Conversion Chemotherapy for Technically Unresectable Colorectal Liver Metastases: A Retrospective, STROBE-Compliant, Single-Center Study Comparing Chemotherapy Alone and Combination Chemotherapy With Cetuximab or Bevacizumab

Combined Liver and Colon Resection of Synchronous Colorectal Liver Metastases at a Quaternary Center

INTRODUCTION

Existing literature on the safety of combined liver and colorectal resections for synchronous colorectal liver metastases is mixed. Using a retrospective review of our institutional data, we aimed to show that combined colorectal and liver resections for synchronous metastases is both feasible and safe in a quaternary center.

METHODS

A retrospective review of combined resections for synchronous colorectal liver metastases at a quaternary referral center from 2015 to 2020 was completed. Clinicopathologic and perioperative data was collected. Univariate and multivariable analyses were performed to identify risk factors for major postoperative complications.

RESULTS

One hundred one patients were identified, with 35 undergoing major liver resections ( ≥ 3 segments) and 66 undergoing minor liver resections. The vast majority of patients (94%) received neoadjuvant therapy. There was no difference in postoperative major complications (Clavien-Dindo grade 3+) between major and minor liver resections (23.9% versus 12.1%, P = 0.16). On univariate analysis, Albumin-Bilirubin (ALBI) score >1 (P < 0.05) was predictive of major complication. However, on multivariable regression analysis, no factor was associated with significantly increased odds of major complication.

CONCLUSIONS

This work demonstrates that with thoughtful patient selection, combined resection for synchronous colorectal liver metastases can be safely performed at a quaternary referral center.

Disappearing Colorectal Liver Metastases: Do We Really Need a Ghostbuster?

The development of new systemic treatment strategies has resulted in a significant increase in the response rates of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) in the last few years. Although the radiological response is a favorable prognostic factor, complete shrinkage of CRLM, known as disappearing liver metastases (DLM), presents a therapeutic dilemma, and proper management is still debated in the literature. In fact, DLM is not necessarily equal to cure, and when resected, pathological examination reveals in more than 80% of patients a variable percentage of the tumor as residual disease or early recurrence in situ. Moreover, while a higher incidence of intrahepatic recurrence is documented in small series when surgery is avoided, its clinical significance for long-term OS is still under investigation. In light of this, a multidisciplinary approach and, in particular, radiologists’ role is needed to assist the surgeon in the management of DLM, thanks to emerging technology and strategy. Therefore, the aim of this review is to provide an overview of the DLM phenomenon and current management.

The Role of Biomarkers in the Management of Colorectal Liver Metastases

Simple Summary

Colorectal cancer remains one of the most significant sources of cancer-related morbidity and mortality worldwide. The liver is the most common site of metastatic spread. Multiple modalities exist to manage and potentially cure patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. However, reliable biomarkers to assist with clinical decision-making are limited. Recent advances in genomic sequencing technology have greatly expanded our knowledge of colorectal cancer carcinogenesis and significantly reduced the cost and timing of the investigation. In this article, we discuss the current utility of biomarkers in the management of colorectal cancer liver metastases.

Abstract

Surgical management combined with improved systemic therapies have extended 5-year overall survival beyond 50% among patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). Furthermore, a multitude of liver-directed therapies has improved local disease control for patients with unresectable CRLM. Unfortunately, a significant portion of patients treated with curative-intent hepatectomy develops disease recurrence. Traditional markers fail to risk-stratify and prognosticate patients with CRLM appropriately. Over the last few decades, advances in molecular sequencing technology have greatly expanded our knowledge of the pathophysiology and tumor microenvironment characteristics of CRLM. These investigations have revealed biomarkers with the potential to better inform management decisions in patients with CRLM. Actionable biomarkers such as RAS and BRAF mutations, microsatellite instability/mismatch repair status, and tumor mutational burden have been incorporated into national and societal guidelines. Other biomarkers, including circulating tumor DNA and radiomic features, are under active investigation to evaluate their clinical utility. Given the plethora of therapeutic modalities and lack of evidence on timing and sequence, reliable biomarkers are needed to assist clinicians with the development of patient-tailored management plans. In this review, we discuss the current evidence regarding biomarkers for patients with CRLM.

Imaging evaluation of the liver in oncology patients: A comparison of techniques

The liver is commonly affected by metastatic disease. Therefore, it is essential to detect and characterize liver metastases, assuming that patient management and prognosis rely on it. The imaging techniques that allow non-invasive assessment of liver metastases include ultrasonography, computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), positron emission tomography (PET)/CT, and PET/MRI. In this paper, we review the imaging findings of liver metastases, focusing on each imaging modality’s advantages and potential limitations. We also assess the importance of different imaging modalities for the management, follow-up, and therapy response of liver metastases. To date, both CT and MRI are the most appropriate imaging methods for initial lesion detection, follow-up, and assessment of treatment response. Multiparametric MRI is frequently used as a problem-solving technique for liver lesions and has evolved substantially over the past decade, including hardware and software developments and specific intravenous contrast agents. Several studies have shown that MRI performs better in small-sized metastases and moderate to severe liver steatosis cases. Although state-of-the-art MRI shows a greater sensitivity for detecting and characterizing liver metastases, CT remains the chosen method. We also present the controversial subject of the "economic implication" to use CT over MRI.

Treatment of metachronous colorectal cancer metastases in the Netherlands: A population-based study

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to describe the treatment of metachronous colorectal cancer metastases in a recent population-based cohort.

METHOD

Patients with stage I-III colorectal cancer (CRC), diagnosed between January 1st and June 30th^, 2015 who were surgically treated with curative intent were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Follow-up was at least 3 years after diagnosis of the primary tumour. Treatment of metachronous metastases was categorized into local treatment, systemic treatment, and best supportive care. Overall survival was estimated using Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

Out of 5412 patients, 782 (14%) developed metachronous metastases, of whom 393 (50%) underwent local treatment (LT) with or without systemic therapy, 30% of patients underwent only systemic therapy (ST) and 19% only best supportive care (BSC). The most common metastatic site was the liver (51%) followed by lungs (33%) and peritoneum (22%). LT rates were 69%, 66%, and 44% for liver-only, lung-only and, peritoneal-only metastases respectively. Patients receiving LT and ST were significantly younger than patients receiving LT alone, while patients receiving BSC were significantly older than the other groups (p < 0.001). Patients with liver-only or lung-only metastases had a 3-year OS of 50.2% (43.3-56.7 95% CI) and 61.5% (50.7-70.6 95% CI) respectively. Patients with peritoneal-only disease had a lower 3-year OS, 18.1% (10.1-28.0 95% CI).

CONCLUSION

Patients with metastases confined to the liver and lung have the highest rates of local treatment for metachronous metastatic colorectal cancer. The number of patients who underwent local treatment is higher than reported in previous Dutch and international studies.

The potential use of extended criteria donors and eligible recipients in liver transplantation for unresectable colorectal liver metastases in Central Sweden

BACKGROUND

Unresectable colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) is a condition with poor prognosis. A recent treatment alternative improving survival in patients with unresectable CRLM, has emerged with the introduction of liver transplantation (LT), yet not uncontroversial with the current organ shortage. This study aimed to retrospectively investigate the potential of declined donors with acceptable risk as liver graft donors and patients with unresectable CRLM as potential recipients.

METHODS

All declined donors in central Sweden and all patients with CRLM discussed at multidisciplinary team conference at Karolinska University Hospital, January 2013-October 2018, were identified. Donors were classified according to the European Committee Guide to the quality and safety of organs for transplantation and potential recipients were evaluated by selection criteria, based on studies on the Norwegian Secondary Cancer study database.

RESULTS

Out of 1,462 evaluated potential donors, 62 (2.7 pmp) donors were identified, corresponding to 6-18% of the utilized donor pool. Out of 1,008 included patients with CRLM, 25 (2.1 pmp) potential recipients were recognized. Eligibility for LT and left-sided colon cancer were favorable prognostic factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Today's donor pool could increase with the use of extended criteria donors, which is sufficient and display an acceptable risk-benefit ratio for patients with unresectable CRLM. With current selection criteria a small subset of patients with unresectable CRLM are eligible recipients. This subset of patients has a better survival compared to patients ineligible for LT.

Colorectal Cancer, Liver Metastases and Biotherapies

(1) Background: colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the deadliest causes of death by cancer worldwide. Its first main metastatic diffusion spreads to the liver. Different mechanisms such as the epithelial-mesenchymal transition and angiogenesis are the characteristics of this invasion. At this stage, different options are possible and still in debate, especially regarding the use of targeted therapeutics and biotherapies. (2) Methods: A review of the literature has been done focusing on the clinical management of liver metastasis of colorectal cancer and the contribution of biotherapies in this field. (3) Results: In a clinical setting, surgeons and oncologists consider liver metastasis in CRC into two groups to launch adapted therapeutics: resectable and non-resectable. Around these two entities, the combination of targeted therapies and biotherapies are of high interest and are currently tested to know in which molecular and clinical conditions they have to be applied to impact positively both on survival and quality of life of patients.

Liver Metastasectomy for Metastatic Breast Cancer Patients: A Single Institution Retrospective Analysis

The liver represents the first metastatic site in 5–12% of metastatic breast cancer (MBC) cases. In absence of reliable evidence, liver metastasectomy (LM) could represent a possible therapeutic option for selected MBC patients (patients) in clinical practice. A retrospective analysis including MBC patients who had undergone an LM after a multidisciplinary Tumor Board discussion at the Hepatobiliary Surgery Unit of Fondazione Policlinico Universitario “Agostino Gemelli” IRCCS in Rome, between January 1994 and December 2019 was conducted. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) after a MBC-LM; the secondary endpoint was the disease-free interval (DFI) after surgery. Forty-nine MBC patients underwent LM, but clinical data were only available for 22 patients. After a median follow-up of 71 months, median OS and DFI were 67 months (95% CI 45–103) and 15 months (95% CI 11–46), respectively. At univariate analysis, the presence of a negative resection margin (R0) was the only factor that statistically significantly influenced OS (78 months versus 16 months; HR 0.083, p < 0.0001) and DFI (16 months versus 5 months; HR 0.17, p = 0.0058). A LM for MBC might represent a therapeutic option for selected patients. The radical nature of the surgical procedure performed in a high-flow center and after a multidisciplinary discussion appears essential for this therapeutic option.

Shanghai international consensus on diagnosis and comprehensive treatment of colorectal liver metastases (version 2019)

The liver is the most common anatomical site for hematogenous metastases from colorectal cancer. Therefore effective treatment of liver metastases is one of the most challenging elements in the management of colorectal cancer. However, there is rare available clinical consensus or guideline only focusing on colorectal liver metastases. After six rounds of discussion by 195 clinical experts of the Shanghai International Consensus Expert Group on Colorectal Liver Metastases (SINCE) from 29 countries or regions, the Shanghai Consensus has been finally completed, based on current research and expert experience. The consensus emphasized the principle of multidisciplinary team, provided detailed diagnosis approaches, and guided precise local and systemic treatments. This Shanghai Consensus might be of great significance to standardized diagnosis and treatment of colorectal liver metastases all over the world.

Secondary technical resectability of colorectal cancer liver metastases after chemotherapy with or without selective internal radiotherapy in the randomized SIRFLOX trial

Background

Secondary resection of initially unresectable colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRLM) can prolong survival. The added value of selective internal radiotherapy (SIRT) to downsize lesions for resection is not known. This study evaluated the change in technical resectability of CRLM with the addition of SIRT to FOLFOX‐based chemotherapy.

Methods

Baseline and follow‐up hepatic imaging of patients who received modified FOLFOX (mFOLFOX6: fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin) chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab (control arm) versus mFOLFOX6 (with or without bevacizumab) plus SIRT using yttrium‐90 resin microspheres (SIRT arm) in the phase III SIRFLOX trial were reviewed by three or five (of 14) expert hepatopancreatobiliary surgeons for resectability. Reviewers were blinded to one another, treatment assignment, extrahepatic disease status, and information on clinical and scanning time points. Technical resectability was defined as at least 60 per cent of reviewers (3 of 5, or 2 of 3) assessing a patient's liver metastases as surgically removable.

Results

Some 472 patients were evaluable (SIRT, 244; control, 228). There was no significant baseline difference in the proportion of technically resectable liver metastases between SIRT (29, 11·9 per cent) and control (25, 11·0 per cent) arms (P = 0·775). At follow‐up, significantly more patients in both arms were deemed technically resectable compared with baseline: 159 of 472 (33·7 per cent) versus 54 of 472 (11·4 per cent) respectively (P = 0·001). More patients were resectable in the SIRT than in the control arm: 93 of 244 (38·1 per cent) versus 66 of 228 (28·9 per cent) respectively (P < 0·001).

Conclusion

Adding SIRT to chemotherapy may improve the resectability of unresectable CRLM.

Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of Monoclonal Antibodies (Bevacizumab, Cetuximab, and Panitumumab) in Combination with Chemotherapy for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

The last decade has seen the increasing use of biological medicines in combination with chemotherapy containing 5-fluorouracil/oxaliplatin or irinotecan for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). These combinations have resulted in increased progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with mCRC; however, there are remaining concerns over the extent of their effect on overall survival (OS). Published studies to date suggest no major differences between the three currently available monoclonal antibodies (MoAbs); however, there are differences in costs. In addition, there is rising litigation in Brazil in order to access these medicines as they are currently not reimbursed.

OBJECTIVE

The aim was to investigate the comparative effectiveness and safety of three MoAbs (bevacizumab, cetuximab and panitumumab) associated with fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy regimens and compared to fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy alone in patients with mCRC, through an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of concurrent or non-concurrent observational cohort studies, to guide authorities and the judiciary.

METHOD

A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed based on cohort studies published in databases up to November 2017. Effectiveness measures included OS, PFS, post-progression survival (PPS), Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST), response rate, metastasectomy and safety. The methodological quality of the studies was also evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 21 observational cohort studies were included. There were statistically significant and clinically relevant benefits in patients treated with bevacizumab versus no bevacizumab mainly around OS, PFS, PPS and the metastasectomy rate, but not for the disease control rates. However, there was an increase in treatment-related toxicities and concerns with the heterogeneity of the studies.

CONCLUSION

The results pointed to an advantage in favor of bevacizumab for OS, PFS, PPS, and metastasectomy. Although this advantage may be considered clinically modest, bevacizumab represents a hope for increased survival and a chance of metastasectomy for patients with mCRC. However, there are serious adverse events associated with its use, especially severe hypertension and gastrointestinal perforation, that need to be considered.

Optimal use of anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies for patients with advanced colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis

This meta-analysis was performed to determine the optimal use of anti-EGFR mAb in the treatment of metastasized colorectal cancer (mCRC). Seventeen randomized clinical trials were included, all evaluating the added value of anti-EGFR mAb to standard treatment line in patients with KRAS wild-type mCRC. Hazard and odds ratios were pooled using a random effect model, weighted according to cohort size. Pooled data of six first- and two second-line studies demonstrated a significantly improved ORR (OR 1.62, CI 1.27-2.04; OR 4.78, CI 3.39-6.75, respectively) and PFS (HR 0.79, CI 0.67-0.94; HR 0.80, CI 0.71-0.91, respectively) with the addition of anti-EGFR mAb to chemotherapy, while OS remained similar. Two third-line anti-EGFR mAb monotherapy studies revealed an improved PFS and OS (HR 0.44, CI 0.35-0.52; HR 0.55, CI 0.41-0.74). Addition of anti-EGFR versus anti-VEGF mAb to first-line chemotherapy was evaluated in three studies; ORR and PFS were comparable, while OS was improved (HR 0.8, CI 0.65-0.97). The influence of the chemotherapy backbone on anti-EGFR mAb efficacy, evaluated with meta-regression, indicated a higher ORR with irinotecan-based versus oxaliplatin-based regimens, but comparable PFS and OS. Reported toxicity (≥3 grade) increased ~20% in all treatment lines with the addition of anti-EGFR mAb. Anti-EGFR treatment significantly improves response and survival outcome of patients with (K)RAS wild-type mCRC, regardless of treatment line or chemotherapeutic backbone. Saving anti-EGFR mAb as third-line monotherapy is a valid and effective option to prevent high treatment burden caused by combination therapy. Combination treatment with anti-EGFR mAb to achieve radical resection of metastases needs further investigation.