Brigham and Women's tumor classification (BWH) better predicts poor outcomes than American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) 7th edition (AJCC 7). AJCC 8th edition (AJCC 8) has not been evaluated. OBJECTIVES To compare BWH and AJCC 8 tumor classifications for head and neck cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (HNCSCC). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS A total of 459 patients with 680 HNCSCCs in this cohort study were staged via BWH and AJCC 8 classifications and poor outcomes (ie, local recurrence [LR], nodal metastasis [NM], disease specific death [DSD], and overall survival [OS]) were compared. The study was carried out at a single academic tertiary care center in Boston, Massachusetts. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Distinctiveness (outcome differences between tumor class), homogeneity (outcome similarity within tumor class), monotonicity (outcome worsening with increasing tumor class), and C statistic. RESULTS A total of 680 HNCSCCs in 459 patients were included in this study, of which 313 (68%) were men with the mean (SD) age of 70.2 (12.7) years. The AJCC 8 (T3/T4) and BWH (T2b/T3) high tumor classes accounted for 121 (18%) vs 63 (9%), 17 (71%) vs 16 (70%), and 11 (85%) vs 12 (92%) of total cases, metastases, and deaths, respectively. The AJCC 8 T2 and T3 comprised 23% of cases and had statistically indistinguishable outcomes. The BWH had higher specificity (93%) and positive predictive value (30%) for identifying cases at risk for metastasis or death. C statistics showed BWH to be superior in predicting NM and DSD (P = .01 and P = .005, respectively), but there was no difference for LR and OS. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Lack of distinction between AJCC T2 and T3 resulted in a 23% subset of HNCSCCs with significant risk of metastasis and death-too large of a group for routine nodal staging or consideration of adjuvant therapy. The BWH identifies the same number of poor outcomes in a 9% subset of HNCSCCs, thus minimizing inappropriate upstaging of low-risk disease.

No abstract

Purpose: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains a significant health issue. For most patients, there are no options for targeted therapy, and existing treatments are limited by toxicity. The HOPE trial (Harnessing Organoids for PErsonalized Therapy) was a pilot feasibility trial aiming to prospectively generate patient-derived organoids (PDO) from patients with PDAC and test their drug sensitivity and correlation with clinical outcomes. Experimental Design: PDOs were established from a heterogeneous population of patients with PDAC including both basal and classical PDAC subtypes. Results: A method for classifying PDOs as sensitive or resistant to chemotherapy regimens was developed to predict the clinical outcome of patients. Drug sensitivity testing on PDOs correlated with clinical responses to treatment in individual patients. Conclusions: These data support the investigation of PDOs to guide treatment in prospective interventional trials in PDAC.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

IMPORTANCE Although the lip is considered a high-risk location in cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC), it has not been established whether this risk stems from vermilion or cutaneous locations or both. OBJECTIVE To compare differences in risks of recurrence, metastasis, and death from cSCCs on the vermilion vs cutaneous lip. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Retrospective cohort study of 303 patients with 310 primary cSCCs of the lip (138 cutaneous, 172 vermilion) diagnosed between 2000 and 2015 at 2 academic tertiary care centers in Boston, Massachusetts. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Development of local recurrence, nodal metastasis, distant metastasis, disease-specific death, and all-cause death. RESULTS Of the 303 study participants with 310 SCCs of the lip, 153 (50.5%) were men, and 150 (49.5%) were women; median age at diagnosis, 68 years (range, 27-93 years). Outcomes were as follows for vermilion vs cutaneous locations: local recurrence, 6.4% (11 of 172) vs 2.9% (4 of 138); nodal metastasis, 7.6% (13 of 172) vs 1.5% (2 of 138); distant metastasis, 0.6% (1 of 172) vs 0.7% (1 of 138); disease-specific death, 3.5% (6 of 172) vs 2.9% (4 of 138); and all-cause death, 26.7% (46 of 172) vs 29.0% (40 of 138). The difference was statistically significant for nodal metastasis (P = .01). In multivariable analysis, nodal metastasis was associated with vermilion lip location (subhazard ratio, 5.0; 95% CI, 1.1-23.8) and invasion beyond fat (fascia or beyond for vermilion lip) (subhazard ratio, 4.4; 95% CI, 1.3-14.9). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE The risk of nodal metastasis is 5-fold greater for cSCCs on the vermilion lip compared with those on the cutaneous lip. Squamous cell carcinomas of the cutaneous lip have a nodal metastasis risk similar to cSCCs in general (1.5%). Thus, vermilion involvement appears responsible for the increased risk associated with cSCC of lip. Vermilion involvement may merit radiologic nodal staging and inclusion in future tumor staging, since it was independently associated with higher-risk cSCC of the lip region.

Background Medication costs can lead to financial burdens for patients, creating barriers to effective medication use. Health care provider use of real‐time benefit tools (RTBTs) may facilitate cost conversations with patients. We sought to explicate patient views on how RTBTs could be used to improve cost considerations in prescribing decisions. Methods We conducted focus groups to characterize patient perspectives on holding cost conversations with their physicians and to identify factors that would influence the value of RTBTs. We focused on adults aged 50+ who reported trouble paying for their prescriptions. Three groups included patients with conditions requiring high‐cost treatments and one group included lower‐income patients independent of their medical conditions. Focus groups were recorded, transcribed, coded, and categorized to salient themes employing inductive and deductive approaches using the Health Equity Implementation Framework. Results Focus groups were conducted from 09/2020–12/2020 including 18 participants representing cancer (n = 6), diabetes (n = 6), rheumatoid arthritis (n = 3), and lower income (n = 3). Participants were between 50–74, eight self‐identified as Black, 10 as White, and eight reported earning <$50,000/year. We identified five themes regarding cost conversations (medication cost importance, past experiences with cost/cost conversations, perception of physician's role and knowledge, knowledge of existing resources, and influence on decision‐making) and four RTBT‐use‐specific themes (advantages/disadvantages, perceived relevance, data quality concerns, and implementation considerations). Conclusion Approaches that envision RTBTs as one‐size‐fits‐all technological interventions may underestimate the complexity of incorporating price information into prescribing decisions. Nevertheless, patients highlighted the potential value of accurate, real‐time information on medication costs to inform decision‐making.