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

Upfront resection versus no resection of the primary tumor in patients with synchronous metastatic colorectal cancer: the randomized phase III CAIRO4 study conducted by the Dutch Colorectal Cancer Group and the Danish Colorectal Cancer Group

BACKGROUND

Upfront primary tumor resection (PTR) has been associated with longer overall survival (OS) in patients with synchronous unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in retrospective analyses. The aim of the CAIRO4 study was to investigate whether the addition of upfront PTR to systemic therapy resulted in a survival benefit in patients with synchronous mCRC without severe symptoms of their primary tumor.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This randomized phase III trial was conducted in 45 hospitals in The Netherlands and Denmark. Eligibility criteria included previously untreated mCRC, unresectable metastases, and no severe symptoms of the primary tumor. Patients were randomized (1 : 1) to upfront PTR followed by systemic therapy or systemic therapy without upfront PTR. Systemic therapy consisted of first-line fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy with bevacizumab in both arms. Primary endpoint was OS in the intention-to-treat population. The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01606098.

RESULTS

Between August 2012 and February 2021, 206 patients were randomized. In the intention-to-treat analysis, 204 patients were included (n = 103 without upfront PTR, n = 101 with upfront PTR) of whom 116 were men (57%) with median age of 65 years (interquartile range 59-71 years). Median follow-up was 69.4 months. Median OS in the arm without upfront PTR was 18.3 months (95% confidence interval 16.0-22.2 months) compared with 20.1 months (95% confidence interval 17.0-25.1 months) in the upfront PTR arm (P = 0.32). The number of grade 3-4 events was 71 (72%) in the arm without upfront PTR and 61 (65%) in the upfront PTR arm (P = 0.33). Three deaths (3%) possibly related to treatment were reported in the arm without upfront PTR and four (4%) in the upfront PTR arm.

CONCLUSIONS

Addition of upfront PTR to palliative systemic therapy in patients with synchronous mCRC without severe symptoms of the primary tumor does not result in a survival benefit. This practice should no longer be considered standard of care.

Conversational artificial intelligence (chatGPT™) in the management of complex colorectal cancer patients: early experience

INTRODUCTION

In 2022 chatGPT™ (OpenAI, San Francisco) was introduced to the public. The complex reasoning and the natural language processing (NLP) ability of the AI platform has generated much excitement about the potential applications. This study conducted a preliminary analysis of the chatGPT™'s ability to formulate a management plan in accordance with oncological principles for patients with colorectal cancer.

METHODOLOGY

Colorectal cancer cases discussed in the multidisciplinary tumor (MDT) board at a single tertiary institution between September 2022 and January 2023 were prospectively collected. The treatment recommendations made by the chatGPT™ for Stage IV, recurrent, synchronous colorectal cancer were analysed for adherence to oncological principles. The recommendations by chatGPT™ were compared with the decision plans made by the MDT.

RESULTS

In all cases, the chatGPT™ was able to adhere to oncological principles. The recommendations in all 30 cases factored in the patient's overall health and functional status. The oncological management recommendation concordance rate between chatGPT™ and the MDT was 86.7%.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows a high concordance rate of the chatGPT™'s recommendations with that given by the MDT in the management of complex colorectal patients. This will need to be verified in a larger prospective study.

Advancing Colorectal Cancer Diagnosis with AI-Powered Breathomics: Navigating Challenges and Future Directions

Early detection of colorectal cancer is crucial for improving outcomes and reducing mortality. While there is strong evidence of effectiveness, currently adopted screening methods present several shortcomings which negatively impact the detection of early stage carcinogenesis, including low uptake due to patient discomfort. As a result, developing novel, non-invasive alternatives is an important research priority. Recent advancements in the field of breathomics, the study of breath composition and analysis, have paved the way for new avenues for non-invasive cancer detection and effective monitoring. Harnessing the utility of Volatile Organic Compounds in exhaled breath, breathomics has the potential to disrupt colorectal cancer screening practices. Our goal is to outline key research efforts in this area focusing on machine learning methods used for the analysis of breathomics data, highlight challenges involved in artificial intelligence application in this context, and suggest possible future directions which are currently considered within the framework of the European project ONCOSCREEN.

Palliative resection of the primary tumour improves survival in incurable metastatic colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Studies show conflicting results on whether primary tumour resection (PTR) in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) prolongs survival. The aim of this study was to analyse prognostic factors and the effects of PTR on overall survival (OS) in mCRC patients.

METHODS

In this population-based cohort study, factors associated with PTR and OS were assessed in 188 mCRC patients with mCRC treated with palliative chemotherapy between 2008 and 2019. The Chi-square test and Mann-Whitney U-test were used to assess factors associated with PTR. The log-rank test was used to compare Kaplan-Meier estimates for OS. Cox regression was used to identify factors predicting OS.

RESULTS

Patients undergoing PTR had significantly better performance status, fewer metastatic sites, lower CEA levels, and more often had left-sided CRC than patients not undergoing PTR. OS was longer in palliative mCRC patients undergoing PTR (P < 0.01) and PTR was an independent variable in the Cox regression analysis (P < 0.05). Median OS was 22.9 ± 1.9 months for the PTR group and 14.5 ± 1.5 months for the non-operated group. Poor performance status and liver metastases were significantly associated with poor prognosis.

CONCLUSION

This study shows that PTR had a positive effect on OS and may be considered in patients suitable for surgery. PTR was offered to palliative mCRC patients with prognostic factors associated with better prognosis.

Clinical Outcomes of Upfront Primary Tumor Resection in Synchronous Unresectable Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

The role of upfront primary tumor resection (PTR) in patients with unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer without severe symptoms remains controversial. We retrospectively analyzed the role of PTR in overall survival (OS) in this population. Among the 205 patients who enrolled, the PTR group (n = 42) showed better performance (p = 0.061), had higher frequencies of right-sided origin (p = 0.058), the T4 stage (p = 0.003), the M1a stage (p = 0.012), and <2 organ metastases (p = 0.002), and received fewer targeted agents (p = 0.011) than the chemotherapy group (n = 163). The PTR group showed a trend for longer OS (20.5 versus 16.0 months, p = 0.064) but was not related to OS in Cox regression multivariate analysis (p = 0.220). The male sex (p = 0.061), a good performance status (p = 0.078), the T3 stage (p = 0.060), the M1a stage (p = 0.042), <2 organ metastases (p = 0.035), an RAS wild tumor (p = 0.054), and the administration of targeted agents (p = 0.037), especially bevacizumab (p = 0.067), seemed to be related to PTR benefits. Upfront PTR could be considered beneficial in some subgroups, but these findings require larger studies to verify.

Preoperative chemotherapy prior to primary tumour resection for asymptomatic synchronous unresectable colorectal liver-limited metastases: The RECUT multicenter randomised controlled trial

PURPOSE

Primary tumour resection (PTR) is still a selection for patients with low tumour burden and good condition, especially with conversion therapy purpose for colorectal liver-limited metastases (CRLMs). The objective was to evaluate whether pre-PTR chemotherapy could improve progression-free survival (PFS) for patients with asymptomatic synchronous unresectable CRLMs.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with asymptomatic synchronous unresectable CRLMs were randomly assigned to receive pre-PTR chemotherapy (arm A) or upfront PTR (arm B). Chemotherapy regimens of mFOLFOX6 plus cetuximab, mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab or mFOLFOX6 alone were chosen according to the RAS genotype. The primary end-point was PFS; secondary end-points included overall survival (OS), tumour response, disease control rate (DCR), liver metastases resection rate, surgical complications and chemotherapy toxicity.

RESULTS

Three hundred and twenty patients were randomly assigned to arm A (160 patients) and arm B (160 patients). Patients in arm A had significantly improved the median PFS compared with arm B (10.5 versus 9.1 months; P = 0.013). Patients in arm A also had significantly better DCR (84.4% versus 75.0%; P = 0.037). The median OS (29.4 versus 27.2 months; P = 0.058), objective response rate (ORR) (53.1% versus 45.0%; P = 0.146) and liver metastases resection rate (21.9% versus 18.1%; P = 0.402) were not significantly different. The Clavien-Dindo 3-4 complications post PTR (4.5% versus 3.8%, P = 0.759) and the incidence of grade 3/4 chemotherapy events (42.2% versus 40.4%, P = 0.744) reached no statistical significance.

CONCLUSIONS

For asymptomatic synchronous unresectable CRLMs, Pre-PTR chemotherapy improved the PFS compared with upfront PTR.

Prognosis of patients with unresectable stage IV Colon cancer undergoing primary tumor resection: A multicenter study of minimally symptomatic or asymptomatic primary tumor

AIM

To determine the factors affecting survival of patients with unresectable stage IV colon cancer with Primary tumour resection (PTR) as first treatment compared with those with conventional palliative chemotherapy.

METHODOLOGY

Patient with minimally or asymptomatic stage IV colon cancer at diagnosis were identified from prospectively managed database in included centers from 2015 to 2020. Patient with and without PTR performed were followed up. Primary end point was overall survival. Risk factors affecting survival will be analysis by Kaplan Meier statistics and Cox regression analysis. Secondary outcome will be stoma formation, complication rate and reoperation.

RESULTS

162 patients were included in analysis. 68 patients treated with systemic therapy PTR and 94 patients with tumour in-situ before systemic therapy. Baseline demographics including sex, age, functional status, tumour location, site of metastasis, RAS status were similar except there was slightly more liver metastasis on non-resection group (63.2% vs 79.8%). Cox regression analysis found PTR (HR 0.485, 0.302-0.778, p = 0.003)), bone metastasis (HR 3.163, 1.146-6.918, p = 0.004) commencement (HR 0.579, 0.345-0.971, p = 0.038) and completion of systemic therapy (HR 0.310, 0.178-0.539, p = 0.000) are independent factors predicting survival. The median overall survival after PTR vs tumour in-situ is 28 (IQR: 16-47) vs 12 (IQR:6-31) months (p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Resection of primary tumour is an independent good prognostic factor in relatively asymptomatic stage IV CA colon patients with unresectable metastasis. Resection should be considered as long as the procedure is straight forward and do not impose significant morbidities with careful patient selection.

The impact of primary tumor resection for asymptomatic colorectal cancer patients with unresectable metastases: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Whether patients with asymptomatic primary tumors and unresectable metastases of colorectal cancer (CRC) should undergo primary tumor resection (PTR) remains controversial. This study aims to determine the appropriateness of PTR for these individuals by evaluating a number of outcome measures.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed. Outcome measures included overall survival, emergency surgery rates, incidence of postoperative complications, time to initiate chemotherapy, conversion rates, and chemotherapy-related toxicities.

RESULTS

Patients who received PTR in addition to chemotherapy had a better overall survival rate than those who only received chemotherapy (HR = 0.62, 95%CI, 0.50-0.78, I2 = 84%, p < 0.00001). In the RCT subgroup, there were no significant differences with a HR of 0.72 (95%CI, 0.45-1.13, I2 = 17%, p = 0.15). More patients in the chemotherapy alone group could be converted to resectable status (OR = 0.47, 95%CI, 0.27-0.82, I2 = 0%, p = 0.008), but the incidence of emergency surgery was 23% (95%CI, 17-29%, I2 = 14%). The risk of chemotherapy-related toxicity was not significantly higher in the PTR group (OR = 1.5, 95%CI, 0.94-2.43, p = 0.09, I2 = 0%), with a 7% incidence of postoperative complications (95%CI, 0-14%, p = 0.05, I2 = 0%). The time to initiate chemotherapy after PTR was approximately 33.06 days (95%CI, 25.55-40.58, I2 = 0%).

CONCLUSION

PTR plus chemotherapy may be associated with improved survival in asymptomatic CRC patients with unresectable metastases. However, PTR did not provide a significant survival benefit in the subgroup of RCTs. Additionally, PTR did not result in a significantly increased risk of chemotherapy-related toxicity, with a postoperative complication rate of approximately 7%, and chemotherapy could be initiated at approximately 33.06 days after PTR. Compared with the PTR plus chemotherapy, chemotherapy alone could result in a significantly higher conversion rate. However, about 23% of patients receiving chemotherapy alone required emergency surgery for primary tumor-related symptoms. The above results needed to be validated in future larger prospective randomized trials.

Development and validation of a nomogram to predict which patients with colorectal cancer liver metastases would benefit from primary tumor resection

PURPOSE

The use of primary tumor resection (PTR) in the treatment of colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRLM) patients has become increasingly controversial. Our goal is to establish a nomogram to screen for the candidates that would benefit from PTR in CRLM patients.

METHODS

The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database was searched for 8366 patients with colorectal liver cancer metastases (CRLM) from 2010 to 2015. Overall survival (OS) rates were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier curve. After propensity score matching (PSM), predictors were analyzed by logistic regression analysis, and a nomogram was created to predict for survival benefit of PTR using R software.

RESULTS

After PSM, there were 814 patients in both PTR group and non-PTR group, respectively. The median OS time in the PTR group was 26 months (95%CI = 23.33 ~ 28.67) and the median OS time in the non-PTR group was 15 months (95%CI = 13.36 ~ 16.64). The Cox regression analysis found that PTR was an independent predictive factor (HR = 0.46, 0.41 ~ 0.52) for OS. Additionally, logistic regression was used to study the factors impacting PTR benefit, and the results showed that CEA (P = 0.016), chemotherapy (P < 0.001), N stage (P < 0.001), histological grade (P < 0.001), and lung metastasis (P = 0.001) are independent predictive factors affecting the therapeutic outcome of PTR in patients with CRLM. The developed nomogram displayed good discriminative ability in predicting the beneficial probability of PTR surgery, with the area under the curve (AUC) values of 0.801 in training set and 0.739 in validation set respectively.

CONCLUSION

We developed a nomogram that predicts the survival benefits of PTR in CRLM patients with relatively high accuracy, and quantifies the predictive factors for PTR-related benefits.

Primary tumor resection or systemic treatment as palliative treatment for patients with isolated synchronous colorectal cancer peritoneal metastases in a nationwide cohort study

Limited data are available to guide the decision-making process for clinicians and their patients regarding palliative treatment options for patients with isolated synchronous colorectal cancer peritoneal metastases (CRC-PM). Therefore, the aim of this study is to analyze the outcome of the different palliative treatments for these patients. All patients diagnosed with isolated synchronous CRC-PM between 2009 and 2020 (Netherlands Cancer Registry) who underwent palliative treatment were included. Patients who underwent emergency surgery or curative intent treatment were excluded. Patients were categorized into upfront palliative primary tumor resection (with or without additional systemic treatment) or palliative systemic treatment only. Overall survival (OS) was compared between both groups and multivariable cox regression analysis was performed. Of 1031 included patients, 364 (35%) patients underwent primary tumor resection and 667 (65%) patients received systemic treatment only. Sixty-day mortality was 9% in the primary tumor resection group and 5% in the systemic treatment group (P = 0.007). OS was 13.8 months in the primary tumor resection group and 10.3 months in the systemic treatment group (P < 0.001). Multivariable analysis showed that primary tumor resection was associated with improved OS (HR 0.68; 95%CI 0.57-0.81; P < 0.001). Palliative primary tumor resection appeared to be associated with improved survival compared to palliative systemic treatment alone in patients with isolated synchronous CRC-PM despite a higher 60-day mortality. This finding must be interpreted with care as residual bias probably played a significant role. Nevertheless, this option may be considered in the decision-making process by clinicians and their patients.

Primary Tumour Treatment in Stage 4 Colorectal Cancer with Unresectable Liver and Lung Metastases and No Peritoneal Carcinomatosis-Current Trends and Attitudes in the Absence of Clear Guidelines

BACKGROUND

The treatment of the primary tumour in colorectal cancer with unresectable liver and/or lung metastases but no peritoneal carcinomatosis is still a matter of debate. In the absence of clear evidence and guidelines, our survey was aimed at obtaining a snapshot of the current attitudes and the rationales for the choice of offering resection of the primary tumour (RPT) despite the presence of untreatable metastases.

METHODS

An online survey was administered to medical professionals worldwide. The survey had three sections: (1) demographics of the respondent, (2) case scenarios and (3) general questions. For each respondent, an "elective resection score" and an "emergency resection score" were calculated as a percentage of the times he or she would offer RPT in the elective and in the emergency case scenarios. They were correlated to independent variables such as age, type of affiliation and specific workload.

RESULTS

Most respondents would offer palliative chemotherapy as the first choice in elective scenarios, while a more aggressive approach with RPT would be reserved for younger patients with good performance status and in emergency situations. Respondents younger than 50 years old and those with a specific workload of fewer than 40 cases of colorectal cancer per year tend to be more conservative.

CONCLUSIONS

In the absence of clear guidelines and evidence, there is a lack of consensus on the treatment of the primary tumour in case of colon cancer with unresectable liver and/or lung metastases and no peritoneal carcinomatosis. Palliative chemotherapy seems to be the first option, but more consistent evidence is needed to guide this choice.

Primary tumor resection in colorectal cancer patients with unresectable distant metastases: a minireview

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most common cause of cancer-related death among both men and women worldwide and the third most common cancer overall. About 20% of patients diagnosed with CRC were discovered to have distant metastatic lesions, the majority of which were located in the liver. For the optimum treatment of CRC patients with hepatic metastases, interventional radiologists, medical oncologists, and surgeons must all collaborate. The surgical excision of the primary tumor is an important part of CRC treatment since it has been found to be curative in cases of CRC with minimal metastases. However, given the evidence to date was gathered from retrospective data, there is still controversy over the effectiveness of primary tumor resection (PTR) in improving the median overall survival (OS) and quality of life. Patients who have hepatic metastases make up a very tiny fraction of those who are candidates for resection. With a focus on the PTR, this minireview attempted to review the current advancements in the treatment options for hepatic colorectal metastatic illness. This evaluation also included information on PTR's risks when performed on individuals with stage IV CRC.

Effect of primary tumor resection on survival in patients with asymptomatic unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

It remains controversial whether primary tumor resection (PTR) improves survival in patients with asymptomatic, unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis to assess the latest evidence on clinical outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases for eligible studies published between database inception and May 2022. RevMan 5.4 and Stata 16.0 were used for the meta-analysis.

RESULTS

A total of nine studies were included, including four randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and five retrospective cohort studies. Meta-analysis showed that overall survival (OS) [HR = 0.89, 95%CI (0.74, 1.06), P = 0.19] and progression-free survival (PFS) [HR = 0.87, 95%CI (0.71, 1.06), P = 0.17] were not significantly different between the PTR and non-PTR groups. In the subgroup analysis, all subgroups showed no significant difference in OS between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

PTR may not provide additional survival benefits over chemotherapy in asymptomatic, unresectable mCRC patients. However, in view of the limitations of this study, more well-designed RCTs are needed to validate our conclusions.

Diagnosis by Volatile Organic Compounds in Exhaled Breath in Exhaled Breath from Patients with Gastric and Colorectal Cancers

One in three cancer deaths worldwide are caused by gastric and colorectal cancer malignancies. Although the incidence and fatality rates differ significantly from country to country, the rates of these cancers in East Asian nations such as South Korea and Japan have been increasing each year. Above all, the biggest danger of this disease is how challenging it is to recognize in its early stages. Moreover, most patients with these cancers do not present with any disease symptoms before receiving a definitive diagnosis. Currently, volatile organic compounds (VOCs) are being used for the early prediction of several other diseases, and research has been carried out on these applications. Exhaled VOCs from patients possess remarkable potential as novel biomarkers, and their analysis could be transformative in the prevention and early diagnosis of colon and stomach cancers. VOCs have been spotlighted in recent studies due to their ease of use. Diagnosis on the basis of patient VOC analysis takes less time than methods using gas chromatography, and results in the literature demonstrate that it is possible to determine whether a patient has certain diseases by using organic compounds in their breath as indicators. This study describes how VOCs can be used to precisely detect cancers; as more data are accumulated, the accuracy of this method will increase, and it can be applied in more fields.

Recent Advance in the Surgical Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer-An English Version

Stage IV colorectal cancer (CRC) has 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. 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. In the treatment of 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, primary tumor resection in patients with asymptomatic CRC with synchronous, unresectable metastases did not show overall survival benefits in recent studies. Therefore, the treatment of metastatic CRC is challenging due to the variable tumor extent and heterogenous characteristics. Tailored surgical treatments and multidisciplinary approaches may improve survival and the quality of life in patients with metastatic CRC.

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.

Survival benefits of primary tumor surgery for synchronous brain metastases: A SEER-based population study with propensity-matched comparative analysis

BACKGROUND

Evidence about the prognostic value of primary tumor surgery (PTS) in patients with brain metastatic malignancies is ambiguous and controversial. This study assessed the survival benefits of primary tumor surgery in patients with brain metastases (BMs).

METHODS

Adults patients with BMs that originated from lung, breast, kidney, skin, colon, and liver diagnosed between 2010 and 2018 were derived from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database (SEER). Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance the bias between patients with or without PTS. Then the prognostic value of PTS was estimated by Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazard regression models.

RESULTS

A total of 32,760 patients with BMs secondary to non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), small cell lung cancer (SCLC), breast cancer, renal cancer, melanoma, colorectal cancer, and liver cancer were identified from the database. After PSM at 1:1 ratio, PTS appeared to significantly prolong cause-specific survival (CSS) time for patients with BMs secondary to NSCLC, breast cancer, renal cancer, and colorectal cancer (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.60 [0.53-0.68], 0.56 [0.43-0.73], 0.47 [0.37-0.60], and 0.59 [0.37-0.95], respectively, all p < 0.05). Patients with earlier T and N classifications, no extracranial metastasis, and cancer-specific subtypes (adenocarcinoma in NSCLC, hormone receptor-negative breast cancer) may derive more survival benefits from PTS when suffering from BMs.

CONCLUSION

This population-based study supported PTS could provide survival benefits for patients with BMs secondary to NSCLC, breast cancer, renal cancer, and colorectal cancer. More emphasis should be put on PTS of selected patients with BMs.

Asymptomatic Primary Tumor Resection in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

In patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) with an asymptomatic primary tumor, there is no consensus on the indication for resection of the primary tumor.

Methods

The PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library databases were searched from inception to November 30,2021. A meta-analysis was performed using RevMan (version 5.3.3; The Cochrane Collaboration) on the outcome of mCRC patients with or without resection of the primary tumor in 8 selected studies.

Results

This meta-analysis included 2805 colorectal cancer patients with an asymptomatic primary tumor from 8 selected studies. Primary tumor resection (PTR) patients had longer overall survival (OS: MD =6.76 [3.39, 10.12], I² = 77%, P < 0.0001), compared with non-primary tumor resection (NPTR) patients. In the subgroup, the randomized controlled trials (RCT) PTR group didn’t have longer overall survival (OS: MD =3.79 [-3.49, 11.08], I² = 69%, P= 0.31); the Non-RCT PTR group had longer overall survival (OS: MD =8.42 [3.14, 13.70], I² = 89%, P= 0.002). In the meanwhile, compared with NPTR group, the 2-year overall survival rate, the 3-year overall survival rate, 5-year overall survival rate in the PTR group is higher (OR=2.35 [1.74, 3.18], I² = 0%, P < 0.00001; OR=3.61 [2.35, 5.54], I² = 0%, P < 0.00001; OR=3.02 [1.72, 5.33], I² = 48%, P= 0.0001, respectively).

Conclusions

Our results from studies demonstrate that the resection of primary tumor is a prognostic factor for survival in mCRC patients. However, 2 RCTs showed the resection of primary tumor was not related with a significant survival benefit in subgroup. Therefore, a larger RCT in the era of modern chemotherapy and liver resection techniques would be helpful.

Impact of Upfront Chemotherapy on the Effect of Primary Tumour Resection for Asymptomatic Synchronous Colorectal Cancer With Unresectable Metastases: A Propensity-Score-Matched Cohort Analysis

Background:

It is controversial whether primary tumour resection (PTR) and the sequencing of chemotherapy and PTR are associated with the survival of patients with incurable stage IV colorectal cancer. This study aimed to explore the effects of PTR and the sequencing of chemotherapy and PTR on asymptomatic colorectal cancer with synchronous unresectable metastases (asmCRC).

Patients and Methods:

Patients with asmCRC were retrospectively identified from a single centre and categorised into 3 groups: PTR followed by chemotherapy (POC), upfront chemotherapy followed by PTR (UFC), and palliative chemotherapy (PC). The primary end points included median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Clinical features were analysed using χ² test, while survival curves were generated using the Kaplan-Meier test. Propensity-score matching (PSM) was performed when comparing survival between POC and UFC groups.

Results:

From 2008 to 2014, 255 patients were identified and included into the POC (n = 101), UFC (n = 40), and PC (n = 114) groups. The UFC and POC groups had significantly better median OS compared with the PC group (40.7 vs 16.3 months, P < .0001; 39.7 vs 16.3 months, P < .0001). Before PSM, the UFC group had better median PFS than the POC and PC groups (18.5 vs 9.7 months, P = .038; 18.5 vs 6.1 months, P < .0001). After PSM, UFC has better PFS than POC (P = .038). And the UFC group did not have higher postoperative or preoperative morbidity compared with the POC group (P = .235).

Conclusions:

Primary tumour resection could improve the survival of patients with asmCRC. Compared with POC or PC, UFC was associated with a better median PFS without significantly increasing preoperative or postoperative morbidity.

Induction Chemotherapy Followed by Primary Tumor Resection Did Not Bring Survival Benefits in Colon Cancer Patients With Asymptomatic Primary Lesion and Synchronous Unresectable Metastases

Background

It is still controversial whether primary tumor resection (PTR) improves survival in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients with unresectable metastases.

Methods

Colon cancer patients were enrolled and randomly allocated to with or without PTR after induction chemotherapy with XELOX or mFOLFOX6, and those with chemotherapy failure were excluded. The primary endpoint was TTF (time to strategy failure) on an intent-to-treat basis. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02291744.

Results

Between April 2015 and July 2020, 140 patients were enrolled, and 54 patients were excluded due to colon obstruction (16), perforation (1), disease progression (22), death (1), radical resection (3), or other reasons (11). After induction chemotherapy, 86 patients were randomized into group A (the resection group, n = 42) or group B (chemotherapy-alone group, n = 44). The median TTF was 143 days (95% CI: 104.9–181.1) in group A and 196 days (95% CI: 96.5–295.5) in group B (HR: 0.930 95% CI: 0.589–1.468, p = 0.755), and there was no significant difference in PFS, OS, and incidence of chemotherapy-related adverse events between two groups. The primary lesion-related events after PTR in group A were significantly fewer than those in group B. Patients with a tumor regression grade (TRG) score of 2 had longer TTF and PFS than those with score of 3.

Conclusion

PTR after induction chemotherapy could not bring survival benefits for colon cancer patients with unresectable metastases, and it is not recommended routinely. However, it also requires individualized treatment as colon obstruction or perforation occurred in some patients and PTR could reduce primary tumor-related events, and the TRG score might help for selection of beneficial 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.

Nomogram to Predict the Occurrence and Prognosis of Distant Metastasis in T1N0 Colon Cancer: A SEER Data-Based Study

Purpose

Distant metastasis (DM) is relatively rare in T1 colon cancer (CC) patients, especially in those with negative lymph node metastasis. The aim of this study was to explore the main clinical factors and build nomogram for predicting the occurrence and prognosis of DM in T1N0 colon cancer patients.

Methods

Patients with T1N0 stage CC were collected from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Result (SEER) database. All patients were divided into development and validation cohorts with the 3:1 ratio. Logistic regressions were performed to analyze the clinical risk factors for DM. Cox regression model was used to identify potential prognostic factors for patients with DM. The performance of nomogram was evaluated by concordance index (C-index), calibration curves, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and decision curve analyses (DCAs). Based on cancer-specific survival (CSS), Kaplan-Meier curves were generated and analyzed using Log rank tests.

Results

A total of 6770 patients were enrolled in this study, including 428 patients (6.3%) with DM. Age, size, grade, CEA were independent risk factors associated with DM. Age, grade, CEA, surgery and chemotherapy were independent prognostic factors for CSS. Nomograms were applied and C-index, calibration curves, ROC curves and DCA curves proved good discrimination, calibration and clinical practicability of the nomogram in predicting the occurrence and prognosis of DM in T1N0 CC patients. In the DM nomogram, the AUCs for development and validation cohort were 0.901 (95% CI = 0.879-0.922) and 0.899 (95% CI=0.865-0.940), respectively. The calibration curves (development cohort: S: p = 0.712; validation cohort: S: p = 0.681) showed the relatively satisfactory prediction accuracy. Similarly, the AUCs of the nomogram at 1-, 2-, and 3-year were 0.763 (95% CI=0.744-0.782), 0.794 (95% CI=0.775-0.813), and 0.822 (95% CI=0.803-0.841) for the development cohort, and 0.785 (95% CI=0.754-0.816), 0.748 (95% CI=0.717-0.779) and 0.896 (95% CI=0.865-0.927) for the validation cohort in the CSS nomogram. The C-indices of the development and validation cohort were 0.718 (95% CI=0.639-0.737) and 0.712 (95% CI=0.681-0.743).

Conclusion

The population-based nomogram could help clinicians predict the occurrence and prognosis of DM in T1N0 CC patients and provide a reference to perform appropriate metastatic screening plans and rational therapeutic options for the special population.

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.

Sixty-Day Mortality of Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Randomized to Systemic Treatment vs Primary Tumor Resection Followed by Systemic Treatment: The CAIRO4 Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

The role of primary tumor resection (PTR) in synchronous patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) who had unresectable metastases and few or absent symptoms of their primary tumor is unclear. Studying subgroups with low postoperative mortality may identify patients who potentially benefit from PTR.

Objective

To determine the difference in 60-day mortality between patients randomized to systemic treatment only vs PTR followed by systemic treatment, and to explore risk factors associated with 60-day mortality.

Design, Setting, and Participants

CAIRO4 is a randomized phase 3 trial initiated in 2012 in which patients with mCRC were randomized to systemic treatment only or PTR followed by systemic treatment with palliative intent. This multicenter study was conducted by the Danish and Dutch Colorectal Cancer Group in general and academic hospitals in Denmark and the Netherlands. Patients included between August 2012 and December 2019 with histologically proven colorectal cancer, unresectable metastases, and a primary tumor with few or absent symptoms were eligible.

Interventions

Systemic treatment, consisting of fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy with bevacizumab vs PTR followed by fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy with bevacizumab.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The aim of the current analysis was to compare 60-day mortality rates in both treatment arms. A secondary aim was the identification of risk factors for 60-day mortality in the treatment arms. These aims were not predefined in the study protocol.

Results

A total of 196 patients were included in the intention-to-treat analysis (112 [57%] men; median [IQR] age, 65 [59-70] years). Sixty-day mortality was 3% (95% CI, 1%-9%) in the systemic treatment arm and 11% (95% CI, 6%-19%) in the PTR arm (P = .03). In a per-protocol analysis, 60-day mortality was 2% (95% CI, 1%-7%) vs 10% (95% CI, 5%-18%; P = .048). Patients with elevated serum levels of lactate dehydrogenase, aspartate aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase, and/or neutrophils who were randomized to PTR had a significantly higher 60-day mortality than patients without these characteristics.

Conclusions and Relevance

Patients with mCRC who were randomized to PTR followed by systemic treatment had a higher 60-day mortality than patients randomized to systemic treatment. Especially patients randomized to the PTR arm with elevated serum levels of lactate dehydrogenase, neutrophils, aspartate aminotransferase, and/or alanine aminotransferase were at high risk of postoperative mortality. Final study results on overall survival have to be awaited.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01606098.

Comparison of Survival Outcomes of Chemotherapy Plus Surgery vs Chemotherapy Alone for Patients With Isolated Liver Metastases From Gallbladder Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Chemotherapy is the standard of treatment for metastatic gallbladder carcinoma (GBC). It is unclear whether chemotherapy plus surgery improves the survival outcomes of patients with isolated liver metastases from GBC. We aimed to investigate the survival benefits of chemotherapy plus surgery in GBC with isolated liver metastases compared to those of chemotherapy alone.

METHODS

We identified 406 patients with isolated liver metastases from GBC who underwent chemotherapy alone or chemotherapy plus surgery between 2010 and 2015 from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results. Patients were divided into 3 subgroups: group I, chemotherapy alone (n = 263); group II, chemotherapy combined with cholecystectomy (n = 116); and group III, chemotherapy combined with cholecystectomy plus hepatectomy (n = 27). The cancer-specific survival and overall survival were evaluated.

RESULTS

Compared with group I, group II revealed a longer survival time (P < .001). In addition, the survival time of the group III was also prolonged (P < .001). Multivariate cox analysis showed that treatment strategy was an independent prognostic factor.

CONCLUSION

Chemotherapy combined with resection of the primary tumor plus or not plus resection of the metastatic lesions may be beneficial in GBC with isolated liver metastases.

Debulking surgery for malignant tumors: the current status, evidence and future perspectives

Debulking surgery, also called cytoreductive surgery, is a resection of the tumor as much as possible and an intended incomplete resection for unresectable malignant tumors. Since the most important principle in surgical oncology is complete R0 resection, debulking surgery goes against the basic principle and obscures the concept of operability. However, debulking surgery has been advocated for various types of advanced malignant tumors, including gynecological cancers, urological cancers, gastrointestinal cancers, breast cancers and other malignancies, with or without adjuvant therapy. Positive data from randomized trials have been shown in subsets of ovarian cancer, renal cell carcinoma, colorectal cancer and breast cancer. However, recent trials for renal cell carcinoma, colorectal cancer and breast cancer have tended to show controversial results, mainly according to the survival improvement of nonsurgical systemic therapy alone. On the other hand, debulking surgery still has a therapeutic role for slow-growing and borderline malignant tumors, such as pseudomyxoma peritonei and thymomas. The recent understanding of tumor heterogeneity and clonal evolution responsible for malignancy and drug resistance indicates that select patients may obtain prolonged survival by the synergistic effect of debulking surgery and novel systemic therapy. This review aimed to describe the current status and evidence of debulking surgery in a cross-organ manner and to discuss future perspectives in the current era with advances in systemic therapy.

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.