The influence of tumour site on prognosis in metastatic colorectal carcinomas with primary tumour resection

Sidedness is not a prognostic factor in an unselected cohort of patients with colon cancer but prognosis for caecal carcinoma is worse - A multivariate analysis of a large single institution database

PURPOSE

Sidedness has emerged as a prognostic factor for metastatic colorectal cancer treated with modern systemic therapies. This study investigates whether it is also relevant for an unselected patient cohort including all stages.

METHODS

All consecutive patients admitted with colon cancer between 1995 and 2018 were retrieved from an institution-held database. Patients were divided into two cohorts. The first cohort included patients without distant metastases who were able to undergo curative resection. The second cohort presented with distant metastases (stage IV). Potentially prognostic factors were subjected to multivariate Cox Regression analysis.

RESULTS

Overall, 1,606 patients met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. An R0-resection was achieved in 1,222 patients without distant metastases. Five-year cause-specific survival rate was 89.3% for this group. There was no difference between right- and left-sided cancers (88.2% vs. 90.1%, p = 0.220). However, prognosis of caecal carcinoma was significantly worse than that of all other sites combined (83.5% vs. 90.2%, p = 0.007). In multivariate analysis, pT-category, pN-category, grading, vascular invasion, emergency operation, adjuvant chemotherapy, and caecal carcinoma remained as independent prognostic factors. In the 384 patients with stage IV-disease, 3-year overall survival for right- vs. left-sided cancers differed only in univariate analysis (17.7% vs. 28.6%, p = 0.013).

CONCLUSION

In non-metastatic colon cancer, location in the caecum is an independent prognostic factor. In unselected patients with stage IV colon cancer, sidedness was not found to be a prognostic factor. Differentiation into right- and left-sided tumors may be simplistic, and further studies on the biological behavior of different colonic sites are warranted.

Prognostic value of primary tumor location in colorectal cancer: an updated meta-analysis

The clinical, histological, and molecular differences between right-sided colon cancer (RCC) and left-sided colon cancer (RCC) have received considerable attention. Over the past decade, many articles have been published concerning the association between primary tumor location (PTL) of colorectal cancer and survival outcomes. Therefore, there is a growing need for an updated meta-analysis integrating the outcomes of recent studies to determine the prognostic role of right vs left-sidedness of PTL in patients with colorectal cancer. We conducted a comprehensive database review using PubMed, SCOPUS, and Cochrane library databases from February 2016 to March 2023 for prospective or retrospective studies reporting data on overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) of RCC compared with LCC. A total of 60 cohort studies comprising 1,494,445 patients were included in the meta-analysis. We demonstrated that RCC is associated with a significantly increased risk of death compared with LCC by 25% (hazard ratio (HR), 1.25; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.19-1.31; I2 = 78.4%; Z = 43.68). Results showed that patients with RCC have a worse OS compared with LCC only in advanced stages (Stage III: HR, 1.275; 95% CI 1.16-1.4; P = 0.0002; I2 = 85.8%; Stage IV: HR, 1.34; 95% CI 1.25-1.44; P < 0.0001; I2 = 69.2%) but not in primary stages (Stage I/II: HR, 1.275; 95% CI 1.16-1.4; P = 0.0002; I2 = 85.8%). Moreover, a meta-analysis of 13 studies including 812,644 patients revealed that there is no significant difference in CSS between RCC and LCC (HR, 1.121; 95% CI 0.97-1.3; P = 0.112). Findings from the present meta-analysis highlight the importance of PTL in clinical decision-making for patients with CRC, especially in advanced stages. We provide further evidence supporting the hypothesis that RCC and LCC are distinct disease entities that should be managed differently.

[What is confirmed in the treatment of colon cancer?]

Colorectal cancer is the second most common cancer diagnosed in Germany and is the third most frequent cause of cancer-related death in both males and females. The majority of colorectal cancers occur via the adenoma-carcinoma sequence of origin. This means that colorectal cancers can be endoscopically detected in premalignant stages and can be curatively treated within the framework of early detection. Screening colonoscopy and, to a lesser extent, fecal occult blood testing, have led to a reduction in the colon cancer-related incidence and mortality. The acceptance and the use of screening colonoscopy should therefore be developed further. Treatment strategies for colorectal cancer are based on TNM staging, supplemented by anatomical and histopathological risk features as well as individual patient characteristics and treatment preferences. The molecular tumor profile is increasingly used to complement decision-making in the surgical, adjuvant and palliative treatment of colorectal cancer. Colon and rectal cancer have many similarities; however, they differ in the preoperative, surgical and adjuvant treatment strategies. This article focuses on colon cancer.

A Possible Distinct Molecular Subtype (Quintuple-Wildtype) of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer in First-Line Anti-EGFR Therapy with Cetuximab Plus FOLFIRI - Palliative Precision Therapy and a Multidisciplinary Treatment Approach: Interim Analysis of the IVOPAK II Trial with Early Results

OBJECTIVE

The study aimed to prospectively evaluate a new molecular biomarker panel (KRAS, NRAS, BRAF, PIK3CA, and ERBB2) for palliative first-line treatment of colorectal cancer (CRC), including a multidisciplinary treatment approach. The rate of secondary metastasis resections was assessed.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 40 patients with definitively nonresectable metastatic CRC were enrolled from 10 centers before the interim analysis (June 2019) of the IVOPAK II trial (Interdisciplinary Care with Quality Control in Palliative Treatment of Colorectal Cancer). After determination of 5 molecular biomarkers in the tumor (KRAS, exons 2-4; NRAS, exons 2-4; BRAF V600E; PIK3CA; and ERBB2), patients in the IVOPAK II study received FOLFIRI plus cetuximab for all-RAS/quintuple-wildtype disease and FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab in the case of RAS mutations. The current article presents the early description of the clinical outcome of the interim analysis of IVOPAK II comparing the all-RAS/quintuple-wildtype and RAS-mutations populations, including a multidisciplinary-treated case report of a quintuple-wildtype patient.

RESULTS

The quintuple-wildtype population treated with FOLFIRI plus cetuximab in first-line exhibited a significantly higher response rate and enhanced early tumor shrinkage in the interim analysis than the RAS-mutations population, as well as a high rate of secondary metastatic resections.

CONCLUSION

Initial results of this new biomarker panel (quintuple-wildtype) are promising for anti-EGFR therapy with cetuximab plus doublet chemotherapy (FOLFIRI) in first-line treatment of metastatic CRC. These results warrant confirmation with higher case numbers in the IVOPAK II trial.

Defining early recurrence in patients with resected primary colorectal carcinoma and its respective risk factors

PURPOSE

There is no evidence-based definition of early recurrence following resection of colorectal cancer. The purpose of this study is to define a point that discriminates between early and late recurrence in patients who have undergone colorectal cancer resection with curative intent and to analyze associated risk factors.

METHODS

A retrospective single-center cohort study was performed at a university hospital recognized as a comprehensive cancer center, specializing in colorectal cancer surgery. Patient data were retrieved from a prospectively maintained institutional database. Included patients underwent resection for primary, non-metastatic colorectal carcinomas with curative intent between 1995 and 2010. Aims of the study were (1) to define the optimal cut-off point of recurrence-free survival based on overall survival using a minimum p value approach and (2) to identify patterns of initial recurrence and putative risk factors for early recurrence using regression models.

RESULTS

Recurrence was diagnosed in 412 of 1893 patients. Statistical analysis suggested that a recurrence-free survival of 16 months could be used to distinguish between early and late recurrence based on overall survival (p < 0.001). Independent risk factors for early recurrence included advanced pT categories (pT3,4/ypT3,4) and positive lymph node status (pN+/ypN+). Early recurrence was independent of site of recurrence and was associated with worse prognosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Recurrence of colorectal carcinoma within 16 months after primary treatment should be labeled as "early." Tumor categories pT3,4/ypT3,4 and positive lymph node status pN+/ypN+ are predictive of early recurrence.

Loss of enhancer of zeste homologue 2 (EZH2) at tumor invasion front is correlated with higher aggressiveness in colorectal cancer cells

PURPOSE

Enhancer of zeste homolog 2 (EZH2) is associated with epigenetic gene silencing and aggressiveness in many tumor types. However, the prognostic impact of high EZH2 expression is controversially discussed for colorectal cancer. For this reason, we immunohistochemically analyzed EZH2 expression in 105 specimens from colon cancer patients separately for tumor center and invasion front.

METHODS

All sections from tissue microarrays were evaluated manually and digitally using Definiens Tissue Studio software (TSS). To mirror-image the EZH2 status at the tumor invasion front, we treated HCT116 colon cancer cells with the EZH2 inhibitor 3-Deazaneplanocin A (DZNep) and studied the growth of in ovo xenografts in the chorioallantoic membrane (CAM) assay.

RESULTS

We showed a significant decrease in EZH2 expression and the repressive H3K27me3 code at the tumor invasion front as supported by the TSS-constructed heatmaps. Loss of EZH2 at tumor invasion front, but not in tumor center was correlated with unfavorable prognosis and more advanced tumor stages. The observed cell cycle arrest in vitro and in vivo was associated with higher tumor aggressiveness. Xenografts formed by DZNep-treated HCT116 cells showed loosely packed tumor masses, infiltrative growth into the CAM, and high vessel density.

CONCLUSION

The differences in EZH2 expression between tumor center and invasion front as well as different scoring and cutoff values can most likely explain controversial literature data concerning the prognostic value of EZH2. Epigenetic therapies using EZH2 inhibitors have to be carefully evaluated for each specific tumor type, since alterations in cell differentiation might lead to unfavorable results.

Epigenetic Regulation by lncRNAs: An Overview Focused on UCA1 in Colorectal Cancer

Colorectal cancers have become the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths. In particular, acquired chemoresistance and metastatic lesions occurring in colorectal cancer are a major challenge for chemotherapy treatment. Accumulating evidence shows that long non-coding (lncRNAs) are involved in the initiation, progression, and metastasis of cancer. We here discuss the epigenetic mechanisms through which lncRNAs regulate gene expression in cancer cells. In the second part of this review, we focus on the role of lncRNA Urothelial Cancer Associated 1 (UCA1) to integrate research in different types of cancer in order to decipher its putative function and mechanism of regulation in colorectal cancer cells. UCA1 is highly expressed in cancer cells and mediates transcriptional regulation on an epigenetic level through the interaction with chromatin modifiers, by direct regulation via chromatin looping and/or by sponging the action of a diversity of miRNAs. Furthermore, we discuss the role of UCA1 in the regulation of cell cycle progression and its relation to chemoresistance in colorectal cancer cells.