No abstract

Research into factors affecting treatment response or survival in patients with cancer frequently involves cohorts that span the most common range of clinical outcomes, as such patients are most readily available for study. However, attention has turned to highly unusual patients who have exceptionally favourable or atypically poor responses to treatment and/or overall survival, with the expectation that patients at the extremes may provide insights that could ultimately improve the outcome of individuals with more typical disease trajectories. While clinicians can often recount surprising patients whose clinical journey was very unusual, given known clinical characteristics and prognostic indicators, there is a lack of consensus among researchers on how best to define exceptional patients and little has been proposed for the optimal design of studies to identify factors that dictate unusual outcome. In this Opinion article, we review different approaches to identifying exceptional patients with cancer, and possible study designs to investigate extraordinary clinical outcomes. We discuss pitfalls with finding these rare patients, including challenges associated with accrual of patients across different treatment centres and time periods. We describe recent molecular and immunological factors that have been identified as contributing to unusual patient outcome, and make recommendations for future studies on these intriguing patients.

Purpose: Inguinofemoral lymphadenectomy (IFLD) is associated with very high morbidity. Fibrin sealant patches are used in various surgical procedures to prevent hematomas and lymphoceles. Here, we report a single-institution experience of fibrin sealants after IFLD in vulvar cancer and give an overview of the current literature. Patients and methods: We retrospectively analyzed outcome data on vulvar cancer patients who underwent bilateral IFLD between November 2014 and June 2016 at the University Hospital Basel. A fibrin sealant patch (Tachosil ® ) was placed in one groin only. Postsurgical fluid collection and complications were compared between both groins; time courses of lymphocele formation were analyzed using a linear mixed-effects regression model. Results: Postsurgical outcome of 11 consecutive patients with bilateral IFLD for vulvar cancer was assessed for a median follow-up of 32 days (range 12–77). Significantly larger lymphoceles were detected over time in the groin with the fibrin sealant patch (median 20 mL vs 5 mL without patch, p =0.002), and more punctures for symptomatic lymphocele were required on this side. The infection rate did not differ between sides. Conclusion: Fibrin sealant patches should not routinely be used for prevention of lymphoceles after IFLD for vulvar cancer. They do not seem to reduce lymph collection, the need for puncture or the infection risk after lymphadenectomy in our experience and according to a general literature review.