A prediction model for recurrence after translabyrinthine surgery for vestibular schwannoma: toward personalized postoperative surveillance

Purpose The aim of this study is to compute and validate a statistical predictive model for the risk of recurrence, defined as regrowth of tumor necessitating salvage treatment, after translabyrinthine removal of vestibular schwannomas to individualize postoperative surveillance. Methods The multivariable predictive model for risk of recurrence was based on retrospectively collected patient data between 1995 and 2017 at a tertiary referral center. To assess for internal validity of the prediction model tenfold cross-validation was performed. A ‘low’ calculated risk of recurrence in this study was set at < 1%, based on clinical criteria and expert opinion. Results A total of 596 patients with 33 recurrences (5.5%) were included for analysis. The final prediction model consisted of the predictors ‘age at time of surgery’, ‘preoperative tumor growth’ and ‘first postoperative MRI outcome’. The area under the receiver operating curve of the prediction model was 89%, with a C-index of 0.686 (95% CI 0.614–0.796) after cross-validation. The predicted probability for risk of recurrence was low (< 1%) in 373 patients (63%). The earliest recurrence in these low-risk patients was detected at 46 months after surgery. Conclusion This study presents a well-performing prediction model for the risk of recurrence after translabyrinthine surgery for vestibular schwannoma. The prediction model can be used to tailor the postoperative surveillance to the estimated risk of recurrence of individual patients. It seems that especially in patients with an estimated low risk of recurrence, the interval between the first and second postoperative MRI can be safely prolonged.

Postresection Period-Specific Hazard of Recurrence as a Framework for Surveillance Strategy in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Multicenter Outcome Study

<b><i>Introduction:</i></b> In spite of the high frequency of recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after resection, little evidence exists to directly help to plan a reasonable schedule for the frequency and intensity of postoperative surveillance for recurrence. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> 1,918 consecutive patients with Child-Turcott-Pugh class A who had T1- or T2-staged HCCs detected by active surveillance and underwent curative resection for their tumors at 3 teaching hospitals in Korea, followed by recurrence screening at 6-monthly or shorter intervals. To set an evidence-based timetable for postoperative surveillance, we investigated the annual hazard rate of recurrence through postoperative year 10 in patients undergoing hepatectomy for HCC, and the clinical and morphological phenotypes associated with early versus late recurrence. <b><i>Results:</i></b> The estimated hazard rate for recurrence peaked during year 0–1 (21.7%), with a subsequent gradual decrease through 5 years, followed by stabilization at &#x3c;7.0% until year 10, except in the case of cirrhotics, who had a rate of 10.5% during year 4–5. Multivariate time-to-recurrence analysis by recurrence period revealed that serum alpha-fetoprotein ≥200 ng/mL, larger size of tumor, tumor multiplicity, microvascular invasion, capsular invasion, and higher METAVIR fibrosis stage were significantly related to disease recurrence within 5 years after resection, while cirrhosis (METAVIR F4) alone was related to disease recurrence beyond 5 years (<i>P</i>s &#x3c; 0.05). Post-relapse overall survival was better in the latter group (<i>p</i> = 0.033). <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> Our chronological and morphological insights into recurrence after resection of primary HCCs may help implement an optimal intensity of surveillance for recurrence.

546 INTENSIVE SURVEILLANCE AFTER CURATIVE INTENT SURGERY FOR ESOPHAGEAL CANCER: INITIAL RESULTS OF THE ENSURE STUDY

Emerging data demonstrate long-term survival after salvage interventions for local or oligometastatic recurrence after planned curative resection for esophageal cancer, providing rationale for postoperative surveillance. However, the impact of intensive surveillance on oncologic outcome is unknown. This multicenter collaborative study aimed to characterize oncologic surveillance protocols across esophageal cancer centers internationally and determine the independent effect of intensive surveillance on oncologic outcome. Methods The ENSURE international multicenter study included consecutive patients who underwent surgery with curative intent for cTxNxM0 esophageal cancer from June 2009 to June 2015. Intensive surveillance was defined as use of cross-sectional imaging, at least annually, during the first three postoperative years. The estimated sample size of 4425 provided 90% power to detect a 5% increase in 5-year overall survival (OS, primary outcome measure). Secondary outcome measures included disease-free (DFS) and disease-specific survival (DSS), surveillance strategies, incidence of oligometastatic recurrence, treatment strategies, and HRQOL. The study was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03461341). Results 4597 patients were included. The participating 27 centres undertook mean(SD) 52.3(17.1) esophageal cancer resections annually between 3.5 ± 1.3 attending surgeons. 37%, 11% and 19% centers utilized postoperative surveillance CT, PET-CT and endoscopy, respectively. Among all patients, intensive surveillance was associated with improved OS (HR0.92 [0.85–0.99]) but not DSS (HR0.93 [0.85–1.01]) or DFS (HR0.97 [0.90–1.04]), and on multivariable analysis, intensive surveillance did not provide oncologic benefit (OS HR1.10 [0.99–1.22], DSS HR1.12 [1.00–1.25]), but reduced observed DFS (HR1.19 [1.08–1.31]). Evaluating surveillance modalities, neither surveillance endoscopy nor laboratory tests improved oncologic outcome, however flexible nasolaryngoscopy was associated with improved OS (HR0.84 [0.69–1.0]). Conclusion ENSURE, the first study powered to assess the impact of postoperative surveillance protocols on oncologic outcome in esophageal cancer, demonstrated no overall survival benefit following intensive imaging surveillance, with reduced observed disease-free survival time. However, routine assessment for secondary aerodigestive malignancies may be of oncologic benefit. The present data do not support the use of intensive imaging surveillance among all patients following esophageal cancer surgery. Further reports detailing subgroup analyses and HRQOL impact are anticipated.

Evaluation of postoperative surveillance strategies for esophago-gastric cancers in the UK and Ireland

Esophago-gastric malignancies are associated with a high recurrence rate; yet there is a lack of evidence to inform guidelines for the standardization and structure of postoperative surveillance after curatively intended treatment. This study aimed to capture the variation in postoperative surveillance strategies across the UK and Ireland, and enquire the opinions and beliefs around surveillance from practicing clinicians. A web-based survey consisting of 40 questions was sent to surgeons or allied health professionals performing or involved in surgical care for esophago-gastric cancers at high-volume centers in the UK. Respondents from each center completed the survey on what best represented their center. The first section of the survey evaluated the timing and components of follow-ups, and their variation between centers. The second section evaluated respondents perspective on how surveillance can be structured. Thirty-five respondents from 27 centers consisting 28 consultants, 6 senior trainees and 1 specialist nurse had completed the questionnaire; 45.7% of responders arranged clinical follow-up at 2–4 weeks. Twenty responders had a specific postoperative surveillance protocol for their patients. Of these, 31.4% had a standardized protocol for all patients, while 25.7% tailored it to patient needs. Patient preference, comorbidities and chance of recurrence were considered as major factors for necessitating more intense surveillance than currently practiced. There is a significant variation in how patients are monitored after surgery between centers in the UK. Randomized controlled trials are necessary to link surveillance strategies to both survival outcomes and quality of life of patients and to evaluate the prognostic value of different postoperative surveillance strategies.