BACKGROUND: While survival after malignancies is traditionally reported as actuarial survival, conditional survival (CS) may be more clinically relevant by accounting for "accrued" survival time as time progresses. We sought to compare actuarial and CS among patients with gallbladder carcinoma (GBC) . METHODS: A total of 312 patients who underwent curative intent surgery for GBC between 2000 and 2014 were identified using a multi-institutional database. Overall survival (OS) was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. CS was calculated as the probability of surviving an additional 3 years at year "x" after surgery using the formula CS3 = S(x+3)/Sx. RESULTS: Among all patients, the median actuarial OS was 24.8 months (IQR 13.3-88.9). While actuarial survival decreased over time, 3-year CS (CS3) increased, with CS3 at 2 years after surgery noted to be 61.8 % compared with the 5-year actuarial OS of 31.6 %. Factors associated with reduced actuarial OS were positive margin status (HR 3.61, 95 % CI 2.47-5.26), increasing tumor size (HR = 1.02, 95 % CI 1.01-1.02), higher tumor grade (HR 2.98, 95 % CI 1.47-6.04), residual disease at repeat resection (HR = 2.78, 95 % CI 1.49-3.49, p < 0.001), and lymph node metastasis (HR = 1.95, 95 % CI 1.39-2.75, all p < 0.001). The calculated CS3 exceeded the actuarial survival within each high-risk patient subgroup. For example, patients with residual disease at repeat resection had an actuarial survival 23.1 % at 5 years versus a CS3 of 56.3 % in patients alive at 2 years (Δ = 33.2 %). CONCLUSIONS: CS provides a more accurate, dynamic estimate for survival, especially among high-risk patients. CS estimates can be used to accurately predict survival and guide clinical decision making.
BACKGROUND: While survival after malignancies is traditionally reported as actuarial survival, conditional survival (CS) may be more clinically relevant by accounting for "accrued" survival time as time progresses. We sought to compare actuarial and CS among patients with gallbladder carcinoma (GBC) . METHODS: A total of 312 patients who underwent curative intent surgery for GBC between 2000 and 2014 were identified using a multi-institutional database. Overall survival (OS) was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. CS was calculated as the probability of surviving an additional 3 years at year "x" after surgery using the formula CS3 = S(x+3)/Sx. RESULTS: Among all patients, the median actuarial OS was 24.8 months (IQR 13.3-88.9). While actuarial survival decreased over time, 3-year CS (CS3) increased, with CS3 at 2 years after surgery noted to be 61.8 % compared with the 5-year actuarial OS of 31.6 %. Factors associated with reduced actuarial OS were positive margin status (HR 3.61, 95 % CI 2.47-5.26), increasing tumor size (HR = 1.02, 95 % CI 1.01-1.02), higher tumor grade (HR 2.98, 95 % CI 1.47-6.04), residual disease at repeat resection (HR = 2.78, 95 % CI 1.49-3.49, p < 0.001), and lymph node metastasis (HR = 1.95, 95 % CI 1.39-2.75, all p < 0.001). The calculated CS3 exceeded the actuarial survival within each high-risk patient subgroup. For example, patients with residual disease at repeat resection had an actuarial survival 23.1 % at 5 years versus a CS3 of 56.3 % in patients alive at 2 years (Δ = 33.2 %). CONCLUSIONS:CS provides a more accurate, dynamic estimate for survival, especially among high-risk patients. CS estimates can be used to accurately predict survival and guide clinical decision making.
Authors: Gaya Spolverato; Yuhree Kim; Aslam Ejaz; Sorin Alexandrescu; Hugo Marques; Luca Aldrighetti; T Clark Gamblin; Carlo Pulitano; Todd W Bauer; Feng Shen; Charbel Sandroussi; George Poultsides; Shishir K Maithel; Timothy M Pawlik Journal: JAMA Surg Date: 2015-06 Impact factor: 14.766
Authors: Yuhree Kim; Georgios A Margonis; Jason D Prescott; Thuy B Tran; Lauren M Postlewait; Shishir K Maithel; Tracy S Wang; Jason A Glenn; Ioannis Hatzaras; Rivfka Shenoy; John E Phay; Kara Keplinger; Ryan C Fields; Linda X Jin; Sharon M Weber; Ahmed Salem; Jason K Sicklick; Shady Gad; Adam C Yopp; John C Mansour; Quan-Yang Duh; Natalie Seiser; Carmen C Solorzano; Colleen M Kiernan; Konstantinos I Votanopoulos; Edward A Levine; George A Poultsides; Timothy M Pawlik Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2017-01 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Tak Geun Oh; Moon Jae Chung; Seungmin Bang; Seung Woo Park; Jae Bok Chung; Si Young Song; Gi Hong Choi; Kyung Sik Kim; Woo Jung Lee; Jeong Youp Park Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2013-01-09 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Alessandro Cucchetti; Fabio Piscaglia; Matteo Cescon; Giorgio Ercolani; Eleonora Terzi; Luigi Bolondi; Matteo Zanello; Antonio D Pinna Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2012-06-27 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Yuhree Kim; Aslam Ejaz; Gaya Spolverato; Malcolm H Squires; George Poultsides; Ryan C Fields; Mark Bloomston; Sharon M Weber; Konstantinos Votanopoulos; Alexandra W Acher; Linda X Jin; William G Hawkins; Carl Schmidt; David Kooby; David Worhunsky; Neil Saunders; Clifford S Cho; Edward A Levine; Shishir K Maithel; Timothy M Pawlik Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2014-10-07 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Stefan Buettner; Cecilia G Ethun; George Poultsides; Thuy Tran; Kamran Idrees; Chelsea A Isom; Matthew Weiss; Ryan C Fields; Bradley Krasnick; Sharon M Weber; Ahmed Salem; Robert C G Martin; Charles R Scoggins; Perry Shen; Harveshp D Mogal; Carl Schmidt; Eliza Beal; Ioannis Hatzaras; Rivfka Shenoy; Bas Groot Koerkamp; Shishir K Maithel; Timothy M Pawlik Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2017-09-14 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Elise de Savornin Lohman; Tessa de Bitter; Rob Verhoeven; Lydia van der Geest; Jeroen Hagendoorn; Nadia Haj Mohammad; Freek Daams; Heinz-Josef Klümpen; Thomas van Gulik; Joris Erdmann; Marieke de Boer; Frederik Hoogwater; Bas Groot Koerkamp; Andries Braat; Joanne Verheij; Iris Nagtegaal; Cornelis van Laarhoven; Peter van den Boezem; Rachel van der Post; Philip de Reuver Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2020-04-09 Impact factor: 6.639