Objective: To evaluate outcomes of palliative surgery for malignant bowel obstruction (MBO) and identify factors associated with postoperative survival. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 27 patients who underwent palliative surgery for MBO between April 2014 and March 2023. Clinical data including symptom relief, oral intake, discharge status, and overall survival (OS) were analyzed. Results: Median age was 70 years; 23 patients were Stage IV. Primary tumors included colon-rectum (15), stomach (6), pancreas (2), and others (4). Peritoneal dissemination was present in 18 cases. Median preoperative Palliative Prognostic Index (PPI) was 3.0. Postoperative symptom relief was achieved in 96.3%, oral intake in 81.5%, and discharge in 51.9%. Median OS was 118 days. Peritoneal dissemination and oral intake status were significantly associated with OS; sex, age, and PPI were not. Conclusion: Palliative surgery may improve outcomes such as symptom relief, oral intake, discharge to preferred care settings, and survival. These findings support its role in advance care planning and enhancing quality of life in patients with terminal cancer.

In this multicenter retrospective cohort study of 99 patients who underwent salvage hysterectomy for residual disease in the uterine cervix following the completion of definitive radiotherapy for cervical cancer across 25 Japan Clinical Oncology Group-affiliated centers from 2005–2014, (i) time duration from the completion of definitive radiotherapy to the diagnosis of residual disease in the uterine cervix, (ii) salvage hysterectomy surgical margin status, and (iii) extent of residual disease, were independently associated with progressionfree survival (PFS). Specifically, (i) time duration to identify residual disease of >62 days was associated with decreased PFS compared to ≤62 days (4-year rates 21.8% vs. 55.0%, adjusted-hazard ratio [aHR]=2.69, 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.55–4.67); (ii) presence of tumor in the surgical margin of hysterectomy specimen was associated with 4 times increased risk of disease progression compared to tumor-free surgical margin (4-year PFS rates 0% vs. 45.3%, aHR=4.27, 95% CI=2.20–8.29); and (iii) hazards of disease progression was 4.5-fold increased when the residual disease extended beyond the uterine cervix compared to residual disease within the uterine cervix only (4-year PFS rates 11.1% vs.50.6%, aHR=4.54, 95% CI=2.60–7.95). In the absence of these 3 prognostic factors, 4-year PFS rate reached nearly 80% (78.6%, SAL-HYS criteria). In sum, these data suggested that early detection of persistent, residual disease following definitive radiotherapy for cervical cancer may be the key to improve survival if salvage hysterectomy is considered as a tailored treatment option. Ideal surgical candidate would be uterine cervix-contained disease and assurance of adequate tumor-free surgical margin.

Objective: Hospital treatment volume affects survival in patients with endometrial cancer;notably, initial treatment at high-volume centers improves survival outcomes. Our study assessed the effect of hospital treatment volume on cost-effectiveness and survival outcomes in patients with endometrial cancer in Japan. Methods: A decision-analytic model was evaluated using the following variables and their impact on cost-effectiveness: 1) hospital treatment volume (low-, intermediate-, and highvolume centers) and 2) postoperative recurrent risk factors based on pathological findings (high- and intermediate-risk or low-risk). Data were obtained from the Japan Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology database, systematic literature searches, and the Japanese Diagnosis Procedure Combination database. Quality-adjusted life years (QALY) was used as a measure of effectiveness. The model was built from a public healthcare perspective and the impact of uncertainty was assessed using sensitivity analyses. Results: A base-case analysis showed that the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio at high-volume centers was below a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of ¥5,000,000with a maximum of ¥3,777,830/4.28 QALY for the high- and intermediate-risk group, and ¥2,316,695/4.57 QALY for the low-risk group. Treatment at the high-volume centers showed better efficiency and cost-effectiveness in both strategies compared to intermediate- or lowvolume centers. Sensitivity analyses showed that the model outcome was robust to changes in input values. With the WTP threshold, treatment at high-volume centers remained cost-effective in at least 73.6% and 78.2% of iterations for high- and intermediate-risk, and lowrisk groups, respectively. Conclusion Treatment at high-volume centers is the most cost-effective strategy for guiding treatment centralization in patients with endometrial cancer.

In this multicenter retrospective cohort study of 99 patients who underwent salvage hysterectomy for residual disease in the uterine cervix following the completion of definitive radiotherapy for cervical cancer across 25 Japan Clinical Oncology Group-affiliated centers from 2005–2014, (i) time duration from the completion of definitive radiotherapy to the diagnosis of residual disease in the uterine cervix, (ii) salvage hysterectomy surgical margin status, and (iii) extent of residual disease, were independently associated with progressionfree survival (PFS). Specifically, (i) time duration to identify residual disease of >62 days was associated with decreased PFS compared to ≤62 days (4-year rates 21.8% vs. 55.0%, adjusted-hazard ratio [aHR]=2.69, 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.55–4.67); (ii) presence of tumor in the surgical margin of hysterectomy specimen was associated with 4 times increased risk of disease progression compared to tumor-free surgical margin (4-year PFS rates 0% vs. 45.3%, aHR=4.27, 95% CI=2.20–8.29); and (iii) hazards of disease progression was 4.5-fold increased when the residual disease extended beyond the uterine cervix compared to residual disease within the uterine cervix only (4-year PFS rates 11.1% vs.50.6%, aHR=4.54, 95% CI=2.60–7.95). In the absence of these 3 prognostic factors, 4-year PFS rate reached nearly 80% (78.6%, SAL-HYS criteria). In sum, these data suggested that early detection of persistent, residual disease following definitive radiotherapy for cervical cancer may be the key to improve survival if salvage hysterectomy is considered as a tailored treatment option. Ideal surgical candidate would be uterine cervix-contained disease and assurance of adequate tumor-free surgical margin.

Objective: Hospital treatment volume affects survival in patients with endometrial cancer;notably, initial treatment at high-volume centers improves survival outcomes. Our study assessed the effect of hospital treatment volume on cost-effectiveness and survival outcomes in patients with endometrial cancer in Japan. Methods: A decision-analytic model was evaluated using the following variables and their impact on cost-effectiveness: 1) hospital treatment volume (low-, intermediate-, and highvolume centers) and 2) postoperative recurrent risk factors based on pathological findings (high- and intermediate-risk or low-risk). Data were obtained from the Japan Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology database, systematic literature searches, and the Japanese Diagnosis Procedure Combination database. Quality-adjusted life years (QALY) was used as a measure of effectiveness. The model was built from a public healthcare perspective and the impact of uncertainty was assessed using sensitivity analyses. Results: A base-case analysis showed that the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio at high-volume centers was below a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of ¥5,000,000with a maximum of ¥3,777,830/4.28 QALY for the high- and intermediate-risk group, and ¥2,316,695/4.57 QALY for the low-risk group. Treatment at the high-volume centers showed better efficiency and cost-effectiveness in both strategies compared to intermediate- or lowvolume centers. Sensitivity analyses showed that the model outcome was robust to changes in input values. With the WTP threshold, treatment at high-volume centers remained cost-effective in at least 73.6% and 78.2% of iterations for high- and intermediate-risk, and lowrisk groups, respectively. Conclusion Treatment at high-volume centers is the most cost-effective strategy for guiding treatment centralization in patients with endometrial cancer.