Eun-Sil Hwang

Over 97% of individuals diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) will choose to receive guideline concordant care (GCC), which was originally designed to treat invasive cancers and is associated with treatment related morbidity. An alternative to GCC is active surveillance (AS) where therapy is delayed until medically necessary. Differences in mortality risk between the two approaches in women age 65+ are analyzed in this study. SEER and Medicare information on treatment during the first year after diagnosis was used to identify three cohorts based on treatment type and timing: GCC (N = 21,772; immediate consent for treatment), AS1 (N = 431; delayed treatment within 365 days), and AS2 (N = 205; no treatment/ongoing AS). A propensity score-based approach provided pseudorandomization between GCC and AS groups and survival was then compared. Strong influence of comorbidities on the treatment received was observed for all age-groups, with the greatest burden observed in the AS2 group. All-cause and breast-cancer-specific mortality hazard ratios (HR) for AS1 were not statistically different from the GCC group; AS2 was associated with notably higher risk for both all-cause (HR:3.54; CI:3.29, 3.82) and breast-cancer-specific (HR:10.73; CI:8.63,13.35) mortality. Cumulative mortality was substantially higher from other causes than from breast cancer, regardless of treatment group. Women managed with AS for DCIS had higher all-cause and breast-cancer-specific mortality. This effect declined after accounting for baseline comorbidities. Delays of up to 12 months in initiation of GCC did not underperform immediate surgery.

Abnormalities in cell nuclear morphology are a hallmark of cancer. Histological assessment of cell nuclear morphology is frequently used by pathologists to grade ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Objective methods that allow standardization and reproducibility of cell nuclear morphology assessment have potential to improve the criteria needed to predict DCIS progression and recurrence. Aggressive cancers are highly heterogeneous. We asked whether cell nuclear morphology heterogeneity could be incorporated into a metric to classify DCIS. We developed a nuclear heterogeneity image index to objectively, and quantitatively grade DCIS. A whole-tissue cell nuclear morphological analysis, that classified tumors by the worst ten percent in a duct-by-duct manner, identified nuclear size ranges associated with each DCIS grade. Digital image analysis further revealed increasing heterogeneity within ducts or between ducts in tissues of worsening DCIS grade. The findings illustrate how digital image analysis comprises a supplemental tool for pathologists to objectively classify DCIS and in the future, may provide a method to predict patient outcome through analysis of nuclear heterogeneity.

BACKGROUND: Surgeons face the unique challenge of being responsible for both clinical encounters and surgical outcomes. We aim to explore how patient evaluations of surgeons may be influenced by patient and provider factors. METHODS: Patient responses from the 2016 CGCAHPS survey at a single institution were identified. A Poisson regression model was used to identify patient/provider factors associated with ratings. RESULTS: 11,007 surveys of 134 surgeons were included. After adjustment, higher overall surgeon ratings were associated with older patient age (p < 0.001) and male patient gender (p = 0.001). Lower ratings were associated with higher patient education (p < 0.001) and lower patient self-health ratings (p < 0.001). Although female surgeons tended to have higher communication scores, overall scores did not differ based on any surgeon factors. CONCLUSIONS: Patient satisfaction scores of surgeons are more closely correlated with patient variables than surgeon factors. This may have implications for physician performance evaluation in value-based care models.