Predictors of extrahepatic recurrence after resection of colorectal liver metastases

Prognostic significance of CXCL12 expression in patients with colorectal carcinoma

The present study investigated the protein expression level of CXCL12 in colorectal cancer and aimed to elucidate its association with prognosis. CXCL12 positivity in 50% or more of tumor cells was defined as high expression and that in less than 50% of the tumor cells as low expression. CXCL12+ tumor budding at the invasive front was divided into 2 grades: high with 10 or more budding foci per x200 field of view and low grade with fewer than 10 budding foci. Patients with high expression (72.7%) and high grade CXCL12+ tumor budding (43.0%) had significantly shorter survival than patients with low expression (P = .014) and low grade (P = .003), respectively. Patients with a combination of high expression and high grade had the worst outcome (P < .001). Our study demonstrated that CXCL12 expression in colorectal cancer cells and at sites of budding were significant prognostic factors. Furthermore, together with lymph node metastasis, a combination of both expression patterns was a more powerful independent prognostic factor.

Prognostic impact of intrahepatic lymphatic and microvascular involvement in cases of colorectal liver metastases

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of intrahepatic microvascular and lymphatic infiltration on survival in cases of colorectal liver metastases.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Prospectively collected data of 331 patients were analyzed for microvascular invasion (V), lymphatic infiltration (L), and resection margins (R) with respect to overall and disease-free survival.

RESULTS

One-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival rates for R0 resected patients were 89%, 64%, and 39%, respectively. The corresponding survival rates for R1 resected patients were 83%, 42%, and 24% (p < 0.001). The sole presence of microvascular invasion (V1) or lymphatic infiltration (L1) was not associated with a diminished overall survival (p > 0.05). However, patients with a combination of L1V1 had a significantly worse overall survival of 68%, 20%, and 0% when compared to L0V0 patients. This difference was not influenced by the status of the resection margin. No other parameter investigated was found to be of predictive value.

CONCLUSIONS

The presence of combined lymphatic and vascular invasion (L1V1) constitutes a predictor of poor overall and disease-free survival. This subgroup of patients might benefit from adjuvant strategies such as chemotherapeutic treatment.

Early and long-term outcomes of patients undergoing liver resection and diaphragm excision for advanced colorectal liver metastases

INTRODUCTION

At present, liver resection offers the best long-term outcome and only chance for cure in patients with colorectal liver metastases. However, there are no large series that report the early and long-term outcomes of patients who require simultaneous diaphragm excision. This study was designed to investigate these patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 285 consecutive liver resections were performed over a 10-year period. Of these, 258 had liver resections alone and 27 underwent liver resection and simultaneous diaphragm excision. Data were collected prospectively and analysed retrospectively. Pre-operative assessment was standardised. The outcomes between the two groups were compared.

RESULTS

There was no difference in age, hospital stay or intra-operative blood loss. The diaphragm was histologically involved in four out of 27 resections. As a result, the cancer involved resection margin incidence was greater in the liver resection and diaphragm excision group (14.8% versus 3.9%; P = 0.12). The median tumour size was also different between the two groups (60 mm versus 30 mm; P = 0.001). The liver and diaphragm resection group had a greater peri-operative complication rate (44.4% versus 21.3%; P = 0.02) and mortality (7.4% versus 1.6%; P = 0.25). Overall and disease-free survival was significantly worse in the group who underwent simultaneous diaphragm excision and liver resection (P = 0.04 and P = 0.005, respectively). Diaphragm invasion was found to be an independent predictor of poor overall outcome (P = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Liver resection and simultaneous diaphragm excision have a greater incidence of peri-operative morbidity and mortality and a significantly worse long-term outcome compared with liver resection alone. However, these data suggest that liver resection in the presence of diaphragm invasion may still offer a favourable outcome compared with chemotherapy treatment alone. Therefore, we believe that diaphragm involvement by tumour should not be a contra-indication to hepatectomy.

[Prognostic factors after resection of colorectal cancer liver metastases]

INTRODUCTION

There are many studies that analyse preoperative factors with a poor prognosis in patients undergoing surgery for colorectal carcinoma liver metastases, in order to avoid unnecessary surgery. However, there are few studies that evaluate the intraand postoperative prognostic factors. The aim of this study is to analyse pre-, intra- and postoperative prognostic factors in a series of 210 patients undergoing surgery for colorectal carcinoma liver metastases, with special emphasis on the postoperative factors that can give us information on the aggressiveness of the tumour and the curative effectiveness of the surgery.

PATIENTS AND METHOD

Between September 1996 and December 2006, 210 patients undergoing surgery for colorectal carcinoma liver metastases in whom we analysed pre-, intra- and postoperative factors of survival. Mean follow-up was 55+/-3 months (range: 12-124 months).

RESULTS

The postoperative mortality rate was 1.4% and the morbidity rate was 22%. Actuarial and disease-free survival at 1-, 3- and 5-years was 89.9% vs 63%, 66.9% vs 32%, and 53.8% vs 23%, respectively. Among the preoperative factors analysed, the age>65 years and LM size>5 cm were independent predictors of poor overall survival, whereas the other two significant factors were obtained from those analysed postoperatively: presence of microsatellitosis and postoperative CEA levels (at 1 and 3 months).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with colorectal carcinoma liver metastases we must take into account certain postoperative factors that can give us information on the aggressiveness of the tumour and the effectiveness of the surgery.

Resection of colorectal liver metastases: is a resection margin of 3 mm enough? : a multicenter analysis of the GAST Study Group

BACKGROUND

A safety margin of > or =10 mm is generally accepted in surgery for colorectal metastases. It is reasonable that modern methods of liver parenchyma dissection may allow for a reduction in this distance.

METHODS

A total of 333 patients were included in a multicenter trial after resection of colorectal liver metastases. Dissection of the liver had been performed with a CUSA, UltraCision, or water-jet dissector. The size of the resection margin was correlated with recurrence risk and survival.

RESULTS

The median hepatic recurrence-free survival reached 35 months for all patients; median recurrence-free survival was 24 months and overall survival was 41 months. Univariate analysis of different groups denoting the extent of resection margin (> or =10 mm, 6-9 mm, 3-5 mm, 1-2 mm, 0 mm (R1)) indicated that a margin of 1-2 mm leads to a significantly reduced median hepatic recurrence-free survival of 20 months (p = 0.004) and recurrence-free survival of 19 months (p = 0.011). Patients with R1 resection had the worst prognosis. Overall survival was not influenced by the size of the resection margin. Surgical margins were significantly reduced in simultaneous resections of four or more liver metastases and in cases in which metastatic infiltration of central liver segments was present. At multivariate analysis, resection margins of 1-2 mm and 0 mm were independent predictors of hepatic recurrence and overall recurrence.

CONCLUSION

The indication for resection of metastases can be safely extended to cases in which tumors sit closer than 1 cm to nonresectable structures.

Survival of patients with synchronous and metachronous colorectal liver metastases--is there a difference?

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to compare outcomes in patients with synchronous and metachronous colorectal liver metastases, with special emphasis on prognostic determinants.

STUDY DESIGN

We analyzed prospectively collected data on 101 patients with synchronous metastases (group A) who were treated surgically during the time period from April 1998 to December 2006 in regard to overall and disease-free survival, impact of chemotherapy, as well as several serum parameters. A group of patients with metachronous colorectal liver metastases (group B) was considered for baseline comparison.

RESULTS

Twenty-three patients in group A received only an explorative laparotomy. Surgical treatment included right hepatectomy (n = 7), left hepatectomy (n = 5), right trisectionectomy (n = 10), left trisectionectomy (n = 1), left lateral resection (n = 11), and sectionectomy (n = 44). Thirty-day mortality was 3%. Morbidity was observed in 10% of the patients. One-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival rates for synchronous metastases were 86%, 68%, and 47%, respectively. The corresponding rates for metachronous metastases were 94%, 68%, and 39% (p > 0.05). Disease free survival was 74%, 42%, and 33% in group A versus 84%, 62%, and 13% in group B (p = 0.28). There was no difference in survival between patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy and no chemotherapy (p > 0.05). Out of all serum parameters, carcinoembryonic antigen levels were a negative predictor for overall and disease-free survival only.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with synchronous colorectal liver metastases had a similar 5-year overall and disease-free survival, which corresponds to patients with metachronous metastases. The impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with synchronous metastases needs to be further clarified.

A comparison of right and extended right hepatectomy with all other hepatic resections for colorectal liver metastases: a ten-year study

AIMS

Colorectal liver metastases are treated by a combination of adjuvant chemotherapy followed by liver resection. In this study we compared all major right-sided resections with left or parenchymal sparing resections.

METHODS

Consecutive patients (n=283) who had successful hepatic resections for colorectal metastases from September 1996 to November 2006 were prospectively studied. Early and late outcomes of those who had right and extended right hepatectomies (RH) were compared with those who had all other types of liver resection (AOLR). Adjuvant therapy and pre-operative assessment were standardised for all.

RESULTS

The 1-, 3- and 5-year overall survival rates in the RH group were 84.1%, 54.3% and 38.9%, respectively. The 1-, 3- and 5-year overall survival rates in the AOLR group were 95.4%, 65.9% and 53.3%, respectively. The difference was statistically significant (p=0.03). The 1-, 3- and 5-year disease-free survival rates in the RH group were 69.5%, 34.4% and 25.5%, respectively and 68.4%, 34.91% and 34.91%, respectively in the AOLR group (p=0.46). Operative mortality was 3.9% in the RH group and 0.7% in the AOLR group (p=0.04). Morbidity was 31.3% in the RH group and 18% in the AOLR group.

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing right and extended right hepatectomies for colorectal metastases have a greater operative morbidity and mortality and have a significantly worse overall survival compared to all other liver resections for the same disease.

Selective resection of colorectal liver metastases

AIMS

Safety of liver surgery for colorectal cancer liver metastases after neoadjuvant chemotherapy has to be re-evaluated.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Two hundred Patients were prospectively analyzed after surgery for colorectal cancer liver metastases between 2001 and 2004 at our institution. Special emphasis was given to perioperative morbidity and mortality under modern perioperative care.

RESULTS

There was no in-hospital mortality and the perioperative morbidity was 10% (20/200). Four patients had to be reoperated due to bile leak or intraabdominal abscess. The remainder either had infectious complications or pleural effusion and/or ascites requiring tapping. Variables strongly associated with decreased survival were T, N, G and UICC (International Union against cancer) classification of the primary, hepatic lesions>5 cm and elevated tumour markers. Short disease free interval and neoadjuvant chemotherapy without response predicted impaired recurrence free survival (RFS). Multivariate analysis revealed lymph node status and differentiation of the primary, presence of extrahepatic tumour and gender as factors associated with decreased survival. Administration of neoadjuvant chemotherapy was not associated with higher postoperative morbidity or prolonged hospital stay.

CONCLUSIONS

Modern dissection techniques and improved perioperative care contributed to a very low rate of surgery-related morbidity (10%) and a zero percent mortality which was also observed in patients pretreated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy prior to resection. Liver resection in experienced hands has become a safe part in the potentially curative attempt of treating patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

How to appraise a prognostic study

Prognostic studies are studies that examine selected predictive variables or risk factors and assess their influence on the outcome of a disease. They allow clinicians to understand better the natural history of a disease, guide clinical decision-making by facilitating the selection of appropriate treatment options, and allow more accurate prediction of disease outcomes. Appraising prognostic studies involves determining the internal validity of the study design and evaluating the influence of systemic errors or bias. In studies examining multiple prognostic variables, care must be taken to minimize the confounding influence each variable would have on the other parameters. Evaluating the results of appropriate statistical analysis enables conclusions to be made that may influence clinical practice. Care must be taken to ensure that the conditions under which the prognostic study were conducted resemble circumstances in the local institution so as to allow the conclusions to be applied to local practices.