Primary mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab without resection of the primary tumor for patients presenting with surgically unresectable metastatic colon cancer and an intact asymptomatic colon cancer: definitive analysis of NSABP trial C-10

Primary Tumor Resection Before Systemic Therapy in Patients With Colon Cancer and Unresectable Metastases: Combined Results of the SYNCHRONOUS and CCRe-IV Trials

PURPOSE

Chemotherapy is established as primary treatment in patients with stage IV colorectal cancer and unresectable metastases. Data from nonrandomized clinical trials have fueled persistent uncertainty if primary tumor resection (PTR) before chemotherapy prolongs survival. We investigated the prognostic value of PTR in patients with newly diagnosed stage IV colon cancer who were not amenable to curative treatment.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients enrolled in the multicenter, randomized SYNCHRONOUS and CCRe-IV trials were included in the analysis. Patients with colon cancer with synchronous unresectable metastases were randomly assigned at 100 sites in Austria, Germany, and Spain to undergo PTR or up-front chemotherapy (No PTR group). The chemotherapy regimen was left at discretion of the local team. Patients with tumor-related symptoms, inability to tolerate surgery and/or systemic chemotherapy, and history of another cancer were excluded. The primary end point was overall survival (OS), and the analyses were performed with intention-to-treat.

RESULTS

A total of 393 patients were randomly assigned to undergo PTR (n = 187) or no PTR (n = 206) between November 2011 and March 2017. Chemotherapy was not administered to 6.4% in the No PTR group and 24.1% in the PTR group. The median follow-up time was 36.7 months (95% CI, 36.6 to 37.3). The median OS was 16.7 months (95% CI, 13.2 to 19.2) in the PTR group and 18.6 months (95% CI, 16.2 to 22.3) in the No PTR group (P = .191). Comparable OS between the study groups was further confirmed on multivariate analysis (hazard ratio, 0.944 [95% CI, 0.738 to 1.209], P = .65) and across all subgroups. Patients with serious adverse events were more common in the No PTR group (10.2% v 18.0%; P = .027).

CONCLUSION

Among patients with colon cancer and synchronous unresectable metastases, PTR before systemic chemotherapy was not associated with prolonged OS.

Predicting surgical benefit of primary tumor resection in patients with stage IV colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

There exists continuous controversy regarding the benefit of primary tumor resection (PTR) for stage IV colorectal cancer (CRC) patients. Little is known about how to predict the patients' benefit from PTR. This study aimed to develop a tool for surgical benefit prediction.

METHODS

Stage IV CRC patients diagnosed between 2010 and 2015 from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results database were included. Patients receiving PTR who survived longer than the median cancer-specific survival (CSS) time of those who did not undergo PTR were considered to benefit from surgery. Logistic regression analysis identified prognostic factors influencing surgical benefit, based on which a nomogram was constructed. The data of patients who underwent PTR from our institution was used for external validation. A user-friendly webserver was then built for convenient clinical use.

RESULTS

The median CSS of the PTR group was 23 months, significantly longer than that of the non-PTR group (7 months, P < 0.001). In the PTR group, 23.3% of patients did not benefit from surgery. Logistic regression analysis identified age, marital status, tumor location, CEA level, chemotherapy, metastasectomy, tumor size, tumor deposits, number of examined lymph nodes, N stage, histological grade and number of distant metastases as independently associated with surgical benefit. The established prognostic nomogram demonstrated satisfactory performance in both the internal and external validation.

CONCLUSION

PTR was associated with prolonged CSS in stage IV CRC. The proposed nomogram could be used as an evidenced-based platform for risk-to-benefit assessment to select appropriate patients for undergoing PTR.

Upfront primary tumor resection versus upfront systemic therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The standard initial treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) remains debated. This study investigated whether upfront primary tumor resection (PTR) or upfront systemic therapy (ST) provides better survival outcomes for patients with mCRC.

METHODS

The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched for studies published at any time from January 1, 2004, to December 31, 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective or retrospective cohort studies (RCSs) utilizing propensity score matching (PSM) or inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) were included. We evaluated overall survival (OS) and short-term (60-day) mortality in these studies.

RESULTS

After reviewing 3,626 articles, we identified 10 studies including a total of 48,696 patients. OS differed significantly between the upfront PTR and upfront ST arms (hazard ratio [HR] 0.62; 95% CI: 0.57-0.68; p < 0.001). However, a subgroup analysis identified no significant difference in OS in RCTs (HR 0.97; 95% CI: 0.7-1.34; p = 0.83), whereas significant difference in OS occurred between the treatment arms in RCSs with PSM or IPTW (HR 0.59; 95% CI: 0.54-0.64; p < 0.001). Short-term mortality was analyzed in three RCTs, and 60-day mortality differed significantly between the treatment arms (risk ratio [RR] 3.52; 95% CI: 1.23-10.10; p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

In RCTs, upfront PTR for mCRC did not improve OS and enhanced the risk of 60-day mortality. However, upfront PTR seemed to increase OS in RCSs with PSM or IPTW. Therefore, whether upfront PTR should be used for mCRC remains unclear. Further large RCTs are required.

Real-world outcomes among patients with metastatic colorectal cancer treated first line with a bevacizumab biosimilar (bevacizumab-awwb)

Background

Bevacizumab-awwb (MVASI®) was the first U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved biosimilar to Avastin® (reference product [RP]) for the treatment of several different types of cancers, including metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), an indication approved based on extrapolation.

Objectives

Evaluate treatment outcomes in mCRC patients who received first-line (1L) bevacizumab-awwb at treatment initiation or as continuing bevacizumab therapy (switched from RP).

Design

A retrospective chart review study.

Methods

Adult patients who had a confirmed diagnosis of mCRC (initial presentation of CRC on or after 01 January 2018) and initiated 1L bevacizumab-awwb between 19 July 2019 and 30 April 2020 were identified from the ConcertAI Oncology Dataset. A chart review was conducted to evaluate patient baseline clinical characteristics and effectiveness and tolerability outcomes during the follow-up. Study measures were reported stratified by prior use of RP: (1) naïve patients and (2) switchers (patients who switched to bevacizumab-awwb from RP without advancing the line of therapy).

Results

At the end of study period, naïve patients (n = 129) had a median 1L progression-free survival (PFS) of 8.6 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 7.6-9.9] and a 12-month overall survival (OS) probability of 71.4% (95% CI, 61.0-79.5%). Switchers (n = 105) had a median 1L PFS of 14.1 months (95% CI, 12.1-15.8) and a 12-month OS probability of 87.6% (95% CI, 79.1-92.8%). During treatment with bevacizumab-awwb, 20 events of interest (EOIs) were reported in 18 naïve patients (14.0%) and 4 EOIs reported in 4 switchers (3.8%), of which the most commonly reported events were thromboembolic and hemorrhagic events. Most EOIs resulted in emergency department visit and/or treatment hold/discontinuation/switch. None of the EOIs resulted in death.

Conclusion

In this real-world cohort of mCRC patients who were treated 1L with a bevacizumab biosimilar (bevacizumab-awwb), the clinical effectiveness and tolerability data were as expected and consistent with previously published findings from real-world studies of bevacizumab RP in mCRC patients.

Primary Tumor Resection for Metastatic Colorectal, Gastric and Pancreatic Cancer Patients: In Search of Scientific Evidence to Inform Clinical Practice

The management of the primary tumor in metastatic colorectal, gastric and pancreatic cancer patients may be challenging. Indeed, primary tumor progression could be associated with severe symptoms, compromising the quality of life and the feasibility of effective systemic therapy, and might result in life-threatening complications. While retrospective series have suggested that surgery on the primary tumor may confer a survival advantage even in asymptomatic patients, randomized trials seem not to definitively support this hypothesis. We discuss the evidence for and against primary tumor resection for patients with metastatic gastrointestinal (colorectal, gastric and pancreatic) cancers treated with systemic therapies and put in context the pros and cons of the onco-surgical approach in the time of precision oncology. We also evaluate current ongoing trials on this topic, anticipating how these will influence both research and everyday practice.

Surgical treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer

Background: Stage IV colorectal cancer (CRC) exhibits heterogeneous characteristics in tumor extent and biology. The overall survival of patients with metastatic CRC has improved with the development of multimodal treatments and new chemotherapeutic drugs.Current Concepts: Resection of metastatic CRC is performed for liver, lung, or peritoneal metastases. Conversion surgeries to resect oligometastatic lesions have been developed with tumor regression using chemotherapeutic agents. Two-stage hepatectomy has extended the surgical indications for patients with metastatic CRC. Synchronous liver and primary tumor resection can be considered in patients with adequate conditions. Local ablation with radiotherapy can be used to treat lung metastasis. Meanwhile, for treating patients with CRC with peritoneal metastasis, cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy can be considered. Surgical treatments should be performed in patients with symptomatic primary tumors with unresectable metastasis. However, in recent studies, primary tumor resection in patients with asymptomatic CRC with synchronous, unresectable metastases did not show overall survival benefits.Discussion and Conclusion: The treatment of metastatic CRC is challenging because of the variable tumor extent and heterogenous characteristics. Tailored surgical treatments and multidisciplinary approaches may improve the survival and quality of life of patients with metastatic CRC.

Predicting Surgical Benefit for Primary Tumor Resection in Patients with Stage IV Colorectal Cancer.. [DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-2031087/v1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0]

Purpose There exists continuous controversy regarding the effect of primary tumor resection (PTR) for stage IV colorectal cancer (CRC) patients. Little is known about how to predict the patients’ survival benefit from PTR. This study aimed to develop a tool for surgical benefit prediction. Methods Stage IV CRC patients diagnosed between 2010 and 2015 from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database were included. After propensity score matching, patients receiving PTR that survived longer than the median cancer-specific survival (CSS) time of those who did not undergo PTR were considered to benefit from surgery. Logistic regression analysis identified prognostic factors influencing the surgical benefit, based on which a nomogram was constructed. A user-friendly webserver was then built for convenient clinical use. The predictive model was assessed using Harrell’s concordance index, calibration plot, receiver operative curve and decision curve analysis. Results The median CSS of the PTR group was 23 months, which was significantly longer than the non-PTR group (12 months, P < 0.001). In the PTR group, 32.9% of patients did not benefit from surgery. Logistic regression analysis identified age, tumor location, CEA level, histological grade, number of distant metastasis, and preoperative chemotherapy independently associated with surgical benefit. The established prognostic nomogram demonstrated satisfactory performance. Conclusion PTR was associated with prolonged survival in stage IV CRC. The proposed nomogram could be used as a risk-to-benefit assessment evidenced-based platform for selecting appropriate patients to undergo PTR.

Primary tumor location and survival among metastatic colorectal cancer patients treated with systemic chemotherapy and biologic therapies: Retrospective analysis

BACKGROUND

Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is a genetically heterogeneous disease and different ethnicities might result in different chemotherapy treatment responses. The aim of the study is to evaluate whether survival outcomes for mCRC patients treated with systemic chemotherapy (SC) and, with and without biologic therapies (BT) are different between left and right-sided tumors.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study via the Ministry of National Guard- Health Affairs (MNG-HA) Cancer registry data was used to identify patients diagnosed with CRC between 2013 and 2016. Kaplan-Meier method and porosity score Cox proportional hazard models were used to assess survival for right and left-sided mCRC with and with BT.

RESULTS

There was a total of 549 CRC patients and 196 mCRC patients with mean age of 64 years and 57.65% were males. The median survival for the left-sided was higher than the right-sided mCRC tumors (P 0.03). mCRC patients treated with SC+BT were associated with decreased mortality only among patients with left-sided mCRC compared to right-sided mCRC (HR, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.05-0.92; P 0.03). mCRC with no primary-tumor resection and CS+TB left-sided mCRC was significantly associated with decreased mortality compared to right-sided mCRC (HR, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.03-0.72; P 0.02).

CONCLUSION

A significant decrease in mortality for the left-sided mCRC treated with SC + BT compared with the right-sided mCRC was observed. mCRC patients with unresectable metastases demonstrated survival benefits from left-sided SC + BT treatment. Randomized controlled trials are needed to determine the optimal treatment for mCRC patients.

The role of upfront primary tumor resection in asymptomatic patients with unresectable stage IV colorectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Controversy exists over the role of upfront primary tumor resection (PTR) in asymptomatic patients with unresectable stage IV colorectal cancer (CRC). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of upfront PTR on survival outcomes and adverse outcomes.

METHODS

Searches were conducted on PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library from inception to August 2021. Studies comparing survival outcomes with or without adverse outcomes between PTR and non-PTR treatments were included. Review Manager 5.3 was applied for meta-analyses with a random-effects model whenever possible.

RESULTS

Overall, 20 studies with 3,088 patients were finally included in this systematic review. Compared with non-PTR, upfront PTR was associated with better 3-year (HR: 0.69, 95% CI, 0.57-0.83, P = 0.0001) and 5-year overall survival (OS) (HR: 0.77, 95% CI, 0.62-0.95, P = 0.01), while subgroup analysis indicated that there was no significant difference between upfront PTR and upfront chemotherapy (CT) group. In addition, grade 3 or higher adverse effects due to CT were more frequent in the PTR group with marginal significance (OR: 1.74, 95% CI, 0.99-3.06, P = 0.05), and other adverse outcomes were comparable.

CONCLUSIONS

PTR might be related to improved OS for asymptomatic patients with unresectable stage IV CRC, whereas receiving upfront CT is a rational alternative without detrimental influence on survival or adverse outcomes compared with upfront PTR.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=272675.

Resection of Asymptomatic Primary Tumor with Synchronous Unresectable Colorectal Metastasis-Is It Reasonable?

As much as 30% of colorectal cancers at presentation may have distant metastasis. Asymptomatic primary tumors in the face of synchronous, unresectable metastasis are usually treated with systemic therapy alone. However, data to support or reject primary tumor resection exists and we are yet to come to a definite conclusion. Multiple randomized trials that attempted to address this question failed to accrue adequate patients. The more recent Japanese trial, however, demonstrated a small detriment in overall survival with primary tumor resection. Early cessation of trial with subsequent underpowered results and lack of representation of rectal tumors are key drawbacks of this study. Finally, a balance has to be struck between the risks of tumor-relatedcomplications on systemic therapy with consequent emergency operative morbidity and that of delays in systemic therapy due to primary tumor resection upfront.

Primary Tumor-Related Complications Among Patients With Unresectable Stage IV Colorectal Cancer in the Era of Targeted Therapy: A Competing Risk Regression Analysis

BACKGROUND

Whether prolonged survival with current chemotherapy using molecular target agents has changed the rate of primary tumor-related complications in patients with unresectable stage IV colorectal cancer is unclear.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to investigate the rate of primary tumor-related complications among patients receiving targeted therapy as compared with patients receiving chemotherapy without molecular target agents.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective review of data from a prospectively maintained database.

SETTINGS

The study was conducted at a high-volume multidisciplinary tertiary cancer center in Japan.

PATIENTS

Subjects were 352 consecutive patients with unresectable stage IV colorectal cancer who received systemic chemotherapy without primary tumor resection from 2001 to 2015. Patients were categorized into nontargeted and targeted groups according to the use of molecular target agents.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Complication rates attributed to primary tumors were measured.

RESULTS

Of the 352 patients, 159 were categorized into the nontargeted group and 193 patients into the targeted group. Competing risk-adjusted univariate analysis revealed that the primary tumor-related complication rates in the nontargeted group were 6.9% (95% CI, 3.8%-11.9%) at 1 year and 8.2% (95% CI, 4.8%-13.8%) at 2 years, whereas the targeted group had complication rates of 11.5% (95% CI, 7.5%-16.6%) at 1 year and 16.7% (95% CI, 12.4%-23.3%) at 2 years. Multivariate analysis revealed that the targeted group was ≈2 times more likely to have primary tumor-related complications (subdistribution HR = 2.04 (95% CI, 1.12-4.01); p = 0.020). Median survival time was 12.0 months in the nontargeted group and 24.1 months in the targeted group (p < 0.001).

LIMITATIONS

This study was limited by the retrospective design.

CONCLUSIONS

Targeted therapy was associated with a significantly increased risk of primary tumor-related complications during chemotherapy. However, targeted therapy also improved overall survival, making it a tolerable therapy. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B536.

COMPLICACIONES PRIMARIAS RELACIONADAS CON EL TUMOR ENTRE PACIENTES CON CNCER COLORRECTAL EN ESTADIO IV IRRESECABLE EN LA ERA DE LA TERAPIA DIRIGIDA UN ANLISIS DE REGRESIN DEL RIESGO COMPETITIVO

ANTECEDENTES:No está claro si la supervivencia prolongada con la quimioterapia actual utilizando agentes moleculares dirigidos ha cambiado la tasa de complicaciones relacionadas con el tumor primario en pacientes con cáncer colorrectal en estadio IV irresecable.OBJETIVO:Este estudio tuvo como objetivo investigar la tasa de complicaciones relacionadas con el tumor primario entre los pacientes que reciben terapia dirigida, en comparación con pacientes que reciben quimioterapia sin agentes moleculares dirigidos.DISEÑO:Revisión retrospectiva de datos de una base de datos mantenida prospectivamente.ESCENARIO CLINICO:Centro oncológico de tercer nivel multidisciplinario de alto volumen en Japón.PACIENTES:352 pacientes consecutivos con cáncer colorrectal en estadio IV irresecable que recibieron quimioterapia sistémica sin resección del tumor primario entre 2001 y 2015. Los pacientes se clasificaron en grupos dirigidos y no dirigidos según el uso de agentes moleculares dirigidos.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE VALORACION:Tasas de complicaciones debidas a tumores primarios.RESULTADOS:De los 352 pacientes, 159 se clasificaron en el grupo no dirigido y 193 pacientes en el grupo dirigido. El análisis univariado ajustado al riesgo competitivo reveló que las tasas de complicaciones primarias relacionadas con el tumor en el grupo no dirigido fueron del 6,9% (intervalo de confianza (IC) del 95%, 3,8 - 11,9%) al año y del 8,2% (IC del 95%, 4,8%). - 13,8%) a los dos años, mientras que el grupo dirigido tuvo tasas de complicaciones del 11,5% (IC del 95%, 7,5 - 16,6%) al año y del 16,7% (IC del 95%, 12,4 - 23,3%) a los dos años. El análisis multivariado reveló que el grupo dirigido tenía aproximadamente dos veces más probabilidades de tener complicaciones relacionadas con el tumor primario (razón de riesgo de subdistribución, 2,04; IC del 95%, 1,12 a 4,01; p = 0,020). La mediana del tiempo de supervivencia fue de 12,0 meses en el grupo no dirigido y de 24,1 meses en el grupo dirigido (p <0,001).LIMITACIONES:Este estudio estuvo limitado por el diseño retrospectivo.CONCLUSIONES:La terapia dirigida se asoció con un riesgo significativamente mayor de complicaciones relacionadas con el tumor primario durante la quimioterapia. Sin embargo, la terapia dirigida también mejoró la SG, convirtiéndola en una terapia tolerable. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B536.

Role of Surgical Approach to Synchronous Colorectal Liver Metastases: A Retrospective Analysis

PURPOSE

This study is a retrospective analysis of exploring the efficiency of surgical management on patients with synchronous colorectal liver metastasis (SCLM).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Nine hundred fifty-three consecutive patients with SCLM from Weifang People's Hospital of Shandong Province between January 2006 and December 2015 were reviewed. The values of different factors were analyzed, such as different surgical indications of liver metastases, simultaneous or staged resection of primary colorectal cancer and liver metastases, and primary tumor resection (PTR) of asymptomatic patients with unresectable liver metastases.

RESULTS

Median survival time (47.3 months) and 5-year survival rate (31%) for patients with resected liver metastases were significantly superior to that of with nonoperative treatment (17.2 months, 4%, P<0.001); enlarging the standard of liver metastases resection can improve the resection rates (31.0% vs 13.6%, P<0.001); for patients with resectable liver metastases, the in-hospital cost for simultaneous resection group was lower than that in the staged resection group (36,698 vs 45,134 RMB, P<0.001); for patients of the asymptomatic primary tumor with unresectable liver metastases, PTR was associated with improved median survival (18.0 vs 15.0 months, P=0.006).

CONCLUSION

For patients with SCLM, liver resection is considered the best treatment; expanding indications of liver resection can improve the resection rates. Simultaneous resection of the primary tumor and liver metastases were indicated in patients with resectable SCLM; PTR was recommended for asymptomatic patients with unresectable hepatic metastases.

Primary Tumor Resection Plus Chemotherapy Versus Chemotherapy Alone for Colorectal Cancer Patients With Asymptomatic, Synchronous Unresectable Metastases (JCOG1007; iPACS): A Randomized Clinical Trial

It remains controversial whether primary tumor resection (PTR) before chemotherapy improves survival in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) with asymptomatic primary tumor and synchronous unresectable metastases.

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 Role of Primary Tumor Resection in Colorectal Cancer Patients with Asymptomatic, Synchronous, Unresectable Metastasis: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial

We aimed to assess the survival benefits of primary tumor resection (PTR) followed by chemotherapy in patients with asymptomatic stage IV colorectal cancer with asymptomatic, synchronous, unresectable metastases compared to those of upfront chemotherapy alone. This was an open-label, prospective, randomized controlled trial (ClnicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01978249). From May 2013 to April 2016, 48 patients (PTR, n = 26; upfront chemotherapy, n = 22) diagnosed with asymptomatic colorectal cancer with unresectable metastases in 12 tertiary hospitals were randomized (1:1). The primary endpoint was two-year overall survival. The secondary endpoints were primary tumor-related complications, PTR-related complications, and rate of conversion to resectable status. The two-year cancer-specific survival was significantly higher in the PTR group than in the upfront chemotherapy group (72.3% vs. 47.1%; p = 0.049). However, the two-year overall survival rate was not significantly different between the PTR and upfront chemotherapy groups (69.5% vs. 44.8%, p = 0.058). The primary tumor-related complication rate was 22.7%. The PTR-related complication rate was 19.2%, with a major complication rate of 3.8%. The rates of conversion to resectable status were 15.3% and 18.2% in the PTR and upfront chemotherapy groups. While PTR followed by chemotherapy resulted in better two-year cancer-specific survival than upfront chemotherapy, the improvement in the two-year overall survival was not significant.

Clinical complete regression after local radiotherapy combined with chemotherapy for stage IV rectal cancer: A case report

Colorectal cancer is the fourth most common type of cancer worldwide with about 0.8 million new cases annually. Improving patient survival remains a challenge for clinicians. Observation waiting method provides improved quality of life compared with direct surgery. This case report suggested that colorectal cancer patients could choose active observation waiting method for treatment. A 59-year-old male patient, with rectal bleeding and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status score of 0, was admitted to the hospital due to increased fecal blood volume. The electronic colonoscopy revealed multiple polyps in colon and rectum, whereas the pathological biopsy indicated poorly differentiated rectal adenocarcinoma. The clinical stage was defined as T3N2M1a according to the TNM classification of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging manual (version 8). In addition, positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) examination showed non-regional lymph node metastasis (subclavian). Subsequently, the expression of PD-L1 (-), NRAS (-), KRAS (-), HRAS (-), BRAF (-) (-, negative) and the microsatellite stability (MSS) were detected in the rectal cancer lesion using molecular pathological examination. Patients with primary rectal cancer and pelvic lymph node metastasis were treated with three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT; dose, 60 Gy/30 Fr) and XELOX chemotherapy (200 mg oxaliplatin at day 1 plus 1.5 g capecitabine twice a day from day 1-14 for a total of 5 cycles). PET/CT scan revealed that the metabolism levels of the lesion returned to normal. In addition, the routine re-examination showed progressive improvement of tumor lesions. Until recently, the carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) level of the male patient has been within normal range. The observation waiting method rather than the direct sequential surgical resection of the primary lesion in patients with advanced rectal cancer who achieved complete clinical remission (CCR) may provide a novel treatment method for rectal cancer. Thus, overall survival (OS) and quality of survival (QoS) differences between the two strategies need to be further verified by multicenter clinical trials.

Enalapril overcomes chemoresistance and potentiates antitumor efficacy of 5-FU in colorectal cancer by suppressing proliferation, angiogenesis, and NF-κB/STAT3-regulated proteins

5-Fluorouracil (5-FU) is one of the most effective drugs for the treatment of colorectal cancer (CRC). However, there is an urgent need in reducing its systemic side effects and chemoresistance to make 5-FU-based chemotherapy more effective and less toxic in the treatment of CRC. Here, enalapril, a clinically widely used antihypertensive and anti-heart failure drug, has been verified as a chemosensitizer that extremely improves the sensitivity of CRC cells to 5-FU. Enalapril greatly augmented the cytotoxicity of 5-FU on the cell growth in both established and primary CRC cells. The combination of enalapril and 5-FU synergistically suppressed the cell migration and invasion in both 5-FU-sensitive and -resistant CRC cells in vitro, and inhibited angiogenesis, tumor growth, and metastasis of 5-FU-resistant CRC cells in vivo without increased systemic toxicity at concentrations that were ineffective as individual agents. Furthermore, combined treatment cooperatively inhibited NF-κB/STAT3 signaling pathway and subsequently reduced the expression levels of NF-κB/STAT3-regulated proteins (c-Myc, Cyclin D1, MMP-9, MMP-2, VEGF, Bcl-2, and XIAP) in vitro and in vivo. This study provides the first evidence that enalapril greatly sensitized CRC cells to 5-FU at clinically achievable concentrations without additional toxicity and the synergistic effect may be mainly by cooperatively suppressing proliferation, angiogenesis, and NF-κB/STAT3-regulated proteins.

Perioperative FOLFOX 4 Versus FOLFOX 4 Plus Cetuximab Versus Immediate Surgery for High-Risk Stage II and III Colon Cancers: A Phase II Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial (PRODIGE 22)

BACKGROUND

Perioperative chemotherapy has proven valuable in several tumors, but not in colon cancer (CC).

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of perioperative chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced nonmetastatic CC.

METHODS

This is a French multicenter randomized phase II trial in patients with resectable high-risk T3, T4, and/or N2 CC on baseline computed tomography (CT) scan. Patients were randomized to receive either 6 months of adjuvant FOLFOX after colectomy (control) or perioperative FOLFOX for 4 cycles before surgery and 8 cycles after (FOLFOX peri-op). In RAS wild-type patients, a third arm testing perioperative FOLFOX-cetuximab was added. Tumor Regression Grade (TRG1) of Ryan et al was the primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints were toxicity, perioperative morbidity, and quality of surgery.

RESULTS

A total of 120 patients were enrolled. At interim analysis, the FOLFOX-cetuximab arm was stopped (lack of efficacy). The remaining 104 patients (control, n = 52; FOLFOX preop n = 52) represented our intention-to-treat population. In the FOLFOX perioperative group, 96% received the scheduled 4 cycles before surgery. R0 resection and complete mesocolic excision rate were 94% and 93%, respectively. Overall mortality and morbidity rates were similar in both groups. Perioperative FOLFOX chemotherapy did not improve major pathological response rate (TRG1 = 8%) but was associated with a significant pathological regression (TRG1-2 = 44% vs 8%, P < 0.001) and a trend to tumor downstaging as compared to the control group. CT scan criteria were associated with a 33% rate of overstaging in control group.

CONCLUSIONS

Perioperative FOLFOX for locally advanced resectable CC is feasible with an acceptable tolerability but is not associated with an increased major pathological response rate as expected. However, perioperative FOLFOX induces pathological regression and downstaging. Better preoperative staging tools are needed to decrease the risk of overtreating patients.

Surgery on primary tumor shows survival benefit in selected stage IV colon cancer patients: A real-world study based on SEER database

Objectives: Most patients with stage IV colon cancer did not have the opportunity for curative surgery, only selected patients could benefit from surgery. This study aimed to determine whether surgery on the primary tumor (SPT) should be performed in patients with stage IV colon cancer and how to select patients for SPT.

Methods: This study included 48,933 patients with stage IV colon cancer who were identified in the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database between 1998 and 2015. Propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was adopted to balance baseline differences between SPT and non-surgery groups. Kaplan-Meier (K-M) curves were utilized to compare the overall survival (OS). Prognostic nomograms were generated to predict survival based on pre- and post-operative risk factors. Patients were divided into low, middle, and high mortality risk subsets for OS by X-tile analyses based on scores derived from above nomograms.

Results: Patients with SPT had a significantly longer OS than those without surgery, regardless of the metastatic sites and diagnostic years. Nomograms, according to the pre- and post-operative risk factors, showed moderate discrimination (all C-indexes above 0.7). Based on X-tile analyses, low mortality risk subset (post-operative score ≤ 22.3, preoperative score ≤ 9.7) recommended for SPT, and high mortality risk was not.

Conclusions: SPT led to prolonged survival in stage IV colon cancer. Our nomograms would help to select suitable patients for SPT.

Quality of Life for Patients With Incurable Stage IV Colorectal Cancer: Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Resection Versus Endoscopic Stenting

BACKGROUND/AIM

A prospective randomized open label parallel trial, comparing the quality of life (QoL) after endoscopic placement of a self-expandable metal stent or primary tumor resection, in patients with stage IV colorectal cancer was performed.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Thirty-three patients affected with stage IV colorectal cancer and unresectable metastases were randomly assigned into two groups: Group 1 (16 patients), that underwent self-expandable metal stent positioning and Group 2 (17 patients), in which primary tumor resection was performed. Karnofsky performance scale and QoL assessment using the EQ-5D-5L™ questionnaire was administered before treatment and thereafter at 1, 3 and 6 months.

RESULTS

At 1 month, index values showed a statistically significant deterioration of the QoL in patients of Group 2 when compared to those of Group 1 (p=0.001; 95%CI=0.065-0.211) whereas, at 6 months, index values showed a statistically significant deterioration of the QoL in patients of Group 1 (p<0.025; 95%CI=0.017-0.238).

CONCLUSION

QoL in patients affected with stage IV colorectal cancer has a bimodal fluctuation pattern: at 1-month it was better in patients that received stent, but at 6-months it was significantly better in patients submitted to surgical resection.

Analysis of Nonsurgical Treatment Options for Metastatic Rectal Cancer

INTRODUCTION

Using a large national registry, we investigated patterns of care and overall survival (OS) for metastatic rectal cancer patients treated with chemotherapy or radiotherapy (RT), or with a multimodal approach.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Adult patients with metastatic rectal cancer who did not undergo resection diagnosed from 2004 to 2014 were included. Kaplan-Meier, log-rank, and Cox regression analyses were performed.

RESULTS

We identified 2385 patients. Of these, 1020 patients (43%) received chemotherapy alone, 228 (10%) received RT alone, 850 (36%) received chemotherapy and RT, and 287 (12%) received no treatment. Receipt of chemotherapy alone increased over the study period, and receipt of chemoradiotherapy decreased (P < .01). The only factor predictive of receiving any RT on multivariate analysis was clinical stage T3 disease. Factors predictive of OS on multivariate analysis included receipt of chemotherapy, Hispanic race, income greater than $46,000, and presence of lung metastasis. The OS for patients treated with chemotherapy and RT was not significantly different than chemotherapy alone. Five-year OS with chemotherapy alone, RT alone, chemoradiotherapy, and no treatment were, respectively, 84%, 56%, 79%, and 46%.

CONCLUSION

Metastatic rectal cancer patients with T3 tumors were more likely to receive RT. Local RT does not improve survival for patients with metastatic rectal cancer who do not also undergo surgery. The use of chemotherapy alone for metastatic rectal cancer is increasing, and chemotherapy is associated with higher OS compared to no treatment and RT alone. This remained true even in patients older than 80 years.

Surgical approach to synchronous colorectal liver metastases: staged, combined, or reverse strategy

An increasing number of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) are presenting with synchronous disease to the liver. The optimal surgical approach for this complex patient group is controversial, but ultimately depends on individual patient characteristics and institutional practices. Surgical strategies include the traditional staged approach, a combined colorectal and liver resection, or a liver-first reverse approach. In this review, the authors will provide an overview of each strategy, including case examples demonstrating the benefits of the more recently described liver-first approach, while arguing for individualized planning and multidisciplinary discussion for every patient.

Adjuvant Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC) for patients at High-Risk of Peritoneal Metastases

BACKGROUND

Selection of patients for hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) continues to evolve. We hypothesized that adjuvant HIPEC for patients at high-risk of peritoneal progression is safe and associated with favorable outcomes.

METHODS

The institutional database of a high-volume center was queried for patients with high-risk disease undergoing HIPEC with a peritoneal carcinomatosis index (PCI) of 0. High-risk patients were defined as those with ruptured primary tumors or locally advanced (T₄) disease.

RESULTS

37 patients underwent adjuvant HIPEC, with a median follow-up of 5.2 years. 54% had low-grade (LG) tumors while 46% had high-grade (HG) tumors. No patients underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy, while eleven patients (32.4%) received adjuvant chemotherapy. There were no perioperative mortalities, and the overall complication rate was 43%. For the entire cohort, five year recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) were 77% and 100%, respectively. Five year RFS and OS were 75% and 100% for LG patients and 81% and 100% for HG patients, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Adjuvant HIPEC for patients at high-risk of peritoneal progression, with PCI 0, is safe and associated with favorable long-term survival. Additional prospective investigation is needed to identify patient populations who may benefit most from HIPEC.

The impact of postoperative morbidity on survival in patients with metastatic colon and rectal cancer

INTRODUCTION

Avoiding postoperative morbidity is essential in patients with advanced cancer. To further improve treatment in stage IV colorectal cancer, knowledge about risk factors which effect short- and long-term outcomes is important.

METHODS

All stage IV colon and rectal cancer who underwent elective surgery between 2004 and 2015 were included (n = 345). We compared resectable colon and rectal patients, and unresectable colon and rectal cancer patients.

RESULTS

Median follow-up duration was 22.2 (unresectable) and 56.7 months (resectable) with no difference in tumor location. Colon cancer patients were more often considered unresectable (P < .001). Rectal procedures were correlated with a higher morbidity rate and a longer surgical duration (P < .001). In the resectable cohort, obese patients, open procedures and prolonged surgery were independently associated with postoperative complications. Considering the palliative group, neoadjuvant treatment and age were correlated with worse outcomes. Morbidity was not associated with long-term outcomes in the resectable cohort. However, unresectable patients who developed respiratory (hazard ratio [HR]: 7.53) or cardiac (HR: 3.75) complications and patients with an American Society of Anesthesiologists-score III to IV (HR: 1.51) had an impaired survival.

CONCLUSION

Our results emphasize the need for an adequate preoperative assessment to identify patients at risk for postoperative complications and impaired survival.

Survival Outcomes After Surgical Management of the Primary Tumor With and Without Radiotherapy for Metastatic Rectal Adenocarcinoma: A National Cancer Database (NCDB) Analysis

BACKGROUND

With advances in systemic therapies, the role of primary tumor resection may be of increased importance in patients with metastatic rectal cancer. The role of combining pelvic radiotherapy with surgical resection in the metastatic setting is unknown. We utilized the National Cancer Database to examine outcomes in patients with metastatic rectal adenocarcinoma with primary tumor resection with and without pelvic radiotherapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We queried the National Cancer Database from 2004 to 2014 for patients with stage IV rectal adenocarcinoma receiving chemotherapy. We identified 4051 patients in that group that had primary tumor resection. Patients were then stratified by receipt of pelvic radiotherapy (yes = 1882; no = 2169) Univariable and multivariable analyses identified characteristics predictive of overall survival. Propensity-adjusted Cox proportional hazard ratios for survival were used to account for indication bias.

RESULTS

The median patient age was 63 years (range, 18-90 years) with a median follow-up of 32.3 months (range, 3.02-151.29 months). There were proportionately more patients with T3/T4 disease or N1 disease in the surgery plus radiotherapy arm. The median survival was 46.3 months versus 35.3 months in favor of addition of radiotherapy (P < .001). The 2- and 5-year overall survival was 68.4% and 24.8% for surgical resection alone compared with 77.2% and 39.6% for surgery + radiotherapy. On propensity-adjusted multivariable analysis, radiotherapy was associated with a statistically significant reduction in risk of death (hazard ratio, 0.722; 95% confidence interval, 0.0665-0.784).

CONCLUSION

This analysis indicates that in patients with metastatic rectal adenocarcinoma receiving chemotherapy, pelvic radiotherapy in addition to primary tumor resection may be of significant benefit.

Managing Synchronous Liver Metastases in Colorectal Cancer

The most common site of blood-borne metastases from colorectal cancers (CRC) is the liver. Resection of (liver) metastases is a part of standard treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. Hepatic resection is the first-line treatment of liver metastases, with 5-year survival rates between 25 and 58%. The enhanced efficacy of systemic chemotherapeutic regimens has increased tumor response rates and improved the progression-free and overall survival of patients with these malignancies. In approximately 20% of patients with initially unresectable liver metastases, the metastases may become resectable after administration of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Unresectable liver metastases can be managed with systemic therapy and/or a variety of liver-directed techniques such as radiofrequency ablation, hepatic artery infusion, or yttrium-90 radioembolization. Our examination of the literature led us to propose a new patient-oriented algorithm to guide clinicians' decisions on the best choice of upfront therapy for CRC and synchronous liver metastases. The need for multidisciplinary consensus has become especially important for metastatic CRC.

To resect or not to resect: The hamletic dilemma of primary tumor resection in patients with asymptomatic stage IV colorectal cancer

Primary tumor resection (PTR) in advanced asymptomatic colorectal cancer (CRC) has been a matter of intense debate for long time. With the advances in systemic treatments, this practice has decreased over the years, although it remains still pervasive. Although the removal of primary tumor has been extensively interrogated both in retrospective and prospective studies, it still remains a clinical conundrum. There are many arguments for and against PTR in CRC both from the preclinical and the clinical point of view. Two scoring models have been published aiming at identifying patients who are suitable candidate for PTR, but they deserve further investigations in larger datasets. While awaiting the results of ongoing randomized clinical trials (RCTs) on this controversial topic, both upfront systemic treatment and PTR followed by chemotherapy should be considered valid options in patients with asymptomatic mCRC. Clinical selection and a shared-decision making approach are the keys to success.

Safety evaluation of simultaneous resection of colorectal primary tumor and liver metastasis after neoadjuvant therapy: A propensity score matching analysis

BACKGROUND

Considering the surgical safety and perioperative complications, simultaneous resection after neoadjuvant therapy is not commonly recommended.

METHODS

A total of 253 patients were included in study. Comparison of the short-term outcomes was performed after propensity score adjustment in Group A (n = 96) and Group B (neoadjuvant therapy, n = 96).

RESULTS

There was no postoperative mortality. After matching, the differences from surgical confounders were well-balanced. Morbidity (15.6% vs. 15.6%, p = 0.981), and Clavien-Dindo grade of complications (p = 0.710) were similar. No difference was found when the complications were divided according to the origin (general, colorectal and hepatic). Length of the hospital stays also did not differ between the groups (p = 0.482). More importantly, there was no increase in the number of patients with delayed adjuvant treatment after surgery in Group B.

CONCLUSIONS

Neoadjuvant treatment did not increase morbidity, length of hospital stays and influence adjuvant treatment after simultaneous resection.

Functional significance of Hippo/YAP signaling for drug resistance in colorectal cancer

Colorectal cancer is a leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. While early stage colorectal cancer can be removed by surgery, patients with advanced disease are treated by chemotherapy, with 5-Fluorouracil (5-FU) as a main ingredient. However, most patients with advanced colorectal cancer eventually succumb to the disease despite some responded initially. Thus, identifying molecular mechanisms responsible for drug resistance will help design novel strategies to treat colorectal cancer. In this study, we analyzed an acquired 5-FU resistant cell line, LoVo-R, and determined that elevated expression of YAP target genes is a major alteration in the 5-FU resistant cells. Hippo/YAP signaling, a pathway essential for cell polarity, is an important regulator for tissue homeostasis, organ size, and stem cells. We demonstrated that knockdown of YAP1 sensitized LoVo-R cells to 5-FU treatment in cultured cells and in mice. The relevance of our studies to colorectal cancer patients is reflected by our discovery that high expression of YAP target genes in the tumor was associated with an increased risk of cancer relapse and poor survival in a larger cohort of colorectal cancer patients who underwent 5-FU-related chemotherapy. Taken together, we demonstrate a critical role of YAP signaling for drug resistance in colorectal cancer.

Quality of life of patients with gastrointestinal cancers undergoing chemotherapy

PURPOSE

Findings regarding changes in the quality of life (QOL) of patients with gastrointestinal cancers (GI) undergoing chemotherapy (CTX) are inconclusive. Purpose was to evaluate for changes in QOL scores of patients with GI cancers over two cycles of CTX.

METHODS

Patients (n = 397) completed disease-specific [i.e., Quality of Life-Scale-Patient Version (QOL-PV)] and generic [12-item Medical Outcomes Study Short Form Survey (SF-12)] measures of QOL a total of six times over two cycles of CTX. Changes in these QOL scores were evaluated using bootstrapped multilevel regression with full information maximum likelihood estimation. Treatment group (i.e., with or without targeted therapy), age, number of metastatic sites, time from cancer diagnosis, number of prior cancer treatments, GI cancer diagnosis (i.e., colon/rectum/anal vs. other), and CTX regimen were evaluated as covariates in the conditional models for each of the QOL scores.

RESULTS

During the second cycle of CTX, QOL-PV scores decreased in the week following CTX administration, and then increased the following week. For both cycles of CTX, the physical component summary and mental component summary scores of the SF-12 decreased in the week following CTX administration and then increased the following week. Increased time from cancer diagnosis and a higher number of prior cancer treatments resulted in worse QOL-PV and SF-12 scores at enrollment.

CONCLUSIONS

While changes in QOL scores over the two CTX cycles were statistically significant, the differences were not clinically meaningful. Future studies need to determine the optimal timing of QOL assessments to assess changes associated with cancer treatments.

Radiologic and pathologic response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy predicts survival in patients undergoing the liver-first approach for synchronous colorectal liver metastases

PURPOSE

To investigate the short- and long-term outcomes of liver first approach (LFA) in patients with synchronous colorectal liver metastases (CRLM), evaluating the predictive factors of survival.

METHODS

Sixty-two out of 301 patients presenting with synchronous CRLM underwent LFA between 2007 and 2016. All patients underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy. After neoadjuvant treatment patients were re-evaluated according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST). Liver resection was scheduled after 4-6 weeks. Changes in non-tumoral parenchyma and the tumor response according to the Tumor Regression Grade score (TRG) were assessed on surgical specimens. Primary tumor resection was scheduled 4-8 weeks following hepatectomy.

RESULTS

Five patients out of 62 (8.1%) showed "Progressive Disease" at re-evaluation after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, 22 (35.5%) showed "Stable Disease" and 35 (56.5%) "Partial Response"; of these latter, 29 (82%) showed histopathologic downstaging. The 5-year survival (OS) rate was 55%, while the 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate was 16%. RECIST criteria, T-stage, N-stage and TRG were independently associated with OS. Bilobar presentation of disease, RECIST criteria, R1 margin and TRG were independently associated with DFS. Patients with response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy had better survival than those with stable or progressive disease (radiological response 5-y OS: 65% vs. 50%; 5-y DFS: 20% vs. 10%; pathological response 5-y OS: 75% vs. 56%; 5-y DFS: 45% vs. 11%).

CONCLUSIONS

LFA is an oncologically safe strategy. Selection is a critical point, and the best results in terms of OS and DFS are observed in patients having radiological and pathological response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

A Population-Based Study of Complications After Colorectal Surgery in Patients Who Have Received Bevacizumab

BACKGROUND

Patients receiving Bevacizumab, a vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor used to treat metastatic colorectal cancer, may be at greater risk of complications after colorectal surgery because of impaired healing.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to describe population-based rates of complications of colorectal surgery after Bevacizumab treatment and evaluate the relationship between time since last treatment and risk of complications.

DESIGN

This was a population-based retrospective cohort study using administrative and cancer registry data.

SETTINGS

The study was conducted in Ontario, Canada.

PATIENTS

Patients with metastatic colorectal cancer receiving Bevacizumab between January 2008 and December 2011 were followed for a year after treatment or until death.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Administrative data were used to identify patients who underwent colorectal surgery after initiation of Bevacizumab and to determine whether they experienced a complicated postoperative course. The relationship between time since last Bevacizumab treatment (≤28 d, 29 d to 3 mo, and >3 mo) and risk of postoperative complications was evaluated using logistic regression.

RESULTS

Of the 2759 patients who received Bevacizumab for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer, 265 underwent a colorectal procedure after exposure. The majority had a bowel resection or repair with no stoma (47.5%) and had emergency surgery (61.1%). Overall, 96 (36.2%) had a complicated postoperative course, including 20.4% readmission, 12.5% wound complications, and 7.9% mortality rate within 30 days of surgery. Adjusted multivariate analysis showed no difference in the likelihood of a complicated postoperative course among patients undergoing surgery within 28 days of receiving their last Bevacizumab dose compared with 29 days to 3 months (OR = 1.23 (95% CI, 0.53-2.84), or 3 to 12 months (OR = 0.98 (95% CI, 0.46-2.09) after receiving Bevacizumab.

LIMITATIONS

Reliance on administrative data to measure complications limited the scope of this study.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with metastatic colorectal cancer requiring colorectal surgery after exposure to Bevacizumab experience substantial morbidity and mortality. The risk of complications is not detectably associated with time since exposure. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A474.

Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Improves Survival in Patients with Clinical T4b Colon Cancer

BACKGROUND

In 2016, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network included neoadjuvant chemotherapy as a treatment option for patients with clinical T4b colon cancer. However, there is little published data on the survival impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced colon cancer.

METHODS

Adult patients with non-metastatic clinically staged T3 or T4 colon cancer who underwent surgical resection were identified from the National Cancer Data Base between 2006 and 2014. Treatment was categorized as neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery and surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy. Overall survival was compared between the two groups using propensity score matching.

RESULTS

Of 27,575 patients that met inclusion criteria, 26,654 (97%) were treated with surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy and 921 (3%) received neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery. After propensity score matching, patients with T4b colon cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy had a 23% lower risk of death at 3 years compared to patients that had adjuvant chemotherapy (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.60-0.98; p = 0.04). However, neoadjuvant chemotherapy did not demonstrate a similar significant benefit for patients with T3 and T4a disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with clinical T4b colon cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy may have an improved survival compared to those who receive adjuvant chemotherapy. Further prospective investigation is warranted.

Centralization of Liver Cancer Surgery and Impact on Multidisciplinary Teams Working on Stage IV Colorectal Cancer

Surgical resection is the most effective treatment approach for colorectal liver metastases but only a minority of patients is suitable for upfront surgery. The treatment strategies of stage IV colorectal cancer have shifted towards a continuum of care in which medical and surgical treatment combinations are tailored to the clinical setting of the individual patient. The optimization of treatment through appropriate decision-making and multimodal therapy for stage IV colorectal cancer require a joint multidisciplinary meeting in a centralized liver cancer unit.

Resection of the Primary Tumor in Stage IV Colorectal Cancer: When Is It Necessary?

Management of metastatic colorectal cancer requires accurate staging and multidisciplinary evaluation, leading to a consensus treatment plan with the ultimate goal of increasing survival and improving the quality of life, while taking into consideration the patient's performance status, disease burden, and goals of care. Since the introduction of multidrug chemotherapeutic regimens, survival of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer has improved. Many patients with unresectable disease are undergoing surgery for asymptomatic primary tumors despite evidence that it is usually a futile intervention. Palliative measures for local control of the primary tumor include colonic stents, laser therapy, and fulguration.

The influence of local therapy on the survival of patients with metastatic rectal cancer: a population-based, propensity-matched study

PURPOSE

This study was aimed to determine the effect of the local tumor therapy on patients' prognosis in the management of metastatic rectal cancer.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with metastatic rectal cancer from 2004 to 2013 were selected from the SEER (Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results) database. Overall survival and cancer-specific survival were compared between the local treatment group and the nonlocal treatment group using Kaplan-Meier methods. Uni- and multivariate analyses were further performed to confirm or deny the results. The statistical approach of propensity score matching was conducted to avoid potential confounding factors.

RESULTS

Of 6867 patients included in this analysis, 3971 (57.8%) received local therapy to the primary tumor and 2896 (42.2%) did not receive. Both univariable and multivariable analysis showed local therapy continued to be associated with an improvement in OS (HR 0.532; 95% CI 0.503-0.563, p < 0.001 and HR 0.532; 95% CI 0.498-0.568, p < 0.001, respectively) and CSS (HR 0.527; 95% CI 0.497-0.559, p < 0.001 and HR 0.521; 95% CI 0.487-0.557, p < 0.001, respectively) in the unmatched cohorts. Further analysis showed patients underwent local tumor destruction or surgical resection had a better overall survival compared with those who did not undergo (p < 0.001). In the matched population, patients receiving local therapy had a better OS (HR 0.427; 95% CI 0.428-0.519, p < 0.001) and CSS (HR 0.462; 95% CI 0.418-0.511, p < 0.001) compared with those who did not receive.

CONCLUSIONS

Local therapy to the primary tumor may be associated with a better survival in patients with metastatic rectal cancer.

Update on optimal treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer from the ACTG/AGITG expert meeting: ECCO 2015

The treatment of metastatic CRC (mCRC) has evolved over the last 20 years, from fluoropyrimidines alone to combination chemotherapy and new biologic agents. Median overall survival is now over 24 months for RAS mutated (MT) patients and over 30 months for RAS wild-type (WT) patients. However, there are subgroups of patients with BRAF V600E MT CRC who have a significantly poorer outlook. Newer treatment options are also being explored in select subgroups of patients (anti-HER 2 in HER2 positive mCRC and immunotherapy in patients with defective mismatch repair (dMMR)). The best use of these systemic treatment options, as well as surgery in well-selected patients requires careful consideration of predictive biomarkers and importantly, the optimal sequence in which therapies should be given to derive maximal benefit. A group of colorectal subspecialty medical oncologists from Australia, USA, The Netherlands and Germany met during ECCO 2015 in Vienna to review current practice.