The Role of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Repeat Local Treatment of Recurrent Colorectal Liver Metastases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Hospital variation and outcomes after repeat hepatic resection for colorectal liver metastases: a nationwide cohort study

BACKGROUND

Approximately 70% of patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) experiences intrahepatic recurrence after initial liver resection. This study assessed outcomes and hospital variation in repeat liver resections (R-LR).

METHODS

This population-based study included all patients who underwent liver resection for CRLM between 2014 and 2022 in the Netherlands. Overall survival (OS) was collected for patients operated on between 2014 and 2018 by linkage to the insurance database.

RESULTS

Data of 7479 liver resections (1391 (18.6%) repeat and 6088 (81.4%) primary) were analysed. Major morbidity and mortality were not different. Factors associated with major morbidity included ASA 3+, major liver resection, extrahepatic disease, and open surgery. Five-year OS after repeat versus primary liver resection was 42.3% versus 44.8%, P = 0.37. Factors associated with worse OS included largest CRLM >5 cm (aHR 1.58, 95% CI: 1.07-2.34, P = 0.023), >3 CRLM (aHR 1.33, 95% CI: 1.00-1.75, P = 0.046), extrahepatic disease (aHR 1.60, 95% CI: 1.25-2.04, P = 0.001), positive tumour margins (aHR 1.42, 95% CI: 1.09-1.85, P = 0.009). Significant hospital variation in performance of R-LR was observed, median 18.9% (8.2% to 33.3%).

CONCLUSION

Significant hospital variation was observed in performance of R-LR in the Netherlands reflecting different treatment decisions upon recurrence. On a population-based level R-LR leads to satisfactory survival.

Recurrent Colorectal Liver Metastases: Upfront Local Treatment versus Neoadjuvant Systemic Therapy Followed by Local Treatment (COLLISION RELAPSE): Study Protocol of a Phase III Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

PURPOSE

The objective of the COLLISION RELAPSE trial is to prove or disprove superiority of neoadjuvant systemic therapy followed by repeat local treatment (either thermal ablation and/or surgical resection), compared to repeat local treatment alone, in patients with at least one recurrent locally treatable CRLM within one year and no extrahepatic disease.

METHODS

A total of 360 patients will be included in this phase III, multicentre randomized controlled trial. The primary endpoint is overall survival. Secondary endpoints are distant progression-free survival, local tumour progression-free survival analysed per patient and per tumour, systemic therapy-related toxicity, procedural morbidity and mortality, length of hospital stay, pain assessment and quality of life, cost-effectiveness ratio and quality-adjusted life years.

DISCUSSION

If the addition of neoadjuvant systemic therapy to repeat local treatment of CRLM proves to be superior compared to repeat local treatment alone, this may lead to a prolonged life expectancy and increased disease-free survival at the cost of possible systemic therapy-related side effects.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 1, phase III randomized controlled trial.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT05861505. May 17, 2023.

Efficacy of Thermal Ablation for Small-Size (0-3 cm) versus Intermediate-Size (3-5 cm) Colorectal Liver Metastases: Results from the Amsterdam Colorectal Liver Met Registry (AmCORE)

PURPOSE

Thermal ablation is widely recognized as the standard of care for small-size unresectable colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). For larger CRLM safety, local control and overall efficacy are not well established and insufficiently validated. The purpose of this comparative series was to analyze outcomes for intermediate-size versus small-size CRLM.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Patients treated with thermal ablation between December 2000 and November 2021 for small-size and intermediate-size CRLM were included. The primary endpoints were complication rate and local control (LC). Secondary endpoints included local tumor progression-free survival (LTPFS) and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

In total, 59 patients were included in the intermediate-size (3-5 cm) group and 221 in the small-size (0-3 cm) group. Complications were not significantly different between the two groups (p = 0.546). No significant difference between the groups was found in an overall comparison of OS (HR 1.339; 95% CI 0.824-2.176; p = 0.239). LTPFS (HR 3.388; p < 0.001) and LC (HR 3.744; p = 0.004) were superior in the small-size group. Nevertheless, the 1-, 3-, and 5-year LC for intermediate-size CRLM was still 93.9%, 85.4%, and 81.5%, and technical efficacy improved over time.

CONCLUSIONS

Thermal ablation for intermediate-size unresectable CRLM is safe and induces long-term LC in the vast majority. The results of the COLLISION-XL trial (unresectable colorectal liver metastases: stereotactic body radiotherapy versus microwave ablation-a phase II randomized controlled trial for CRLM 3-5 cm) are required to provide further clarification of the role of local ablative methods for intermediate-size unresectable CRLM.

Limited Effect of Perioperative Systemic Therapy in Patients Selected for Repeat Local Treatment of Recurrent Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastases

Objectives

The aim of this study was to determine the potential benefit of perioperative systemic therapy on overall and progression-free survival after repeat local treatment in patients suffering from recurrent colorectal cancer liver metastasis (CRLM).

Background

The optimal treatment strategy in patients with recurrent CRLM needs to be clarified, in particular for those suffering from early recurrence of CRLM.

Methods

In this multicenter observational cohort study, consecutive patients diagnosed with recurrent CRLM between 2009 and 2019 were retrospectively identified in 4 academic liver surgery centers. Disease-free interval after initial local treatment of CRLM was categorized into recurrence within 6, between 6 and 12, and after 12 months. Perioperative systemic therapy consisted of induction, (neo)adjuvant, or combined regimens. Overall and progression-free survival after repeat local treatment of CRLM were analyzed by multivariable Cox regression analyses, resulting in adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs).

Results

Out of 303 patients included for analysis, 90 patients received perioperative systemic therapy for recurrent CRLM. Favorable overall (aHR, 0.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.26-0.75) and progression-free (aHR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.35-0.78) survival were observed in patients with a disease-free interval of more than 12 months. No significant difference in overall and progression-free survival was observed in patients receiving perioperative systemic therapy at repeat local treatment of CRLM, stratified for disease-free interval, previous exposure to chemotherapy, and RAS mutation status.

Conclusions

No benefit of perioperative systemic therapy was observed in overall and progression-free survival after repeat local treatment of recurrent CRLM.

Microwave Ablation, Radiofrequency Ablation, Irreversible Electroporation, and Stereotactic Ablative Body Radiotherapy for Intermediate Size (3-5 cm) Unresectable Colorectal Liver Metastases: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Purpose of Review

Based on good local control rates and an excellent safety profile, guidelines consider thermal ablation the gold standard to eliminate small unresectable colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). However, efficacy decreases exponentially with increasing tumour size. The preferred treatment for intermediate-size unresectable CRLM remains uncertain. This systematic review and meta-analysis compare safety and efficacy of local ablative treatments for unresectable intermediate-size CRLM (3–5 cm).

Recent Findings

We systematically searched for publications reporting treatment outcomes of unresectable intermediate-size CRLM treated with thermal ablation, irreversible electroporation (IRE) or stereotactic ablative body-radiotherapy (SABR). No comparative studies or randomized trials were found. Literature to assess effectiveness was limited and there was substantial heterogeneity in outcomes and study populations. Per-patient local control ranged 22–90% for all techniques; 22–89% (8 series) for thermal ablation, 44% (1 series) for IRE, and 67–90% (1 series) for SABR depending on radiation dose.

Summary

Focal ablative therapy is safe and can induce long-term disease control, even for intermediate-size CRLM. Although SABR and tumuor-bracketing techniques such as IRE are suggested to be less susceptible to size, evidence to support any claims of superiority of one technique over the other is unsubstantiated by the available evidence. Future prospective comparative studies should address local-tumour-progression-free-survival, local control rate, overall survival, adverse events, and quality-of-life.

Multi-institutional analysis of outcomes for thermosphere microwave ablation treatment of colorectal liver metastases: the SMAC study

OBJECTIVES

Oligometastatic colorectal cancer benefits of locoregional treatments but data concerning microwave ablation (MWA) are limited and interactions with systemic therapy are still debated. The aim of this study is to evaluate safety and effectiveness of Thermosphere™ MWA (T-MWA) of colorectal liver metastases (CLM) and factors affecting local tumor progression-free survival (LTPFS).

METHODS

In this multi-institutional retrospective study (January 2015-September 2019), patients who underwent T-MWA for CLM were enrolled. Complications according to SIR classification were collected, primary efficacy and LTP were calculated. Analyzed variables included CLM size at diagnosis and at ablation, CLM number, ablation margins, intra-segment progression, chemotherapy before ablation (CBA), variations in size (ΔS_DIA-ABL), and velocity of size variation (V_DIA-ABL) between CLM diagnosis and ablation. Uni/multivariate analyses were performed using mixed effects Cox model to account for the hierarchical structure of data, patient/lesions.

RESULTS

One hundred thirty-two patients with 213 CLM were evaluated. Complications were reported in 6/150 procedures (4%); no biliary complications occurred. Primary efficacy was achieved in 204/213 CLM (95.7%). LTP occurred in 58/204 CLM (28.4%). Six-, twelve-, and eighteen-month LTPFS were 88.2%, 75.8%, and 69.9%, respectively. At multivariate analysis, CLM size at ablation (p = 0.00045), CLM number (p = 0.046), ablation margin < 5 mm (p = 0.0035), and intra-segment progression (p < 0.0001) were statistically significant for LTPFS. ΔS_DIA-ABL (p = 0.63) and V_DIA-ABL (p = 0.38) did not affect LTPFS. Ablation margins in the chemo-naïve group were larger than those in the CBA group (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

T-MWA is a safe and effective technology with adequate LTPFS rates. Intra-segment progression is significantly linked to LTPFS. CBA does not affect LTPFS. Anticipating ablation before chemotherapy may take the advantages of adequate tumor size with correct ablation margin planning.

KEY POINTS

• Thermosphere™-Microwave ablation is a safe and effective treatment for colorectal liver metastases with no registered biliary complications in more than 200 ablations. • Metastases size at time of ablation, intra-segment progression, and minimal ablation margin < 5 mm were found statistically significant for local tumor progression-free survival. • Chemotherapy before ablation modifies kinetics growth of the lesions but deteriorates ablation margins and does not significantly impact local tumor progression-free survival.

Repeat Local Treatment of Recurrent Colorectal Liver Metastases, the Role of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: An Amsterdam Colorectal Liver Met Registry (AmCORE) Based Study

This cohort study aimed to evaluate efficacy, safety, and survival outcomes of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) followed by repeat local treatment compared to upfront repeat local treatment of recurrent colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). A total of 152 patients with 267 tumors from the prospective Amsterdam Colorectal Liver Met Registry (AmCORE) met the inclusion criteria. Two cohorts of patients with recurrent CRLM were compared: patients who received chemotherapy prior to repeat local treatment (32 patients) versus upfront repeat local treatment (120 patients). Data from May 2002 to December 2020 were collected. Results on the primary endpoint overall survival (OS) and secondary endpoints local tumor progression-free survival (LTPFS) and distant progression-free survival (DPFS) were reviewed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Subsequently, uni- and multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression models, accounting for potential confounders, were estimated. Additionally, subgroup analyses, according to patient, initial and repeat local treatment characteristics, were conducted. Procedure-related complications and length of hospital stay were compared using chi-square test and Fisher's exact test. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year OS from date of diagnosis of recurrent disease was 98.6%, 72.5%, and 47.7% for both cohorts combined. The crude survival analysis did not reveal a significant difference in OS between the two cohorts (p = 0.834), with 1-, 3-, and 5-year OS of 100.0%, 73.2%, and 57.5% for the NAC group and 98.2%, 72.3%, and 45.3% for the upfront repeat local treatment group, respectively. After adjusting for two confounders, comorbidities (p = 0.010) and primary tumor location (p = 0.023), the corrected HR in multivariable analysis was 0.839 (95% CI, 0.416-1.691; p = 0.624). No differences between the two cohorts were found with regards to LTPFS (HR = 0.662; 95% CI, 0.249-1.756; p = 0.407) and DPFS (HR = 0.798; 95% CI, 0.483-1.318; p = 0.378). No heterogeneous treatment effects were detected in subgroup analyses according to patient, disease, and treatment characteristics. No significant difference was found in periprocedural complications (p = 0.843) and median length of hospital stay (p = 0.600) between the two cohorts. Chemotherapy-related toxicity was reported in 46.7% of patients. Adding NAC prior to repeat local treatment did not improve OS, LTPFS, or DPFS, nor did it affect periprocedural morbidity or length of hospital stay. The results of this comparative assessment do not substantiate the routine use of NAC prior to repeat local treatment of CRLM. Because the exact role of NAC (in different subgroups) remains inconclusive, we are currently designing a phase III randomized controlled trial (RCT), COLLISION RELAPSE trial, directly comparing upfront repeat local treatment (control) to neoadjuvant systemic therapy followed by repeat local treatment (intervention).

Image-Guided Ablation for Colorectal Liver Metastasis: Principles, Current Evidence, and the Path Forward

Image-guided ablation can provide effective local tumor control in selected patients with CLM. A randomized controlled trial suggested that radiofrequency ablation combined with systemic chemotherapy resulted in a survival benefit for patients with unresectable CLM, compared to systemic chemotherapy alone. For small tumors, ablation with adequate margins can be considered as an alternative to resection. The improvement of ablation technologies can allow the treatment of tumors close to major vascular structures or bile ducts, on which the applicability of thermal ablation modalities is challenging. Several factors affect the outcomes of ablation, including but not limited to tumor size, number, location, minimal ablation margin, RAS mutation status, prior hepatectomy, and extrahepatic disease. Further understanding of the impact of tumor biology and advanced imaging guidance on overall patient outcomes might help to tailor its application, and improve outcomes of image-guided ablation.

Survival Benefit of Repeat Local Treatment in Patients Suffering From Early Recurrence of Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastases

BACKGROUND

A uniform treatment strategy for patients suffering from early recurrence after local treatment of CRLM is currently lacking. The aim of this observational cohort study was to assess the potential survival benefit of repeat local treatment compared to systemic therapy in patients suffering from early recurrence of CRLM.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients who developed recurrent CRLM within 12 months after initial local treatment with curative intent were retrospectively identified in Amsterdam University Medical Centers between 2009-2019. Differences in overall and progression-free survival among treatment strategies were assessed using multivariable Cox regression analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 135 patients were included. Median overall survival of 41 months [range 4-135] was observed in patients who received repeat local treatment, consisting of upfront or repeat local treatment after neoadjuvant systemic therapy, compared to 24 months [range 1-55] in patients subjected to systemic therapy alone (adjusted HR = 0.42 [95%-CI: 0.25-0.72]; P = .002). Prolonged progression-free survival was observed after neoadjuvant systemic therapy followed by repeat local treatment, as compared to upfront repeat local treatment in patients with recurrent CRLM within 4 months following initial local treatment of CRLM (adjusted HR = 0.36 [95%-CI: 0.15-0.86]; P = .021).

CONCLUSION

Patients with early recurrence of CRLM should be considered for repeat local treatment strategies. A multimodality approach, consisting of neoadjuvant systemic therapy followed by repeat local treatment, appeared favorable in patients with recurrence within 4 months following initial local treatment of CRLM.

Repeat hepatectomy justified in patients with early recurrence of colorectal cancer liver metastases: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The benefit of repeat hepatectomy in patients with early recurrence of colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRLM) is questioned, in particular in those suffering from recurrence within three to six months following initial hepatectomy. The aim of this review was therefore to assess whether disease-free interval was associated with overall survival in patients undergoing repeat hepatectomy for recurrent CRLM.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted, according to PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library databases were searched from database inception to 6th June 2020. Observational studies describing results of repeat hepatectomy for recurrent CRLM, including (disease-free) interval between hepatic resections and overall survival were included. Patients undergoing repeat hepatectomy within three months or additional resection of extrahepatic disease were excluded from meta-analysis.

RESULTS

The initial search identified 2159 records, of which 28 were included for qualitative synthesis. A meta-analysis of 15 cohort studies was performed, comprising 1039 eligible patients. Median overall survival of 54.0 months [95 %-CI: 38.6-69.4] was observed after repeat hepatectomy in patients suffering from recurrent CRLM between three to six months compared to 53.0 months [95 %-CI: 44.3-61.6] for patients with recurrent CRLM between seven to twelve months (adjusted HR = 0.89, 95 %-CI: 0.66-1.18; p = 0.410), and 60.0 months [95 %-CI: 52.7-67.3] for patients with recurrent CRLM after twelve months (adjusted HR = 0.70, 95 %-CI: 0.53-0.92; p = 0.012).

CONCLUSIONS

Disease-free interval is considered a prognostic factor for overall survival, but should not be used as selection criterion per se for repeat hepatectomy in patients suffering from recurrent CRLM.

Thermal Ablation Compared to Partial Hepatectomy for Recurrent Colorectal Liver Metastases: An Amsterdam Colorectal Liver Met Registry (AmCORE) Based Study

Simple Summary

Between 64 and 85% of patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) develop distant intrahepatic recurrence after curative intent local treatment. The current standard of care for new CRLM is repeat local treatment, comprising partial hepatectomy and thermal ablation. Although relatively safe and feasible, repeat partial hepatectomy can be challenging due to adhesions and due to the reduced liver volume after surgery. This AmCORE based study assessed safety, efficacy and survival outcomes of repeat thermal ablation as compared to repeat partial hepatectomy in patients with recurrent CRLM. Repeat partial hepatectomy was not different from repeat thermal ablation with regard to survival, distant- and local recurrence rates and complications, whereas length of hospital stay favored repeat thermal ablation. Thermal ablation should be considered a valid and potentially less invasive alternative in the treatment of recurrent new CRLM, while the eagerly awaited results of the COLLISION trial (NCT03088150) should provide definitive answers regarding surgery versus thermal ablation for CRLM.

Abstract

The aim of this study was to assess safety, efficacy and survival outcomes of repeat thermal ablation as compared to repeat partial hepatectomy in patients with recurrent colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). This Amsterdam Colorectal Liver Met Registry (AmCORE) based study of two cohorts, repeat thermal ablation versus repeat partial hepatectomy, analyzed 136 patients (100 thermal ablation, 36 partial hepatectomy) and 224 tumors (170 thermal ablation, 54 partial hepatectomy) with recurrent CRLM from May 2002 to December 2020. The primary and secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), distant progression-free survival (DPFS) and local tumor progression-free survival (LTPFS), estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method, and complications, analyzed using the chi-square test. Multivariable analyses based on Cox proportional hazards model were used to account for potential confounders. In addition, subgroup analyses according to patient, initial and repeat local treatment characteristics were performed. In the crude overall comparison, OS of patients treated with repeat partial hepatectomy was not statistically different from repeat thermal ablation (p = 0.927). Further quantification of OS, after accounting for potential confounders, demonstrated concordant results for repeat local treatment (hazard ratio (HR), 0.986; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.517–1.881; p = 0.966). The 1-, 3- and 5-year OS were 98.9%, 62.6% and 42.3% respectively for the thermal ablation group and 93.8%, 74.5% and 49.3% for the repeat resection group. No differences in DPFS (p = 0.942), LTPFS (p = 0.397) and complication rate (p = 0.063) were found. Mean length of hospital stay was 2.1 days in the repeat thermal ablation group and 4.8 days in the repeat partial hepatectomy group (p = 0.009). Subgroup analyses identified no heterogeneous treatment effects according to patient, initial and repeat local treatment characteristics. Repeat partial hepatectomy was not statistically different from repeat thermal ablation with regard to OS, DPFS, LTPFS and complications, whereas length of hospital stay favored repeat thermal ablation. Thermal ablation should be considered a valid and potentially less invasive alternative for small-size (0–3 cm) CRLM in the treatment of recurrent new CRLM. While, the eagerly awaited results of the phase III prospective randomized controlled COLLISION trial (NCT03088150) should provide definitive answers regarding surgery versus thermal ablation for CRLM.