Risk Factors and Adequate Management for Complications of Bevacizumab Treatment Requiring Surgical Intervention in Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer. Clin Colorectal Cancer. 2018;17:e639-e645. [PMID: 30031634 DOI: 10.1016/j.clcc.2018.06.005]

Triplet chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab as first line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer: An AGEO multicenter real-world study

BACKGROUND

Prior trials validated triplet chemotherapy (Tri-CT) with bevacizumab as first line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) but real-world data are scarce and practices remain heterogeneous.

AIMS

To evaluate Tri-CT +/- bevacizumab efficacy and safety, and to identify factors influencing treatment decisions.

METHODS

The COLOTRIP retrospective study enrolled mCRC patients treated from 2014 to 2019 in 14 French centers.

RESULTS

Of 299 patients (81% PS 0-1, 58% RAS-mutated and 19% BRAF-mutated), 51% received Tri-CT and 49% Tri-CT + bevacizumab. Metastatic disease was classified as resectable (6.5%), potentially resectable (40%), and unresectable (54%). Bevacizumab use was associated with primary tumor location, mutational status and number of metastases. Median overall survival was 33.5 months in the Tri-CT group and 23.9 months in the Tri-CT + bevacizumab group, with median progression-free survival being 14.5 and 11.4 months. After adjusting for initial characteristics, no difference in survival was noted. Around 30% of patients experienced grade ≥3 adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights several factors influencing Tri-CT use +/- bevacizumab decision and confirms the real-world good oncological outcomes and tolerability of these regimens in mCRC patients. Our results suggest that Tri-CT alone may by an appropriate option for specific subgroups of patients.

Malignant Acute Colonic Obstruction: Multidisciplinary Approach for Endoscopic Management

Patients presenting with acute colonic obstruction are usually evaluated in the emergency department and multiple specialties are involved in the patients' management. Pre-treatment evaluation is essential in order to establish the correct endoscopic indication for stent implantation. Contrast-enhanced imaging could allow the exclusion of benign causes of colonic obstruction and evaluation of the length of malignant stricture. Endoscopic stenting is the gold standard of treatment for palliative indications whereas there are still concerns about its use as a bridge to surgery. Different meta-analyses showed that stenting as a bridge to surgery improves short-term surgical outcomes but has no role in improving long-term outcomes. Multidisciplinary evaluation is also essential in patients that may be started on or are currently receiving antiangiogenic agents because endoscopic stenting may increase the risk of perforation. Evidence in the literature is weak and based on retrospective data. Here we report on how to correctly evaluate a patient with acute colonic malignant obstruction in collaboration with other essential specialists including a radiologist, surgeon and oncologist, and how to optimize the technique of endoscopic stenting.

Successful management of malignant colovesical fistula using covered colonic self-expanding metallic stent: a case report

BACKGROUND

A colovesical fistula (CVF) is commonly treated by resection of the intestine containing the fistula or creation of a defunctioning stoma. We herein report a case of successful fistula closure and avoidance of colostomy after placement of a covered colonic self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS) as a palliative treatment for a malignant CVF.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 75-year-old man undergoing infusional 5-fluorouracil and irinotecan chemotherapy plus bevacizumab for recurrent peritoneal dissemination of rectal cancer was admitted to our hospital because of fecaluria with a high-grade fever. Blood tests showed a moderate inflammatory reaction (white blood cell count, 9200/mm3; C-reactive protein, 11.03 mg/dL; procalcitonin, 1.33 ng/mL). Urinary sediment examination showed severe bacteriuria. Abdominal contrast-enhanced computed tomography showed intravesical gas, thickening of the posterior wall of the bladder, and irregular thickening of the sigmoid colon wall contiguous with the posterior bladder wall. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) clearly showed a fistula between the bladder and sigmoid colon. Colonoscopy revealed a circumferential malignant stricture 15 cm from the anal verge, and a fistula to the bladder was identified by water-soluble contrast medium. We diagnosed a complicated urinary tract infection (UTI) associated with a CVF due to peritoneal dissemination and started empirical treatment with sulbactam/ampicillin. Given the absence of active inflammatory findings around the fistula on MRI and the patient's physical frailty, we decided to place a covered SEMS to close the fistula. Under fluoroscopic and endoscopic guidance, a covered colonic SEMS of 80-mm length and 20-mm diameter was successfully deployed, and the fistula was sealed immediately after placement. Urine culture on day 3 after stenting was negative for bacteria, and a contrast study on day 5 showed no fistula. The patient was discharged home on day 6 with no complications. The UTI did not recur for 4 months after discharge.

CONCLUSIONS

A covered colonic SEMS was useful for sealing a malignant CVF in a patient unfit for surgery, and MRI was valuable to determine the status of the fistula. A covered colonic SEMS could be an alternative to surgical treatment for CVFs in patients who require palliative care.

Acute left-sided malignant colonic obstruction: Is there a role for endoscopic stenting?

The therapy of left-sided malignant colonic obstruction continues to be one of the largest problems in clinical practice. Numerous studies on colonic stenting for neoplastic colonic obstruction have been reported in the last decades. Thereby the role of self-expandable metal stents (SEMS) in the treatment of malignant colonic obstruction has become better defined. However, numerous prospective and retrospective investigations have highlighted serious concerns about a possible worse outcome after endoscopic colorectal stenting as a bridge to surgery, particularly in case of perforation. This review analyzes the most recent evidence in order to highlight pros and cons of SEMS placement in left-sided malignant colonic obstruction.

Oncologic safety of colonic stenting as a bridge to surgery in left-sided malignant colonic obstruction: Current evidence and prospects

Approximately 7%-29% of patients with colorectal cancer present with colonic obstruction. The concept of self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) insertion as a bridge to surgery (BTS) is appealing. However, concerns on colonic stenting possibly impairing oncologic outcomes have been raised. This study aimed to review current evidence on the short- and long-term oncologic outcomes of SEMS insertion as BTS for left-sided malignant colonic obstruction. For short-term outcomes, colonic stenting facilitates a laparoscopic approach, increases the likelihood of primary anastomosis without a stoma, and may decrease postoperative morbidity. However, SEMS-related perforation also increases local recurrence and impairs overall survival. Moreover, colonic stenting may cause negative oncologic outcomes even without perforation. SEMS can induce shear forces on the tumor, leading to increased circulating cancer cells and aggressive pathological characteristics, including perineural and lymphovascular invasion. The conflicting evidence has led to discordant guidelines. Well-designed collaborative studies that integrate both oncologic outcomes and data on basic research (e.g., alteration of circulating tumors) are needed to clarify the actual benefit of colonic stenting as BTS.

Are Thyroid Functions Affected in Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome in Children?

OBJECTIVE

Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C), associated with Coronavirus disease-2019, is defined as the presence of documented fever, inflammation, and at least two signs of multisystem involvement and lack of an alternative microbial diagnosis in children who have recent or current Severe acute respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus-2 infection or exposure. In this study, we evaluated thyroid function tests in pediatric cases with MIS-C in order to understand how the hypothalamus-pituitary-thyroid axis was affected and to examine the relationship between disease severity and thyroid function.

METHODS

This case-control study was conducted between January 2021 and September 2021. The patient group consisted of 36 MIS-C cases, the control group included 72 healthy children. Demographic features, clinical findings, inflammatory markers, thyroid function tests, and thyroid antibody levels in cases of MIS-C were recorded. Thyroid function tests were recorded in the healthy control group.

RESULTS

When MIS-C and healthy control groups were compared, free triiodothyronine (fT3) level was lower in MIS-C cases, while free thyroxine (fT4) level was found to be lower in the healthy group (p<0.001, p=0.001, respectively). Although the fT4 level was significantly lower in controls, no significant difference was found compared with the age-appropriate reference intervals (p=0.318). When MIS-C cases were stratified by intensive care requirement, fT3 levels were also lower in those admitted to intensive care and also in those who received steroid treatment (p=0.043, p<0.001, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Since the endocrine system critically coordinates and regulates important metabolic and biochemical pathways, investigation of endocrine function in MIS-C may be beneficial. These results show an association between low fT3 levels and both diagnosis of MIS-C and requirement for intensive care. Further studies are needed to predict the prognosis and develop a long-term follow-up management plan.

Comparison of colonic stenting and stoma creation as palliative treatment for incurable malignant colonic obstruction

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) is a favorable therapeutic option for patients with incurable malignant colonic obstruction (MCO). However, their long-term efficacy and safety compared with those of stoma creation have not been well investigated. This study aimed to compare these long-term outcomes between these two techniques in patients with incurable MCO.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort included patients with incurable MCO with SEMS insertion (n = 105) and stoma creation (n = 97) between January 2009 and December 2019. The primary outcomes were patency after the procedure and 1-year re-intervention rates.

RESULTS

The patency of the SEMS group was lower than that of the stoma group (88.9 vs 93.2% at 6 months, 84.1 vs 90.5% at 12 months, and 65.8 vs 90.5% at 18 months; log-rank test, P = 0.024), but 1-year re-intervention rates were not different between the groups (10 vs 8%, P = 0.558). The median patency durations were 190 days for SEMS insertion and 231 days for stoma creation. Majority (84%) of SEMS patients did not require any re-intervention until death. The early complication rate did not differ between the groups (P = 0.377), but SEMS insertion had fewer late minor complications than stoma creation (5 vs 22%, P = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

SEMS insertion is a safe and effective treatment for patients with incurable MCO. Although SEMS insertion had a lower patency than stoma creation, especially after 1 year, the 1-year re-intervention rates were not different, and SEMS durability was sufficient in most patients.

Systemic Chemotherapy is a Promising Treatment Option for Patients with Colonic Stents: A Review

Approximately 10% of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) develop malignant large bowel obstruction (MLBO) at diagnosis. Furthermore, for 35% of patients with MLBO, curative primary tumor resection is unfeasible because of locally advanced disease and comorbidities. The practice of placing a self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) has dramatically increased as an effective palliative treatment. Recent advances in systemic chemotherapy for metastatic CRC have significantly contributed to prolonging patients' prognosis and expanding the indications. However, the safety and efficacy of systemic chemotherapy in patients with SEMS have not been established. This review outlines the current status of this relatively new therapeutic strategy and future perspectives. Some reports on this topic have demonstrated that 1) systemic chemotherapy and the addition of molecular targeted agents contribute to prolonged survival in patients with SEMS; 2) delayed SEMS-related complications are a major concern, and this requires strict patient monitoring; however, primary tumor control by chemotherapy might result in decreased complications, especially regarding re-obstruction; and 3) using bevacizumab could be a risk factor for SEMS-related perforation, which may be lethal. Although this relatively new approach for unresectable stage IV obstructive CRC requires a well-planned clinical trial, this therapy could be promising for patients who are unideal candidates for emergency surgery and require immediate systemic chemotherapy.

Does the presence of an intact primary increase the risk of nonelective colorectal surgery in patients treated with bevacizumab?

AIM

In patients with incurable metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), resection of the primary tumour is debated; however, patients with intact primaries may be at a higher risk of complications requiring surgery when receiving treatment with bevacizumab. Our aim was to estimate the risk of nonelective colorectal surgery in patients undergoing bevacizumab therapy for mCRC and evaluate the association between intact primary tumours and risk of nonelective surgery.

METHOD

We designed a population-based, retrospective cohort study using administrative and cancer registry data in Ontario, Canada. We included patients with mCRC who received bevacizumab from 1 January 2008 to 31 December 2014. The primary outcome was nonelective colorectal surgery after initiation of bevacizumab. We determined the cumulative incidence of nonelective colorectal surgery among patients with previously resected and unresected primaries, accounting for the competing risk of death. We explored the relationship between previous resection of the primary and need for nonelective surgery using a cause-specific hazards model, controlling for patient, tumour and treatment factors.

RESULTS

We identified 1840 (32.7%) patients with intact primaries and 3784 (67.3%) patients with prior resection. The cumulative incidence of nonelective surgery 1 year after initiating bevacizumab for all patients was 3.9% (95% CI 3.4-4.5%). One-year cumulative incidence was higher in those with intact primaries than in those with resected primaries (6.1% vs 2.9%, P < 0.0001). After adjustment, an intact primary remained strongly associated with nonelective colorectal surgery (hazard ratio = 2.89, 95% CI 2.32-3.61; P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Bevacizumab is associated with a low but meaningful risk for serious gastrointestinal complications, necessitating vigilance, particularly among patients with an intact primary tumour.

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.

Colonic stents for malignant bowel obstruction: current status and future prospects

Introduction: Although more than two decades are already passed from the first description of this technique, the debate remains open on the role of self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) placement in the management of malignant bowel obstruction (MBO). According to most recent data, SEMS placement is considered a safe and effective alternative treatment as a bridge to surgery(BTS). In addition, stent placement should be considered as primary option for palliative treatment of obstructing cancer.Areas covered: Current status, indication, technique, oncological outcomes, advantages, and risks of SEMS placement in MBO were reviewed.Expert commentary: The placement of colonic SEMS for palliation and for BTS in patients with MBO has been increasingly reported and it seems to have several advantages over emergency surgery. Substantial concerns of tumor seeding following SEMS placement, especially in case of perforation, have been raised in numerous studies. Actually, no significant differences are reported in oncologic long-term survival between patients undergoing stent placement as a BTS and those undergoing emergency surgery. Considering all the mentioned factors, indication for colorectal stenting should be evaluated only in highly specialized centers, in the context of multidisciplinary approach where risks and benefits of stenting are carefully weighed, especially in the BTS setting.

Acute abdominal obstruction: Colon stent or emergency surgery? An evidence-based review

According to the American Cancer Society and Colorectal Cancer Statistics 2017, colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common malignancies in the United States and the second leading cause of cancer death in the world in 2018. Previous studies demonstrated that 8%-29% of patients with primary CRC present malignant colonic obstruction (MCO). In the past, emergency surgery has been the primary treatment for MCO, although morbidity and surgical mortality rates are higher in these settings than in elective procedures. In the 1990s, self-expanding metal stents appeared and was a watershed in the treatment of patients in gastrointestinal surgical emergencies. The studies led to high expectations because the use of stents could prevent surgical intervention, such as colostomy, leading to lower morbidity and mortality, possibly resulting in higher quality of life. This review was designed to provide present evidence of the indication, technique, outcomes, benefits, and risks of these treatments in acute MCO through the analysis of previously published studies and current guidelines.