The treatment of squamous anal carcinoma: guidelines of the Italian society of colo-rectal surgery

Systematic review of survival following liver or lung metastasectomy for metastatic anal squamous cell carcinoma

INTRODUCTION

Metastatic anal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) carries a poor prognosis and the evidence base for surgical resection of metastases remains limited. The aim of this study was to establish the survival outcomes for patients undergoing metastasectomy for anal SCC.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed using the MEDLINE®, Embase®, Cochrane and PubMed® databases. Studies were considered for inclusion in the review if they involved patients aged >18 years with a diagnosis of stage IV anal SCC who underwent metastasectomy for liver and/or lung metastases. The primary outcome measure was overall survival. Secondary outcome measures were disease free survival, early morbidity according to the Clavien-Dindo classification and quality of life, measured using a validated scoring tool. Risk of bias was assessed with the ROBINS-I (Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions) tool.

RESULTS

There were 10 studies with a total of 98 patients. There was heterogeneity in results reporting, with recurrence free survival the most reported outcome. For all studies reporting on liver metastasectomy, the one-year overall survival rate was 87%. In studies with adequate follow-up reported, the three and five-year overall survival rates were 53% and 38% respectively. Only one study reported on lung metastasectomy patients; the overall median survival was 24 months. None of the studies reported on quality of life measures. The ROBINS-I tool identified a critical risk of bias in six studies, a serious risk in one study and a moderate risk in three studies.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence base for metastasectomy in metastatic anal SCC is limited. Further information is required to inform future treatment methods and use of a standardised outcomes reporting method is needed to support this.

Colorectal cancer treatment guidelines and shared decision making quality and reporting assessment: Systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Physicians must share decisions and choose personalised treatments regarding patients´ beliefs and values.

OBJECTIVE

To analyse the quality of the recommendations about shared decision making (SDM) in colorectal (CRC) and anal cancer treatment clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and consensus statements (CSs).

METHODS

Guidelines were systematically reviewed following prospective registration (Prospero: CRD42021286146) without language restrictions searching 15 databases and 59 professional society websites from January 2010 to November 2021. A validated 31-item SDM quality assessment tool was employed to extract data in duplicate.

RESULTS

We identified 134 guidelines. Only 46/134 (34.3 %) mentioned SDM. Fifteen (11.1 %) made clear, precise and actionable recommendations, while 9/134 (6.7 %) indicated the strength of the SDM-related recommendations. CPGs underpinned by systematic reviews reported SDM more often than those based on consensus or reviews (35.9 % vs 32.0 %; p = 0.031). Guidelines that reported following quality tools (i.e., AGREE II) more commonly commented about SDM than when it was not reported (75.0 % vs 32.0 %; p = 0.003).

CONCLUSION AND PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Most of the CRC and anal treatment guidelines did not mention SDM and it was superficial. Guidelines based on systematic reviews and those using quality tools demonstrated better reporting of SDM. Recommendations about SDM in these guidelines merit urgent improvement.

Anal Cancer in High-Risk Women: The Lost Tribe

In developed countries the incidence of anal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) has been rising; especially in women over the age of 60 years who present with more advanced disease stage than men. Historically, anal SCC screening has focused on people living with Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) (PLWH) who are considered to be at the highest risk of anal SCC, and its precancerous lesion, anal squamous intraepithelial lesion (SIL). Despite this, women with vulval high-grade squamous epithelial lesions (HSIL) and SCCs have been shown to be as affected by anal HSIL and SCC as some PLWH. Nevertheless, there are no guidelines for the management of anal HSIL in this patient group. The ANCHOR trial demonstrated that treating anal HSIL significantly reduces the risk of anal SCC in PLWH, there is therefore an unmet requirement to clarify whether the screening and treatment of HSIL in women with a prior genital HSIL is also beneficial. This review presents the current evidence supporting the screening, treatment, and surveillance of anal HSIL in high-risk women with a previous history of genital HSIL and/or SCC.

Anal Cancer: Emerging Standards in a Rare Rare Disease

The social stigma surrounding an anal cancer diagnosis has traditionally prevented open discussions about this disease. However, as recent treatment options and an increasing rate of diagnoses are made worldwide, awareness is growing. In the United States alone, 9,090 individuals were expected to be diagnosed with anal cancer in 2021. The US annual incidence of squamous cell carcinoma of the anus continues to increase by 2.7% yearly, whereas the mortality rate increases by 3.1%. The main risk factor for anal cancer is a human papillomavirus infection; those with chronic immunosuppression are also at risk. Patients with HIV are 19 times more likely to develop anal cancer compared with the general population. In this review, we have provided an overview of the carcinoma of the anal canal, the role of screening, advancements in radiation therapy, and current trials investigating acute and chronic treatment-related toxicities. This article is a comprehensive approach to presenting the existing data in an effort to encourage continuous international interest in anal cancer.

Comparing and contrasting clinical consensus and guidelines for anal intraepithelial neoplasia in different geographical regions

Anal Squamous Cell Carcinoma (ASCC) is an uncommon cancer with a recognised precursor Anal Intraepithelial Neoplasia (AIN). Although there are consistent evidence-based guidelines for the management of ASCC, historically this has not been the case for AIN and as a result there have been geographical variations in the recommendations for the treatment of AIN. More recently there have been updates in the literature to the recommendations for the management of AIN. To assess whether we are now closer to achieving an international consensus, we have completed a systematic scoping review of available guidelines for the screening, treatment and follow-up of AIN as a precursor to ASCC. MEDLINE and EMBASE were systematically searched for available clinical guidelines endorsed by a recognised clinical society that included recommendations on either the screening, treatment or follow-up of AIN. Nine clinical guidelines from three geographical areas were included. The most recent guidelines agreed that screening for AIN in high-risk patients and follow-up after treatment was necessary but there was less consensus on the modality of screening. Six Guidelines recommended the treatment of high-grade AIN and four guidelines describe a follow-up protocol of patients diagnosed with AIN. There appears to be increasing consensus on the treatment and follow-up of patients despite a poor evidence base. There is still significant discrepancy in guidance on the method to identify patients at risk of ASCC and AIN despite consensus between geographical regions on which patient subgroups are at the highest risk.

Local excision and treatment of early node-negative anal squamous cell carcinomas in a highly HIV prevalent population

Background

Anal squamous cell carcinoma (ASCC) is an uncommon cancer associated with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection. There has been increasing interest in providing organ-sparing treatment in small node-negative ASCC’s, however, there is a paucity of evidence about the use of local excision alone in people living with HIV (PLWH). The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of local excision alone in this patient population.

Methods

We present a case series of stage 1 and stage 2 ASCC in PLWH and HIV negative patients. Data were extracted from a 20-year retrospective cohort study analysing the treatment and outcomes of patients with primary ASCC in a cohort with a high prevalence of HIV.

Results

Ninety-four patients were included in the analysis. Fifty-seven (61%) were PLWH. Thirty-five (37%) patients received local excision alone as treatment for ASCC, they were more likely to be younger (p = 0.037, ANOVA) and have either foci of malignancy or well-differentiated tumours on histology (p = 0.002, Fisher’s exact test).

There was no statistically significant difference in 5-year disease-free survival and recurrence between treatment groups, however, patients who had local excision alone and PLWH were both more likely to recur later compared to patients who received other treatments for ASCC. (72.3 months vs 27.3 months, p = 0.06, ANOVA, and 72.3 months vs 31.8 months, p = 0.035, ANOVA, respectively).

Conclusions

We recommend that local excision be considered the sole treatment for stage 1 node-negative tumours that have clear margins and advantageous histology regardless of HIV status. However, PLWH who have local excision alone must have access to an expert long-term surveillance programme after treatment to identify late recurrences.

Clinical evaluation of anal intraepithelial neoplasia: are we missing the boat?

BACKGROUND

Anal intraepithelial neoplasia (AIN) is dysplasia in the epithelium of the anus and is a pre-malignant condition associated with a low rate of progression to invasive squamous cell carcinoma (SCC). The natural history of progression for AIN to anal SCC is poorly defined. This study aims to review our experience with AIN and investigate the natural history of progression.

METHODS

Data on all patients with AIN from January 2005 to December 2015 were retrospectively reviewed. Three separate databases were searched - Colorectal, Radiation Oncology and Infectious Diseases. All databases were cross-referred to obtain a complete but non-duplicated data set. Electronic charts were reviewed to obtain clinical information.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight patients were identified with AIN of various grades. There were 25 males, three females. Twenty of the male patients were human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) positive. Mean length of follow up was 56 months. Complete regression of AIN to normal was noted in 13 patients (46%). Four patients had persisting AIN III with no evidence of regression or malignant transformation. Nine patients with pre-existing AIN developed SCC (32%). Seven were positive for HIV infection (all males). Median time to progression was 36 months. None of the patients demonstrated clear linear pattern of progression of AIN to SCC.

CONCLUSION

High grade AIN may progress to anal SCC and surveillance is indicated. The exact natural history of progression for AIN is difficult to predict. There is no linear progression over time evident. HIV patients with AIN are at higher risk of developing SCC.

Systematic review of guidelines for the assessment and management of high-grade anal intraepithelial neoplasia (AIN II/III)

AIM

There is ambiguity with regard to the optimal management of anal intraepithelial neoplasia (AIN) III. The aim of this review was to assess and compare international/national society guidelines currently available in the literature on the management, treatment and surveillance of AIN III. We also aimed to assess the quality of the studies used to compile the guidelines and to clarify the terminology used in histological assessment.

METHOD

An electronic search of PubMed and Embase was performed using the search terms 'anal intraepithelial neoplasia', 'AIN', 'anal cancer', 'guidelines', 'surveillance' and 'management'. Literature reviews and guidelines or practice guidelines in peer reviewed journals from 1 January 2000 to 31 December 2014 assessing the treatment, surveillance or management of patients with AIN related to human papilloma virus were included. The guidelines identified by the search were assessed for the quality of evidence behind them using the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine 2011 Levels of Evidence.

RESULTS

The database search identified 5159 articles and two further guidelines were sourced from official body guidelines. After inclusion criteria were applied, 28 full-text papers were reviewed. Twenty-five of these were excluded, leaving three guidelines for inclusion in the systematic review: those published by the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons and the Italian Society of Colorectal Surgery. No guidelines were identified on the management of AIN III from human papilloma virus associations and societies. All three guidelines agree that a high index of clinical suspicion is essential for diagnosing AIN with a disease-specific history, physical examination, digital rectal examination and anal cytology. There is interchange of terminology from high-grade AIN (HGAIN) (which incorporates AIN II/III) and AIN III in the literature leading to confusion in therapy use. Treatment varies from immunomodulation and photodynamic therapy to targeted destruction of areas of HGAIN/AIN II/III using infrared coagulation, electrocautery, cryotherapy or surgical excision but with little consensus between the guidelines. Recommendations on surveillance strategies are similarly discordant, ranging from 6-monthly physical examination to annual anoscopy ± biopsy. Over 50% of the recommendations are based on Level 3 or Level 4 evidence and many were compiled using studies that were more than 10 years old.

CONCLUSION

Despite concordance regarding diagnosis, there is significant variation in the guidelines over recommendations on the treatment and surveillance of patients with HGAIN/AIN II/III. All three sets of guidelines are based on low level, outdated evidence originating from the 1980s and 1990s.

The role of MRI in the assessment of the local status of anal carcinomas and in their management

This study aims to define the role of Magnetic Resonance (MR) examinations in the assessment and therapy of anal cancer (AC), and to present the main features of the MR examinations and the typical tumor spread pattern. The MR examinations of 67 anal cancer patients with histologically confirmed planocellular cancer were analyzed retrospectively. The tumor size and the signal intensity, the nodal status were examined before and after the treatment, and in recidive tumors (N = 13). At the time of the diagnosis the primary tumor was in early stage (Tis, T1, T2) in 71.5 % of the cases, and it was localized in 97 %. In 97.4 % of the cases the tumor had relatively increased signal intensities compared to the adjacent muscles. Patients received chemo-radiotherapy (CRT). After CRT in 26 out of 39 patients (66.7 %) the size of the tumor decreased (in 75 %), and the signal intensity decreased on the T2 weighted (T2w) images. In the residual tumor cases (19/39) verified 6 patients out of 19 had further decrease in size, and signal intensity a year after the end of the therapy. The MR examination plays a key role in the therapy of AC, by assessing the precise local status, the possible recidive tumors, and monitoring the therapy.