High practice variation in risk stratification, baseline oncological staging, and follow-up strategies for T1 colorectal cancers in the Netherlands

Management after non-curative endoscopic resection of T1 rectal cancer

Since the introduction of population-based screening, increasing numbers of T1 rectal cancers are detected and removed by local endoscopic resection. Patients can be cured with endoscopic resection alone, but there is a possibility of residual tumor cells remaining after the initial resection. These can be located intraluminally at the resection site or extraluminally in the form of (lymph node) metastases. To decrease the risk of residual cells progressing towards more advanced disease, additional treatment is usually needed. However, with the currently available risk stratification models, it remains challenging to determine who should and should not be further treated after non-curative endoscopic resection. In this review, the different management strategies for patients with non-curatively treated T1 rectal cancers are discussed, along with the available evidence for each strategy and relevant considerations for clinical decision making. Furthermore, we provide practical guidance on the management and surveillance following non-curative endoscopic resection of T1 rectal cancer.

Dilemmas in the Clinical Management of pT1 Colorectal Cancer

Implementation of population-based colorectal cancer screening programs has led to increases in the incidence of pT1 colorectal cancer. These incipient invasive cancers have a very good prognosis and can be treated locally, but more than half of these cases are treated with surgery due to the presence of histological high-risk criteria. These high-risk criteria are suboptimal, with no consensus among clinical guidelines, heterogeneity in definitions and assessment, and poor concordance in evaluation, and recent evidence suggests that some of these criteria considered high risk might not necessarily affect individual prognosis. Current criteria classify most patients as high risk with an indication for additional surgery, but only 2-10.5% have lymph node metastasis, and the residual tumor is present in less than 20%, leading to overtreatment. Patients with pT1 colorectal cancer have excellent disease-free survival, and recent evidence indicates that the type of treatment, whether endoscopic or surgical, does not significantly impact prognosis. As a result, the protective role of surgery is questionable. Moreover, surgery is a more aggressive treatment option, with the potential for higher morbidity and mortality rates. This article presents a comprehensive review of recent evidence on the clinical management of pT1 colorectal cancer. The review analyzes the limitations of histological evaluation, the prognostic implications of histological risk status and the treatment performed, the adverse effects associated with both endoscopic and surgical treatments, and new advances in endoscopic treatment.

Risk of recurrence after local resection of T1 rectal cancer: a meta-analysis with meta-regression

BACKGROUND

T1 rectal cancer (RC) patients are increasingly being treated by local resection alone but uniform surveillance strategies thereafter are lacking. To determine whether different local resection techniques influence the risk of recurrence and cancer-related mortality, a meta-analysis was performed.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted for T1RC patients treated with local surgical resection. The primary outcome was the risk of RC recurrence and RC-related mortality. Pooled estimates were calculated using mixed-effect logistic regression. We also systematically searched and evaluated endoscopically treated T1RC patients in a similar manner.

RESULTS

In 2585 unique T1RC patients (86 studies) undergoing local surgical resection, the overall pooled cumulative incidence of recurrence was 9.1% (302 events, 95% CI 7.3-11.4%; I2 = 68.3%). In meta-regression, the recurrence risk was associated with histological risk status (p < 0.005; low-risk 6.6%, 95% CI 4.4-9.7% vs. high-risk 28.2%, 95% CI 19-39.7%) and local surgical resection technique (p < 0.005; TEM/TAMIS 7.7%, 95% CI 5.3-11.0% vs. other local surgical excisions 10.8%, 95% CI 6.7-16.8%). In 641 unique T1RC patients treated with flexible endoscopic excision (16 studies), the risk of recurrence (7.7%, 95% CI 5.2-11.2%), cancer-related mortality (2.3%, 95% CI 1.1-4.9), and cancer-related mortality among patients with recurrence (30.0%, 95% CI 14.7-49.4%) were comparable to outcomes after TEM/TAMIS (risk of recurrence 7.7%, 95% CI 5.3-11.0%, cancer-related mortality 2.8%, 95% CI 1.2-6.2% and among patients with recurrence 35.6%, 95% CI 21.9-51.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with T1 rectal cancer may have a significantly lower recurrence risk after TEM/TAMIS compared to other local surgical resection techniques. After TEM/TAMIS and endoscopic resection the recurrence risk, cancer-related mortality and cancer-related mortality among patients with recurrence were comparable. Recurrence was mainly dependent on histological risk status.

Impact of ≥ 0.1-mm free resection margins on local intramural residual cancer after local excision of T1 colorectal cancer

Background and study aims  A free resection margin (FRM) > 1 mm after local excision of a T1 colorectal cancer (CRC) is known to be associated with a low risk of local intramural residual cancer (LIRC). The risk is unclear, however, for FRMs between 0.1 to 1 mm. This study evaluated the risk of LIRC after local excision of T1 CRC with FRMs between 0.1 and 1 mm in the absence of lymphovascular invasion (LVI), poor differentiation and high-grade tumor budding (Bd2-3). Patients and methods  Data from all consecutive patients with local excision of T1 CRC between 2014 and 2017 were collected from 11 hospitals. Patients with a FRM ≥ 0.1 mm without LVI and poor differentiation were included. The main outcome was risk of LIRC (composite of residual cancer in the local excision scar in adjuvant resection specimens or local recurrence during follow-up). Tumor budding was also assessed for cases with a FRM between 0.1 and 1mm. Results  A total of 171 patients with a FRM between 0.1 and 1 mm and 351 patients with a FRM > 1 mm were included. LIRC occurred in five patients (2.9 %; 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.0-6.7 %) and two patients (0.6 %; 95 % CI 0.1-2.1 %), respectively. Assessment of tumor budding showed Bd2-3 in 80 % of cases with LIRC and in 16 % of control cases. Accordingly, in patients with a FRM between 0.1 and 1 mm without Bd2-3, LIRC was detected in one patient (0.8%; 95 % CI 0.1-4.4 %). Conclusions  In this study, risks of LIRC were comparable for FRMs between 0.1 and 1 mm and > 1 mm in the absence of other histological risk factors.

High-Mannose N-Glycans as Malignant Progression Markers in Early-Stage Colorectal Cancer

The increase incidence of early colorectal cancer (T1 CRC) last years is mainly due to the introduction of population-based screening for CRC. T1 CRC staging based on histological criteria remains challenging and there is high variability among pathologists in the scoring of these criteria. It is crucial to unravel the biology behind the progression of adenoma into T1 CRC. Glycomic studies have reported extensively on alterations of the N-glycomic pattern in CRC; therefore, investigating these alterations may reveal new insights into the development of T1 CRC. We used matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization (MALDI) mass spectrometry imaging (MSI) to spatially profile the N-glycan species in a cohort of pT1 CRC using archival formalin-fixed and paraffin-embedded (FFPE) material. To generate structural information on the observed N-glycans, CE-ESI-MS/MS was used in conjunction with MALDI-MSI. Relative intensities and glycosylation traits were calculated based on a panel of 58 N-glycans. Our analysis showed pronounced differences between normal epithelium, dysplastic, and carcinoma regions. High-mannose-type N-glycans were higher in the dysplastic region than in carcinoma, which correlates to increased proliferation of the cells. We observed changes in the cancer invasive front, including higher expression of α2,3-linked sialic acids which followed the glycosylation pattern of the carcinoma region.

The Importance of Being “That” Colorectal pT1: A Combined Clinico-Pathological Predictive Score to Improve Nodal Risk Stratification

The management of endoscopically resected pT1 colorectal cancer (CRC) relies on nodal metastasis risk estimation based on the assessment of specific histopathological features. Avoiding the overtreatment of metastasis-free patients represents a crucial unmet clinical need. By analyzing a consecutive series of 207 pT1 CRCs treated with colectomy and lymphadenectomy, this study aimed to develop a novel clinicopathological score to improve pT1 CRC metastasis prediction. First, we established the clinicopathological profile of metastatic cases: lymphovascular invasion (OR: 23.8; CI: 5.12–110.9) and high-grade tumor budding (OR: 5.21; CI: 1.60–16.8) correlated with an increased risk of nodal metastasis, while age at diagnosis >65 years (OR: 0.26; CI: 0.09–0.71) and high tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (OR: 0.19; CI: 0.06–0.59) showed a protective effect. Combining these features, we built a five-tier risk score that, applied to our series, identified cases with a higher risk (score ≥ 2) of nodal metastasis (OR: 7.7; CI: 2.4–24.4). Notably, a score of 0 was only assigned to cases with no metastases (13/13 cases) and all the score 4 samples (2/2 cases) showed nodal metastases. In conclusion, we developed an effectively combined score to assess pT1 CRC nodal metastasis risk. We believe that its adoption within a multidisciplinary pT1 unit could improve patients' clinical management and limit surgical overtreatment.

Risk and Time Pattern of Recurrences After Local Endoscopic Resection of T1 Colorectal Cancer: A Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Growing numbers of patients with T1 CRC are being treated with local endoscopic resection only and as a result, the need for optimization of surveillance strategies for these patients also increases. We aimed to estimate the cumulative incidence and time pattern of CRC recurrences for endoscopically treated patients with T1 CRC.

METHODS

Using a systematic literature search in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and Cochrane Library (from inception till 15 May 2020), we identified and extracted data from studies describing the cumulative incidence of local or distant CRC recurrence for patients with T1 CRC treated with local endoscopic resection only. Pooled estimates were calculated using mixed-effect logistic regression models.

RESULTS

Seventy-one studies with 5167 unique, endoscopically treated patients with T1 CRC were included. The pooled cumulative incidence of any CRC recurrence was 3.3% (209 events; 95% CI, 2.6%-4.3%; I² = 54.9%), with local and distant recurrences being found at comparable rates (pooled incidences 1.9% and 1.6%, respectively). CRC-related mortality was observed in 42 out of 2519 patients (35 studies; pooled incidence 1.7%, 95% CI, 1.2%-2.2%; I² = 0%), and the CRC-related mortality rate among patients with recurrence was 40.8% (42/103 patients). The vast majority of recurrences (95.6%) occurred within 72 months of follow-up. Pooled incidences of any CRC recurrence were 7.0% for high-risk T1 CRCs (28 studies; 95% CI, 4.9%-9.9%; I² = 48.1%) and 0.7% (36 studies; 95% CI, 0.4%-1.2%; I² = 0%) for low-risk T1 CRCs.

CONCLUSIONS

Our meta-analysis provides quantitative outcome measures which are relevant to guidelines on surveillance after local endoscopic resection of T1 CRC.

Surgical rather than endoscopic resection of early-stage colorectal cancers promotes excessive imaging surveillance

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Imaging surveillance after curative resection of colorectal cancer (CRC) is debated, particularly in cases of early-stage CRC. The aim of this study was to retrospectively analyze whether and how patients with screened stage 0 and stage 1 CRC were monitored by imaging.

METHODS

A cohort of patients with stage 0 (intramucosal) or stage 1 (T1N0) CRC detected from 2003 to 2015 through the French national screening programme was included. All imaging findings were recorded. Statistical analyses were performed for the entire cohort (n = 450) and separately for the two groups (stage 0 n = 268, stage 1 n = 182). Factors associated with imaging surveillance, including the patient's referring gastroenterologist, were determined by logistic regression.

RESULTS

A total of 450 patients were followed up for 6.6 ± 3.9 years. Imaging surveillance was performed for 159 (35.3%), more often for those with stage 1 (66.5%) than stage 0 (14.2%) tumours (p < 0.0001). Within the stage 1 group, 17 of the 47 patients (36.2%) treated by local (endoscopic or surgical transanal) resection alone were followed up by imaging monitoring. Factors significantly associated with surveillance in the entire cohort were the gastroenterologist assigned to the patient (p < 0.0001) and surgical vs endoscopic resection (OR = 39.0, p < 0.0001). The histological risk of lymph node metastasis was not significantly associated with imaging monitoring for stage 1 patients. Of the 5 patients who developed distant metastasis during follow-up, one was diagnosed through imaging surveillance.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates excessive imaging surveillance for early-stage cancers. The use of surgical over endoscopic tumour resection could promote unnecessary surveillance.