Primary site resection is superior for incurable metastatic colorectal cancer

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.

Whole transcriptome sequencing identifies crucial genes associated with colon cancer and elucidation of their possible mechanisms of action

PURPOSE

This study aimed to investigate the key long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) associated with colon cancer and elucidate their possible mechanisms of action.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eight early-stage (ES) colon tumor tissues, eight late-stage (LS) colon tumor tissues, and eight normal tissues were collected, and they were subjected to high-throughput RNA sequencing. Subsequently, comprehensive bioinformatics analyses, including the identification of differentially expressed mRNAs and lncRNAs, functional enrichment analysis, and construction of a protein-protein interaction network and an miRNA-lncRNA-mRNA regulatory network were performed. Additionally, the expression of key lncRNAs was verified using real-time quantitative PCR (qPCR).

RESULTS

In total, 549 common differentially expressed mRNAs and 30 common differentially expressed lncRNAs were identified in both the ES and LS colon cancer samples upon comparison with the normal samples. Functional enrichment analysis showed that KIAA0125 was significantly enriched in the PI3K-Akt signaling pathway and that MSTRG.35002.1 was markedly enriched in BMP signaling-related functions. Moreover, key miRNA-lncRNA-mRNA relationships, such as hsa-miR-29b-3p-KIAA0125-BCL2 and hsa-miR-29b-3p-MSTRG.35002.1-MMP2, were identified. Notably, the qPCR assay confirmed that KIAA0125 and MSTRG.35002.1 were significantly downregulated in both ES and LS colon tumor tissues compared with normal colon tissues.

CONCLUSION

Our findings indicate that key lncRNAs, including KIAA0125 and MSTRG.35002.1, may be involved in colorectal cancer (CRC) development. Downregulation of KIAA0125 may contribute to CRC development via sponging of hsa-miR-29b-3p to regulate BCL2 expression or regulating the PI3K-Akt signaling pathway. Downregulation of MSTRG.35002.1 may promote CRC development via sponging of hsa-miR-29b-3p to regulate MMP2 expression or regulating the BMP signaling pathway.

A systematic analysis highlighting deficiencies in reported outcomes for patients with stage IV colorectal cancer undergoing palliative resection of the primary tumour

BACKGROUND

Management of the primary tumour in the presence of unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is controversial. The role of primary tumour resection (PTR) has been investigated by a number of retrospective cohort studies, with a number on going randomised controlled trials. The aim of this study was to identify the clinical and patient-reported outcomes currently reported in studies that evaluate the role of PTR in mCRC.

METHODS

Literature searches were performed in MEDLINE (via OvidSP) (1966-June 2017), EMBASE (via OvidSP) and the Cochrane Library using terms related to colorectal cancer and primary tumour resection. All studies documenting outcomes following palliative PTR were included. Eligible articles were assessed using the Risk of Bias In Non-Randomised Studies of Intervention (ROBINS-I) tool.

RESULTS

Of 11,209 studies screened, 59 non-randomised studies reporting outcomes on 331,157 patients were included. Patient characteristics regarding performance status and co-morbidity were recorded in 26 (44.1%) and 17 (28.8%) studies. The chemotherapy regime used was reported in 27 (45.8%) studies. The operative setting and the operative approach was reported in 42 (71%) and 14 (23.7%) studies. Post-operative mortality and morbidity were reported in 33 (55.9%) and 35 (59.3%) studies. Overall survival was reported in 49 (83.1%) studies, with 5 different definitions identified. Quality of life was only reported in 1 (1.7%) study.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates significant heterogeneity in the selection and definition of outcomes reported following PTR in mCRC. There is significant heterogeneity with a significant under-reporting of important outcomes such as treatment related adverse events and patient reported outcomes.

Survival outcomes following primary tumor resection for patients with incurable metastatic colorectal carcinoma: Experience from a single institution

OBJECTIVE

Palliative primary tumor resection (PTR) has been used for preventing and treating tumor-related complications. We aimed to determine whether PTR can increase overall survival (OS) in patients with unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC).

METHODS

A retrospective review of a prospectively collected database in a single center was performed. Patients diagnosed with metastatic CRC from January 2004 to December 2014 were included. Patients who had attained curative resection or had disease recurrence were excluded. All patients were discussed at a multidisciplinary tumor board where subsequent treatment decisions were made.

RESULTS

Altogether 408 patients were analyzed. Of these 145 received PTR with palliative chemotherapy (PC; group A), 110 received PC only (group B), 52 received PTR only (group C), while 101 received neither PTR nor PC (group D). Undergoing PTR led to statistically significant improvement in OS (22.7 months vs 12.1 months vs 6.9 months vs 2.7 months, P < 0.001). We performed subgroup analyses to control for potential confounders and found that the influence of PTR on OS persisted. With multivariate analysis, the predictors of poor OS were no PTR (hazards ratio [HR] 2.32, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.82-2.96, P < 0.001), no PC (HR 4.25, 95% CI 3.27-5.33, P < 0.001) and the presence of peritoneal metastases (HR 1.37, 95% CI 1.06-1.78, P = 0.018). Diversion surgery did not lead to a statistical difference in OS.

CONCLUSIONS

The absences of PTR and PC, and peritoneal metastases are independently associated with decreased OS in patients with unresectable metastatic CRC. Randomized controlled trials are needed to verify this observation.

Meta-analysis of oncologic effect of primary tumor resection in patients with unresectable stage IV colorectal cancer in the era of modern systemic chemotherapy

Purpose

The management of primary tumors in patients with stage IV colorectal cancer remains unclear. This meta-analysis evaluated the survival benefits of primary tumor resection (PTR) in patients with unresectable stage IV colorectal cancer in the era of modern chemotherapy.

Methods

Multiple comprehensive databases were searched for studies comparing survival outcomes in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer who did and did not undergo PTR. Outcome data were pooled, and overall effect size was calculated using random effect models.

Results

Seventeen nonrandomized studies involving 18,863 patients met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis showed that PTR significantly improved overall survival (hazard ratio [HR], 0.63; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.56–0.71; P < 0.001) and progression free survival (HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.67–0.87; P < 0.001). Subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses, performed by predefined methods, also indicated that PTR improved overall patient survival.

Conclusion

Palliative resection of the primary tumor may have survival benefits in patients with unresectable stage IV colorectal cancer. Randomized controlled trials are needed to determine the optimal treatment for these patients.

The role of primary tumor resection in colorectal cancer patients with asymptomatic, synchronous unresectable metastasis: Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

Approximately 20 % of all patients with colorectal cancer are diagnosed as having Stage IV cancer; 80 % of these present with unresectable metastatic lesions. It is controversial whether chemotherapy with or without primary tumor resection (PTR) is effective for the treatment of patients with colorectal cancer with unresectable metastasis. Primary tumor resection could prevent tumor-related complications such as intestinal obstruction, perforation, bleeding, or fistula. Moreover, it may be associated with an increase in overall survival. However, surgery delays the use of systemic chemotherapy and affects the systemic spread of malignancy.

Methods/design

Patients with colon and upper rectal cancer patients with asymptomatic, synchronous, unresectable metastasis will be included after screening. They will be randomized and assigned to receive chemotherapy with or without PTR. The primary endpoint measure is 2-year overall survival rate and the secondary endpoint measures are primary tumor-related complications, quality of life, surgery-related morbidity and mortality, interventions with curative intent, chemotherapy-related toxicity, and total cost until death or study closing day. The authors hypothesize that the group receiving PTR following chemotherapy would show a 10 % improvement in 2-year overall survival, compared with the group receiving chemotherapy alone. The accrual period is 3 years and the follow-up period is 2 years. Based on the inequality design, a two-sided log-rank test with α-error of 0.05 and a power of 80 % was conducted. Allowing for a drop-out rate of 10 %, 480 patients (240 per group) will need to be recruited. Patients will be followed up at every 3 months for 3 years and then every 6 months for 2 years after the last patient has been randomized.

Discussion

This randomized controlled trial aims to investigate whether PTR with chemotherapy shows better overall survival than chemotherapy alone for patients with asymptomatic, synchronous unresectable metastasis. This trial is expected to provide evidence so support clear treatment guidelines for patients with colorectal cancer with asymptomatic, synchronous unresectable metastasis.

Trial registration

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01978249.

Should noncurative resection of the primary tumour be performed in patients with stage iv colorectal cancer? A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Surgical resection of the primary tumour in patients with advanced colorectal cancer (crc) remains controversial. This review compares survival in patients with advanced crc who underwent surgical resection of the primary tumour with that in patients not undergoing resection, and determines rates of post-operative mortality and nonfatal complications, the primary tumour complication rate, the non-resection surgical procedures rate, and quality of life (qol).

METHODS

Reports in the central, medline, and embase databases were searched for relevant studies, which were selected using pre-specified eligibility criteria. The search was also restricted to publication dates from 1980 onward, the English language, and studies involving human subjects. Screening, evaluation of relevant articles, and data abstraction were performed in duplicate, and agreement between the abstractors was assessed. Articles that met the inclusion criteria were assessed for quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Data were collected and synthesized per protocol.

RESULTS

From among the 3379 reports located, fifteen retrospective observational studies were selected. Of the 12,416 patients in the selected studies, 8620 (69%) underwent surgery. Median survival was 15.2 months (range: 10-30.7 months) in the resection group and 11.4 months (range: 3-22 months) in the non-resection group. Hazard ratio for survival was 0.69 [95% confidence interval (ci): 0.61 to 0.79] favouring surgical resection. Mean rates of postoperative mortality and nonfatal complications were 4.9% (95% ci: 0% to 9.7%) and 25.9% (95%ci: 20.1% to 31.6%) respectively. The mean primary tumour complication rate was 29.7% (95% ci: 18.5% to 41.0%), and the non-resection surgical procedures rate in the non-resection group was 27.6% (95 ci: 15.4% to 39.9%). No study provided qol data.

CONCLUSIONS

Although this review supports primary tumour resection in advanced crc, the results have significant biases. Randomized trials are warranted to confirm the findings.

When a chance to cut is not a chance to cure: a future for palliative surgery?

In the context of healthcare reform, Surgery stands at a critical juncture. Attempting to rein in healthcare spending, legislators and payers can be expected to closely examine the legitimacy and necessity of a variety of medical treatments, including surgical procedures. Among these procedures, the most at risk for dismissal based on perceived ineffectiveness or lack of need may be those performed near the end of life, when the potential benefit of surgical intervention may seem negligible. While procedures may be performed for a variety of reasons toward the end of life--some indeed being inappropriate and/or unnecessary--palliative surgery plays an important role in the management of incurable disease. The purposes of this article are to: describe the place for palliative surgery in the armamentarium of palliative care; discuss potential challenges to patients' access to palliative surgery that may arise from health policy or quality initiatives based on poor evidence; and outline a strategy for (a) systematically differentiating palliative surgeries from other, potentially expendable surgeries performed near the end of life, and (b) defining a plan for generating the evidence base to support best practice.