1
|
Narayanan G, Gentile NT, Eyshi J, Schiro BJ, Gandhi RT, Peña CS, Ucar A, Aparo S, de Zarraga FI, Joseph SN, Asbun HJ, Dijkstra M. Irreversible Electroporation in Treating Colorectal Liver Metastases in Proximity to Critical Structures. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2024; 35:1806-1813. [PMID: 39218213 DOI: 10.1016/j.jvir.2024.08.021] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/01/2024] [Revised: 08/06/2024] [Accepted: 08/23/2024] [Indexed: 09/04/2024] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To evaluate the safety, effectiveness, and oncological outcomes of irreversible electroporation (IRE) of unresectable colorectal liver metastases (CRLMs) close to critical structures. MATERIALS AND METHODS This is a single-center, institutional review board (IRB)-approved, retrospective analysis of patients who underwent percutaneous computed tomography (CT)-guided IRE of CRLM. Between August 2018 and October 2023, 26 patients had 46 tumors treated with percutaneous IRE in 30 ablation sessions. Primary end points were tumor response and local progression-free survival analyzed using Kaplan-Meier survival curves. Secondary end points were overall survival (OS), distant progression-free survival (DPFS) analyzed using Kaplan-Meier survival curves, adverse events rated according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), and length of hospital stay. RESULTS All tumors were close to critical structures, including the portal and hepatic veins, inferior vena cava, bile ducts, and gallbladder. All patients received preprocedural systemic therapy (median 10 cycles). Median length of hospital stay was 1 night. Adverse events occurred in 7 (23%) of 30 procedures, with four Grade 1 and two Grade 2 adverse events, including pleural effusions (n = 2), ileus (n = 1), small hematoma (n = 1), and pneumothorax (n = 2) requiring chest tube placements. Following IRE, the 1- and 2-year local tumor progression-free survival rates were 55.0% and 51.3%. The median DPFS was 3.5 months, with 1- and 2-year DPFS rates of 23.3% and 9.7%. Six patients (23.1%) died during follow-up, with a median OS of 40.4 months. The 1- and 2-year OS rates were 90.9% and 83.9%. CONCLUSIONS IRE is a safe and viable option in the treatment of unresectable CRLMs in locations close to critical structures, but carries a risk of local recurrence.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Govindarajan Narayanan
- Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, Florida; Department of Interventional Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, Florida; Department of Interventional Radiology, Miami Cardiac and Vascular Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, Florida
| | - Nicole T Gentile
- Department of Interventional Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, Florida; Department of Interventional Radiology, Miami Cardiac and Vascular Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, Florida
| | - Jonathan Eyshi
- Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, Florida; Department of Interventional Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, Florida; Department of Interventional Radiology, Miami Cardiac and Vascular Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, Florida
| | - Brian J Schiro
- Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, Florida; Department of Interventional Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, Florida; Department of Interventional Radiology, Miami Cardiac and Vascular Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, Florida
| | - Ripal T Gandhi
- Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, Florida; Department of Interventional Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, Florida; Department of Interventional Radiology, Miami Cardiac and Vascular Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, Florida
| | - Costantino S Peña
- Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, Florida; Department of Interventional Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, Florida; Department of Interventional Radiology, Miami Cardiac and Vascular Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, Florida
| | - Antonio Ucar
- Department of Medical Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, Florida
| | - Santiago Aparo
- Department of Medical Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, Florida
| | - Fernando I de Zarraga
- Department of Medical Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, Florida
| | - Sarah N Joseph
- Department of Medical Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, Florida
| | - Horacio J Asbun
- Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, Florida
| | - Madelon Dijkstra
- Department of Interventional Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, Florida; Department of Interventional Radiology, Miami Cardiac and Vascular Institute, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, Florida; Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, Location VUmc, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Pereira PL, Siemou P, Rempp HJ, Hoffmann R, Hoffmann RT, Kettenbach J, Clasen S, Helmberger T. CT versus MR guidance for radiofrequency ablation in patients with colorectal liver metastases: a 10-year follow-up favors MR guidance. Eur Radiol 2024; 34:4663-4671. [PMID: 38041717 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-023-10270-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/02/2022] [Revised: 07/30/2023] [Accepted: 08/09/2023] [Indexed: 12/03/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To compare the results of CT- vs MR-guided radiofrequency ablation (RFA) of liver metastases (LM) from colorectal cancer after 10 years of follow-up in an observational, retrospective, and multicentric study. METHODS A total of 238 patients with 496 LM were treated with RFA either with CT (CT group) or magnetic resonance (MR group) guidance. Every ablated LM was assessed and followed up with diagnostic MRI. Technical success, technique efficacy, predictive factors, recurrence rates, and overall survival were assessed. RESULTS The CT group comprised 143 patients and the MR group 77 patients. Eighteen patients underwent ablation with both modalities. Technical success per patient and per lesion was 88% and 93% for CT and 87% and 89.6% for MR, and technique efficacy was 97.1% and 98.6% for CT and 98.7% and 99.3% for MR respectively. Local recurrence following the first ablation (primary patency) occurred in 20.1% (CT) vs 4.6% (MR) (p < 0.001). Residual liver tumor, size of LM, and advanced N and M stage at initial diagnosis were independent predictors for overall survival in both groups. The median overall survival measured from first RFA treatment was 2.6 years. The 1-year, 5-year, and 10-year survival were 85.9%, 25.5%, and 19.1% respectively. CONCLUSIONS The MR group had significantly better local control compared to the CT group. There was no significant difference in patient survival between the two groups. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT MR-guided radiofrequency ablation of colorectal liver metastases is safe and effective, and offers better local control than CT-guided ablation. KEY POINTS • Imaging modality for radiofrequency ablation guidance is an independent predictor of local recurrence in colorectal liver metastases. • MR-guided radiofrequency ablation achieved better local control of liver metastases from colorectal cancer than CT-guided. • The number and size of liver metastases are, among others, independent predictors of survival. Radiofrequency ablation with MR guidance improved clinical outcome but does not affect survival.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Philippe Lucien Pereira
- Center for Radiology, Minimally-Invasive Therapies and Nuclear Medicine, SLK Kliniken GmbH Heilbronn, Heilbronn, Germany.
- Danube Private University (DPU), Krems, Austria.
| | - Panagiota Siemou
- Radiology Department, Alexandra General Hospital, Athens, Greece
| | - Hans-Jörg Rempp
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Eberhard-Karls-University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
| | - Rüdiger Hoffmann
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Eberhard-Karls-University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
| | - Ralf Thorsten Hoffmann
- Institute and Policlinic for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Carl-Gustav Carus University of Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Joachim Kettenbach
- Institute for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Wiener Neustadt, Austria
| | - Stephan Clasen
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Eberhard-Karls-University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
| | - Thomas Helmberger
- Clinic for Radiology, Neuroradiology and Nuclear Medicine Bogenhausen, Munich, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Kuiper BI, Abu Hilal M, Aldrighetti LA, Björnsson B, D'Hondt M, Dopazo C, Fretland ÅA, Isoniemi H, Philip Jonas J, Kazemier G, Lesurtel M, Primrose J, Schnitzbauer AA, Buffart T, Gruenberger B, Swijnenburg RJ, Gruenberger T. Pan-European survey on current treatment strategies in patients with upfront resectable colorectal liver metastases. HPB (Oxford) 2024; 26:639-647. [PMID: 38373870 DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2024.01.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/21/2023] [Revised: 11/09/2023] [Accepted: 01/15/2024] [Indexed: 02/21/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND There is a lack of consensus on the definition of upfront resectability and use of perioperative systemic therapy for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). This survey aimed to summarize the current treatment strategies for upfront resectable CRLM throughout Europe. METHODS A survey was sent to all members of the European-African Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association to gain insight into the current views on resectability and the use of systemic therapy for upfront resectable CRLM. RESULTS The survey was completed by 87 surgeons from 24 countries. The resectability of CRLM is mostly based on the volume of the future liver remnant, while considering tumor biology. Thermal ablation was considered as an acceptable adjunct to resection in parenchymal-sparing CRLM surgery by 77 % of the respondents. A total of 40.2 % of the respondents preferred standard perioperative systemic therapy and 24.1 % preferred standard upfront local treatment. CONCLUSION Among the participating European hepato-pancreato-biliary surgeons, there is a high degree of consensus on the definition of CRLM resectability. However, there is much variety in the use of adjunctive thermal ablation. Major variations persist in the use of perioperative systemic therapy in cases of upfront resectable CRLM, stressing the need for further evidence and a consensus.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Babette I Kuiper
- Amsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, De Boelelaan 1117, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, Treatment and Quality of Life, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Mohammad Abu Hilal
- Department of Surgery, Poliambulanza Foundation Hospital, Brescia, Italy
| | - Luca A Aldrighetti
- Hepatobiliary Surgery Division, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy
| | - Bergthor Björnsson
- Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, Division of Surgery, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden
| | - Mathieu D'Hondt
- Department of Digestive and Hepatobiliary/Pancreatic Surgery, Groeninge Hospital, Kortrijk, Belgium
| | - Cristina Dopazo
- Department of HPB Surgery and Transplants, Vall d'Hebron Hospital Universitari, Vall d'Hebron Institut de Recerca (VHIR), Vall d'Hebron Barcelona Hospital Campus, Universitat Autónoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Åsmund A Fretland
- The Intervention Centre and Department of HPB Surgery, Oslo University Hospital, Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Helena Isoniemi
- Department of Transplantation and Liver Surgery, Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
| | - J Philip Jonas
- Swiss HPB and Transplantation Center, Department of Surgery and Transplantation, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Geert Kazemier
- Amsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, De Boelelaan 1117, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, Treatment and Quality of Life, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Mickael Lesurtel
- Department of HPB Surgery and Liver Transplantation, DMU DIGEST, AP-HP, Hôpital Beaujon, Clichy, France
| | - John Primrose
- University Department of Surgery, University Hospital Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom
| | | | - Tineke Buffart
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Treatment and Quality of Life, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Amsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Medical Oncology, De Boelelaan 1117, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Birgit Gruenberger
- Department of Oncology & Haematology, Wr Neustadt Hospital, Wr Neustadt, Austria
| | - Rutger-Jan Swijnenburg
- Amsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, De Boelelaan 1117, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, Treatment and Quality of Life, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| | - Thomas Gruenberger
- Department of Surgery, HPB Center Vienna Health Network, Clinic Favoriten and Sigmund Freud Private University, Vienna, Austria
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Dijkstra M, Kuiper BI, Schulz HH, van der Lei S, Puijk RS, Vos DJW, Timmer FEF, Scheffer HJ, Buffart TE, van den Tol MP, Lissenberg-Witte BI, Swijnenburg RJ, Versteeg KS, Meijerink MR. Recurrent Colorectal Liver Metastases: Upfront Local Treatment versus Neoadjuvant Systemic Therapy Followed by Local Treatment (COLLISION RELAPSE): Study Protocol of a Phase III Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2024; 47:253-262. [PMID: 37943351 PMCID: PMC10844349 DOI: 10.1007/s00270-023-03602-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/15/2023] [Accepted: 10/17/2023] [Indexed: 11/10/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE The objective of the COLLISION RELAPSE trial is to prove or disprove superiority of neoadjuvant systemic therapy followed by repeat local treatment (either thermal ablation and/or surgical resection), compared to repeat local treatment alone, in patients with at least one recurrent locally treatable CRLM within one year and no extrahepatic disease. METHODS A total of 360 patients will be included in this phase III, multicentre randomized controlled trial. The primary endpoint is overall survival. Secondary endpoints are distant progression-free survival, local tumour progression-free survival analysed per patient and per tumour, systemic therapy-related toxicity, procedural morbidity and mortality, length of hospital stay, pain assessment and quality of life, cost-effectiveness ratio and quality-adjusted life years. DISCUSSION If the addition of neoadjuvant systemic therapy to repeat local treatment of CRLM proves to be superior compared to repeat local treatment alone, this may lead to a prolonged life expectancy and increased disease-free survival at the cost of possible systemic therapy-related side effects. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Level 1, phase III randomized controlled trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION NCT05861505. May 17, 2023.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Madelon Dijkstra
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, Location VUmc, Cancer Center Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Babette I Kuiper
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location VUmc, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Hannah H Schulz
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, Location VUmc, Cancer Center Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Susan van der Lei
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, Location VUmc, Cancer Center Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Robbert S Puijk
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, Location VUmc, Cancer Center Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Danielle J W Vos
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, Location VUmc, Cancer Center Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Florentine E F Timmer
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, Location VUmc, Cancer Center Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Hester J Scheffer
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, Location VUmc, Cancer Center Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Noordwest Ziekenhuisgroep, Alkmaar, the Netherlands
| | - Tineke E Buffart
- Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam UMC, Location VUmc, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Birgit I Lissenberg-Witte
- Department of Epidemiology and Data Science, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Location VUmc, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Rutger-Jan Swijnenburg
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location VUmc, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Kathelijn S Versteeg
- Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam UMC, Location VUmc, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Martijn R Meijerink
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, Location VUmc, Cancer Center Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Guglielmi A, Tripepi M, Salmaso L, Fedeli U, Ruzzenente A, Saia M. Trends in hospital volume and operative mortality in hepato-biliary surgery in Veneto region, Italy. Updates Surg 2023; 75:1949-1959. [PMID: 37395932 PMCID: PMC10543584 DOI: 10.1007/s13304-023-01574-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/17/2023] [Accepted: 06/22/2023] [Indexed: 07/04/2023]
Abstract
Hepatobiliary resections are among the most complex and technically challenging surgical procedures. Even though robust evidence showed that complex surgical procedures such as hepatobiliary surgery have better short- and long-term outcomes and lower mortality rate when performed in high-volume centers, the minimal criteria of centers that can perform hepatobiliary activity are not clearly defined. We conducted a retrospective population study of patients who underwent hepatobiliary surgery for malignant disease in a single Italian administrative region (Veneto) from 2010 to 2021 with the aim to investigate the hospitals annual surgical volume for hepatobiliary malignant diseases and the effect of hospital volume on in-hospital, 30- and 90-day postoperative mortality. The centralization process of hepatobiliary surgery in Veneto is rapidly increasing over the past 10 years (rate of performed in highly specialized centers increased from 62% in 2010 to 78% in 2021) and actually it is really established. The crude and adjusted (for age, sex, Charlson Index) mortality rate after hepatobiliary surgery resulted significantly lower in centers with high-volume activity compared to them with low-volume activity. In the Veneto region, the "Hub and Spoke" model led to a progressive centralization of liver and biliary cancer treatment. High surgical volume has been confirmed to be related to better outcomes in terms of mortality rate after hepatobiliary surgical procedures. Further studies are necessary to clearly define the minimal criteria and associated numerical cutoffs that can help define the characteristics of centers that can perform hepatobiliary activities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alfredo Guglielmi
- Department of Surgery, Division of General and Hepatobiliary Surgery, School of Medicine, University of Verona, Piazzale L. Scuro, 10, 37123, Verona, Italy
| | - Marzia Tripepi
- Department of Surgery, Division of General and Hepatobiliary Surgery, School of Medicine, University of Verona, Piazzale L. Scuro, 10, 37123, Verona, Italy
| | | | - Ugo Fedeli
- Azienda Zero, Veneto Region, Padua, Italy
| | - Andrea Ruzzenente
- Department of Surgery, Division of General and Hepatobiliary Surgery, School of Medicine, University of Verona, Piazzale L. Scuro, 10, 37123, Verona, Italy.
| | - Mario Saia
- Azienda Zero, Veneto Region, Padua, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Robinson TP, Pebror T, Krosin ME, Koniaris LG. Ablative Therapy in Non-HCC Liver Malignancy. Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15:cancers15041200. [PMID: 36831543 PMCID: PMC9954041 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15041200] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/11/2023] [Revised: 02/07/2023] [Accepted: 02/08/2023] [Indexed: 02/16/2023] Open
Abstract
Surgical extirpation of liver tumors remains a proven approach in the management of metastatic tumors to the liver, particularly those of colorectal origin. Ablative, non-resective therapies are an increasingly attractive primary therapy for liver tumors as they are generally better tolerated and result in far less morbidity and mortality. Ablative therapies preserve greater normal liver parenchyma allowing better post-treatment liver function and are particularly appropriate for treating subsequent liver-specific tumor recurrence. This article reviews the current status of ablative therapies for non-hepatocellular liver tumors with a discussion of many of the clinically available approaches.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tyler P. Robinson
- Department of Surgery, Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA
- Correspondence: ; Tel.: +1-312-371-8360
| | - Travis Pebror
- Department of Interventional Radiology, Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA
| | - Matthew E. Krosin
- Department of Interventional Radiology, Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Comparison of radiofrequency ablation and ablative external radiotherapy for the treatment of intrahepatic malignancies: A hybrid meta-analysis. JHEP Rep 2022; 5:100594. [PMID: 36561128 PMCID: PMC9763860 DOI: 10.1016/j.jhepr.2022.100594] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/26/2022] [Revised: 09/08/2022] [Accepted: 09/11/2022] [Indexed: 02/01/2023] Open
Abstract
Background & Aims Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and ablative external beam radiotherapy (ablative RT) are commonly used to treat small intrahepatic malignancies. We meta-analysed oncologic outcomes and systematically reviewed the clinical consideration of tumour location and size. Methods PubMed, Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched on February 24, 2022. Studies comparing RFA and ablative RT, providing one of the endpoints (local control or survival), and encompassing ≥5 patients in each arm were included. Results Twenty-one studies involving 4,638 patients were included. Regarding survival, the odds ratio (OR) was 1.204 (p = 0.194, favouring RFA, not statistically significant) among all studies, 1.253 (p = 0.153) among hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) studies, and 1.002 (p = 0.996) among colorectal cancer metastasis studies. Regarding local control, the OR was 0.458 (p <0.001, favouring ablative RT) among all studies, 0.452 (p <0.001) among HCC studies, favouring the ablative RT arm, and 0.649 (p = 0.484) among colorectal cancer metastasis studies. Pooled 1- and 2-year survival rates for HCC studies were 91.8% and 77.7% after RFA, and 89.0% and 76.0% after ablative RT, respectively; and for metastasis studies were 88.2% and 66.4% after RFA and 82.7% and 60.6% after RT, respectively. Literature analysis suggests that ablative RT can be more effective than RFA for tumours larger than 2-3 cm or for specific sublocations in the liver (e.g. subphrenic or perivascular sites), with moderate quality of evidence (reference to the grading system of the American Society for Radiation Oncology Primary Liver Cancer Clinical Guidelines). The pooled grade ≥3 complication rates were 2.9% and 2.8% in the RFA and ablative RT arms, respectively (p = 0.952). Conclusions Our study shows that ablative RT can yield oncologic outcomes similar to RFA, and suggests that it can be more effective for the treatment of tumours in locations where RFA is difficult to perform or for large-sized tumours. Systematic Review Registration This study was registered with PROSPERO (Protocol No: CRD42022332997). Impact and implications Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and ablative radiotherapy (RT) are non-surgical modalities for the treatment of small intrahepatic malignancies. Ablative RT showed oncologic outcomes at least similar to those of RFA, and was more effective at specific locations (e.g. perivascular or subphrenic locations).
Collapse
Key Words
- ASCO, American Society of Clinical Oncology
- ASTRO, American Society for Radiation Oncology
- CIRSE, cardiovascular and interventional radiological society of Europe
- CRC, colorectal cancer
- EBRT, external beam radiation therapy
- EQD2, Equivalent dose, 2 Gy per Fraction
- External beam radiation therapy
- HCC, hepatocellular carcinoma
- HFRT, hypofractionated radiotherapy
- IPTW, inverse probability of treatment weighting
- Intrahepatic malignancy
- LC, local control
- LT, liver transplantation
- Liver cancer
- MWA, microwave ablation
- NCDB, national cancer database
- OS, overall survival
- P, prospective
- PBT, proton beam therapy
- PRISMA, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses
- PSM, propensity score matching
- R, retrospective
- RCT, randomised controlled trial
- RFA, radiofrequency ablation
- RT, radiotherapy
- Radiofrequency ablation
- SBRT, stereotactic body radiotherapy
- TACE, transarterial chemoembolisation
Collapse
|
8
|
Viganò L, Branciforte B, Laurenti V, Costa G, Procopio F, Cimino M, Del Fabbro D, Di Tommaso L, Torzilli G. The Histopathological Growth Pattern of Colorectal Liver Metastases Impacts Local Recurrence Risk and the Adequate Width of the Surgical Margin. Ann Surg Oncol 2022; 29:5515-5524. [PMID: 35687176 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-022-11717-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/11/2021] [Accepted: 03/21/2022] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The histopathological growth pattern (HGP) of colorectal liver metastases (CLM) has been associated with prognosis. This study was designed to elucidate if the HGP is associated with local recurrence risk and impacts the adequate width of surgical margin. METHODS All consecutive patients resected for CLM in 2018-2019 were considered. HGP was prospectively classified as follows: desmoplastic, pushing, and replacement. Surgical margin was classified as follows: R0 (margin ≥ 1 mm), R1vasc (0-mm margin, tumor detachment from intrahepatic vessels), and R1par (tumor exposure along transection plane). R0 resections were further distinguished in R0min (1-mm margin) and R0wide (> 1-mm margin). RESULTS A total of 340 resection areas in 136 patients were analyzed (70 R0min, 143 R0wide, 31 R1vasc, 96 R1par). HGP was desmoplastic in 26 cases, pushing in 221, and replacement in 93. Thirty-six local recurrences occurred (11%, median follow-up 21 months): 1 after R0wide, 4 after R0min, 3 after R1vasc, and 28 after R1par resection. In R1par group, local recurrence rate was high independently of HGP (29%). In R1vasc and R0min groups, local recurrence risk was higher in the replacement group (R1vasc: 29% vs. 4% if pushing/desmoplastic; R0min: 11% vs. 4%). In R0wide group, local recurrence risk was low for all HGP ( < 1%). Independent predictors of local recurrence were replacement HGP (odds ratio = 1.654, P = 0.036), and R1par resection (odds ratio = 57.209, P < 0.001 vs. R0). CONCLUSIONS Replacement HGP is associated with an increased risk of local recurrence. In these patients, a wide surgical margin should be pursued, because R1vasc and R0min resections could be insufficient. R1par resection is inadequate, independently of the HGP.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- L Viganò
- Division of Hepatobiliary and General Surgery, Department of Surgery, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Via A. Manzoni, 56, 20089, Milan, Rozzano, Italy.,Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Milan, Pieve Emanuele, Italy
| | - B Branciforte
- Division of Hepatobiliary and General Surgery, Department of Surgery, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Via A. Manzoni, 56, 20089, Milan, Rozzano, Italy
| | - V Laurenti
- Division of Hepatobiliary and General Surgery, Department of Surgery, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Via A. Manzoni, 56, 20089, Milan, Rozzano, Italy
| | - G Costa
- Division of Hepatobiliary and General Surgery, Department of Surgery, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Via A. Manzoni, 56, 20089, Milan, Rozzano, Italy
| | - F Procopio
- Division of Hepatobiliary and General Surgery, Department of Surgery, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Via A. Manzoni, 56, 20089, Milan, Rozzano, Italy
| | - M Cimino
- Division of Hepatobiliary and General Surgery, Department of Surgery, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Via A. Manzoni, 56, 20089, Milan, Rozzano, Italy
| | - D Del Fabbro
- Division of Hepatobiliary and General Surgery, Department of Surgery, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Via A. Manzoni, 56, 20089, Milan, Rozzano, Italy
| | - L Di Tommaso
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Milan, Pieve Emanuele, Italy.,Pathology Unit, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Milan, Rozzano, Italy
| | - G Torzilli
- Division of Hepatobiliary and General Surgery, Department of Surgery, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Via A. Manzoni, 56, 20089, Milan, Rozzano, Italy. .,Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Milan, Pieve Emanuele, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Thompson SM, Welch BT, Kurup AN. Ablation for oligometastatic colorectal carcinoma in extrahepatic, extrapulmonary sites. Int J Hyperthermia 2022; 39:633-638. [DOI: 10.1080/02656736.2021.1952318] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/08/2023] Open
Affiliation(s)
| | - Brian T. Welch
- Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - A. Nick Kurup
- Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Aquina CT, Eskander MF, Pawlik TM. Liver-Directed Treatment Options Following Liver Tumor Recurrence: A Review of the Literature. Front Oncol 2022; 12:832405. [PMID: 35174097 PMCID: PMC8841620 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.832405] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/09/2021] [Accepted: 01/11/2022] [Indexed: 01/27/2023] Open
Abstract
Recurrence following curative-intent hepatectomy for colorectal cancer liver metastasis, hepatocellular carcinoma, or cholangiocarcinoma is unfortunately common with a reported incidence as high as 75%. Various treatment modalities can improve survival following disease recurrence. A review of the literature was performed using PubMed. In addition to systemic therapy, liver-directed treatment options for recurrent liver disease include repeat hepatectomy, salvage liver transplantation, radiofrequency or microwave ablation, intra-arterial therapy, and stereotactic body radiation therapy. Repeat resection can be consider for patients with limited recurrent disease that meets resection criteria, as this therapeutic approach can provide a survival benefit and is potentially curative in a subset of patients. Salvage liver transplantation for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma is another option, which has been associated with a 5-year survival of 50%. Salvage transplantation may be an option in particular for patients who are not candidates for resection due to underlying liver dysfunction but meet criteria for transplantation. Ablation is another modality to treat patients who recur with smaller tumors and are not surgical candidates due to comorbidity, liver dysfunction, or tumor location. For patients with inoperable disease, transarterial chemoembolization, or radioembolization with Yttrium-90 are liver-directed intra-arterial therapy modalities with relatively low risks that can be utilized. Stereotactic body radiation therapy is another palliative treatment option that can provide a response and local tumor control for smaller tumors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christopher T. Aquina
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, United States
- Digestive Health and Surgery Institute, AdventHealth Orlando, Orlando, FL, United States
| | - Mariam F. Eskander
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, United States
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School and Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ, United States
| | - Timothy M. Pawlik
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, United States
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Repeat Local Treatment of Recurrent Colorectal Liver Metastases, the Role of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: An Amsterdam Colorectal Liver Met Registry (AmCORE) Based Study. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13:cancers13194997. [PMID: 34638481 PMCID: PMC8507904 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13194997] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/02/2021] [Revised: 10/02/2021] [Accepted: 10/03/2021] [Indexed: 01/10/2023] Open
Abstract
This cohort study aimed to evaluate efficacy, safety, and survival outcomes of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) followed by repeat local treatment compared to upfront repeat local treatment of recurrent colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). A total of 152 patients with 267 tumors from the prospective Amsterdam Colorectal Liver Met Registry (AmCORE) met the inclusion criteria. Two cohorts of patients with recurrent CRLM were compared: patients who received chemotherapy prior to repeat local treatment (32 patients) versus upfront repeat local treatment (120 patients). Data from May 2002 to December 2020 were collected. Results on the primary endpoint overall survival (OS) and secondary endpoints local tumor progression-free survival (LTPFS) and distant progression-free survival (DPFS) were reviewed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Subsequently, uni- and multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression models, accounting for potential confounders, were estimated. Additionally, subgroup analyses, according to patient, initial and repeat local treatment characteristics, were conducted. Procedure-related complications and length of hospital stay were compared using chi-square test and Fisher's exact test. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year OS from date of diagnosis of recurrent disease was 98.6%, 72.5%, and 47.7% for both cohorts combined. The crude survival analysis did not reveal a significant difference in OS between the two cohorts (p = 0.834), with 1-, 3-, and 5-year OS of 100.0%, 73.2%, and 57.5% for the NAC group and 98.2%, 72.3%, and 45.3% for the upfront repeat local treatment group, respectively. After adjusting for two confounders, comorbidities (p = 0.010) and primary tumor location (p = 0.023), the corrected HR in multivariable analysis was 0.839 (95% CI, 0.416-1.691; p = 0.624). No differences between the two cohorts were found with regards to LTPFS (HR = 0.662; 95% CI, 0.249-1.756; p = 0.407) and DPFS (HR = 0.798; 95% CI, 0.483-1.318; p = 0.378). No heterogeneous treatment effects were detected in subgroup analyses according to patient, disease, and treatment characteristics. No significant difference was found in periprocedural complications (p = 0.843) and median length of hospital stay (p = 0.600) between the two cohorts. Chemotherapy-related toxicity was reported in 46.7% of patients. Adding NAC prior to repeat local treatment did not improve OS, LTPFS, or DPFS, nor did it affect periprocedural morbidity or length of hospital stay. The results of this comparative assessment do not substantiate the routine use of NAC prior to repeat local treatment of CRLM. Because the exact role of NAC (in different subgroups) remains inconclusive, we are currently designing a phase III randomized controlled trial (RCT), COLLISION RELAPSE trial, directly comparing upfront repeat local treatment (control) to neoadjuvant systemic therapy followed by repeat local treatment (intervention).
Collapse
|
12
|
Hellingman T, Kuiper BI, Buffart LM, Meijerink MR, Versteeg KS, Swijnenburg RJ, van Delden OM, Haasbeek CJA, de Vries JJJ, van Waesberghe JHTM, Zonderhuis BM, van der Vliet HJ, Kazemier G. Survival Benefit of Repeat Local Treatment in Patients Suffering From Early Recurrence of Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastases. Clin Colorectal Cancer 2021; 20:e263-e272. [PMID: 34462211 DOI: 10.1016/j.clcc.2021.07.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/18/2021] [Revised: 07/17/2021] [Accepted: 07/23/2021] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND A uniform treatment strategy for patients suffering from early recurrence after local treatment of CRLM is currently lacking. The aim of this observational cohort study was to assess the potential survival benefit of repeat local treatment compared to systemic therapy in patients suffering from early recurrence of CRLM. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients who developed recurrent CRLM within 12 months after initial local treatment with curative intent were retrospectively identified in Amsterdam University Medical Centers between 2009-2019. Differences in overall and progression-free survival among treatment strategies were assessed using multivariable Cox regression analyses. RESULTS A total of 135 patients were included. Median overall survival of 41 months [range 4-135] was observed in patients who received repeat local treatment, consisting of upfront or repeat local treatment after neoadjuvant systemic therapy, compared to 24 months [range 1-55] in patients subjected to systemic therapy alone (adjusted HR = 0.42 [95%-CI: 0.25-0.72]; P = .002). Prolonged progression-free survival was observed after neoadjuvant systemic therapy followed by repeat local treatment, as compared to upfront repeat local treatment in patients with recurrent CRLM within 4 months following initial local treatment of CRLM (adjusted HR = 0.36 [95%-CI: 0.15-0.86]; P = .021). CONCLUSION Patients with early recurrence of CRLM should be considered for repeat local treatment strategies. A multimodality approach, consisting of neoadjuvant systemic therapy followed by repeat local treatment, appeared favorable in patients with recurrence within 4 months following initial local treatment of CRLM.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tessa Hellingman
- Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| | - Babette I Kuiper
- Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Laurien M Buffart
- Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Medical Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Martijn R Meijerink
- Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Kathelijn S Versteeg
- Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Medical Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Rutger-Jan Swijnenburg
- Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Otto M van Delden
- Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Cornelis J A Haasbeek
- Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Radiation Oncology, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Jan J J de Vries
- Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Jan Hein T M van Waesberghe
- Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Barbara M Zonderhuis
- Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Hans J van der Vliet
- Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Medical Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Lava Therapeutics, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Geert Kazemier
- Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Dijkstra M, Nieuwenhuizen S, Puijk RS, Timmer FE, Geboers B, Schouten EA, Opperman J, Scheffer HJ, de Vries JJ, Swijnenburg RJ, Versteeg KS, Lissenberg-Witte BI, van den Tol MP, Meijerink MR. Thermal Ablation Compared to Partial Hepatectomy for Recurrent Colorectal Liver Metastases: An Amsterdam Colorectal Liver Met Registry (AmCORE) Based Study. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13:cancers13112769. [PMID: 34199556 PMCID: PMC8199651 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13112769] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/30/2021] [Revised: 05/25/2021] [Accepted: 05/31/2021] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary Between 64 and 85% of patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) develop distant intrahepatic recurrence after curative intent local treatment. The current standard of care for new CRLM is repeat local treatment, comprising partial hepatectomy and thermal ablation. Although relatively safe and feasible, repeat partial hepatectomy can be challenging due to adhesions and due to the reduced liver volume after surgery. This AmCORE based study assessed safety, efficacy and survival outcomes of repeat thermal ablation as compared to repeat partial hepatectomy in patients with recurrent CRLM. Repeat partial hepatectomy was not different from repeat thermal ablation with regard to survival, distant- and local recurrence rates and complications, whereas length of hospital stay favored repeat thermal ablation. Thermal ablation should be considered a valid and potentially less invasive alternative in the treatment of recurrent new CRLM, while the eagerly awaited results of the COLLISION trial (NCT03088150) should provide definitive answers regarding surgery versus thermal ablation for CRLM. Abstract The aim of this study was to assess safety, efficacy and survival outcomes of repeat thermal ablation as compared to repeat partial hepatectomy in patients with recurrent colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). This Amsterdam Colorectal Liver Met Registry (AmCORE) based study of two cohorts, repeat thermal ablation versus repeat partial hepatectomy, analyzed 136 patients (100 thermal ablation, 36 partial hepatectomy) and 224 tumors (170 thermal ablation, 54 partial hepatectomy) with recurrent CRLM from May 2002 to December 2020. The primary and secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), distant progression-free survival (DPFS) and local tumor progression-free survival (LTPFS), estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method, and complications, analyzed using the chi-square test. Multivariable analyses based on Cox proportional hazards model were used to account for potential confounders. In addition, subgroup analyses according to patient, initial and repeat local treatment characteristics were performed. In the crude overall comparison, OS of patients treated with repeat partial hepatectomy was not statistically different from repeat thermal ablation (p = 0.927). Further quantification of OS, after accounting for potential confounders, demonstrated concordant results for repeat local treatment (hazard ratio (HR), 0.986; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.517–1.881; p = 0.966). The 1-, 3- and 5-year OS were 98.9%, 62.6% and 42.3% respectively for the thermal ablation group and 93.8%, 74.5% and 49.3% for the repeat resection group. No differences in DPFS (p = 0.942), LTPFS (p = 0.397) and complication rate (p = 0.063) were found. Mean length of hospital stay was 2.1 days in the repeat thermal ablation group and 4.8 days in the repeat partial hepatectomy group (p = 0.009). Subgroup analyses identified no heterogeneous treatment effects according to patient, initial and repeat local treatment characteristics. Repeat partial hepatectomy was not statistically different from repeat thermal ablation with regard to OS, DPFS, LTPFS and complications, whereas length of hospital stay favored repeat thermal ablation. Thermal ablation should be considered a valid and potentially less invasive alternative for small-size (0–3 cm) CRLM in the treatment of recurrent new CRLM. While, the eagerly awaited results of the phase III prospective randomized controlled COLLISION trial (NCT03088150) should provide definitive answers regarding surgery versus thermal ablation for CRLM.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Madelon Dijkstra
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, VU Medical Center Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (S.N.); (R.S.P.); (F.E.F.T.); (B.G.); (E.A.C.S.); (H.J.S.); (J.J.J.d.V.); (M.R.M.)
- Correspondence: ; Tel.: +31-20-444-4571
| | - Sanne Nieuwenhuizen
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, VU Medical Center Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (S.N.); (R.S.P.); (F.E.F.T.); (B.G.); (E.A.C.S.); (H.J.S.); (J.J.J.d.V.); (M.R.M.)
| | - Robbert S. Puijk
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, VU Medical Center Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (S.N.); (R.S.P.); (F.E.F.T.); (B.G.); (E.A.C.S.); (H.J.S.); (J.J.J.d.V.); (M.R.M.)
| | - Florentine E.F. Timmer
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, VU Medical Center Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (S.N.); (R.S.P.); (F.E.F.T.); (B.G.); (E.A.C.S.); (H.J.S.); (J.J.J.d.V.); (M.R.M.)
| | - Bart Geboers
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, VU Medical Center Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (S.N.); (R.S.P.); (F.E.F.T.); (B.G.); (E.A.C.S.); (H.J.S.); (J.J.J.d.V.); (M.R.M.)
| | - Evelien A.C. Schouten
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, VU Medical Center Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (S.N.); (R.S.P.); (F.E.F.T.); (B.G.); (E.A.C.S.); (H.J.S.); (J.J.J.d.V.); (M.R.M.)
| | - Jip Opperman
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Noordwest Ziekenhuisgroep, location Alkmaar, 1800 AM Alkmaar, The Netherlands;
| | - Hester J. Scheffer
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, VU Medical Center Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (S.N.); (R.S.P.); (F.E.F.T.); (B.G.); (E.A.C.S.); (H.J.S.); (J.J.J.d.V.); (M.R.M.)
| | - Jan J.J. de Vries
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, VU Medical Center Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (S.N.); (R.S.P.); (F.E.F.T.); (B.G.); (E.A.C.S.); (H.J.S.); (J.J.J.d.V.); (M.R.M.)
| | - Rutger-Jan Swijnenburg
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, VU Medical Center Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (R.-J.S.); (M.P.v.d.T.)
| | - Kathelijn S. Versteeg
- Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, VU Medical Center Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands;
| | - Birgit I. Lissenberg-Witte
- Department of Epidemiology and Data Science, Amsterdam University Medical Centers VU Medical Center Amsterdam, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands;
| | - M. Petrousjka van den Tol
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, VU Medical Center Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (R.-J.S.); (M.P.v.d.T.)
| | - Martijn R. Meijerink
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, VU Medical Center Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (S.N.); (R.S.P.); (F.E.F.T.); (B.G.); (E.A.C.S.); (H.J.S.); (J.J.J.d.V.); (M.R.M.)
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Percutaneous ablation of post-surgical solitary early recurrence of colorectal liver metastases is an effective "test-of-time" approach. Updates Surg 2021; 73:1349-1358. [PMID: 33844146 DOI: 10.1007/s13304-021-01047-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 03/29/2021] [Indexed: 01/06/2023]
Abstract
Standard treatment of early recurrence of colorectal liver metastases (CLM) after liver resection (LR) is chemotherapy followed by loco-regional therapy. We reviewed the outcome of a different strategy ("test-of-time" approach): upfront percutaneous ablation without chemotherapy. Twenty-six consecutive patients with early solitary liver-only recurrence amenable to both resection and ablation (< 30 mm, distant from vessels) undergone "test-of-time" approach were analyzed. Early recurrence had a median size of 17 mm and occurred after a median interval from LR of 4 months. Primary efficacy rate of ablation was 100%. Five patients are alive and disease-free after a mean follow-up of 46 months. Five patients had local-only recurrence; all had repeat treatment (LR = 4; Ablation = 1) without chemotherapy. Local recurrence risk was associated with incomplete ablation of 1-cm thick peritumoral margin. The remaining 16 patients had non-local recurrence, 13 early after ablation. Overall, six (23%) patients had ablation as unique treatment and 13 (50%) avoided or postponed chemotherapy (mean chemotherapy-free interval 33.5 months). Ablation without chemotherapy of early liver-only recurrence is a reliable "test-of-time" approach. It minimized the invasiveness of treatment with good effectiveness and high salvageability in case of local failure, avoided worthless surgery, and saved chemotherapy for further disease progression.
Collapse
|
15
|
Hepatic and Extrahepatic Colorectal Metastases Have Discordant Responses to Systemic Therapy. Pathology Data from Patients Undergoing Simultaneous Resection of Multiple Tumor Sites. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13:cancers13030464. [PMID: 33530435 PMCID: PMC7865224 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13030464] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/31/2020] [Revised: 01/19/2021] [Accepted: 01/21/2021] [Indexed: 12/22/2022] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary The standard treatment of patients with hepatic and extrahepatic metastases from colorectal cancer is systemic chemotherapy. We assume that this therapy has the same effectiveness on all disease foci, independent of the involved organ. The effectiveness of chemotherapy is assessed by the pathological response rate: the higher the response rate, the higher the effectiveness of chemotherapy. In the present manuscript, we analyzed patients undergoing resection of hepatic and extrahepatic metastases from colorectal cancer after preoperative chemotherapy. We observed unexpected heterogeneity of the response to chemotherapy of distant metastases from colorectal cancer according to the involved organ. Peritoneal metastases had the highest pathological response rate, which was much higher than the hepatic metastases, while lung and lymph node metastases had extremely poor response rates. Such inhomogeneous effectiveness of systemic treatment in different organs open new perspectives in the treatment of colorectal cancer with distant metastases and oncological research. Abstract Background: Systemic therapy is the standard treatment for patients with hepatic and extrahepatic colorectal metastases. It is assumed to have the same effectiveness on all disease foci, independent of the involved organ. The present study aims to compare the response rates of hepatic and extrahepatic metastases to systemic therapy. Methods: All consecutive patients undergoing simultaneous resection of hepatic and extrahepatic metastases from colorectal cancer after oxaliplatin- and/or irinotecan-based preoperative chemotherapy were analyzed. All specimens were reviewed. Pathological response to chemotherapy was classified according to tumor regression grade (TRG). Results: We analyzed 45 patients undergoing resection of 134 hepatic and 72 extrahepatic metastases. Lung and lymph node metastases had lower response rates to chemotherapy than liver metastases (TRG 4–5 95% and 100% vs. 67%, p = 0.008, and p = 0.006). Peritoneal metastases had a higher pathological response rate than liver metastases (TRG 1–3 66% vs. 33%, p < 0.001) and non-hepatic non-peritoneal metastases (3%, p < 0.001). Metastases site was an independent predictor of pathological response to systemic therapy. Conclusions: Response to chemotherapy of distant metastases from colorectal cancer varies in different organs. Systemic treatment is highly effective for peritoneal metastases, more so than liver metastases, while it has a very poor impact on lung and lymph node metastases.
Collapse
|
16
|
Dijkstra M, Nieuwenhuizen S, Puijk RS, Geboers B, Timmer FEF, Schouten EAC, Scheffer HJ, de Vries JJJ, Ket JCF, Versteeg KS, Meijerink MR, van den Tol MP. The Role of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Repeat Local Treatment of Recurrent Colorectal Liver Metastases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13:378. [PMID: 33561088 PMCID: PMC7864163 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13030378] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/15/2020] [Revised: 01/15/2021] [Accepted: 01/18/2021] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
The additive value of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) prior to repeat local treatment of patients with recurrent colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) is unclear. A systematic search was performed in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and an additional search in Google Scholar to find articles comparing repeat local treatment by partial hepatectomy and/or thermal ablation with versus without NAC. The search included randomized trials and comparative observational studies with univariate/multivariate analysis and/or matching as well as (inter)national guidelines assessed using the AGREE II instrument. The search identified 21,832 records; 172 were selected for full-text review; 20 were included: 20 comparative observational studies were evaluated. Literature to evaluate the additive value of NAC prior to repeat local treatment was limited. Outcomes of NAC were often reported as subgroup analyses and reporting of results was frequently unclear. Assessment of the seven studies that qualified for inclusion in the meta-analysis showed conflicting results. Only one study reported a significant difference in overall survival (OS) favoring NAC prior to repeat local treatment. However, further analysis revealed a high risk for residual bias, because only a selected group of chemo-responders qualified for repeat local treatment, disregarding the non-responders who did not qualify. All guidelines that specifically mention recurrent disease (3/3) recommend repeat local treatment; none provide recommendations about the role of NAC. The inconclusive findings of this meta-analysis do not support recommendations to routinely favor NAC prior to repeat local treatment. This emphasizes the need to investigate the additive value of NAC prior to repeat local treatment of patients with recurrent CRLM in a future phase 3 randomized controlled trial (RCT).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Madelon Dijkstra
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Center, VU Medical Center Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (S.N.); (R.S.P.); (B.G.); (F.E.F.T.); (E.A.C.S.); (H.J.S.); (J.J.J.d.V.); (M.R.M.)
| | - Sanne Nieuwenhuizen
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Center, VU Medical Center Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (S.N.); (R.S.P.); (B.G.); (F.E.F.T.); (E.A.C.S.); (H.J.S.); (J.J.J.d.V.); (M.R.M.)
| | - Robbert S. Puijk
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Center, VU Medical Center Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (S.N.); (R.S.P.); (B.G.); (F.E.F.T.); (E.A.C.S.); (H.J.S.); (J.J.J.d.V.); (M.R.M.)
| | - Bart Geboers
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Center, VU Medical Center Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (S.N.); (R.S.P.); (B.G.); (F.E.F.T.); (E.A.C.S.); (H.J.S.); (J.J.J.d.V.); (M.R.M.)
| | - Florentine E. F. Timmer
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Center, VU Medical Center Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (S.N.); (R.S.P.); (B.G.); (F.E.F.T.); (E.A.C.S.); (H.J.S.); (J.J.J.d.V.); (M.R.M.)
| | - Evelien A. C. Schouten
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Center, VU Medical Center Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (S.N.); (R.S.P.); (B.G.); (F.E.F.T.); (E.A.C.S.); (H.J.S.); (J.J.J.d.V.); (M.R.M.)
| | - Hester J. Scheffer
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Center, VU Medical Center Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (S.N.); (R.S.P.); (B.G.); (F.E.F.T.); (E.A.C.S.); (H.J.S.); (J.J.J.d.V.); (M.R.M.)
| | - Jan J. J. de Vries
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Center, VU Medical Center Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (S.N.); (R.S.P.); (B.G.); (F.E.F.T.); (E.A.C.S.); (H.J.S.); (J.J.J.d.V.); (M.R.M.)
| | - Johannes C. F. Ket
- Medical Library, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands;
| | - Kathelijn S. Versteeg
- Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam University Medical Center, VU Medical Center Amsterdam Cancer Center Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands;
| | - Martijn R. Meijerink
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Center, VU Medical Center Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (S.N.); (R.S.P.); (B.G.); (F.E.F.T.); (E.A.C.S.); (H.J.S.); (J.J.J.d.V.); (M.R.M.)
| | - M. Petrousjka van den Tol
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Center, location VU Medical Center Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands;
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Franchi E, Donadon M, Torzilli G. Effects of volume on outcome in hepatobiliary surgery: a review with guidelines proposal. Glob Health Med 2020; 2:292-297. [PMID: 33330823 DOI: 10.35772/ghm.2020.01013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/12/2020] [Revised: 07/29/2020] [Accepted: 08/11/2020] [Indexed: 12/31/2022]
Abstract
The positive relationship between volume and outcome in hepatobiliary surgery has been demonstrated for many years. As for other complex surgical procedures, both improved short- and long-term outcomes have been associated with a higher volume of procedures. However, whether the centralization of complex hepatobiliary procedures makes full sense because it should be associated with higher quality of care, as reported in the literature, precise criteria on what to centralize, where to centralize, and who should be entitled to perform complex procedures are still missing. Indeed, despite the generalized consensus on centralization in hepatobiliary surgery, this topic remains very complex because many determinants are involved in such a centralization process, of which some of them cannot be easily controlled. In the context of different health systems worldwide, such as national health systems and private insurance, there are different stakeholders that demand different needs: politicians, patients, surgeons, institutions and medical associations do not always have the same needs. Starting from a review of the literature on centralization in hepatobiliary surgery, we will propose some guidelines that, while not data-driven due to low evidence in the literature, will be based on good clinical practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eloisa Franchi
- Division of Hepatobiliary and General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center - IRCCS, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
| | - Matteo Donadon
- Division of Hepatobiliary and General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center - IRCCS, Rozzano, Milan, Italy.,Department of Biomedical Science, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele, Milan, Italy
| | - Guido Torzilli
- Division of Hepatobiliary and General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center - IRCCS, Rozzano, Milan, Italy.,Department of Biomedical Science, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele, Milan, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Comparisons between radiofrequency ablation and stereotactic body radiotherapy for liver malignancies: Meta-analyses and a systematic review. Radiother Oncol 2020; 145:63-70. [PMID: 31923711 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2019.12.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 87] [Impact Index Per Article: 17.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/09/2019] [Revised: 12/11/2019] [Accepted: 12/11/2019] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is a standard ablative modality for small liver malignancies. Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) has emerged although yet suffers a lack of high-level evidence. We performed meta-analyses and a systematic review to integrate the literature and help in clinical decision-making. METHODS Systemic searches were performed of the PubMed, Medline, and EMBASE databases to identify controlled studies comparing RFA and SBRT. RESULTS Eleven studies involving 2238 patients were included. Among them, eight studies were for treating early hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs) and three for liver metastases. Including HCCs and liver metastases studies, the pooled two-year local control (LC) rate was higher in the SBRT arm (83.8%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 77.6-88.4) than that in the RFA arm (71.8%, 95% CI: 61.5-80.2) (p = 0.024). Among studies on liver metastases, the pooled two-year LC rate was higher in the SBRT arm (83.6% vs. 60.0%, p < 0.001). No significant difference was found between arms in HCC studies (SBRT vs. RFA: 84.5 vs. 79.5% p = 0.431). Pooled analysis of overall survival (OS) in HCC studies showed an odds ratio of 1.43 (95% CI: 1.05-1.95, p = 0.023), favoring RFA. Among the two liver metastases studies with comparative survival data, no significant difference was observed. CONCLUSION LC was equivalent between RFA and SBRT for HCC and better for SBRT for the treatment of liver metastases. RFA was associated with better OS for HCC, but discrepancy between LC and OS requires further investigation, as they are local modalities having comparable efficacy.
Collapse
|
19
|
Reece M, Saluja H, Hollington P, Karapetis CS, Vatandoust S, Young GP, Symonds EL. The Use of Circulating Tumor DNA to Monitor and Predict Response to Treatment in Colorectal Cancer. Front Genet 2019; 10:1118. [PMID: 31824558 PMCID: PMC6881479 DOI: 10.3389/fgene.2019.01118] [Citation(s) in RCA: 44] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/09/2019] [Accepted: 10/16/2019] [Indexed: 12/20/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: Colorectal cancer is one of the most common cancers worldwide and has a high mortality rate following disease recurrence. Treatment efficacy is maximized by providing tailored cancer treatment, ideally involving surgical resection and personalized neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapies, including chemotherapy, radiotherapy and increasingly, targeted therapy. Early detection of recurrence or disease progression results in more treatable disease and is essential to improving survival outcomes. Recent advances in the understanding of tumor genetics have resulted in the discovery of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA). A growing body of evidence supports the use of these sensitive biomarkers in detecting residual disease and diagnosing recurrence as well as enabling targeted and tumor-specific adjuvant therapies. Methods: A literature search in Pubmed was performed to identify all original articles preceding April 2019 that utilize ctDNA for the purpose of monitoring response to colorectal cancer treatment. Results: Ninety-two clinical studies were included. These studies demonstrate that ctDNA is a reliable measure of tumor burden. Studies show the utility of ctDNA in assessing the adequacy of surgical tumor clearance and changes in ctDNA levels reflect response to systemic treatments. ctDNA can be used in the selection of targeted treatments. The reappearance or increase in ctDNA, as well as the emergence of new mutations, correlates with disease recurrence, progression, and resistance to therapy, with ctDNA measurement allowing more sensitive monitoring than currently used clinical tools. Conclusions: ctDNA shows enormous promise as a sensitive biomarker for monitoring response to many treatment modalities and for targeting therapy. Thus, it is emerging as a new way for guiding treatment decisions-initiating, altering, and ceasing treatments, or prompting investigation into the potential for residual disease. However, many potentially useful ctDNA markers are available and more work is needed to determine which are best suited for specific purposes and for improving specific outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mifanwy Reece
- Colorectal Surgery, Division of Surgery & Perioperative Medicine, Flinders Medical Centre, Bedford Park, SA, Australia
| | - Hariti Saluja
- Department of Medicine, College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, Bedford Park, SA, Australia.,Flinders Centre for Innovation in Cancer, College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, Bedford Park, SA, Australia
| | - Paul Hollington
- Colorectal Surgery, Division of Surgery & Perioperative Medicine, Flinders Medical Centre, Bedford Park, SA, Australia
| | - Christos S Karapetis
- Flinders Centre for Innovation in Cancer, College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, Bedford Park, SA, Australia.,Department of Medical Oncology, Flinders Medical Centre, Bedford Park, SA, Australia
| | - Sina Vatandoust
- Department of Medical Oncology, Flinders Medical Centre, Bedford Park, SA, Australia
| | - Graeme P Young
- Flinders Centre for Innovation in Cancer, College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, Bedford Park, SA, Australia
| | - Erin L Symonds
- Flinders Centre for Innovation in Cancer, College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, Bedford Park, SA, Australia.,Bowel Health Service, Flinders Medical Centre, Bedford Park, SA, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Winkelmann MT, Clasen S, Pereira PL, Hoffmann R. Local treatment of oligometastatic disease: current role. Br J Radiol 2019; 92:20180835. [PMID: 31124700 DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20180835] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/17/2022] Open
Abstract
The presence of distant metastases has long been a predictor of poor outcome in solid cancer. However, in an oncologic situation called oligometastatic disease (OMD), multiple studies have revealed a survival benefit with aggressive treatment of these metastases. Besides surgery and radiation therapy, local thermal therapies have developed into a treatment option for OMD. Most studies concerning local therapy of OMD are available for colorectal cancer, which is therefore the focus of this article. Furthermore, this review gives a basic overview of the most popular ablation techniques for treatment of OMD.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Moritz T Winkelmann
- 1 Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Tuebingen, Hoppe-Seyler-Strasse, Tuebingen, Germany
| | - Stephan Clasen
- 1 Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Tuebingen, Hoppe-Seyler-Strasse, Tuebingen, Germany
| | - Philippe L Pereira
- 2 Department of Radiology, SLK-Hospital Heilbronn GmbH, Am Gesundbrunnen, Heilbronn, Germany
| | - Rüdiger Hoffmann
- 1 Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Tuebingen, Hoppe-Seyler-Strasse, Tuebingen, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Torzilli G, Viganò L. ASO Author Reflections: Colorectal Liver Metastases Early Progression After Chemotherapy: A Possible Contraindication to Surgery? Ann Surg Oncol 2018; 26:525-526. [PMID: 30511094 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-018-7042-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/31/2018] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Guido Torzilli
- Division of Hepatobiliary and General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Humanitas University and Research Hospital, Rozzano, Milan, Italy.
| | - Luca Viganò
- Division of Hepatobiliary and General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Humanitas University and Research Hospital, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Evrard S, Torzilli G, Caballero C, Bonhomme B. Parenchymal sparing surgery brings treatment of colorectal liver metastases into the precision medicine era. Eur J Cancer 2018; 104:195-200. [PMID: 30380461 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2018.09.030] [Citation(s) in RCA: 33] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/05/2018] [Revised: 09/11/2018] [Accepted: 09/26/2018] [Indexed: 12/30/2022]
Abstract
The treatment of advanced colorectal liver metastases (CRLMs) follows the biphasic pattern characteristic of oncological surgery. A phase of escalation-the therapeutic aggressiveness-is followed by a phase of de-escalation aimed at decreasing the morbidity, while preserving the gains in survival. From a maximum of three lesions, the rule no longer limits the number, provided the intervention does not cause lethal liver failure. Technically feasible non-anatomical resections, two-stage hepatectomies, portal vein obliteration and so forth, have pushed the boundaries of surgery far. However, the impact and the biology of metastatic processes have been long ignored. Parenchymal sparing surgery (PSS) is a de-escalation strategy that targets only metastasis by minimising the risk of stimulating tumour growth, while enabling iterative interventions. Reducing the loss of healthy parenchyma increases the tolerance of the liver to interval chemotherapy. Technically, PSS could use any type of hepatectomy, providing it is centred on the metastatic load alongside intraoperative ablation. The PSS concept sometimes wrongly comes across as a debate between minor versus major hepatectomies. Hence, we propose a clear definition, both quantitative and qualitative, of what PSS is and what it is not. Conversely, the degree of selectivity of PSS as a percentage of the volume of resected metastases versus the volume of total liver removed has not been stopped to date and should be the subject of prospective studies. Ultimately, the treatment of advanced CRLMs, of which PSS is a part, needs to be personalised by the multidisciplinary team by adapting its response to each new recurrence.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Serge Evrard
- Institut Bergonié, 229 Cours de L'Argonne, 33076 Bordeaux, Cedex, France.
| | - Guido Torzilli
- Department of Surgery, Division of Hepatobiliary and General Surgery, Humanitas Research Hospital & Humanitas University, Via A Manzoni 56, 20089 Rozzano-Milano, Italy
| | | | - Benjamin Bonhomme
- Department of Biopathology, Institut Bergonié, 229 Cours de L'Argonne, 33076 Bordeaux, Cedex, France
| |
Collapse
|