Lymph node status as a prognostic factor after palliative resection of primary tumor for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer

Cancer histology in metastatic lymph node predicts prognosis in patients with node-positive stage IV colorectal cancer

Background

Appropriate prognostic indicators are required for patients with stage IV colorectal cancer (CRC). Lymph node metastasis mainly involves four histological types of CRC. Some metastatic lymph nodes (mLNs) showing cribriform carcinoma are associated with distant metastasis in patients with node-positive CRC and are correlated with recurrence and survival in stage III disease. However, the significance of mLN histology in the prognosis of patients with node-positive stage IV disease remains unclear.

Methods

We enrolled 449 consecutive patients with CRC who underwent primary tumor resection with lymph node dissection between January 2011 and November 2018. This study included 88 patients with node-positive stage IV CRC and synchronous or metachronous distant metastases. We retrospectively investigated the association between cancer histology in the mLNs based on our classification and cancer-specific survival (CSS) in patients with node-positive stage IV CRC.

Results

Kaplan-Meier analysis showed that CSS was better in patients with CRC and all the mLNs showing tubular-type carcinoma. In contrast, patients with at least some mLNs showing poorly differentiated-type carcinoma had poor prognosis. Multivariate analysis showed that "all mLNs showing tubular-type carcinoma" was an independent good prognostic factor for CSS in patients with node-positive stage IV CRC. In addition, "at least some mLNs showing poorly differentiated-type carcinoma" was an independent poor prognostic factor for CSS in patients with node-positive stage IV disease.

Conclusions

The histological type of the mLN may indicate a better or poor prognosis for patients with stage IV CRC.

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.

Survival Contradiction Between Stage IIA and Stage IIIA Rectal Cancer: A Retrospective Study

Background: When compared with patients harboring stage IIB and stage IIC disease, those with stage IIIA colorectal cancer have a better prognosis. We aimed to compare the cause-specific survival (CSS) of the patients with stage IIA rectal cancer with that of the patients with stage IIIA rectal cancer.

Methods: Data analyzed about patients with stage IIA and stage IIIA rectal cancer was from the US Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. We then validated the results using data derived from Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center (FUSCC).

Results: A total of 16,788 patients (13,551 staged IIA and 3,237 staged IIIA) were identified in SEER database. A multivariate analysis manifested that patients with stage IIIA disease were more likely to have a better CSS (HR 0.894, 95% CI 0.816-0.979, p=0.016) compared with patients with stage IIA rectal cancer. In the subgroup of patients whose number of lymph nodes harvested (LNH) <12, multivariate analysis signified that patients with stage IIIA disease were more prone to have favorable CSS (HR 0.805, 95% CI 0.719-0.901, p<0.001) compared with patients with stage IIA rectal cancer. In LNH≥12 subgroup, the Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed no significant difference between patients experiencing stage IIA and IIIA rectal cancer (p=0.618). Validation of data from FUSCC proved that patients with stage IIIA rectal cancer were more inclined to have better CSS (HR 0.407, 95% CI 0.187-0.885, p=0.019) in comparison to those with stage IIA rectal cancer. Specifically, in LNH<12 subgroup, the survival outcomes of stage IIIA patients were significantly better than that of the stage IIA patients (p=0.019), while there was no statistical significance between these two stages in the subgroup of patients with LNH≥12 (p=0.180).

Conclusions: Patients with stage IIA rectal cancer have poorer CSS than patients with stage IIIA rectal cancer, particularly when inadequate lymph nodes are harvested.