ContextElucidating the genomic landscape of sporadic parathyroid carcinoma (PC) has been limited by low tumor incidence.ObjectiveIdentify driver mutations of sporadic PC and potential actionable pathways.MethodsPatients undergoing surgical resection for sporadic PC between 1980 and 2016 at MD Anderson Cancer Center were identified. Patients with sporadic PC according to World Health Organization diagnostic criteria and with available formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) PC tumor tissue were included and their clinical data analyzed to assess extent of disease. Patients with parathyroid tumors of uncertain malignancy or atypical parathyroid neoplasms were excluded. Thirty-one patients meeting diagnostic criteria had available tissue for analysis. FFPE PC tumors were subjected to DNA extraction and next-generation whole-exome sequencing. All variant calls are single-algorithm only. Twenty-nine samples passed quality assurance after DNA extraction.Main Outcome MeasuresSomatic or private germline mutations present in sporadic PC and identification of pathways involved in tumorigenesis.ResultsWe identified 35 genes with considerable mutational load; only eight genes were previously identified in other PC cohorts. These genes mediate critical processes, including chromosome organization, DNA repair, and cell cycle regulations. Gene mutations involved in MAPK signaling and immune response are also heavily implicated. These findings are limited by inherent molecular artifacts in FFPE tissue analysis and the absence of matched germline DNA. Additionally, variant calls are only single algorithm and may include false-positive/negative calls.ConclusionWe identified 33 candidate driver genes of sporadic PC, in addition to previously known driver genes CDC73 and MEN1.

No abstract

Background: The novel composite metric textbook outcome (TO) has increasingly been used as a quality indicator but has not been reported among patients undergoing surgical resection for retroperitoneal sarcoma (RPS) using multi-institutional collaborative data. Methods: All patients who underwent resection for RPS between 2000 to 2016 from eight academic institutions were included. TO was defined as a patient with R0/R1 resection that discharged to home and was without transfusion, reoperation, grade ≥2 complications, hospital-stay >50th percentile, or 90-day readmission or mortality. Univariate and multivariable analyses were performed. Results: Among 627 patients, 56.1% were female and the median age was 59 years. A minority of patients achieved a TO (34.9%). Factors associated with achieving a TO were tumor size <20 cm and low tumor grade, while ASA class ≥3, history of a prior cardiac event, resection of left colon/rectum, distal pancreatic resection, major venous resection and drain placement were associated with not achieving a TO (all P < .05). Achievement of a TO was associated with improved survival (median:12.7 vs 5.9 years, P < .01). Conclusions: Among patients undergoing resection for RPS, failure to achieve TO is common and associated with significantly worse survival. The use of TO may inform patient expectations and serve as a measure for patient-level hospital performance.

Background and Objectives: Outcomes of palliative-intent surgery in retroperitoneal sarcomas (RPS) are not well understood. This study aims to define indications for and outcomes after palliative-intent RPS resection. Methods: Using a retrospective 8-institution database, patients undergoing resection of primary/recurrent RPS with palliative intent were identified. Logistic regression and Cox-proportional hazards models were constructed to analyze factors associated with postoperative complications and overall survival (OS). Results: Of 3088 patients, 70 underwent 87 palliative-intent procedures. Most common indications were pain (26%) and bowel obstruction (21%). Dedifferentiated liposarcoma (n = 17, 24%), leiomyosarcoma (n = 13, 19%) were predominant subtypes. Median OS was 10.69 months (IQR, 3.91-23.23). R2 resection (OR, 8.60; CI, 1.42-52.15; P = .019), larger tumors (OR, 10.87; CI, 1.44-82.11; P = .021) and low preoperative albumin (OR, 0.14; CI, 0.04-0.57; P = .006) were associated with postoperative complications. Postoperative complications (HR, 1.95; CI, 1.02-3.71; P = .043) and high-grade histology (HR, 6.56; CI, 1.72-25.05; P = .006) rather than resection status were associated with reduced OS. However, in R2-resected patients, development of postoperative complications significantly reduced survival (P = .042).Conclusions: Postoperative complications and high-grade histology rather than resection status impacts survival in palliative-intent RPS resections. Given the higher incidence of postoperative complications which may diminish survival, palliative-intent R2 resection should be offered only after cautious consideration.

BackgroundThe ACS‐NSQIP risk calculator predicts perioperative risk. This study tested the calculator's ability to predict risk for outcomes following retroperitoneal sarcoma (RPS) resection.MethodsThe United States Sarcoma Collaborative database was queried for adults who underwent RPS resection. Estimated risk for outcomes was calculated twice in the risk calculator, once using sarcoma‐specific CPT codes and once using codes indicative of most comorbid organ resection (eg nephrectomy). ROC curves were generated, with area under the curve (AUC) and Brier scores reported to assess discrimination and calibration. An AUC < 0.6 was considered ineffective discrimination. A negative ▲ Brier indicated improved performance relative to baseline outcome rates.ResultsIn total, 482 patients were identified with a 42.3% 90‐day complication rate. Discrimination was poor for all outcomes except “all complications” and “renal failure.” Baseline outcome rates were better predictors than calculator estimates except for “discharge to nursing or rehab facility” and “renal failure.” Replacing sarcoma‐specific CPT codes with resection‐specific codes did not improve performance.ConclusionThe ACS‐NSQIP risk calculator poorly predicted outcomes following RPS resection. Changing sarcoma‐specific CPT to resection‐specific codes did not improve performance. Comorbidities in the calculator may not effectively capture perioperative risk. Future work should evaluate a sarcoma‐specific calculator.