Tissue-resident memory B cells (B RM ) provide powerful localized protection against microbial infection in barrier tissues. It is unknown if analogous B RM populations survey solid tumors and contribute to anti-cancer immunity. We profiled B cells from patients with colorectal cancer and cutaneous basal cell carcinoma and identified a CD69 + memory B cell population consistent with a tissue-resident phenotype. Integrative analysis of transcriptomic datasets identified an optimized signature enriched across cancer types. Tumor infiltrating B RM -like cells preferentially exhibited autoreactivity and their signature correlated with patient outcomes and response to immunotherapy. Skin and lung targeted vaccination established localized B RM that provided IgA dependent organ specific protection upon tumor challenge in murine models. These findings establish B RM as an active component of anti-cancer immunity via preferential reactivity to tumor associated self-antigens.

TPS274 Background: Treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer currently involves tri-modal therapy with pre-operative chemo-radiation (CRT), surgery, and combination chemotherapy. Total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) is emerging as an important treatment pathway that can increase rates of complete response (CR) leading to better overall outcomes. Novel radio-sensitizing agents may improve rates of CR. Trifluridine/tipiracil (TFD/TPI) is a novel fluoropyrimidine that has demonstrated clinical efficacy in patients with treatment-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. Importantly, TFD/TPI has superior radio-sensitization in vitro compared to 5-fluorouracil, and we hypothesize that this can improve the tumor response of patients. This phase 1 study assesses the safety and preliminary efficacy of using TFD/TPI for long-course CRT for rectal cancer followed by FOLFOX chemotherapy in the TNT setting. Methods: NCT04104139 is a prospective, dose-finding phase I study using Bayesian Optimal Interval (BOIN) design to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of TFD/TPI with concurrent standard dose/fractionation radiation for resectable rectal cancer. Adults with previously untreated rectal adenocarcinoma, with clinical stage II (T3-4aN0) and stage III (T1-4aN1+) by MRI and endoscopy are eligible. Patients must first receive CRT with standard radiation (45-50 Gy over 25-28 fractions) followed by up to 8 cycles of standard FOLFOX, or alternatively 5 cycles of CAPOX chemotherapy. During CRT, the first dose level of TFD/TPI is PO 25mg/m2 twice a day from Mon to Fri (5 weekdays) alternating on weeks 1, 3, and 5 concurrent with 5-6 weeks of radiation. The second dose level is 30mg/m2, and third dose level is 35mg/m2. The MTD of TFD/TPI in combination with radiation is the dose corresponding to a dose limiting toxicity (DLT) probability of 30% using the BOIN design with escalation/de-escalation of each dose level occurring in cohorts of 3 participants until a maximum total of 18 participants, sub-total of 12 patients within one dose level, or another stopping rule based on serious toxicities. The primary endpoint is proportion of DLTs for TFD/TPI at MTD. Secondary endpoints include overall tolerability profile, delayed toxicities during FOLFOX, rates of clinical CR, rates of pathologic CR, and correlative biomarkers. The study was activated December 2019 and has accrued 8 of intended 18 patients. Clinical trial information: NCT04104139 .

Background: Synchronous colorectal liver metastases may be managed with primary-first, simultaneous, or liver-first resection. Relative oncologic outcomes based on treatment sequencing are understudied. Objective: This study aimed to assess oncologic survival outcomes in patients with synchronous colorectal liver metastases managed with each of the 3 treatment strategies, with respect to early or delayed removal of the primary tumor. Design: Retrospective analysis of the prospectively maintained database, with 1:1 propensity score matching of relevant clinicopathologic variables comparing liver-first to primary-first/simultaneous approaches. Settings: Single-institution, tertiary cancer center. Patients: Patients undergoing curative-intent hepatectomy for synchronous colorectal liver metastases from 2003 to 2019. Main outcome measures: Overall and recurrence-free survival. Results: Of 151 patients, 23% (n = 35) had liver-first and 77% (n = 116; primary-first = 93 and simultaneous = 23) had primary-first/simultaneous approaches. The median follow-up was 45 months. Recurrence-free survival was worse for liver-first versus primary-first/simultaneous groups (median 12 versus 16 months, p = 0.02), driven by 3-year extrahepatic recurrence-free survival of 19%, 58%, and 50% for liver-first, primary-first, and simultaneous groups, respectively. Three-year overall survival was not significantly different at 86%, 79%, and 86%, respectively. Oncologic outcomes did not differ significantly between primary-first and simultaneous groups (all p > 0.4). Matching yielded 34 clinicopathologically similar patients per group (liver-first = 34, primary-first = 28, simultaneous = 6). The liver-first approach was associated with shorter recurrence-free survival (median 12 versus 23 months, p = 0.004), driven by extrahepatic recurrence-free survival (3 years: 20% versus 55%, p = 0.04). Overall survival was not significantly different at 3 years (79% versus 80%, p = 0.95) or 5 years (59% versus 59%, p > 0.99). Limitations: This study has a retrospective design and a limited sample size. Conclusions: A liver-first approach is associated with worse recurrence-free survival compared to primary-first or simultaneous resection, driven by extrahepatic recurrence. A prospective study of whether oncologic risk is associated with leaving the primary in situ is needed. Multidisciplinary treatment sequencing and enhanced postoperative surveillance for patients receiving liver-first resection are recommended. See Video Abstract.

BACKGROUND: Gastrointestinal function is mediated by the cholinergic pathway, which is impacted by neostigmine and glycopyrrolate, but not sugammadex. We hypothesized that sugammadex is associated with earlier gastric emptying in adults undergoing colorectal surgery, compared to neostigmine-glycopyrrolate. METHODS: Patients were enrolled in a pragmatic, single-center, patient and assessor-blinded, randomized, controlled trial. At skin closure, subjects were randomized to sugammadex 2 mg/kg or neostigmine 0.07 mg/kg and glycopyrrolate (0.2 mg per 1 mg of neostigmine). The primary end point, gastric emptying, was assessed with the paracetamol absorption test, with greater area under the curve representing faster gastric emptying. Secondary end points included time to first bowel movement, time to achieve adequate reversal (train-of-four ratio ≥0.9), gastrointestinal complications, hospital length of stay, and postanesthesia care unit recovery time. The analysis was intention-to-treat. RESULTS: All 60 patients randomized to sugammadex received the allocated intervention. Of 60 patients randomized to neostigmine-glycopyrrolate, 56 received neostigmine-glycopyrrolate, 2 received sugammadex, and 2 received both agents. Gastric emptying did not differ significantly between sugammadex (mean [standard deviation {SD}] area under the curve {AUC} 1118 [122]) and neostigmine (AUC 1130 [117], P = .58). Sugammadex treatment was associated with shorter time to first bowel movement (44.3 hours [33.8] vs 61.0 hours [43.0]; difference = 16.7 hours, 95% confidence interval {CI}, [2.3–31.1], P = .02) and time to adequate reversal (5.2 minutes [6.3] vs 17.5 minutes [10.1]; difference = 12.3 minutes, 95% CI, [9.2–15.4], P < .001). Neostigmine-glycopyrrolate treatment was not associated with a significant increase in gastrointestinal complications (32% vs 17%; OR = 2.3, 95% CI, [0.9–6.2], P = .09), a longer hospital length of stay (7.8 days [19.8] vs 4.8 days [4.9]; difference = 3 days, 95% CI, [ − 2.2 to 8.3], P = .27), or a difference in postanesthesia care unit recovery time (108 minutes [56.4] vs 115 minutes [50.3]; difference= −6.9 minutes, 95% CI, [ − 26.4 to 12.6], P = .48). Adverse events were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Sugammadex treatment was not associated with faster gastric emptying (primary end point). Regarding prespecified secondary end points, sugammadex treatment was associated with a 12.3-minute shorter time to adequate reversal in real-life practice conditions, but it did not benefit the proportion of subjects with a gastrointestinal complication, hospital length of stay, or postanesthesia care unit recovery time. Further studies are needed to confirm our finding that sugammadex is associated with a clinically significant 16.7-hour shorter time to first bowel movement, and to establish the role of sugammadex in colorectal surgery enhanced recovery protocols.

The traditional, surgery-first approach for colon cancer is increasingly challenged by our evolving understanding of tumor biology and a growing number of measurable tumor features that can help guide contemporary treatment plans. Certain tumor characteristics now make it practical to challenge locally advanced colon cancer with neoadjuvant chemotherapy or immunotherapy, and allow for targeted postoperative therapies. The contemporary data supporting these tailored approaches to integrating systemic therapy before or after resection are summarized in this article.

Importance:Assessing clinical tumor response following completion of total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer is paramount to select patients for watch-and-wait treatment. Objective:To assess organ preservation (OP) and oncologic outcomes according to clinical tumor response grade. Design, Setting, and Participants:This was secondary analysis of the Organ Preservation in Patients with Rectal Adenocarcinoma trial, a phase 2, nonblinded, multicenter, randomized clinical trial. Randomization occurred between April 2014 and March 2020. Eligible participants included patients with stage II or III rectal adenocarcinoma. Data analysis occurred from March 2022 to July 2023. Intervention:Patients were randomized to induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation or chemoradiation followed by consolidation chemotherapy. Tumor response was assessed 8 (±4) weeks after TNT by digital rectal examination and endoscopy and categorized by clinical tumor response grade. A 3-tier grading schema that stratifies clinical tumor response into clinical complete response (CCR), near complete response (NCR), and incomplete clinical response (ICR) was devised to maximize patient eligibility for OP. Main Outcomes and Measures:OP and survival rates by clinical tumor response grade were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test. Results:There were 304 eligible patients, including 125 patients with a CCR (median [IQR] age, 60.6 [50.4-68.0] years; 76 male [60.8%]), 114 with an NCR (median [IQR] age, 57.6 [49.1-67.9] years; 80 male [70.2%]), and 65 with an ICR (median [IQR] age, 55.5 [47.7-64.2] years; 41 male [63.1%]) based on endoscopic imaging. Age, sex, tumor distance from the anal verge, pathological tumor classification, and clinical nodal classification were similar among the clinical tumor response grades. Median (IQR) follow-up for patients with OP was 4.09 (2.99-4.93) years. The 3-year probability of OP was 77% (95% CI, 70%-85%) for patients with a CCR and 40% (95% CI, 32%-51%) for patients with an NCR (P < .001). Clinical tumor response grade was associated with disease-free survival, local recurrence-free survival, distant metastasis-free survival, and overall survival. Conclusions and Relevance:In this secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial, most patients with a CCR after TNT achieved OP, with few developing tumor regrowth. Although the probability of tumor regrowth was higher for patients with an NCR compared with patients with a CCR, a significant proportion of patients achieved OP. These findings suggest the 3-tier grading schema can be used to estimate recurrence and survival outcomes in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer who receive TNT. Trial Registration:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02008656.

The treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer has traditionally included sequenced multimodal therapy including radiation, chemotherapy, and surgery. The relative contribution of each and the order of treatments have evolved over the years. By the early twenty-first century, there was widespread use of the German Rectal Cancer Trial approach: preoperative chemoradiation, followed by standardized surgery including total mesorectal excision, and finally adjuvant chemotherapy. Recent advances have defined the superiority of moving the chemotherapy into the preoperative setting. This approach, termed total neoadjuvant therapy promises better systemic control and overall survival and expaned options for omitting surgery in selected patients.

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical Trial Updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported. To assess long-term risk of local tumor regrowth, we report updated organ preservation rate and oncologic outcomes of the OPRA trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02008656 ). Patients with stage II/III rectal cancer were randomly assigned to receive induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation (INCT-CRT) or chemoradiation followed by consolidation chemotherapy (CRT-CNCT). Patients who achieved a complete or near-complete response after finishing treatment were offered watch-and-wait (WW). Total mesorectal excision (TME) was recommended for those who achieved an incomplete response. The primary end point was disease-free survival (DFS). The secondary end point was TME-free survival. In total, 324 patients were randomly assigned (INCT-CRT, n = 158; CRT-CNCT, n = 166). Median follow-up was 5.1 years. The 5-year DFS rates were 71% (95% CI, 64 to 79) and 69% (95% CI, 62 to 77) for INCT-CRT and CRT-CNCT, respectively ( P = .68). TME-free survival was 39% (95% CI, 32 to 48) in the INCT-CRT group and 54% (95% CI, 46 to 62) in the CRT-CNCT group ( P = .012). Of 81 patients with regrowth, 94% occurred within 2 years and 99% occurred within 3 years. DFS was similar for patients who underwent TME after restaging (64% [95% CI, 53 to 78]) and patients in WW who underwent TME after regrowth (64% [95% CI, 53 to 78]; P = .94). Updated analysis continues to show long-term organ preservation in half of the patients with rectal cancer treated with total neoadjuvant therapy. In patients who enter WW, most cases of tumor regrowth occur in the first 2 years.

Colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with colorectal cancer. Hepatic arterial infusion (HAI) chemotherapy has been demonstrated to improve survival in patients with resected CRLM and to facilitate conversion of technically unresectable disease.

PURPOSE Prospective data on the efficacy of a watch-and-wait strategy to achieve organ preservation in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer treated with total neoadjuvant therapy are limited. METHODS In this prospective, randomized phase II trial, we assessed the outcomes of 324 patients with stage II or III rectal adenocarcinoma treated with induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiotherapy (INCT-CRT) or chemoradiotherapy followed by consolidation chemotherapy (CRT-CNCT) and either total mesorectal excision (TME) or watch-and-wait on the basis of tumor response. Patients in both groups received 4 months of infusional fluorouracil-leucovorin-oxaliplatin or capecitabine-oxaliplatin and 5,000 to 5,600 cGy of radiation combined with either continuous infusion fluorouracil or capecitabine during radiotherapy. The trial was designed as two stand-alone studies with disease-free survival (DFS) as the primary end point for both groups, with a comparison to a null hypothesis on the basis of historical data. The secondary end point was TME-free survival. RESULTS Median follow-up was 3 years. Three-year DFS was 76% (95% CI, 69 to 84) for the INCT-CRT group and 76% (95% CI, 69 to 83) for the CRT-CNCT group, in line with the 3-year DFS rate (75%) observed historically. Three-year TME-free survival was 41% (95% CI, 33 to 50) in the INCT-CRT group and 53% (95% CI, 45 to 62) in the CRT-CNCT group. No differences were found between groups in local recurrence-free survival, distant metastasis-free survival, or overall survival. Patients who underwent TME after restaging and patients who underwent TME after regrowth had similar DFS rates. CONCLUSION Organ preservation is achievable in half of the patients with rectal cancer treated with total neoadjuvant therapy, without an apparent detriment in survival, compared with historical controls treated with chemoradiotherapy, TME, and postoperative chemotherapy.

The definition of early recurrence (ER) in rectal cancer is unclear, and the association of ER with post-recurrence survival (PRS) is poorly described. We therefore sought to identify if time to recurrence (TTR) is associated with PRS. We reviewed all curative-intent resections of nonmetastatic rectal cancer from 2003 to 2018 in our institutional registry within an NCI-Designated Comprehensive Cancer Center. Clinicopathologic data at diagnosis and first recurrence were collected and analyzed. ER was pre-specified at < 24 months and late recurrence (LR) at ≥ 24 months. PRS was evaluated by the Kaplan–Meier method and Cox proportional hazards modeling. At a median follow-up of 53 months, 61 out of 548 (11.1%) patients undergoing resection experienced recurrence. Median TTR was 14 months (IQR 10–18) with 45 of 61 patients (74%) classified as ER. There were no significant baseline differences between patients with ER and LR. Most recurrences were isolated to the liver (26%) or lung (31%), and 16% were locoregional. ER was not associated with worse PRS compared to LR (P > 0.99). On multivariable analysis, detection of recurrence via workup for symptoms, CEA > 10 ng/mL at recurrence, and site of recurrence were independently associated with PRS. ER is not associated with PRS in patients with resected rectal cancer. Symptomatic recurrences and those accompanied by CEA elevations are associated with worse PRS, while metastatic disease confined to the liver or lung is associated with improved PRS. Attention should be directed away from TTR and instead toward determining therapy for patients with treatable oligometastatic disease.

Real-time monitoring of treatment response with a liquid biomarker has potential to inform treatment decisions for patients with rectal adenocarcinoma (RAC), esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), and colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM). Circulating hybrid cells (CHCs), which have both immune and tumor cell phenotypes, are detectable in the peripheral blood of patients with gastrointestinal cancers, but their potential as an indicator of treatment response is unexplored. Peripheral blood specimens were collected from RAC and EAC patients after neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) or longitudinally during therapy and evaluated for CHC levels by immunostaining. Receiver operating characteristics (ROCs) and the Kaplan-Meier method were used to analyze the CHC level as a predictor of pathologic response to NAT and disease-specific survival (DSS), respectively. Patients with RAC (n = 23) and EAC (n = 34) were sampled on the day of resection, and 11 patients (32%) demonstrated a pathologic complete response (pCR) to NAT. On ROC analysis, CHC levels successfully discriminated pCR from non-pCR with an area under the curve of 0.82 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71–0.92; P < 0.001). Additionally, CHC levels in the EAC patients correlated with residual nodal involvement (P = 0.026) and 1-year DSS (P = 0.029). The patients with RAC who were followed longitudinally during NAT (n = 2) and hepatic arterial infusion therapy for CRLM (n = 2) had CHC levels that decreased with therapy response and increased before clinical evidence of disease progression. Circulating hybrid cells are a novel blood-based biomarker with potential for monitoring treatment response and disease progression to help guide decisions for further systemic therapy, definitive resection, and post-therapy surveillance. Additional validation studies of CHCs are warranted.

3509 Background: Clinical response following neoadjuvant therapy is paramount to identifying locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) patients suitable for Watch and Wait (WW). A 3-tier schema was devised to stratify clinical response. Patients with a complete clinical response (cCR) are considered for WW, while those with an incomplete clinical response (iCR) are recommended for total mesorectal excision (TME). A near complete response (nCR) tier captures patients with significant, but not complete, response to be considered for WW. This schema’s efficacy has yet to be validated. We investigated survival and organ preservation (OP) rates based on this 3-tier clinical response assessment in patients with LARC who underwent total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) in a prospective, multi-center clinical trial. Methods: Patients with MRI stage II and III rectal adenocarcinoma were randomized to either induction chemotherapy (FOLFOX or CAPEOX) followed by chemoradiation or chemoradiation followed by consolidation chemotherapy (FOLFOX or CAPEOX). At 8+/-4 weeks following TNT, response on digital rectal and endoscopic examinations was evaluated by the 3-tier schema. The date of this restaging clinical response assessment was used as time zero. The endpoints of rate of OP, disease-free survival (DFS), TME-free DFS, and overall survival (OS) were evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier method with differences analyzed by the log-rank test. Results: Clinical response assessments were available for 294 patients. The median time to assessment after neoadjuvant therapy was 7.9 weeks. Based on the 3-tier schema, 124 patients were categorized as cCR, 113 as nCR, and 57 as iCR. Baseline age, sex, average distance from the anal verge, clinical T classification, and clinical N classification were similar between the response groups. The table shows the 3-year rates of OP, DFS, TME-free DFS, and OS. The median follow-up was 2.36 years. Of the patients with a nCR, the 3-year TME rate was 48% compared with 21% in the cCR group. Conclusions: The 3-tier clinical response assessment has prognostic implications for OP and DFS in patients with LARC who underwent TNT. In patients with a nCR, more than half achieved OP at 3 years. This information should be utilized to counsel patients regarding their expected outcomes. Clinical trial information: NCT02008656. [Table: see text]

Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) frequently presents with extranodal involvement, including within the gastrointestinal tract. There are no established local treatment options for extranodal MCL.

BACKGROUND:Circular staplers perform a critical function for creation of anastomoses in colorectal surgeries. Powered stapling systems allow for reduced force required by surgeons to fire the device and may provide advantages for creating a secure anastomosis. The objective of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance of a novel circular powered stapler in a post-market setting, during left-sided colectomy procedures.MATERIALS AND METHODS:Consecutive subjects underwent left-sided colorectal resections that included anastomosis performed with the ECHELON CIRCULAR™ Powered Stapler (ECP). The primary endpoint was the frequency in which a stapler performance issue was observed. Secondary endpoints included evaluation of ease of use of the device via a surgeon satisfaction questionnaire, and monitoring/recording of procedure-related adverse events (AEs).RESULTS:A total of 168 anastomoses were performed with the ECP. Surgical approaches included robotic-assisted (n = 74, 44.0%), laparoscopic (n = 71, 42.3%), open (n = 20, 11.9%), and hand-assisted minimally invasive (n = 3, 1.8%) procedures. There were 22 occurrences of device performance issues in 20 (11.9%) subjects during surgery. No positive intraoperative leak tests were observed, and only 1 issue was related to a procedure-related AE or surgical complication, which was an instance of incomplete surgical donut necessitating re-anastomosis. Postoperative anastomotic leaks were experienced in 4 (2.4%) subjects. Clavien-Dindo classification of all AEs indicated that 92.0% were Grades I or II. Participating surgeons rated the ECP as easier to use compared to previously used manual circular staplers in 85.7% of procedures.CONCLUSION:The circular powered stapler exhibited few clinically relevant performance issues, an overall favorable safety profile, and ease of use for creation of left-sided colon anastomoses.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common type of cancer and the second leading cause of cancer death in men and women. Although about one third of cancers arise in patients with a family history of CRC, only 5% arise in the setting of mendelian-inherited disorders. Patients without a family history but with a significant polyp burden (> 20 polyps) should be considered to have polyposis syndrome. The field of polyposis syndromes continues to advance, based on new genetic discoveries that define the genetic etiologies of polyposis syndromes. When considered in relation to an individual’s phenotype, these discoveries help guide screening and treatment based on the cancer risk created by specific mutations. Patients with polyposis syndromes carry an increased risk of CRC and some other extracolonic cancers. Future research will provide additional insight into the cause of polyposis syndromes without a currently detectable gene defect and will improve early identification and cancer prevention in affected individuals. Identification of additional molecular characteristics may lead to a more personalized approach to treatment for these individuals. This review contains 7 figures, 11 tables and 52 references. Key words: attenuated familial polyposis, colorectal cancer risk, familial adenomatous polyposis, hamartomatous polyposis syndrome, juvenile polyposis syndrome, MUTYH-associated polyposis, Peutz-Jeghers syndrome, polyposis syndromes, screening guidelines, serrated polyposis syndrome

Background: We sought to identify patterns of care for patients with appendiceal cancer and identify clinical factors associated with patient selection for multimodality treatment, including cytoreductive surgery and perioperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS/PIC). Materials and methods: National Cancer Database (NCDB) data from 2004 to 2014 of all diagnoses of appendiceal cancers were examined. We examined treatment modalities, as well as demographic, tumor-specific, and survival data. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to determine the patient cohort most likely to receive CRS/PIC. Kaplan-Meier was used to estimate survival for all treatment groups. Significance was evaluated at P <= 0.05. Results: We analyzed data on 18,055 patients. Nine thousand nine hundred ninety-two (55.3%) were treated with surgery only, 5848 (32.4%) received surgery and systemic chemotherapy, 1393 (7.71%) received CRS/PIC, 520 (2.88%) received chemotherapy alone, and 302 (1.67%) received neither surgery nor chemotherapy. Significant predictors of receiving CRS/PIC included male sex (OR 1.33, 95% CI: 1.11-1.59), white race (OR 2.00, 95% CI 1.40-2.86), non-Hispanic ethnicity (OR 1.92, 95% CI 1.21-3.05), private insurance (OR 1.52, 95% CI 1.26-1.84), and well-differentiated tumors (OR 4.25, CI: 3.39-5.32) (P < 0.05). Treatment with CRS/PIC was associated with a higher 5-year survival for mucinous malignancies, when compared to surgery alone (65.6% versus 62.4%, P < 0.01). Treatment with CRS/PIC was also associated with higher 5-year survival for well-differentiated malignancies, when compared to all other treatment modalities (74.9% versus 65.4%, P < 0.01). Conclusions: Patients were more likely to undergo CRS/PIC if they were male, white, privately insured, and with well-differentiated tumors. CRS/PIC was associated with improved survival in patients with mucinous and low-grade tumors. (C) 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.