Adrenergic, Inflammatory, and Immune Function in the Setting of Oncological Surgery: Their Effects on Cancer Progression and the Role of the Anesthetic Technique in their Modulation

Intraoperative Oxygen Consumption and Postoperative Immune Response in Colorectal Oncological Surgery: A Prospective, Monocentric Pilot Study

Surgical resection is the key treatment for colorectal cancer, but the extent of surgical trauma has been implied as a key factor for the oncologic outcome. The immune stress response to surgical trauma generates a cascade of immunological events implying neutrophils' perioperative change generating NETosis, N killer decrease, and platelets' activation that may influence postoperative surgical outcome, tumor cell growth, and future oncogenesis. The present study aimed to investigate the correlation between intraoperative oxygen consumption (VO2) and the dynamic variation of neutrophils, lymphocytes, and platelets in the perioperative period to identify an intraoperative tool that could predict the postoperative immune response. Twenty-six colorectal oncological surgical patients were enrolled in an observational, prospective, monocentric study, over 18 months. Serum neutrophils, lymphocytes, and thrombocytes values were collected in the preoperative period and on the third postoperative day, oxygen consumption was measured and recorded every 15 min during surgery using indirect calorimetry. We compared oxygen consumption measurements registered 30 min after induction of anesthesia (VO2a) and the first value registered after abdominal wall closure (VO2b) to perioperative variation of absolute neutrophils (VNC), lymphocytes (VLC), and platelets (VPC) count. Our results proved a significant correlation between VO2 variation and neutrophils' perioperative dynamic assessed by VNC (correlation coefficient = 0.547, p < 0.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) =0.175, 0.783). We also noticed a correlation between VPC and VO2 (correlation coefficient = -0.603, p < 0.01, 95% CI = -0.815, -0.248). No correlation could be shown between VO2 and VLC variation (p = 0.39). In conclusion, intraoperative VO2 variation measured by indirect calorimetry correlates well with perioperative neutrophils and platelets count dynamic variations and can be used as an early prognosis marker of postoperative immune response and surgical outcome in colorectal oncological surgery.

Local anaesthetics and chemotherapeutic agents: a systematic review of preclinical evidence of interactions and cancer biology

Background

Local anaesthetics are widely used for their analgesic and anaesthetic properties in the perioperative setting, including surgical procedures to excise malignant tumours. Simultaneously, chemotherapeutic agents remain a cornerstone of cancer treatment, targeting rapidly dividing cancer cells to inhibit tumour growth. The potential interactions between these two drug classes have drawn increasing attention and there are oncological surgical contexts where their combined use could be considered. This review examines existing evidence regarding the interactions between local anaesthetics and chemotherapeutic agents, including biological mechanisms and clinical implications.

Methods

A systematic search of electronic databases was performed as per Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Selection criteria were designed to capture in vitro, in vivo, and clinical studies assessing interactions between local anaesthetics and a wide variety of chemotherapeutic agents. Screening and data extraction were performed independently by two reviewers. The data were synthesised using a narrative approach because of the anticipated heterogeneity of included studies.

Results

Initial searches yielded 1225 relevant articles for screening, of which 43 met the inclusion criteria. The interactions between local anaesthetics and chemotherapeutic agents were diverse and multifaceted. In vitro studies frequently demonstrated altered cytotoxicity profiles when these agents were combined, with variations depending on the specific drug combination and cancer cell type. Mechanistically, some interactions were attributed to modifications in efflux pump activity, tumour suppressor gene expression, or alterations in cellular signalling pathways associated with tumour promotion. A large majority of in vitro studies report potentially beneficial effects of local anaesthetics in terms of enhancing the antineoplastic activity of chemotherapeutic agents. In animal models, the combined administration of local anaesthetics and chemotherapeutic agents showed largely beneficial effects on tumour growth, metastasis, and overall survival. Notably, no clinical study examining the possible interactions of local anaesthetics and chemotherapy on cancer outcomes has been reported.

Conclusions

Reported preclinical interactions between local anaesthetics and chemotherapeutic agents are complex and encompass a spectrum of effects which are largely, although not uniformly, additive or synergistic. The clinical implications of these interactions remain unclear because of the lack of prospective trials. Nonetheless, the modulation of chemotherapy effects by local anaesthetics warrants further clinical investigation in the context of cancer surgery where they could be used together.

Clinical trial registration

Open Science Framework (OSF, project link: https://osf.io/r2u4z).

Circulating biomarkers in perioperative management of cancer patients

Owing to the advances in surgical technology, most solid tumours can be controlled by surgical excision. The priority should be tumour control, while some routine perioperative management might influence cancer progression in an unnoticed way. Moreover, it is increasingly recognized that effective perioperative management should include techniques to improve postoperative outcomes. These influences are elucidated by the different functions of circulating biomarkers in cancer patients. Here, circulating biomarkers with two types of clinical functions were reviewed: (i) circulating biomarkers for cancer progression monitoring, for instance, those related to cancer cell malignancy, tumour microenvironment formation, and early metastasis, and (ii) circulating biomarkers with relevance to postoperative outcomes, including systemic inflammation, immunosuppression, cognitive dysfunction, and pain management. This review aimed to provide new perspectives for the perioperative management of patients with cancer and highlight the potential clinical translation value of circulating biomarkers in improving outcomes.

Research Progress on Serratus Anterior Plane Block in Breast Surgery: A Narrative Review

Breast surgery, especially radical mastectomy, is often accompanied by moderate to severe acute pain, which significantly reduces postoperative quality of life. Effective pain management can accelerate patient recovery. Serratus anterior plane block (SAPB) is a new type of fascial plane block technique, which can better target the nerve network innervating the chest wall and breast and provide good analgesia in the anterolateral chest wall. Current clinical research evidence indicates that SAPB has significant benefits in breast surgery. Further research avenues for this technology include optimal local anesthetic dosing strategy, the type of SAPB which is more suitable for breast surgery, comparison of SAPB and pectoral nerve block II (PECS II) in breast surgery, and high-quality randomized controlled study with outcomes of chronic pain or cancer prognosis.

Perioperative pectoral nerve block type II and postoperative recurrence in breast cancer: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

A new technique for analgesia called pectoral nerve block is widely used in surgeries of breast cancer. Pectoral nerve block type II (Pecs II) block has less influence on immunity when compared with general anesthesia method. The purpose of this research is to demonstrate whether Pecs II block has influence on the recurrence of breast cancer after surgical operation.

METHODS

526 breast cancer patients were recruited in this research and randomized into general anesthesia group and general anesthesia with Pecs II block group. Recurrence-free survival (RFS), distant recurrence-free survival (DRFS), and overall survival (OS) were evaluated for the two groups.

RESULTS

Based on the statistical data, only the consumption of remifentanil was dramatically reduced by the performance of Pecs II block when compared with general anesthesia method. The performance of Pecs II block had no significant influence on OS, RFS, and DRFS of breast cancer patients after surgery. ASA physical status III, TNM stage 2 + 3, and mastectomy were proved to have association with lower recurrence-free survival.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, the performance of Pecs II block declined the remifentanil consumption during surgery of breast cancer. Meanwhile, the performance of Pecs II block had no significant influence on the OS, RFS, and DRFS of breast cancer patients after surgical resection.

Potential Influence of Anesthetic Interventions on Breast Cancer Early Recurrence According to Estrogen Receptor Expression: A Sub-Study of a Randomized Trial

Background

Effects of anesthetic interventions on cancer prognosis remain controversial. There is evidence that estrogen receptor (ER)-negative breast cancer patients have an early recurrence peak. We aimed to assess the potential benefit of regional anesthesia-analgesia versus general anesthesia regarding early recurrence in breast cancer according to ER expression.

Methods

Based on a multicenter randomized controlled trial (clinicaltrials.gov, NCT00418457), we included all the patients from Peking Union Medical College Hospital research center in this study. The primary outcome was breast cancer recurrence after surgery. The Cox proportional hazard model was used to compare recurrence between groups.

Results

In total, 1,253 breast cancer patients were included in this sub-study, among whom the median follow-up time was 53 months. In this sub-study, 320 patients were ER-negative, and 933 were ER-positive. As for ER-negative patients, the recurrence risk in the PPA (paravertebral blocks and propofol general anesthesia) group showed no statistical difference compared with the GA (sevoflurane and opioids general anesthesia) group (19.1% versus 23.4%; adjusted HR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.50–1.30; P = 0.377). In the first 18 months after breast cancer surgery, which is considered as the classical early peak of recurrence, after adjustment for menstruation and the pathological stage of tumor, the decrease of early recurrence observed in the PPA group was not significant compared with the GA group (adjusted HR: 0.63, 95% CI: 0.34–1.14; P = 0.127).

Conclusions

In our study, the effects of early recurrence after breast cancer surgery in both ER-negative and ER-positive patients were similar between regional anesthesia-analgesia and general anesthesia. Large samples of ER-negative patients will be needed to clarify the effects of anesthetic interventions.

Application of Anesthetics in Cancer Patients: Reviewing Current Existing Link With Tumor Recurrence

Surgery remains the most effective cancer treatment, but residual disease in the form of scattered micro-metastases and tumor cells is usually unavoidable. Whether minimal residual disease results in clinical metastases is a function of host defense and tumor survival and growth. The much interesting intersection of anesthesiology and immunology has drawn increasing clinical interest, particularly, the existing concern of the possibility that the perioperative and intraoperative anesthetic care of the surgical oncology patient could meaningfully influence tumor recurrence. This paper examines current data, including recent large clinical trials to determine whether the current level of evidence warrants a change in practice. Available pieces of evidence from clinical studies are particularly limited, largely retrospective, smaller sample size, and often contradictory, causing several questions and providing few answers. Recent randomized controlled clinical trials, including the largest study (NCT00418457), report no difference in cancer recurrence between regional and general anesthesia after potentially curative surgery. Until further evidence strongly implicates anesthesia in future clinical trials, clinicians may continue to choose the optimum anesthetic-analgesic agents and techniques in consultation with their cancer patients, based on their expertise and current best practice.

Effects of Propofol Versus Sevoflurane on Postoperative Breast Cancer Prognosis: A Narrative Review

Perioperative interventions produce substantial biologic perturbations which are associated with the risk of recurrence after cancer surgery. The changes of tumor microenvironment caused by anesthetic drugs received increasing attention. Till now, it’s still unclear whether or not anesthetic drugs may exert positive or negative impact on cancer outcomes after surgery. Breast cancer is the most common tumor and the leading cause of cancer deaths in women. Propofol and sevoflurane are respectively the most commonly used intravenous and inhaled anesthetics. Debates regarding which of the two most commonly used anesthetics may relatively contribute to the recurrence and metastasis vulnerability of breast cancer postoperatively remain. This review aimed to provide a comprehensive view about the effect of propofol versus sevoflurane on the prognosis of breast cancer obtained from pre-clinical studies and clinical studies. Laboratory and animal studies have demonstrated that sevoflurane may enhance the recurrence and metastasis of breast cancer, while propofol is more likely to reduce the activity of breast cancer cells by attenuating the suppression of the immune system, promoting tumor cells apoptosis, and through other direct anti-tumor effects. However, retrospective clinical studies have shown contradictory results about the effects of propofol and sevoflurane on long-term survival in breast cancer patients. Furthermore, recent prospective studies did not identify significant differences between propofol and sevoflurane in breast cancer metastasis and recurrence. Therefore, more preclinical studies and randomized controlled studies are needed to guide the choice of anesthetics for breast cancer patients.

Regional anesthesia and cancer recurrence in patients with late-stage cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Whether regional anesthesia may help to prevent disease recurrence in cancer patients is still controversial. The stage of cancer at the time of diagnosis is a key factor that defines prognosis and is one of the most important sources of heterogeneity for the treatment effect. We sought to update existing systematic reviews and clarify the effect of regional anesthesia on cancer recurrence in late-stage cancer patients.

METHODS

Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched from inception to September 2020 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies that assessed the effect of regional anesthesia on cancer recurrence and overall survival (OS) compared with general anesthesia. Late-stage cancer patients were primarily assessed according to the American Joint Committee on Cancer Cancer Staging Manual (eighth edition), and the combined hazard ratio (HR) from random-effects models was used to evaluate the effect of regional anesthesia.

RESULTS

A total of three RCTs and 34 cohort studies (including 64,691 patients) were identified through the literature search for inclusion in the analysis. The risk of bias was low in the RCTs and was moderate in the observational studies. The pooled HR for recurrence-free survival (RFS) or OS did not favor regional anesthesia when data from RCTs in patients with late-stage cancer were combined (RFS, HR = 1.12, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.58-2.18, P = 0.729, I2 = 76%; OS, HR = 0.86, 95% CI: 0.63-1.18, P = 0.345, I2 = 48%). Findings from observational studies showed that regional anesthesia may help to prevent disease recurrence (HR = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.78-0.96, P = 0.008, I2 = 71%) and improve OS (HR = 0.88, 95% CI: 0.79-0.98, P = 0.022, I2 = 79%).

CONCLUSIONS

RCTs reveal that OS and RFS were similar between regional and general anesthesia in late-stage cancers. The selection of anesthetic methods should still be based on clinical evaluation, and changes to current practice need more support from large, well-powered, and well-designed studies.

Perioperative Intravenous Lidocaine and Metastatic Cancer Recurrence - A Narrative Review

Cancer is a major global health problem and the second leading cause of death worldwide. When detected early, surgery provides a potentially curative intervention for many solid organ tumours. Unfortunately, cancer frequently recurs postoperatively. Evidence from laboratory and retrospective clinical studies suggests that the choice of anaesthetic and analgesic agents used perioperatively may influence the activity of residual cancer cells and thus affect subsequent recurrence risk. The amide local anaesthetic lidocaine has a well-established role in perioperative therapeutics, whether used systemically as an analgesic agent or in the provision of regional anaesthesia. Under laboratory conditions, lidocaine has been shown to inhibit cancer cell behaviour and exerts beneficial effects on components of the inflammatory and immune responses which are known to affect cancer biology. These findings raise the possibility that lidocaine administered perioperatively as a safe and inexpensive intravenous infusion may provide significant benefits in terms of long term cancer outcomes. However, despite the volume of promising laboratory data, robust prospective clinical evidence supporting beneficial anti-cancer effects of perioperative lidocaine treatment is lacking, although trials are planned to address this. This review provides a state of the art summary of the current knowledge base and recent advances regarding perioperative lidocaine therapy, its biological effects and influence on postoperative cancer outcomes.

Serum NETosis expression and recurrence risk after regional or volatile anaesthesia during breast cancer surgery: A pilot, prospective, randomised single-blind clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Some experimental and retrospective clinical studies signal an association between certain anaesthetic techniques and tumour metastasis following breast cancer surgery. Neutrophil Extracellular Trapping (NETosis) is an immunological process, whereby neutrophils engulf tumour antigen then degranulate, leaving a serologic marker. NETosis expression among breast cancer patients is associated with an increased risk of metastasis. We investigated the effect of two distinct anaesthetic techniques on the expression of NETosis in women who underwent potentially curative breast cancer surgery.

METHODS

In a parallel-group, randomised controlled trial, a subset of women (n = 40) undergoing breast cancer resection surgery, who were partaking in a larger trial (NCT00418457), were randomly assigned to receive volatile general anaesthesia (GA) or propofol GA combined with paravertebral regional anaesthesia (PPA) for their surgery. Serum was taken and stored before and 24 hours post-operatively. NETosis was measured by ELISA using Neutrophil Myeloperoxidase (MPO) and citrullinated histone H3 (H3Cit) biomarkers, which were the co-primary end points.

RESULTS

Patient and breast cancer characteristics did not differ significantly between groups. Recurrence occurred in 7.5% patients. GA patients received more opioids and reported higher post-operative pain than PPA. There was no difference in post-operative MPO in GA vs PPA (10.5 ± 6.6 vs 11.5 ± 4.7 ng mL^-1 , P = .60). Regarding CitH3, there was no difference post-operatively in GA vs PPA (3.6 ± 2.3 vs 4.0 ± 5.9, P = .80). NET expression did not differ before or after anaesthesia and surgery in either group, for either biomarker.

CONCLUSION

Anaesthetic technique did not affect NETosis expression in breast cancer patients, indicating that it is not a viable marker of the effect of anaesthetic technique on breast cancer recurrence.

Neutrophil extracellular trapping and angiogenesis biomarkers after intravenous or inhalation anaesthesia with or without intravenous lidocaine for breast cancer surgery: a prospective, randomised trial

BACKGROUND

Experimental and, retrospective, clinical data indicate that anaesthetic technique might influence the risk of metastasis after cancer surgery. Neutrophil extracellular trapping (NETosis) is an immunological mechanism strongly linked with increased metastatic risk. Similarly, vascular endothelial growth factor A is linked to angiogenesis implicated in recurrence. Therefore, we investigated the effect of four anaesthetic techniques on NETosis and angiogenic factors expression in women undergoing breast cancer resection.

METHODS

Women (n=120) undergoing primary breast tumour resection were randomly assigned to receive one of four anaesthetics: sevoflurane (S), sevoflurane plus i.v. lidocaine (SL), propofol (P), and propofol plus i.v. lidocaine (PL). Venous blood was collected before induction and 20-28 h after operation. Neutrophil myeloperoxidase and citrullinated histone H3, biomarkers of NETosis, and biomarkers of angiogenesis were measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay.

RESULTS

Patient characteristic data and perioperative management did not differ between study groups. The anaesthetic technique including lidocaine decreased expression of citrullinated histone H3 compared with no lidocaine (109 [23] vs 125 [22] ng ml^-1, P=0.01 for SL and S and 98 [14] vs 130 [32] mg ml^-1, P=0.007, for PL and P, respectively). Similarly, myeloperoxidase was decreased by lidocaine (8.5 [3.4] vs 10.8 [1.8] ng ml^-1, P=0.03 for SL and S and 8.6 [3.1] vs 11.6 [2.5] ng ml^-1, P=0.01 for PL and P, respectively). Lidocaine also decreased expression of matrix metalloproteinase 3 (MMP3) but not MMP9, whichever anaesthetic was used. Vascular endothelial growth factor A concentrations were not significantly influenced by the anaesthetic technique.

CONCLUSIONS

I.V. perioperative lidocaine decreased postoperative expression of NETosis and MMP3, regardless of general anaesthetic technique. This supports the hypothesis that i.v. lidocaine during cancer surgery of curative intent might reduce recurrence.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT02839668.

Recurrence of breast cancer after regional or general anaesthesia: a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Three perioperative factors impair host defence against recurrence during cancer surgery: the surgical stress response, use of volatile anaesthetic, and opioids for analgesia. All factors are ameliorated by regional anaesthesia-analgesia. We tested the primary hypothesis that breast cancer recurrence after potentially curative surgery is lower with regional anaesthesia-analgesia using paravertebral blocks and the anaesthetic propofol than with general anaesthesia with the volatile anaesthetic sevoflurane and opioid analgesia. A second hypothesis was that regional anaesthesia-analgesia reduces persistent incisional pain.

METHODS

We did a randomised controlled trial at 13 hospitals in Argentina, Austria, China, Germany, Ireland, New Zealand, Singapore, and the USA. Women (age <85 years) having potentially curative primary breast cancer resections were randomised by computer to either regional anaesthesia-analgesia (paravertebral blocks and propofol) or general anaesthesia (sevoflurane) and opioid analgesia. The primary outcome was local or metastatic breast cancer recurrence. The secondary outcome was incisional pain at 6 months and 12 months. Primary analyses were done under intention-to-treat principles. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00418457. The study was stopped after a preplanned futility boundary was crossed.

FINDINGS

Between Jan 30, 2007, and Jan 18, 2018, 2132 women were enrolled to the study, of whom 24 were excluded before surgery. 1043 were assigned to regional anaesthesia-analgesia and 1065 were allocated to general anaesthesia. Baseline characteristics were well balanced between study groups. Median follow-up was 36 (IQR 24-49) months. Among women assigned regional anaesthesia-analgesia, 102 (10%) recurrences were reported, compared with 111 (10%) recurrences among those allocated general anaesthesia (hazard ratio 0·97, 95% CI 0·74-1·28; p=0·84). Incisional pain was reported by 442 (52%) of 856 patients assigned to regional anaesthesia-analgesia and 456 (52%) of 872 patients allocated to general anaesthesia at 6 months, and by 239 (28%) of 854 patients and 232 (27%) of 852 patients, respectively, at 12 months (overall interim-adjusted odds ratio 1·00, 95% CI 0·85-1·17; p=0·99). Neuropathic breast pain did not differ by anaesthetic technique and was reported by 87 (10%) of 859 patients assigned to regional anaesthesia-analgesia and 89 (10%) of 870 patients allocated to general anaesthesia at 6 months, and by 57 (7%) of 857 patients and 57 (7%) of 854 patients, respectively, at 12 months.

INTERPRETATION

In our study population, regional anaesthesia-analgesia (paravertebral block and propofol) did not reduce breast cancer recurrence after potentially curative surgery compared with volatile anaesthesia (sevoflurane) and opioids. The frequency and severity of persistent incisional breast pain was unaffected by anaesthetic technique. Clinicians can use regional or general anaesthesia with respect to breast cancer recurrence and persistent incisional pain.

FUNDING

Sisk Healthcare Foundation (Ireland), Eccles Breast Cancer Research Fund, British Journal of Anaesthesia International, College of Anaesthetists of Ireland, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Science Fund for Junior Faculty 2016, Central Bank of Austria, and National Healthcare Group.

Influence of perioperative anaesthetic and analgesic interventions on oncological outcomes: a narrative review

Surgery is an important treatment modality for the majority of solid organ cancers. Unfortunately, cancer recurrence following surgery of curative intent is common, and typically results in refractory disease and patient death. Surgery and other perioperative interventions induce a biological state conducive to the survival and growth of residual cancer cells released from the primary tumour intraoperatively, which may influence the risk of a subsequent metastatic disease. Evidence is accumulating that anaesthetic and analgesic interventions could affect many of these pathophysiological processes, influencing risk of cancer recurrence in either a beneficial or detrimental way. Much of this evidence is from experimental in vitro and in vivo models, with clinical evidence largely limited to retrospective observational studies or post hoc analysis of RCTs originally designed to evaluate non-cancer outcomes. This narrative review summarises the current state of evidence regarding the potential effect of perioperative anaesthetic and analgesic interventions on cancer biology and clinical outcomes. Proving a causal link will require data from prospective RCTs with oncological outcomes as primary endpoints, a number of which will report in the coming years. Until then, there is insufficient evidence to recommend any particular anaesthetic or analgesic technique for patients undergoing tumour resection surgery on the basis that it might alter the risk of recurrence or metastasis.