Adjuvant perioperative portal vein or peripheral intravenous chemotherapy for potentially curative colorectal cancer: long-term results of a randomized controlled trial

Local anaesthetics and chemotherapeutic agents: a systematic review of preclinical evidence of interactions and cancer biology

Background

Local anaesthetics are widely used for their analgesic and anaesthetic properties in the perioperative setting, including surgical procedures to excise malignant tumours. Simultaneously, chemotherapeutic agents remain a cornerstone of cancer treatment, targeting rapidly dividing cancer cells to inhibit tumour growth. The potential interactions between these two drug classes have drawn increasing attention and there are oncological surgical contexts where their combined use could be considered. This review examines existing evidence regarding the interactions between local anaesthetics and chemotherapeutic agents, including biological mechanisms and clinical implications.

Methods

A systematic search of electronic databases was performed as per Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Selection criteria were designed to capture in vitro, in vivo, and clinical studies assessing interactions between local anaesthetics and a wide variety of chemotherapeutic agents. Screening and data extraction were performed independently by two reviewers. The data were synthesised using a narrative approach because of the anticipated heterogeneity of included studies.

Results

Initial searches yielded 1225 relevant articles for screening, of which 43 met the inclusion criteria. The interactions between local anaesthetics and chemotherapeutic agents were diverse and multifaceted. In vitro studies frequently demonstrated altered cytotoxicity profiles when these agents were combined, with variations depending on the specific drug combination and cancer cell type. Mechanistically, some interactions were attributed to modifications in efflux pump activity, tumour suppressor gene expression, or alterations in cellular signalling pathways associated with tumour promotion. A large majority of in vitro studies report potentially beneficial effects of local anaesthetics in terms of enhancing the antineoplastic activity of chemotherapeutic agents. In animal models, the combined administration of local anaesthetics and chemotherapeutic agents showed largely beneficial effects on tumour growth, metastasis, and overall survival. Notably, no clinical study examining the possible interactions of local anaesthetics and chemotherapy on cancer outcomes has been reported.

Conclusions

Reported preclinical interactions between local anaesthetics and chemotherapeutic agents are complex and encompass a spectrum of effects which are largely, although not uniformly, additive or synergistic. The clinical implications of these interactions remain unclear because of the lack of prospective trials. Nonetheless, the modulation of chemotherapy effects by local anaesthetics warrants further clinical investigation in the context of cancer surgery where they could be used together.

Clinical trial registration

Open Science Framework (OSF, project link: https://osf.io/r2u4z).

Efficacy of various adjuvant chemotherapy methods in preventing liver metastasis from potentially curative colorectal cancer: A systematic review network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

PURPOSE

Various chemotherapy administration methods have been used to prevent liver metastasis (LM) in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC). This network meta-analysis evaluated the efficacy of these different methods in preventing LM in CRC patients who underwent curative surgery.

METHOD

A systematic search of randomized controlled trials reporting the efficacy of various adjuvant chemotherapy methods in patients with colorectal cancer who underwent curative surgery was conducted. The primary outcome was the LM rate.

RESULTS

This network meta-analysis included 19 studies reporting on 12,588 participants, comparing portal vein infusion chemotherapy (PVIC) versus hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) versus systematic chemotherapy (SC) versus surgery alone. The HAIC group had the lowest LM rate when compared to the other three groups (odds ratio [OR] of PVIC vs. HAIC: 1.86; OR of SC vs. HAIC: 1.98; and HAIC vs. surgery alone: 0.43). The LM rate did not differ significantly between PVIC, SC, and surgery alone. The recurrence rates were lower for PVIC and HAIC than for surgery alone (the ORs for PVIC and HAIC were 0.73 [95% CI: 0.58-0.92] and 0.45 [95% CI: 0.26-0.77]). The mortality rates of patients undergoing PVIC and HAIC were lower than that of patients undergoing surgery alone (the ORs for PVIC and HAIC were 0.77 [95% CI: 0.64-0.93] and 0.49 [95% CI: 0.24-0.98]). Anastomotic leakage, cardiopulmonary leakage, diarrhea, nausea and vomiting, oral ulceration, wound infection, or ileus did not differ significantly between the four groups. PVIC showed the highest hepatic toxicity rate compared to those for SC, HAIC, and surgery alone.

CONCLUSION

HAIC might be a satisfactory method for preventing LM in patients with CRC undergoing curative surgery.

Auranofin and its analogs as prospective agents for the treatment of colorectal cancer

Today colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the leading causes of cancer death worldwide. This disease is poorly chemo-sensitive toward the existing medical treatments so that new and more effective therapeutic agents are urgently needed and intensely sought. Platinum drugs, oxaliplatin in particular, were reported to produce some significant benefit in CRC treatment, triggering the general interest of medicinal chemists and oncologists for metal-based compounds as candidate anti-CRC drugs. Within this frame, gold compounds and, specifically, the established antiarthritic drug auranofin with its analogs, form a novel group of promising anticancer agents. Owing to its innovative mechanism of action and its favorable pharmacological profile, auranofin together with its derivatives are proposed here as novel experimental agents for CRC treatment, capable of overcoming resistance to platinum drugs. Some encouraging results in this direction have already been obtained. A few recent studies demonstrate that the action of auranofin may be further potentiated through the preparation of suitable pharmaceutical formulations capable of protecting the gold pharmacophore from unselective reactivity or through the design of highly synergic drug combinations. The perspectives of the research in this field are outlined.

Management of the adenocarcinoma of the upper rectum: a reappraisal

The present review attempts to assess whether upper rectal cancer (URC) should be treated either as colon cancer or as rectal one, namely to be managed with upfront surgery without neo-adjuvant treatment and partial mesorectal excision (PME), or with neo-adjuvant short course radiotherapy (SCRT) or chemoradiotherapy (CRT) as indicated, followed by surgery with total mesorectal excision. Reports from current evidence including studies, reviews and various guidelines are conflicting. Main reasons for inability to reach safe conclusions are (i) the various anatomical definitions of the rectum and its upper part, (ii) the inadequate preoperative local staging,(iii) the heterogeneity of selection criteria for the neo-adjuvant treatment,(iv) the different neo-adjuvant treatment regimens, and(v) the variety in the extent of surgical resection, among the studies. Although not adequately supported, locally advanced URC can be treated with neo-adjuvant CRT provided the lesion is within the radiation field of safety, and a PME if the lower border of the tumour is located above the anterior peritoneal reflection. There is evidence that adjuvant chemotherapy is of benefit in high-risk stage II and stage III lesions.

Comparative Efficacy of Preoperative, Postoperative, and Perioperative Treatments for Resectable Colorectal Liver Metastases: A Network Meta-Analysis

Background: Several treatment strategies are used for management of resectable colorectal liver metastases. We performed a Bayesian network meta-analysis to compare preoperative, postoperative, or perioperative treatments, identifying the optimal approach. Methods: We searched reports of randomized controlled trials through the relevant databases. The primary outcome criterion was overall survival (OS). The secondary outcome measure was disease-free survival (DFS). We calculated the hazard ratio (HR) with the 95% credible interval (Crl) of the time-to-event data. Rank probabilities were evaluated by the probability of treatment rankings. Multiple treatment comparisons based on a Bayesian network integrated the efficacy of all included approaches. Results: Twenty-two eligible randomized controlled trials with 6,115 patients were included in the network meta-analysis. One treatment that resulted in a significant improvement in OS compared with surgery alone was hepatic arterial infusion (HAI) plus postoperative chemotherapy (CT) [HR = 0.74 with 95% Crl: (0.60, 0.94)]. With regard to the secondary outcome measure, three approaches that led to a significant improvement in DFS compared with surgery alone were HAI plus postoperative CT [HR = 1.44 with 95% Crl: (1.19, 1.75)], postoperative CT [HR = 1.14 with 95% Crl: (1.01, 1.29)], preoperative hepatic and regional arterial chemotherapy (PHRAC) plus preoperative CT [HR = 1.41 with 95% Crl: (1.03, 1.89)]. According to the results for the rank probabilities of the 11 treatments, the combination of HAI and bevacizumab plus postoperative CT showed the highest probability of benefitting OS, and PHRAC plus preoperative CT was most likely to benefit DFS. Conclusions: The combination of HAI and bevacizumab plus postoperative CT exhibited the greatest odds of being the most effective treatment for improving OS, and PHRAC plus preoperative CT exhibited the greatest odds of improving DFS. Further clinical studies are needed and justified.

Evidence-based medical oncology and interventional radiology paradigms for liver-dominant colorectal cancer metastases

Colorectal cancer metastasizes predictably, with liver predominance in most cases. Because liver involvement has been shown to be a major determinant of survival in this population, liver-directed therapies are increasingly considered even in cases where there is (limited) extrahepatic disease. Unfortunately, these patients carry a known risk of recurrence in the liver regardless of initial therapy choice. Therefore, there is a demand for minimally invasive, non-surgical, personalized cancer treatments to preserve quality of life in the induction, consolidation, and maintenance phases of cancer therapy. This report aims to review evidence-based conceptual, pharmacological, and technological paradigm shifts in parenteral and percutaneous treatment strategies as well as forthcoming evidence regarding next-generation systemic, locoregional, and local treatment approaches for this patient population.

Systematic review of congenital and acquired portal-systemic shunts in otherwise normal livers

BACKGROUND

Portal-systemic shunts (PSSs) are rarely seen in healthy individuals or patients with non-cirrhotic liver disease. They may play an important role in hepatic metabolism as well as in the spread of gastrointestinal metastatic tumours to specific organs. Small spontaneous PSSs may be more common than generally thought. However, epidemiological data are scarce and inconclusive. This systematic review examined the prevalence of reported PSSs and the associated detection methods.

METHODS

Literature up to 2011 was reviewed for adult patients with proven congenital or acquired PSSs. Only PSSs in normal livers were analysed for the methods of diagnosis. Eligible studies were identified by searching relevant databases, including PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library. The selection of eligible articles was carried out using predefined inclusion criteria (adult, non-surgical PSS) and a set of search terms that were established before the articles were identified.

RESULTS

Eighty studies were included describing 112 patients with congenital or acquired PSSs. The majority were diagnosed incidentally using Doppler ultrasound imaging and CT.

CONCLUSION

Congenital and acquired PSSs are rare. They are usually clinically asymptomatic and discovered incidentally by radiological techniques. They may be clinically relevant owing to drug, tumour cell, metabolic and pathogen shunting.

Adenocarcinomas of the upper third of the rectum and the rectosigmoid junction seem to have similar prognosis as colon cancers even without radiotherapy, SAKK 40/87

PURPOSE

To investigate the prognosis of adenocarcinomas of the upper third of the rectum and the rectosigmoid-junction without radiotherapy.

METHODS

Patients from a multicenter randomized controlled trial from 1987-1993 on adjuvant chemotherapy for R0-resected colorectal cancers with stage I-III disease were retrospectively allocated: cancers of the lower two-thirds of the rectum (11 cm or less from anal-verge, Group A, n = 205), of the upper-third of the rectum and rectosigmoid-junction (>11-20 cm from anal-verge, Group B, n = 142), and of the colon (>20 cm from anal-verge, Group C, n = 378). The total mesorectal excision (TME) technique had not been introduced yet. The adjuvant chemotherapy turned out to be ineffective. None of the patients received neoadjuvant or adjuvant radiotherapy.

RESULTS

The patients had a regular follow-up (median, 8.0 years). The 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate was 0.54 (95%CI, 0.47-0.60) in Group A, 0.68 (95%CI, 0.60-0.75) in Group B, and 0.69 (95%CI, 0.64-0.74) in Group C. The 5-year overall survival (OS) rate was 0.64 (95%CI, 0.57-0.71) in Group A, 0.79 (95%CI, 0.71-0.85) in Group B, and 0.77 (95%CI, 0.73-0.81) in Group C. Compared with Group C, patients in Group A had a significantly worse OS (hazard ratio [HR] for death 2.10) and a worse DFS (HR for relapse/death 1.93), while patients in Group B had a similar OS (HR 1.12) and DFS (HR 1.07).

CONCLUSIONS

Adenocarcinomas of the upper third of the rectum and the rectosigmoid-junction seem to have similar prognosis as colon cancers. Even for surgeons not familiar with the TME technique, preoperative radiotherapy may be avoided for most rectosigmoid cancers above 11 cm from anal-verge.

Colorectal cancer: prevention and management of metastatic disease

This paper compared the similarities and differences of the two most common types of colorectal cancer metastases. The treatment of liver metastases by surgery combined with systemic chemotherapy was explained. The different natural history of liver metastases as compared to peritoneal metastases and the possibility for prevention of peritoneal metastases were emphasized. Perioperative cancer chemotherapy or second-look surgery must be considered as individualized treatments of selected patients who have small volume peritoneal metastases or who are known to be at risk for subsequent disease progression on peritoneal surfaces. However, the fact that peritoneal metastases, when diagnosed in the follow-up of colorectal cancer patients, can be cured with a combination of cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic perioperative chemotherapy cannot be ignored. Careful follow-up and timely intervention in colorectal cancer patients with progressive disease are a necessary part of the management strategies recommended by the multidisciplinary team. After a critical evaluation of the data currently available, these strategies for prevention and management of colorectal metastases are presented as the author's recommendations for a high standard of care. As more information becomes available, modifications may be necessary.

Effect of portal vein chemotherapy on liver metastasis after surgical resection of colorectal cancer

OBJECTIVE

To explore the effect of portal vein chemotherapy on liver metastasis after surgical resection of colorectal cancer.

METHODS

Patients fulfilling the eligibility criteria were assigned to receive either surgery plus 1-week continuous infusion of 5-FU (study group) or surgery alone (observational group). Patients in the study group received portal vein chemotherapy, whereby 5-FU (1000 mg/d) and heparin (5000 IU/d) infusion was initiated from the day of surgery and lasted for 7 consecutive days. Liver metastasis was monitored during five years follow-up postoperatively.

RESULTS

Sixty four patients were recruited and assigned to the study group (12 with colon and 20 with rectal cancer) or the control group (10 with colon and 22 with rectal cancer). Liver metastasis rate was 12.5% in study and 25.0% in observational group, the difference being significant (P<0.01).

CONCLUSION

Portal vein chemotherapy could be an effective treatment in preventing liver metastasis after surgical resection of colorectal cancer.

Adjuvant systemic chemotherapy for Stage II and III colon cancer after complete resection: an updated practice guideline

AIMS

The standard adjuvant therapy for resected stage III colon cancer has been intravenous 5-fluorouracil. However, newer chemotherapy agents, such as capecitabine, oxaliplatin and irinotecan, have been investigated in clinical trials since the publication of the original guidelines. The Gastrointestinal Cancer Disease Site Group (DSG) conducted a systematic review of the evidence for the use of adjuvant systemic chemotherapy for patients with resected stage II and III colon cancer and developed an updated practice guideline based on that evidence and expert consensus. The following research questions were addressed: Should patients with stage II or III colon cancer receive adjuvant systemic chemotherapy? What are the preferred adjuvant systemic chemotherapy options for patients with completely resected stage II or III colon cancer? Outcomes of interest were disease-free survival, overall survival, adverse effects and quality of life.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic search of published studies was conducted for the time period following the publication of the original guidelines to identify relevant randomised trials and syntheses of evidence in the form of meta-analyses. Recommendations were based on that evidence, evidence contained in the original guidelines and consensus of the Gastrointestinal Cancer DSG. The systematic review and practice guideline were externally reviewed through a mailed survey of practitioners in Ontario, Canada.

RESULTS

Recommendations were drafted based on the available evidence and expert consensus.

CONCLUSIONS

The routine use of adjuvant chemotherapy for all patients with stage II colon cancer is not recommended. However, a subset of patients with high-risk stage II disease should be considered for adjuvant therapy. Patients with completely resected stage III colon cancer should be offered adjuvant chemotherapy. Treatment should depend on factors such as patient suitability and preference, and patients and clinicians must work together to determine the optimal course of treatment.

Regional hepatic chemotherapies in the treatment of colorectal cancer metastases to the liver

The liver is the most common site of metastatic spread of colorectal cancer (CRC). Liver may be the only site of spread in as many as 30% to 40% of patients with advanced disease and can be treated with regional therapies directed toward their liver tumors. Surgery is currently the only potentially curative treatment, with a 5-year survival rate as high as 30% to 40% in selected patients. However, fewer than 25% of cases are candidates for curative resection. A number of other locoregional therapies, such as radiofrequency or microwave ablation, cryotherapy, and chemotherapy, may be offered to patients with unresectable but isolated liver metastases. However, for most patients with metastatic spread beyond the liver, systemic chemotherapy rather than regional therapy is a more appropriate option. We review the status of various regional hepatic chemotherapies in the treatment of colorectal metastases to the liver in the light of the available, published prospective, randomized trials; this discipline has not yet been properly applied to the burgeoning use of locally ablative techniques. The regional strategies reviewed include portal venous infusion (PVI) of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), intra-arterial chemotherapy (hepatic arterial infusion [HAI]), chemoembolization, and selective internal radiation therapy (SIRT).