39.1% were women, respectively. Women received less often systemic treatment compared to men in EAC (42.7% vs. 47.4%, P = 0.045) and GAC (33.8% vs. 38.8%, P = 0.03), but not in ESCC (33.2% vs. 39.5%, P = 0.07). Women had a lower probability of receiving systemic treatment in GAC in multivariable analyses (odds ratio [OR] = 0.79, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.62-1.00), but not in EAC (OR = 0.86, 95%CI = 0.69-1.06) and ESCC (OR = 0.81, 95%CI = 0.57-1.14). Median OS was lower in women with EAC (4.4 vs. 5.2 months, P = 0.04), but did not differ after adjustment for patient and tumor characteristics and systemic treatment administration. Conclusion We observed statistically significant and clinically relevant gender differences in systemic treatment administration and OS in advanced gastroesophageal cancer. Causes of these disparities may be sex-based, i.e. related to tumor biology, as well as gender-based, e.g. related to differences in treatment choices.

Background Chemoradiation followed by resection has been the standard therapy for resectable (cT1-4aN0-3M0) esophageal carcinoma in the Netherlands since 2010. The optimal surgical approach remains a matter of debate. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare the transhiatal and the transthoracic approach concerning morbidity, mortality and oncological quality. Methods Data was acquired from the Dutch Upper GI Cancer Audit. Patients who underwent esophagectomy with curative intent and gastric tube reconstruction for mid/distal esophageal or esophagogastric junction carcinoma (cT1-4aN0-3M0) from 2011 to 2016 were included. Patients who underwent a transthoracic and transhiatal esophagectomy were compared after propensity score matching. Results After propensity score matching, 1532 of 4143 patients were included for analysis. The transthoracic approach yielded more lymph nodes (transthoracic median 19, transhiatal median 14; p < 0.001). There was no difference in the number of positive lymph nodes, however, the median (y)pN-stage was higher in the transthoracic group (p = 0.044). The transthoracic group experienced more chyle leakage (9.7% vs. 2.7%, p < 0.001), more pulmonary complications (35.5% vs. 26.1%, p < 0.001), and more cardiac complications (15.4% vs. 10.3%, p = 0.003). The transthoracic group required a longer hospital stay (median 14 vs. 11 days, p < 0.001), ICU stay (median 3 vs. 1 day, p < 0.001), and had a higher 30-day/in-hospital mortality rate (4.0% vs. 1.7%, p = 0.009). Conclusions In a propensity score-matched cohort, the transthoracic esophagectomy provided a more extensive lymph node dissection, which resulted in a higher lymph node yield, at the cost of increased morbidity and short-term mortality.

Introduction A considerable number of patients experience some long-term weight regain after bariatric surgery. Body contouring surgery (BCS) is thought to strengthen post-bariatric surgery patients in their weight control and maintenance of achieved improvements in comorbidities. Objectives To examine the impact of BCS on long-term weight control and comorbidities after bariatric surgery. Methods We performed a retrospective study in a prospective database. All patients who underwent primary Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and presented for preoperative consultation of BCS in the same hospital were included in the study. Linear and logistic mixed-effect model analyses were used to evaluate the longitudinal relationships between patients who were accepted or rejected for BCS and their weight loss outcomes or changes in comorbidities. Results Of the 1150 patients who underwent primary RYGB between January 2010 and December 2014, 258 patients (22.4%) presented for preoperative consultation of BCS. Of these patients, 126 patients eventually underwent BCS (48.8%). Patients who were accepted for BCS demonstrated significant better ∆body mass index (BMI) on average over time (− 1.31 kg/m 2 /year, 95% confidence interval (CI) −2.52 − −0.10, p = 0.034) and percent total weight loss (%TWL) was significantly different at 36 months (5.79, 95%CI 1.22 – 10.37, p = 0.013) and 48 months (6.78, 95%CI 0.93 – 12.63, p = 0.023) after body contouring consultation. Patients who were accepted or rejected did not differ significantly in the maintenance of achieved improvements in comorbidities. Conclusion BCS could not be associated with the maintenance of achieved improvements in comorbidities after bariatric surgery, whereas it could be associated with improved weight loss maintenance at 36 and 48 months after body contouring consultation. This association should be further explored in a large longitudinal study.

Background Sex differences in clinicopathological characteristics, treatment, and postoperative outcomes of gastric and esophageal cancer are largely undefined. This study aimed to compare tumor and treatment characteristics and outcomes of gastric and esophageal cancer surgery between male and female patients. Methods Patients after elective surgery for primary esophageal (EAC) or gastric adenocarcinoma (GAC) registered in the Dutch Upper GI Cancer Audit between 2011 and 2016 were included. The primary endpoint, 5-year relative survival with relative excess risk (RER), i.e., adjusted for the normal life expectancy, was compared between male and female patients with EAC and GAC. Results In total, 4937 patients were included (75% male) with a mean age of 66 years. cT and cN-stages showed a similar distribution in male and female patients. In females, antrum GAC was more frequent (47% vs. 38%, p < 0.001). Female patients with EAC less frequently received neo-adjuvant treatment (OR = 0.60, 95% CI 0.38–0.96, p = 0.033). For GAC, less postoperative morbidity (33% vs. 38% p = 0.017) and less re-interventions (12% vs. 16%, p = 0.008) were observed in females, although they had inferior 5-year relative survival (49% vs. 56%, RER = 1.31, 95% CI 1.09–1.58, p = 0.004). No differences in relative survival of EAC were observed. Conclusions In addition to significant sex differences in tumor location, female patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma less frequently received neo-adjuvant therapy, and female patients with gastric adenocarcinoma had inferior relative survival. Further consideration and exploration of sex differences in surgical treatment and outcomes are necessary to improve tailored treatment and outcomes.

Objectives: This study aimed to compare long-term survival following MIE versus OE for esophageal cancer using a nationwide propensityscore matched cohort. Summary of Background Data: MIE provides lower postoperative morbidity and mortality, and similar short-term oncological quality compared to OE. Methods: Data was acquired from the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit. Patients undergoing minimally invasive or open, transthoracic or transhiatal esophagectomy for primary esophageal cancer between 2011 and 2015 were included. A propensity-score matching analysis for MIE versus OE was performed separately for transthoracic and transhiatal esoph-agectomies. Results: A total of 1036 transthoracic MIE and OE patients, and 582 transhiatal MIE and OE patients were matched. Long-term survival was comparable for MIE and OE for both transthoracic and transhiatal procedures (5-year overall survival: transthoracic MIE 49.2% vs OE 51.1%, P 0.695; transhiatal MIE 48.4% vs OE 50.7%, P 0.832). For both procedures, MIE yielded more lymph nodes (transthoracic median 21 vs 18, P < 0.001; transhiatal 15 vs 13, P 0.007). Postoperative morbidity was comparable after transthoracic MIE and OE (60.8% vs 64.9%, P 0.177), with a reduced length of stay after transthoracic MIE (median 12 vs 15 days, P < 0.001). After transhiatal MIE, more postoperative complications (64.9% vs 56.4%, P 0.034) were observed, without subsequent difference in length of stay. Conclusion: Long-term survival after MIE was equivalent to open in both propensity-score matched cohorts of patients undergoing transthoracic or transhiatal esophageal resections. Transhiatal MIE was accompanied with more postoperative morbidity. Both transthoracic and transhiatal MIE resulted in a more extended lymphadenectomy.

Dr van Berge Henegouwen discloses a financial relationship with Stryker, Olympus, Johnson & Johnson, Medtronic, and Mylan; Dr Gisbertz with Olympus and Medtronic.