Determinants of morbidity and survival after elective non-curative resection of stage IV colon and rectal cancer

Management Strategies for Malignant Left-Sided Colonic Obstruction: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials and Propensity Score Matching Studies

BACKGROUND

The optimal treatment strategy for left-sided malignant colonic obstruction remains controversial. Emergency colonic resection has been the standard of care; however, self-expanding metallic stenting as a bridge to surgery may offer short-term advantages, although oncological concerns exist. Decompressing stoma may provide a valid alternative, with limited evidence.

OBJECTIVE

To perform a systematic review and Bayesian arm random-effects model network meta-analysis comparing the approaches for management of malignant left-sided colonic obstruction.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic review of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar databases was conducted from inception to August 22, 2023.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized controlled trials and propensity score-matched studies.

INTERVENTIONS

Emergency colonic resection, self-expanding metallic stent, and decompressing stoma.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Oncologic efficacy, morbidity, successful minimally invasive surgery, primary anastomosis, and permanent stoma rates.

RESULTS

Nineteen of 5225 articles identified met our inclusion criteria. Stenting (risk ratio 0.57; 95% credible interval, 0.33-0.79) and decompressing stomas (risk ratio 0.46, 95% credible interval: 0.18-0.92) resulted in a significant reduction in the permanent stoma rate. Stenting facilitated minimally invasive surgery more frequently (risk ratio 4.10; 95% credible interval, 1.45-13.13) and had lower overall morbidity (risk ratio 0.58; 95% credible interval, 0.35-0.86). A pairwise analysis of primary anastomosis rates showed increased stenting (risk ratio 1.40; 95% credible interval, 1.31-1.49) compared with emergency resection. There was a significant decrease in the 90-day mortality with stenting (risk ratio 0.63; 95% credible interval, 0.41-0.95) compared with resection. There were no differences in disease-free and overall survival rates, respectively.

LIMITATIONS

There is a lack of randomized controlled trials and propensity score matching data comparing short-term and long-term outcomes for diverting stomas compared to self-expanding metallic stents. Two trials compared self-expanding metallic stents and diverting stomas in left-sided malignant colonic obstruction.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides high-level evidence that a bridge-to-surgery strategy is safe for the management of left-sided malignant colonic obstruction and may facilitate minimally invasive surgery, increase primary anastomosis rates, and reduce permanent stoma rates and postoperative morbidity compared with emergency colonic resection.

Has the open surgical approach in colorectal cancer really become uncommon?

Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer in the world. Surgery is mandatory to treat patients with colorectal cancer. Can colorectal cancer be treated in laparoscopy? Scientific literature has validated the oncological quality of laparoscopic approach for the treatment of patients with colorectal cancer. Randomized non-inferiority trials with good remote control have answered positively to this long-debated question. Early as 1994, first publications demonstrated technical feasibility and compliance with oncological imperatives and, as far as short-term outcomes are concerned, there is no difference in terms of mortality and post-operative morbidity between open and minimally invasive surgical approaches, but only longer operating times at the beginning of the experience. Subsequently, from 2007 onwards, long-term results were published that demonstrated the absence of a significant difference regarding overall survival, disease-free survival, quality of life, local and distant recurrence rates between open and minimally invasive surgery. In this editorial, we aim to summarize the clinical and technical aspects which, even today, make the use of open surgery relevant and necessary in the treatment of patients with colorectal cancer.

The Real-Life Impact of Primary Tumor Resection of Synchronous Metastatic Colorectal Cancer-From a Clinical Oncologic Point of View

AIM

The complex medical care of synchronous metastatic colorectal (smCRC) patients requires prudent multidisciplinary planning and treatments due to various challenges caused by the primary tumor and its metastases. The role of primary tumor resection (PTR) is currently uncertain; strong arguments exist for and against it. We aimed to define its effect and find its best place in our therapeutic methodology.

METHOD

We performed retrospective data analysis to investigate the clinical course of 449 smCRC patients, considering treatment modalities and the location of the primary tumor and comparing the clinical results of the patients with or without PTR between 1 January 2013 and 31 December 2018 at the Institute of Oncotherapy of the University of Pécs.

RESULTS

A total of 63.5% of the 449 smCRC patients had PTR. Comparing their data to those whose primary tumor remained intact (IPT), we observed significant differences in median progression-free survival with first-line chemotherapy (mPFS1) (301 vs. 259 days; p < 0.0001; 1 y PFS 39.2% vs. 26.6%; OR 0.56 (95% CI 0.36-0.87)) and median overall survival (mOS) (760 vs. 495 days; p < 0.0001; 2 y OS 52.4 vs. 26.9%; OR 0.33 (95% CI 0.33-0.53)), respectively. However, in the PTR group, the average ECOG performance status was significantly better (0.98 vs. 1.1; p = 0.0456), and the use of molecularly targeted agents (MTA) (45.3 vs. 28.7%; p = 0.0005) and rate of metastasis ablation (MA) (21.8 vs. 1.2%; p < 0.0001) were also higher, which might explain the difference partially. Excluding the patients receiving MTA and MA from the comparison, the effect of PTR remained evident, as the mOS differences in the reduced PTR subgroup compared to the reduced IPT subgroup were still strongly significant (675 vs. 459 days; p = 0.0009; 2 y OS 45.9 vs. 24.1%; OR 0.37 (95% CI 0.18-0.79). Further subgroup analysis revealed that the site of the primary tumor also had a major impact on the outcome considering only the IPT patients; shorter mOS was observed in the extrapelvic IPT subgroup in contrast with the intrapelvic IPT group (422 vs. 584 days; p = 0.0026; 2 y OS 18.2 vs. 35.9%; OR 0.39 (95% CI 0.18-0.89)). Finally, as a remarkable finding, it should be emphasized that there were no differences in OS between the smCRC PTR subgroup and metachronous mCRC patients (mOS 760 vs. 710 days, p = 0.7504, 2 y OS OR 0.85 (95% CI 0.58-1.26)).

CONCLUSIONS

The role of PTR in smCRC is still not professionally justified. Our survey found that most patients had benefited from PTR. Nevertheless, further prospective trials are needed to clarify the optimal treatment sequence of smCRC patients and understand this cancer disease's inherent biology.

The preventive effect of oral 76% Meglumine Diatrizoate for the postoperative ileus

After emergency surgery for intestinal obstruction caused by colorectal cancer, postoperative ileus (POI) is more likely to occur in the early-stage oral intake. POI incited the occurrence of postoperative complications and prolongs hospital stay. Reducing the occurrence of POI will Enhance Recovery After Surgery (ERAS).

AIM

The aim of this study is to observe and evaluate the preventive effect of postoperative oral administration of 76% Meglumine Diatrizoate in reducing the incidence of POI and promoting intestinal absorption during the recovery of intestinal peristalsis in patients after intestinal obstruction surgery.

METHODS

From October 2018 to December 2021, 94 patients (47 vs 47) with intestinalobstruction were rolled. Patients with an ASA score of 4 or higher and gastrointestinal perforation with peritonitis were excluded. After 24 hours of surgery, the patients were divided into experimental group and control group disposed of with an opaque airtight envelope method, patient-side single blind. After intestinal peristalsis recovery (2.45 ± 0.62 d vs 2.60 ± 0.68 d, P > 0.05), the experimental group was given 76% Meglumine Diatrizoate 20 ml orally 9am and the control group was given 10% glucose 20 ml for three consecutive days. POI cases, the time taken to achieve full daily oral calorie and discharge days were counted.

RESULTS

The time required to achieve full daily oral calorie (11.04 ± 2.70 d vs 14.09 ± 3.74 d, p < 0.05), POI cases (10/47 vs 20/47, p < 0.05) and discharge days (14.00 ± 4.89 d vs 16.77 ± 5.94 d, p < 0.05) are significantly different between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Oral 76% Meglumine Diatrizoate is safe and effective, which can reduce the occurrence of POI, promote the recovery of intestinal absorption and shorten the length of hospital stay effectively.

Survival for patients with metastatic colon cancer underwent cytoreductive colectomy in the era of rapid development of anticancer drugs: A real-world analysis based on updated population dataset of 2004-2018

Objective: Metastatic colon cancer (mCC) poses a great threat to the survival of patients suffering from it. In the past decade, many clinical trials have been carried out to improve the prognosis of patients with mCC. Numerous treatments have emerged, and satisfactory efficacy has been demonstrated in randomized phase III trials in highly selective patients with mCC. Our present study aims to investigate whether these therapeutic advances can be reflected to the broader mCC patients who performed cytoreductive colectomy. Method: General and prognostic data for patients diagnosed with mCC who underwent cytoreductive colectomy between 2004-2018 were extracted from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Survival was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards model. The hazard ratio (HR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI) were used to evaluate the influence of risk factors on prognosis. Results: A total of 26,301 patients diagnosed with mCC treated with cytoreductive colectomy were included in this study. The median overall survival was 19 months (range, 17-23). The good prognosis was associated with patients diagnosed at the most recent year, younger age, non-black race, female, married, without previous history of malignancy, no second malignancy onset, descending/sigmoid/splenic flexure colon tumor, normal CEA levels at diagnosis, low primary tumor burden, T1/T2 stage, N0 stage, single organ metastasis, underwent surgical resection of synchronous distant metastatic lymph nodes or organs, a high number of lymph-node examinations, low positive lymph-node ratio and received adjuvant chemotherapy. The proportion of patients surviving for ≥24 months increased from 37% in 2004 to 44.2% in 2016 (p < 0.001), especially in ≤49 years patients [46.8% in 2004 to 57.8% in 2016 (p < 0.001)]. The percentage of patients who died within 3 months decreased between 2004 and 2018 (from 19.6% to 15.7%; p < 0.001). Conclusion: Over a span of 15 years, the long-term survival has improved in real-world mCC patients who were treated with cytoreductive colectomy, especially among younger patients. However, the median overall survival remains not substantial.

OUP accepted manuscript

Background

As the outcome of modern colorectal cancer (CRC) surgery has significantly improved over the years, however, renewed and adequate risk stratification for mortality is important to identify high-risk patients. This population-based study was conducted to analyse postoperative outcomes in patients with CRC and to create a risk model for 30-day mortality.

Methods

Data from the Dutch Colorectal Audit were used to assess differences in postoperative outcomes (30-day mortality, hospital stay, blood transfusion, postoperative complications) in patients with CRC treated from 2009 to 2017. Time trends were analysed. Clinical variables were retrieved (including stage, age, sex, BMI, ASA grade, tumour location, timing, surgical approach) and a prediction model with multivariable regression was computed for 30-day mortality using data from 2009 to 2014. The predictive performance of the model was tested among a validation cohort of patients treated between 2015 and 2017.

Results

The prediction model was obtained using data from 51 484 patients and the validation cohort consisted of 32 926 patients. Trends of decreased length of postoperative hospital stay and blood transfusions were found over the years. In stage I–III, postoperative complications declined from 34.3 per cent to 29.0 per cent (P < 0.001) over time, whereas in stage IV complications increased from 35.6 per cent to 39.5 per cent (P = 0.010). Mortality decreased in stage I–III from 3.0 per cent to 1.4 per cent (P < 0.001) and in stage IV from 7.6 per cent to 2.9 per cent (P < 0.001). Eight factors, including stage, age, sex, BMI, ASA grade, tumour location, timing, and surgical approach were included in a 30-day mortality prediction model. The results on the validation cohort documented a concordance C statistic of 0.82 (95 per cent c.i. 0.80 to 0.83) for the prediction model, indicating good discriminative ability.

Conclusion

Postoperative outcome improved in all stages of CRC surgery in the Netherlands. The developed model accurately predicts postoperative mortality risk and is clinically valuable for decision-making.

Sixty-Day Mortality of Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Randomized to Systemic Treatment vs Primary Tumor Resection Followed by Systemic Treatment: The CAIRO4 Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

The role of primary tumor resection (PTR) in synchronous patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) who had unresectable metastases and few or absent symptoms of their primary tumor is unclear. Studying subgroups with low postoperative mortality may identify patients who potentially benefit from PTR.

Objective

To determine the difference in 60-day mortality between patients randomized to systemic treatment only vs PTR followed by systemic treatment, and to explore risk factors associated with 60-day mortality.

Design, Setting, and Participants

CAIRO4 is a randomized phase 3 trial initiated in 2012 in which patients with mCRC were randomized to systemic treatment only or PTR followed by systemic treatment with palliative intent. This multicenter study was conducted by the Danish and Dutch Colorectal Cancer Group in general and academic hospitals in Denmark and the Netherlands. Patients included between August 2012 and December 2019 with histologically proven colorectal cancer, unresectable metastases, and a primary tumor with few or absent symptoms were eligible.

Interventions

Systemic treatment, consisting of fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy with bevacizumab vs PTR followed by fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy with bevacizumab.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The aim of the current analysis was to compare 60-day mortality rates in both treatment arms. A secondary aim was the identification of risk factors for 60-day mortality in the treatment arms. These aims were not predefined in the study protocol.

Results

A total of 196 patients were included in the intention-to-treat analysis (112 [57%] men; median [IQR] age, 65 [59-70] years). Sixty-day mortality was 3% (95% CI, 1%-9%) in the systemic treatment arm and 11% (95% CI, 6%-19%) in the PTR arm (P = .03). In a per-protocol analysis, 60-day mortality was 2% (95% CI, 1%-7%) vs 10% (95% CI, 5%-18%; P = .048). Patients with elevated serum levels of lactate dehydrogenase, aspartate aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase, and/or neutrophils who were randomized to PTR had a significantly higher 60-day mortality than patients without these characteristics.

Conclusions and Relevance

Patients with mCRC who were randomized to PTR followed by systemic treatment had a higher 60-day mortality than patients randomized to systemic treatment. Especially patients randomized to the PTR arm with elevated serum levels of lactate dehydrogenase, neutrophils, aspartate aminotransferase, and/or alanine aminotransferase were at high risk of postoperative mortality. Final study results on overall survival have to be awaited.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01606098.

Impact of Treatment Coordination on Overall Survival in Rectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Rectal cancer treatment is often multimodal, comprising of surgery, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy. However, the impact of coordination between these modalities is currently unknown. We aimed to assess whether delivery of nonsurgical therapy within same facility as surgery impacts survival in patients with rectal cancer.

METHODS

A patient cohort with rectal cancer stages II to IV who received multimodal treatment between 2004 and 2016 from National Cancer Database was retrospectively analyzed. Patients were categorized into three groups: (A) surgery + chemotherapy + radiotherapy at same facility (surgery + 2); (B) surgery + chemotherapy or radiotherapy at same facility (surgery + 1); or (C) only surgery at reporting facility (chemotherapy + radiotherapy elsewhere; surgery + 0). The primary outcome was 5-year overall survival (OS), analyzed using Kaplan-Meier curves, log-rank tests, and Cox proportional-hazards models.

RESULTS

A total of 44,716 patients (16,985 [37.98%] surgery + 2, 12,317 [27.54%] surgery + 1, and 15,414 [34.47%] surgery + 0) were included. In univariate analysis, we observed that surgery+2 patients had significantly greater 5-year OS compared to surgery + 1 or surgery + 0 patients (5-year OS: 63.46% vs 62.50% vs 61.41%, respectively; P= .002). We observed similar results in multivariable Cox proportional-hazards analysis, with surgery + 0 group demonstrating increased hazard of mortality when compared to surgery + 2 group (HR: 1.09; P< .001). These results held true after stratification by stage for stage II (HR 1.10; P= .022) and stage III (HR 1.12; P< .001) but not for stage IV (P= .474).

CONCLUSION

Greater degree of care coordination within the same facility is associated with greater OS in patients with stage II to III rectal cancer. This finding illustrates the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration in multimodal rectal cancer therapy.

Prognostic Impact of Tumor Status, Nodal Status and Tumor Sidedness in Metastatic Colon Cancer

Background Locally advanced primary tumors have been associated with poor overall survival (OS) in non-metastatic colon cancer. However, their impact on metastatic colon cancer (mCC) is not fully defined. The association between primary tumor location and prognosis in mCC is also evolving. Methods Using National Cancer Data Base, we identified a cohort of 25,377 patients diagnosed with mCC from 2004-2009. Chi-square test was used for descriptive analyses, while all potential prognostic factors were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier survival estimates and Cox proportional hazards regression modeling. Results The five-year OS for the entire study cohort was 12.3%. Factors associated with significant survival impact in multivariate analysis included age, gender, race, comorbidity index, academic level of treating institution, insurance status, income, year of diagnosis, primary tumor site, histologic differentiation, pathologic tumor stage (pT), pathologic nodal stage (pN), and modality of chemotherapy. pT1 lesions demonstrated poor prognosis in stage IV colon cancers, not statistically different when compared to survival outcomes observed in cases with pT4 lesions. Regional nodal involvement demonstrated poor OS in full cohort analysis and subgroup analysis independent of primary tumor location. Both right-sided and transverse colon tumors had similarly worse OS compared to left-sided tumors (right-sided: HR: 1.21, 95% CI: 1.17-1.25; transverse: HR: 1.21, 95% CI: 1.15-1.27). Conclusions T1 lesions arising from right-side or transverse colon portend a poor prognosis in mCC, while regional lymph node involvement by itself is an independent poor prognostic factor. Right-sided tumors are associated with poor outcomes than left-sided tumors, suggesting the role of underlying molecular or biologic variants.

Antibiotics Improve the Treatment Efficacy of Oxaliplatin-Based but Not Irinotecan-Based Therapy in Advanced Colorectal Cancer Patients

Background

Oxaliplatin and irinotecan are generally used to treat advanced colorectal cancer (CRC) patients. Antibiotics improve the cytotoxicity of oxaliplatin but not irinotecan in a colon cancer cell line in vitro. This study retrospectively assessed whether antibiotics improve the treatment efficacy of oxaliplatin- but not irinotecan-based therapy in advanced CRC patients. Patients and Methods. The medical records of 220 advanced CRC patients who underwent oxaliplatin- or irinotecan-based therapy were retrospectively reviewed. The oxaliplatin and irinotecan groups were further divided into antibiotic-treated (group 1) and antibiotic-untreated (group 2) subgroups.

Results

In oxaliplatin groups 1 and 2, the response rate (RR) was 58.2% and 30.2%, while the disease control rate (DCR) was 92.5% and 64.2%, respectively; the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 10.5 months (95% confidence interval (CI) = 7.5–12.2) and 7.0 months (95% CI = 17.0–26.0), respectively, and the median overall survival (OS) was 23.8 months (95% CI = 5.1–9.1) and 17.4 months (95% CI = 13.1–24.9), respectively. In irinotecan groups 1 and 2, the RR was 17.8% and 20.0%, while the DCR was 75.6% and 69.1%, respectively; the median PFS was 8.2 months (95% CI = 6.2–12.7) and 7.9 months (95% CI = 12.0–23.0), respectively, and the median OS was 16.8 months (95% CI = 5.9–10.6) and 13.1 months (95% CI = 10.4–23.7), respectively.

Conclusion

To improve the treatment efficacy of oxaliplatin-based therapy in advanced CRC patients, adding antibiotics is a potential therapeutic option.

Analysis of Nonsurgical Treatment Options for Metastatic Rectal Cancer

INTRODUCTION

Using a large national registry, we investigated patterns of care and overall survival (OS) for metastatic rectal cancer patients treated with chemotherapy or radiotherapy (RT), or with a multimodal approach.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Adult patients with metastatic rectal cancer who did not undergo resection diagnosed from 2004 to 2014 were included. Kaplan-Meier, log-rank, and Cox regression analyses were performed.

RESULTS

We identified 2385 patients. Of these, 1020 patients (43%) received chemotherapy alone, 228 (10%) received RT alone, 850 (36%) received chemotherapy and RT, and 287 (12%) received no treatment. Receipt of chemotherapy alone increased over the study period, and receipt of chemoradiotherapy decreased (P < .01). The only factor predictive of receiving any RT on multivariate analysis was clinical stage T3 disease. Factors predictive of OS on multivariate analysis included receipt of chemotherapy, Hispanic race, income greater than $46,000, and presence of lung metastasis. The OS for patients treated with chemotherapy and RT was not significantly different than chemotherapy alone. Five-year OS with chemotherapy alone, RT alone, chemoradiotherapy, and no treatment were, respectively, 84%, 56%, 79%, and 46%.

CONCLUSION

Metastatic rectal cancer patients with T3 tumors were more likely to receive RT. Local RT does not improve survival for patients with metastatic rectal cancer who do not also undergo surgery. The use of chemotherapy alone for metastatic rectal cancer is increasing, and chemotherapy is associated with higher OS compared to no treatment and RT alone. This remained true even in patients older than 80 years.

Surgical treatment of stage IV colorectal cancer with synchronous liver metastases: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The ideal treatment approach for colorectal cancer (CRC) with synchronous liver metastases (SCRLM) remains debated. We performed a network meta-analysis (NMA) comparing the 'bowel-first' approach (BFA), simultaneous resection (SIM), and the 'liver-first' approach (LFA).

METHODS

A systematic search of comparative studies in CRC with SCRLM was undertaken using the Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, and CENTRAL databases. Outcome measures included postoperative complications, 30- and 90-day mortality, chemotherapy use, treatment completion rate, 3- and 5-year recurrence-free survival, and 3- and 5-year overall survival (OS). Pairwise and network meta-analysis were performed to compare strategies. Heterogeneity was assessed using the Higgins I² statistic.

RESULTS

One prospective and 43 retrospective studies reporting on 10 848 patients were included. Patients undergoing the LFA were more likely to have rectal primaries and a higher metastatic load. The SIM approach resulted in a higher risk of major morbidity and 30-day mortality. Compared to the BFA, the LFA more frequently resulted in failure to complete treatment as planned (34% versus 6%). Pairwise and network meta-analysis showed a similar 5-year OS between LFA and BFA and a more favorable 5-year OS after SIM compared to LFA (odds ratio 0.25-0.90, p = 0.02, I² = 0%), but not compared to BFA.

CONCLUSION

Despite a higher tumor load in LFA compared to BFA patients, survival was similar. A lower rate of treatment completion was observed with LFA. Uncertainty remains substantial due to imprecise estimates of treatment effects. In the absence of prospective trials, treatment of stage IV CRC patients should be individually tailored.

The outcome of primary tumor resection in the unresectable stage IV colorectal cancer patients who received the bevacizumab-containing chemotherapy

Primary tumor resection (PTR) for unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients has been documented to be associated with postoperative hyper-neovascularization and enhanced growth of metastases, which may be prevented by bevacizumab. This study aimed to investigate the survival outcome of PTR in patients who received palliative bevacizumab-containing chemotherapy (BCT).From January 2006 to December 2018, medical records of 240 mCRC patients who received palliative BCT at a single tertiary colorectal cancer center were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were classified into three groups: PTR-a (PTR before BCT, n = 60), PTR-b (PTR during BCT, n = 17), and BCT-only group (n = 163). Resectable mCRCs or recurrent diseases were excluded, and the end-point was overall survival (OS) rate.Three groups had similar age, cell differentiation, location of the primary tumor, and the number of metastatic organs. More than two-thirds of patients who received PTR experienced disease-progressions (PD) during their postoperative chemotherapy-free time (PTR-a vs PTR-b; 66.7% vs 76.5%, P = .170), but OS was not inferior to the BCT-only group (PTR-a vs BCT-only; HR 0.477 [95% CI 0.302-0.754], P = .002/PTR-b vs BCT-only; HR 0.77 [95% CI 0.406-1.462], P = .425). The postoperative chemotherapy-free time was similar between PTR-a and PTR-b (median 32.0 [14-98] days vs 41.0 [18-71] days, P = .142), but non-obstructive indications (perforation, bleeding, pain) were the more frequent in the PTR-b than PTR-a. Young age, the number of BCT, and PTR-a were the independent factors for OS.The efficacy of the PTR for unresectable mCRC has been controversial, but this study demonstrated that PTR should be considered for the unresectable mCRC patients regardless before and during BCT.

Endoscopic stenting in colorectal cancer

Acute malignant large bowel obstruction presents as one of the few emergencies of colorectal cancer (CRC). Management of this condition can either be by (I) upfront surgery or (II) the use of self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS) as a bridge to elective surgery. For patients with metastasis, the use of SEMS is reported to enable earlier commencement of chemotherapy. Although the use of SEMS in patients with acute malignant large bowel obstruction looks promising, it is plagued by its own set of complications and divided opinion over its long-term outcomes. Conflicting data are present, and definitive indication requires further evaluation and debate. This article will describe the typical presentation of patients with acute malignant large bowel obstruction. An introduction to the SEMS insertion procedural steps will be undertaken. Following which the article aims to review the safety profile of SEMS and the short- and long-term outcomes of SEMS in both the curative and palliative setting.

A novel scoring system predicting survival benefits of palliative primary tumor resection for patients with unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer: A retrospective cohort study protocol

The role of palliative primary tumor resection (PPTR) in improving survival in patients with synchronous unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is controversial. In this study, we aimed to evaluate whether our novel scoring system could predict survival benefits of PPTR in mCRC patients.In this retrospective cohort study consecutive patients with synchronous mCRC and unresectable metastases admitted to Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital between January 2005 and December 2013 were identified. A scoring system was established by the serum levels of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), cancer antigen 19-9 (CA19-9), neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio (NLR), and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH). Patients with scores of 0, 1-2, or 3-4 were considered as being in the low, intermediate, and high score group, respectively. Primary outcome was overall survival (OS).A total of 138 eligible patients were included in the analysis, of whom 103 patients had undergone PPTR and 35 had not. The median OS of the PPTR group was better than that of the Non-PPTR group, with 26.2 and 18.9 months, respectively (P < .01). However, the subgroup of PPTR with a high score (3-4) showed no OS benefit (13.3 months) compared with that of the Non-PPTR group (18.9 months, P = .11). The subgroup of PPTR with a low score (52.1 months) or intermediate score (26.2 months) had better OS than that of the Non-PPTR group (P < .001, P = .017, respectively).A novel scoring system composed of CEA, CA19-9, NLR, and LDH values is a feasible method to evaluate whether mCRC patients would benefit from PPTR. It might guide clinical decision making in selecting patients with unresectable mCRC for primary tumor resection.

The impact of postoperative morbidity on survival in patients with metastatic colon and rectal cancer

INTRODUCTION

Avoiding postoperative morbidity is essential in patients with advanced cancer. To further improve treatment in stage IV colorectal cancer, knowledge about risk factors which effect short- and long-term outcomes is important.

METHODS

All stage IV colon and rectal cancer who underwent elective surgery between 2004 and 2015 were included (n = 345). We compared resectable colon and rectal patients, and unresectable colon and rectal cancer patients.

RESULTS

Median follow-up duration was 22.2 (unresectable) and 56.7 months (resectable) with no difference in tumor location. Colon cancer patients were more often considered unresectable (P < .001). Rectal procedures were correlated with a higher morbidity rate and a longer surgical duration (P < .001). In the resectable cohort, obese patients, open procedures and prolonged surgery were independently associated with postoperative complications. Considering the palliative group, neoadjuvant treatment and age were correlated with worse outcomes. Morbidity was not associated with long-term outcomes in the resectable cohort. However, unresectable patients who developed respiratory (hazard ratio [HR]: 7.53) or cardiac (HR: 3.75) complications and patients with an American Society of Anesthesiologists-score III to IV (HR: 1.51) had an impaired survival.

CONCLUSION

Our results emphasize the need for an adequate preoperative assessment to identify patients at risk for postoperative complications and impaired survival.

To resect or not to resect: The hamletic dilemma of primary tumor resection in patients with asymptomatic stage IV colorectal cancer

Primary tumor resection (PTR) in advanced asymptomatic colorectal cancer (CRC) has been a matter of intense debate for long time. With the advances in systemic treatments, this practice has decreased over the years, although it remains still pervasive. Although the removal of primary tumor has been extensively interrogated both in retrospective and prospective studies, it still remains a clinical conundrum. There are many arguments for and against PTR in CRC both from the preclinical and the clinical point of view. Two scoring models have been published aiming at identifying patients who are suitable candidate for PTR, but they deserve further investigations in larger datasets. While awaiting the results of ongoing randomized clinical trials (RCTs) on this controversial topic, both upfront systemic treatment and PTR followed by chemotherapy should be considered valid options in patients with asymptomatic mCRC. Clinical selection and a shared-decision making approach are the keys to success.

A systematic analysis highlighting deficiencies in reported outcomes for patients with stage IV colorectal cancer undergoing palliative resection of the primary tumour

BACKGROUND

Management of the primary tumour in the presence of unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is controversial. The role of primary tumour resection (PTR) has been investigated by a number of retrospective cohort studies, with a number on going randomised controlled trials. The aim of this study was to identify the clinical and patient-reported outcomes currently reported in studies that evaluate the role of PTR in mCRC.

METHODS

Literature searches were performed in MEDLINE (via OvidSP) (1966-June 2017), EMBASE (via OvidSP) and the Cochrane Library using terms related to colorectal cancer and primary tumour resection. All studies documenting outcomes following palliative PTR were included. Eligible articles were assessed using the Risk of Bias In Non-Randomised Studies of Intervention (ROBINS-I) tool.

RESULTS

Of 11,209 studies screened, 59 non-randomised studies reporting outcomes on 331,157 patients were included. Patient characteristics regarding performance status and co-morbidity were recorded in 26 (44.1%) and 17 (28.8%) studies. The chemotherapy regime used was reported in 27 (45.8%) studies. The operative setting and the operative approach was reported in 42 (71%) and 14 (23.7%) studies. Post-operative mortality and morbidity were reported in 33 (55.9%) and 35 (59.3%) studies. Overall survival was reported in 49 (83.1%) studies, with 5 different definitions identified. Quality of life was only reported in 1 (1.7%) study.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates significant heterogeneity in the selection and definition of outcomes reported following PTR in mCRC. There is significant heterogeneity with a significant under-reporting of important outcomes such as treatment related adverse events and patient reported outcomes.

Endoscopic stenting should be advocated in patients with stage IV colorectal cancer presenting with acute obstruction

Background

It remains contentious whether endoscopic stenting or upfront surgery is more optimal in patients with metastatic colorectal cancers presenting with large bowel obstruction.

Methods

A retrospective review of all patients with metastatic colorectal cancer who underwent either endoscopic stenting or emergency surgery for acute large bowel obstruction was performed.

Results

Between January 2007 and June 2014, 66 patients, median age, 64 (range, 25-96) years, presented with acute large bowel obstruction from metastatic colorectal cancer. Forty (60.6%) patients underwent endoscopic stenting whilst the rest received immediate upfront surgical intervention. Of the 40 patients, 29 (72.5%) were successfully stented. The remaining 11 (27.5%) patients who failed endoscopic stenting required immediate emergency surgery to relieve the obstruction. Patients who failed endoscopic stenting had worse complications than those patients who had their stents successfully inserted [odds ratio (OR), 23.3; 95% confidence interval (CI), 2.29-250.00, P=0.004]. Patients who underwent emergency surgery had a longer median length of stay than patients who had successful endoscopic stenting (P=0.003). The patients that underwent successful stenting had earlier commencement of chemotherapy compared to those who had upfront surgery (P=0.02). There was no difference in stoma creation rates between patients who had emergency surgery versus those who were successfully stented.

Conclusions

Stenting is a safe option in patients with stage IV colorectal cancer presenting with acute large bowel obstruction. Earlier commencement of chemotherapy occurs in patients who were successfully stented. Patients who failed stenting have equivalent outcomes to those who undergone upfront emergency surgery.

Short- and long-term outcomes following laparoscopic palliative resection for patients with incurable, asymptomatic stage IV colorectal cancer: A multicenter study in Japan

OBJECTIVE

This retrospective multicenter study compared short- and long-term results between Japanese patients with asymptomatic stage IV colorectal cancer who underwent palliative laparoscopic surgery (LS) versus those who underwent conventional open surgery (OS).

METHODS

Among 968 patients treated for stage IV colorectal cancer from January 2006 to December 2007 in 41 surgical units that were participating in the Japan Society of Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery group, we studied 398 patients who received palliative resection of their asymptomatic primary colorectal tumor.

RESULTS

We analyzed data from patients undergoing LS (LS group, n=106) and OS (OS group, n=292). Fourteen (13.2%) LS group patients were converted to OS. Although the differences between groups for postoperative complications were not significant, the mean time to solid food intake and postoperative length of hospital stay for the LS group were significantly shorter than those for the OS group (2 vs. 3 days, p<0.0001; 13 vs. 16 days, p<0.0001, respectively). The LS group patients experienced a longer median survival time than that of the OS group (24.5 vs. 23.9 months, p=0.0357).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic palliative resection (LS) offers advantages for short-term outcomes and no disadvantages for long-term outcomes. The use of laparoscopic procedures to treat asymptomatic, incurable stage IV colorectal cancer appears to be acceptable.

Characterization of methylthioadenosin phosphorylase (MTAP) expression in colorectal cancer

PURPOSE

Tumour seriously affects people's quality of life. Colorectal cancer is a refractory tumour in digestive tract tumors. In colorectal cancer, gene expression abnormalities is the main reason for its incidence, we mainly focus on the molecular mechanism of MTAP in the development of colorectal cancer.

METHODS

The tumour tissue and its adjacent tissue samples of 50 patients with colorectal cancer were screened from July 2011 to February 2015, and the expression of MTAP was detected. Cell lines that overexpress MTAP and low expression of MTAP were constructed in colorectal cancer cell lines. The cell proliferation, invasion and migration was detected in the cells with different expression levels of MTAP. Immunohistochemistry was used to detect the expression of MTAP in liver metastasis and to investigate its clinical significance. And statistics of clinical significance.

RESULTS

Q-PCR results showed that the expression of MTAP in colorectal cancer cell lines were significantly higher than that normal human colonic myofibroblasts cell line. Cell proliferation test results showed that cell proliferation was accelerated when MTAP was overexpression, cell invasion and migration were simultaneously accelerated. The expression of MTAP in primary liver was positively correlated with metastatic disease in patients with liver metastatic colorectal cancer via EMT.

CONCLUSIONS

MTAP accelerates the growth and metastasis of colorectal cancer through EMT.

Meta-analysis of outcomes following resection of the primary tumour in patients presenting with metastatic colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

It is not clear whether resection of the primary tumour (when there are metastases) alters survival and/or whether resection is associated with increased morbidity. This systematic review and meta-analysis assessed the prognostic value of primary tumour resection in patients presenting with metastatic colorectal cancer.

METHODS

A systematic review of MEDLINE/PubMed was performed on 12 March 2016, with no language or date restrictions, for studies comparing primary tumour resection versus conservative treatment without primary tumour resection for metastatic colorectal cancer. The quality of the studies was assessed using the MINORS and STROBE criteria. Differences in survival, morbidity and mortality between groups were estimated using random-effects meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Of 37 412 initially screened articles, 56 retrospective studies with 148 151 patients met the inclusion criteria. Primary tumour resection led to an improvement in overall survival of 7·76 (95 per cent c.i. 5·96 to 9·56) months (risk ratio (RR) for overall survival 0·50, 95 per cent c.i. 0·47 to 0·53), but did not significantly reduce the risk of obstruction (RR 0·50, 95 per cent c.i. 0·16 to 1·53) or bleeding (RR 1·19, 0·48 to 2·97). Neither was the morbidity risk altered (RR 1·14, 0·77 to 1·68). Heterogeneity between the studies was high, with a calculated I² of more than 50 per cent for most outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Primary tumour resection may provide a modest survival advantage in patients presenting with metastatic colorectal cancer.

Emergency Presentations of Colorectal Cancer

Many colorectal carcinomas will present emergently with issues such as obstruction, perforation, and bleeding. Emergency surgery is associated with poor short- and long-term outcomes. For abnormality localizing to the colon proximal to the splenic flexure, surgical management with hemicolectomy is often a safe and appropriate approach. Obstructions are more common in the distal colon, however, where there is an evolving spectrum of surgical and nonsurgical options, most notably by the development of endoluminal stents. Perforation and bleeding are managed similarly to benign causes, as malignancy may be only part of a differential diagnosis at the time of an operation.

Choosing wisely in cancer control across Canada-a set of baseline indicators

Value-based care, which balances high-quality care with the most efficient use of resources, has been considered the next frontier in cancer care and a means to maintain health system sustainability. Created to promote value-based care, Choosing Wisely Canada-modelled after Choosing Wisely in the United States-is a national clinician-driven campaign to identify unnecessary or harmful services that are frequently used in Canada. As part of the campaign, national medical societies have developed recommendations for tests and treatments that clinicians and patients should question. Here, we present baseline indicator findings about current practice patterns associated with 7 cancer-related recommendations from Choosing Wisely Canada and about the effects of those practices on patients and the health care system. Indicator findings point to substantial variations in cancer system performance between Canadian jurisdictions, most notably for breast cancer screening practices, treatment practices for men with low-risk localized prostate cancer, and radiation therapy practices for early-stage breast cancer and bone metastases. Extrapolating indicator findings to the entire country, it was estimated that 740,000 breast and cervical cancer screening tests were performed outside of the recommended age ranges, and within 1 year of diagnosis, 17,000 patients received treatments that could be low-value. A 15% reduction in the use of the 7 screening and treatment practices examined could lead to multiple benefits for patients and the health care system: 9000 false-positive results and 3000 treatments and related side effects could be avoided, and 4500 hours of linear accelerator capacity could be freed up each year. Interjurisdictional performance variations suggest potential differences in clinical practice patterns in the planning and delivery of cancer control services, and in some cases, in disease management outcomes. Although the cancer screening and treatment practices described might be unnecessary for some patients, it is important to realize that they could, in fact, be necessary for other patients. Further research into appropriate rates of use could help to determine how much cancer care represents overuse of practices that are not supported by evidence or underuse of practices that are supported by evidence.

High expression of PFTK1 in cancer cells predicts poor prognosis in colorectal cancer

The serine/threonine-protein kinase PFTAIRE 1 (PFTK1) is a member of the cyclin‑dependent kinase family that is highly expressed in several malignant tumors, including hepatocellular carcinoma, esophageal, breast and gastric cancers, and glioma. It contributes to tumor progression and influences tumor prognosis. However, the expression and clinicopathological significance of PFTK1 in human colorectal cancer (CRC) remain to be elucidated. The present study aimed to examine the expression of PFTK1 and to evaluate the clinical significance of its expression in human CRC. Reverse transcription‑quantitative polymerase chain reaction was performed on 10 fresh CRC and 10 surrounding normal tissue samples to detect and compare the expression of PFTK1 mRNA in CRC and normal colorectal tissues. Immunohistochemistry was performed on 179 CRC tissue specimens and 47 control samples of normal colorectal lesions to characterize the expression of PFTK1 protein. Kaplan‑Meier overall survival (OS) rate and Cox regression analyses were performed to evaluate the prognosis of patients with CRC. The expression of PFTK1 mRNA in CRC tissues (1.433±0.168) was significantly higher compared with normal tissues (0.853±0.107; t=1.97 ('t' was the value obtained from quantification of the mRNA data, following a paired t‑test), P=0.008). High PFTK1 expression in cancerous cells was detected in 92 of the CRC specimens (51.40%), and high levels of PFTK1 were associated with tumor node metastasis (TNM) stage (P=0.042), tumor classification (P=0.022) and preoperative carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) level (P<0.001). Kaplan‑Meier OS rate and Cox regression analysis revealed that high PFTK1 expression level (hazard ratio (HR)=1.999; P=0.019) was an independent prognostic factor of CRC patients. The degree of differentiation (HR, 0.368, P=0.003), TNM classification (HR, 2.118, P=0.001) and preoperative CEA level (HR, 2.302, P=0.003) were also predictors of the prognosis of patients with CRC. The present study suggested that PFTK1 may be a potential anticancer target and prognostic marker in patients with CRC.

Self-expanding metallic stent as a bridge to surgery in the treatment of left colon cancer obstruction: Cost-benefit analysis and oncologic results

INTRODUCTION

The use of a self-expanding metallic stent as a bridge to surgery in acute malignant left colonic obstruction has been suggested as an alternative treatment to emergency surgery. The aim of the present study was to compare the morbi-mortality, cost-benefit and long-term oncological outcomes of both therapeutic options.

METHODS

This is a prospective, comparative, controlled, non-randomized study (2005-2010) performed in a specialized unit. The study included 82 patients with left colon cancer obstruction treated by stent as a bridge to surgery (n=27) or emergency surgery (n=55) operated with local curative intention. The main outcome measures (postoperative morbi-mortaliy, cost-benefit, stoma rate and long-term oncological outcomes) were compared based on an "intention-to-treat" analysis.

RESULTS

There were no significant statistical differences between the two groups in terms of preoperative data and tumor characteristics. The technically successful stenting rate was 88.9% (11.1% perforation during stent placement) and clinical success was 81.4%. No difference was observed in postoperative morbi-mortality rates. The primary anastomosis rate was higher in the bridge to surgery group compared to the emergency surgery group (77.8% vs. 56.4%; P=.05). The mean costs in the emergency surgery group resulted to be €1,391.9 more expensive per patient than in the bridge to surgery group. There was no significant statistical difference in oncological long-term outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of self-expanding metalllic stents as a bridge to surgery is a safe option in the urgent treatment of obstructive left colon cancer, with similar short and long-term results compared to direct surgery, inferior mean costs and a higher rate of primary anastomosis.

Palliative resection of a primary tumor in patients with unresectable colorectal cancer: could resection type improve survival?

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of extended resection of primary tumor on survival outcome in unresectable colorectal cancer (UCRC).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was conducted for 190 patients undergoing palliative surgery for UCRC between 1998 and 2007 at a single institution. Variables including demographics, histopathological characteristics of tumors, surgical procedures, and course of the disease were examined.

RESULTS

Kaplan-Meier survival curve indicated a significant increase in survival times in patients undergoing extended resection of the primary tumor (P < 0.001). Multivariate analysis showed that extra-abdominal metastasis (P = 0.03), minimal resection of the primary tumor (P = 0.034), and the absence of multimodality adjuvant therapy (P < 0.001) were significantly associated poor survival outcome. The histological characteristics were significantly associated with survival times. Patients with well to moderate differentiation tumors that were extensively resected had significantly increased survival time (P < 0.001), while those with poor differentiation tumors that were extensively resected did not have increase survival time (P = 0.786).

CONCLUSION

Extended resection of primary tumors significantly improved overall survival compared to minimal resection, especially in well to moderately differentiated tumors (survival time: extended resection, 27.8 ± 2.80 months; minimal resection, 16.5 ± 2.19 months; P = 0.002).

Colonic stenting for malignant colonic obstruction with pneumatosis intestinalis: A case report

•

Pneumatosis intestinalis is characterized by the presence of air localizing in the submucosa and subserosa layers of the bowel wall.

•

Because of its risk of impending perforation, emergency surgery is generally required to be a definite treatment.

•

Colonic stenting can be used as a safe alternative procedure in the selected patient.

Introduction

Pneumatosis intestinalis is one of serious conditions following mechanical bowel obstruction. Emergency surgery is generally required to be a definite treatment in these patients of pneumatosis intestinalis, because of its risk of bowel ischemia and perforation. Since the operation in unprepared colon usually resulted in unfavorable outcome, the use of colonic stent is considered one of potential options as a bridge to definitive surgery. Presently, there is no widely published report of using colonic stent in these patients, particularly for stepping to curative surgery. Therefore, we herein report a case of obstructing sigmoid cancer with pneumatosis intestinalis who underwent successfully emergency metallic stent placement to convert from emergency to elective surgery.

Presentation of case

A 50-year-old woman presented with 3-day history of abdominal pain and obstipation. Abdominal computed tomography demonstrated a short segment of circumferential luminal narrowing at sigmoid colon, the presence of pneumatosis intestinalis at cecum, including ascending colon, and no extraluminal air. We performed colonoscopy and placed the metallic stent. The patient was then improved. After 1 week, the patient underwent elective hand-assisted laparoscopic sigmoidectomy and was discharged 5 days later. Pathological report showed stage IIa sigmoid cancer. The patient had no local recurrence or distant metastasis in 1 year follow up.

Conclusion

In obstructing colonic patient with pneumatosis intestinalis, nonsurgical treatment by colonic stenting can be used in selected patient as a bridge to definitive surgery. This will result in decreased morbidity and mortality and lower rate of stoma formation.

Australian contemporary management of synchronous metastatic colorectal cancer

INTRODUCTION

This article outlines the current Australian multidisciplinary treatment of synchronous metastatic colorectal adenocarcinoma and assesses the factors that influence patient outcome.

METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of the prospective 'Treatment of Recurrent and Advanced Colorectal Cancer' registry, describing the patient treatment pathway and documenting the extent of disease, resection of the colorectal primary and metastases, chemotherapy and biological therapy use. Cox regression models for progression-free and overall survival were constructed with a comprehensive set of clinical variables. Analysis was intentionn-ton-treat, quantifying the effect of treatment intent decided at the multidisciplinary team meeting (MDT).

RESULTS

One thousand one hundred and nine patients presented with synchronous metastatic disease between July 2009 and November 2015. Median follow-up was 15.8 months; 4.4% (group 1) had already curative resections of primary and metastases prior to MDT, 22.2% (group 2) were considered curative but were referred to MDT for opinion and/or medical oncology treatment prior to resection and 70.2% were considered palliative at MDT (group 3). Overall, 83% received chemotherapy, 55% had their primary resected and 23% had their metastases resected; 13% of resections were synchronous, 20% were staged with primary resected first and 62% had only the colorectal primary managed surgically. Performance status, metastasis resection (R0 versus R1 versus R2 versus no resection), resection of the colorectal primary and treatment intent determined at MDT were the most significant factors for progression-free and overall survival.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the largest Australian series of synchronous metastatic colorectal adenocarcinoma and offers insight into the nature and utility of contemporary practice.

Control of primary lesions using resection or radiotherapy can improve the prognosis of metastatic colorectal cancer patients

BACKGROUND

Control of the primary lesions in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is still controversial. For rectal cancer patients, not only resection but also irradiation is expected to provide palliative effects. We investigated the effects of resection and irradiation of primary lesions (local control) on the prognosis of mCRC patients.

PATIENTS

Forty-seven patients with mCRC at our institute were examined, with 34 in the local controlled group and 13 in the uncontrolled group.

RESULTS

The median survival time (MST) of the local controlled and uncontrolled groups were 2.90 and 1.39 years (P = 0.028). Cox proportional hazard regression analysis showed that local control was an independent prognostic factor (P < 0.05). The patients who underwent primary lesion resection had significantly longer MST (2.90 vs. 1.39 years, P = 0.032) than those in the uncontrolled group. In rectal cancer patients, the patients who underwent irradiation to control the primary lesions had a significantly longer MST than the uncontrolled patient group (1.97 vs. 1.39 years, P = 0.019).

CONCLUSIONS

Local control of primary lesions may improve the prognosis in mCRC patients. In rectal cancer patients with metastasis, not only resection but also irradiation of the primary lesions may be a useful therapeutic strategy. J. Surg. Oncol. 2016;114:75-79. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

High Rab27A expression indicates favorable prognosis in CRC

Background

Rab27A is a peculiar member in Rab family and has been suggested to play essential roles in the development of human cancers. However, the association between Rab27A expression and clinicopathological characteristics of colorectal cancer (CRC) has not been elucidated yet.

Methods

One-step quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) test with 18 fresh-frozen CRC samples and immunohistochemistry (IHC) analysis in 112 CRC cases were executed to evaluate the relationship between Rab27A expression and the clinicopathological features of CRC. Cox regression and Kaplan-Meier survival analyses were performed to identify the prognostic factors for 112 CRC patients.

Results

The results specified that the expression levels of Rab27A mRNA and protein were significantly higher in CRC tissues than that in matched non-cancerous tissues, in both qPCR test (p = 0.029) and IHC analysis (p = 0.020). The IHC data indicated that the Rab27A protein expression in CRC was statistically correlated with lymph node metastasis (p = 0.022) and TNM stage (p = 0.026). Cox multi-factor analysis and Kaplan-Meier method suggested Rab27A protein expression (p = 0.012) and tumor differentiation (p = 0.004) were significantly associated with the overall survival of CRC patients.

Conclusion

The data indicated the differentiate expression of Rab27A in CRC tissues and matched non-cancerous tissues. Rab27A may be used as a valuable prognostic biomarker for CRC patients.

Choosing Wisely Canada Cancer List: Ten Low-Value or Harmful Practices That Should Be Avoided In Cancer Care

Using knowledge translation and exchange efforts, this list should empower patients with cancer and physicians to participate in a targeted conversation about the appropriateness and quality of individual patient care.

GRECCAR 8: impact on survival of the primary tumor resection in rectal cancer with unresectable synchronous metastasis: a randomized multicentre study

Background

A majority of patients with rectal cancer and metastasis are not eligible to curative treatment because of an extensive and unresectable metastatic disease. Primary tumor resection is still debated in this situation. Rectal surgery treats or prevents the symptoms and avoids the risk of acute complications related to the primary tumor. Several studies on colorectal cancers seem to show interesting results in terms of survival in favor to the resection of the primary tumor. To date, no randomized trial or even a prospective study has assessed the impact of primary tumor resection on overall survival in patients with colorectal cancer with unresectable metastasis. All published studies were retrospective and included colon and rectal cancers. Rectal cancer is associated with specific problems related to the rectal surgery. Surgery is more complex, and may be source of more morbidity and postoperative functional dysfunctions (stoma, digestive, sexual, urinary) than colic surgery. On the other hand, symptoms related to the progression of rectal tumor are often very disabling: pain, rectal syndrome.

Methods/Design

GRECCAR 8 is a multicentre randomized open-label controlled trial aimed to evaluate the impact on survival of the primary tumor resection in rectal cancer with unresectable synchronous metastasis. Patients must undergo upfront systemic chemotherapy for at least 4 courses before inclusion. Patients with progressive metastatic disease during upfront chemotherapy will be excluded from the study. Patients will be randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to Arm A: primary tumor resection followed by systemic chemotherapy versus Arm B: systemic chemotherapy alone. Primary endpoint will be overall survival measured from the date of randomization to the date of death or to the end of follow-up (2 years). Secondary endpoints will include progression-free survival, quality of life, toxicity of chemotherapy, response of the primary tumor and metastatic disease to chemotherapy, postoperative morbidity and mortality, rate of patient not eligible for postoperative chemotherapy (arm A), primary tumor related complications and rate of emergency surgery (arm B). The number of patients needed is 290.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrial.gov: NCT02314182

The CAIRO4 study: the role of surgery of the primary tumour with few or absent symptoms in patients with synchronous unresectable metastases of colorectal cancer--a randomized phase III study of the Dutch Colorectal Cancer Group (DCCG)

Background

There is no consensus regarding resection of the primary tumour with few or absent symptoms in patients with synchronous unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC). A potential benefit of resection of the primary tumour is to prevent complications of the primary tumour in later stages of the disease. We here propose a randomized trial in order to demonstrate that resection of the primary tumour improves overall survival.

Methods/design

The CAIRO4 study is a multicentre, randomized, phase III study of the Dutch Colorectal Cancer Group (DCCG). Patients with synchronous unresectable metastases of CRC and few or absent symptoms of the primary tumour are randomized 1:1 between systemic therapy only, and resection of the primary tumour followed by systemic therapy. Systemic therapy will consist of fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy in combination with bevacizumab. The primary objective of this study is to determine the clinical benefit in terms of overall survival of initial resection of the primary tumour. Secondary endpoints include progression free survival, surgical morbidity, quality of life and the number of patients requiring resection of the primary tumour in the control arm.

Discussion

The CAIRO4 study is a multicentre, randomized, phase III study that will assess the benefit of resection of the primary tumour in patients with synchronous metastatic CRC.

Trial registration

The CAIRO4 study is registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01606098)

Prognostic Implications of Primary Tumor Resection in Stage IVB Colorectal Cancer in Elderly Patients

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to identify prognostic factors in stage IVB colorectal cancer in elderly patients, focusing on the influence of treatment modalities, including palliative chemotherapy and primary tumor resection.

METHODS

A cohort of 64 patients aged over 65 years who presented with stage IVB colorectal cancer at the Gangneung Asan Hospital between July 1, 2001, and December 31, 2009, was analyzed. Demographics, tumor location, tumor grade, performance status, levels of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), level of aspartate aminotransferase (AST), and distant metastatic site at diagnosis were analyzed. Using the treatment histories, we analyzed the prognostic implications of palliative chemotherapy and surgical resection of the primary tumor retrospectively.

RESULTS

The cohort consisted of 30 male (46.9%) and 34 female patients (53.1%); the median age was 76.5 years. Primary tumor resection was done on 28 patients (43.8%); 36 patients (56.2%) were categorized in the nonresection group. The median survival times were 12.43 months in the resection group and 3.58 months in the nonresection group (P < 0.001). Gender, level of CEA, level of AST, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, tumor location, and presence of liver metastasis also showed significant differences in overall survival. On multivariate analysis, male gender, higher level of CEA, higher AST level, and no primary tumor resection were independent poor prognostic factors. In particular, nonresection of the primary tumor was the most potent/poor prognostic factor in the elderly-patient study group (P = 0.001; 95% confidence interval, 2.33 to 21.99; hazard ratio, 7.16).

CONCLUSION

In stage IVB colorectal cancer in elderly patients, resection of the primary tumor may enhance survival.

Prognostic and predictive value of liver volume in colorectal cancer patients with unresectable liver metastases

PURPOSE

To determine the prognostic and predictive value of liver volume in colorectal cancer patients with unresectable liver metastases.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sixteen patients received whole liver radiotherapy (WLRT) between January 1997 and June 2013. A total dose of 21 Gy was delivered in 7 fractions.

RESULTS

The median survival time after WLRT was 9 weeks. In univariate analysis, performance status, serum albumin and total bilirubin level, liver volume and extrahepatic metastases were associated with survival. The mean liver volume was significantly different between subgroups with and without pain relief (3,097 and 4,739 mL, respectively; p = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

A larger liver volume is a poor prognostic factor for survival and also a negative predictive factor for response to WLRT. If patients who are referred for WLRT have large liver volume, they should be informed of the poor prognosis and should be closely observed during and after WLRT.

Primary tumor resection in colorectal cancer with unresectable synchronous metastases: A review

At the time of diagnosis, 25% of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) present with synchronous metastases, which are unresectable in the majority of patients. Whether primary tumor resection (PTR) followed by chemotherapy or immediate chemotherapy without PTR is the best therapeutic option in patients with asymptomatic CRC and unresectable metastases is a major issue, although unanswered to date. The aim of this study was to review all published data on whether PTR should be performed in patients with CRC and unresectable synchronous metastases. All aspects of the management of CRC were taken into account, especially prognostic factors in patients with CRC and unresectable metastases. The impact of PTR on survival and quality of life were reviewed, in addition to the characteristics of patients that could benefit from PTR and the possible underlying mechanisms. The risks of both approaches are reported. As no randomized study has been performed to date, we finally discussed how a therapeutic strategy's trial should be designed to provide answer to this issue.

Association between palliative resection of the primary tumor and overall survival in a population-based cohort of metastatic colorectal cancer patients

BACKGROUND

The impact of palliative resection of the primary tumor on outcomes in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) remains unclear. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the association between palliative resection and overall survival (OS) in a population-based cohort of mCRC.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with mCRC between 2006 and 2008 and treated at the BC Cancer Agency were reviewed. Survival analysis was conducted using Kaplan-Meier methods. Cox proportional hazards regression models were fitted to evaluate the relationship between palliative resection and OS while controlling for potential confounders, such as age, gender, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group status, carcinoembryonic antigen level, primary tumor location, metastatic site and number, and receipt of systemic therapy. To adjust for the heterogeneity and selection bias between the group that underwent palliative resection and the group that did not, a propensity score-matched analysis was also performed.

RESULTS

A total of 517 patients were included. Among these cases, 378 (73 %) patients underwent palliative resection of their primary tumor, and 139 (27 %) patients did not. A total of 327 patients (63 %) were treated with palliative chemotherapy. Palliative resection was associated with a longer median OS (17.9 vs. 7.9 months) and more favorable unadjusted and adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for death (HR 0.46, 95 % CI 0.37-0.56, p < 0.0001 and HR 0.56, 95 % CI 0.40-0.78, p = 0.0007, respectively) when compared with no resection. In a propensity score-matched analysis, prognosis was also more favorable in the resected group (p = 0.0017).

CONCLUSIONS

In this cohort of mCRC patients, palliative resection of the primary tumor was associated with improved OS.

The impact of primary tumor resection on overall survival in patients with colorectal carcinoma and unresectable distant metastases: a prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

To compare the patients with primary colorectal carcinoma (CRC) and non-resectable distant metastases with or without primary colorectal tumor resection as a primary treatment in terms of postoperative mortality and overall survival (OS).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The clinicopathological data of 188 CRC patients with non-resectable distant metastases was analyzed. All patient data were collected prospectively. Colorectal tumor was resected in 121 patients (64.3%). Kaplan-Meier method was used for calculation and plotting of the OS curves of the patient groups, and log-rank test was used for the comparison of the survival curves. The relative importance of the prognostic features was investigated using the Cox proportional hazards model.

RESULTS

In the whole series and in the patient group undergoing emergency surgical intervention, mortality rate was lower in patients having colorectal tumor resection compared with non-resected patients, with differences approaching the significance level (p = 0.072 and p = 0.076, respectively). Median OS time was significantly longer in resection group (11.0 months), compared with non-resection group (5.5 months) (p < 0.001); in the multivariate Cox analysis colorectal tumor resection had independent prognostic significance (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Resection of colorectal tumor in primary CRC patients with non-resectable distant metastasis gives significant survival advantage without increasing postoperative mortality compared with non-resection.

Is primary tumor resection associated with a longer survival in colon cancer and unresectable synchronous metastases? A 4-year multicentre experience

AIM

To explore the survival impact of primary tumor resection (PTR) in patients with metastatic colon cancer (mCC) and unresectable metastases.

METHODS

We retrospectively studied a multicenter cohort of consecutive mCC patients with unresectable metastases receiving first-line chemotherapy. A weighted Cox proportional regression model was used to balance for clinical variables associated with the probability of undergoing PTR, using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) based on a propensity score.

RESULTS

Ninety-six patients were included. PTR was performed in 69 (72%). The rates of secondary resection of metastases (p = 0.02) and bevacizumab administration (p = 0.02) were higher in the PTR group. Raw median overall survival (OS) was 23.1 months (95%CI[14.6-27.8]) in the PTR group and 22.1 months (95%CI[12.3-23.7]) in the non-PTR group (p = 0.11). After adjustment on IPTW, OS was 23.1 months (95%CI[17.0-28.7]) in the PTR group and 17.2 months (95%CI[13.5-22.2]) in the non-PTR group (HR 0.68; 95%CI[0.50-0.93]; p = 0.016). This result remained significant on multivariate analysis (HR 0.71; 95%CI[0.50-1.00]; p = 0.05).

CONCLUSION

In mCC patients with unresectable metastases receiving chemotherapy, up-front PTR was independently associated with prolonged OS. Patients eligible for secondary metastases resection and/or bevacizumab may benefit the most from PTR. Randomized controlled trials are mandatory.

[Treatment of colorectal cancer with unresectable metastasis with chemotherapy without primary tumor resection: analysis of tumor-related complications]

INTRODUCTION

Although the conventional treatment of patients with stage iv colorectal cancer involves resection of the primary tumor followed by chemotherapy, several studies suggest that in patients with few symptoms the first and only treatment should be chemotherapy. The objective of this study is to analyze the complications related to the primary tumor in a series of patients with unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer treated with chemotherapy without surgery.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Retrospective descriptive study. The study included all patients with unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer treated with chemotherapy without resection of the primary tumor (January 2007-February 2011).

RESULTS

The mean age of the 61 patients analyzed was 67±13 years and the performance status was 0-1 in 53 (87%). Twenty (33%) patients developed complications during follow-up. The most common complication was intestinal obstruction in 15 (25%) patients followed by perforation. Complications required surgery in 6 (10%) cases. We did not find differences in patient characteristics between those who had a complication and those without, although the complication rate in patients with a colonic stent (53%) was twice that of other patients (26%).

CONCLUSIONS

Chemotherapy without surgery is a good option in most patients with unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer. However, although the percentage of patients requiring surgery is low, the total number of complications related to the primary tumor is not negligible. Studies are needed to identify those patients in whom a prophylactic colectomy could be indicated.