Search

Aim: The standard treatment for anal cancer is chemoradiotherapy. Most patients survive anal cancer but remain living with long‐term side effects related to the treatment received. The aim of this study was to assess the occurrence of long‐term impairment of urinary and sexual function at 3 and 6 years after diagnosis and to investigate the additive effect from chemotherapy in combined chemoradiotherapy on urinary incontinence, compared to radiotherapy alone. Method: The ANal CAncer study (ANCA) is based on a national Swedish cohort of patients diagnosed with anal cancer between 2011 and 2013. All identified patients within the study were invited to respond to a study‐specific questionnaire at 3 and 6 years. Descriptive analyses for the primary endpoint were performed. To investigate a possible additional effect from chemotherapy logistic regression was used. Results: A total of 388 patients were included in the study. At 3 years 264 patients were alive and invited to respond to an anal cancer specific questionnaire. The 3‐ and 6 year response rates were 195 (74%) and 155 patients (67%), respectively. The patient reported urinary function impairment at 3 years were urgency (63%), incomplete bladder emptying (47%), and incontinence (46%) and there was an absolute increase of the prevalence of urinary dysfunction in about 10% at 6 years. Three years after diagnosis, 77% reported that intercourse was not part of their sex life; this percentage increased at 6 years to 83%. We found no negative effect of chemotherapy in combined chemoradiotherapy versus radiotherapy alone on patient reported urinary incontinence. Conclusion: For anal cancer survivors, urinary function was impaired after 3 years and continued to deteriorate as measured at 6 years after diagnosis. Anal cancer and its treatment negatively affected sexual function for both men and women. This may explain why patients reported that sexual activity and frequency of intercourse was not of importance in their life. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Neoadjuvant therapy has an established role in the treatment of patients with colorectal cancer. However, its role continues to evolve due to both advances in the available treatment modalities, and refinements in the indications for neoadjuvant treatment and subsequent surgery. Methods A narrative review of the most recent relevant literature was conducted. Results Short-course radiotherapy and long-course chemoradiotherapy have an established role in improving local but not systemic disease control in patients with rectal cancer. Total neoadjuvant therapy offers advantages over short-course radiotherapy and long-course chemoradiotherapy, not only in terms of increased local response but also in reducing the risk of systemic relapses. Non-operative management is increasingly preferred to surgery in patients with rectal cancer and clinical complete responses but is still associated with some negative impacts on functional outcomes. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy may be of some benefit in patients with locally advanced colon cancer with proficient mismatch repair, although patient selection is a major challenge. Neoadjuvant immunotherapy in patients with deficient mismatch repair cancers in the colon or rectum is altering the treatment paradigm for these patients. Conclusion Neoadjuvant treatments for patients with colon or rectal cancers continue to evolve, increasing the complexity of decision-making for patients and clinicians alike. This review describes the current guidance and most recent developments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: In recent years, there have been significant improvements in the treatment of rectal cancer. Preoperative treatment and surgical techniques have advanced, leading to fewer local recurrences, fewer surgical complications, and more complete resections. Recent trials investigating total neoadjuvant treatment aim to decrease distant metastasis and improve overall survival in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. In addition, adding chemotherapy to the preoperative treatment increases the complete response rate to 30 to 50 percent of patients. This means that no residual tumour is left and that patients can follow a Watch & Wait surveillance program, potentially avoiding surgery, complications, and colostomy. Nonetheless, many factors have to be considered when deciding on a treatment plan for patients with rectal cancer. Ongoing research aims to identify the optimal treatment regimen, considering factors like tumour stage, toxicity of (neo)adjuvant treatment, and patient preference. Over the past decade, the treatment of rectal cancer has changed considerably. The implementation of TME surgery has, in addition to decreasing the number of local recurrences, improved surgical morbidity and mortality. At the same time, the optimisation of radiotherapy in the preoperative setting has improved oncological outcomes even further, although higher perineal infection rates have been reported. Radiotherapy regimens have evolved through the adjustment of radiotherapy techniques and fields, increased waiting intervals, and, for more advanced tumours, adding chemotherapy. Concurrently, imaging techniques have significantly improved staging accuracy, facilitating more precise selection of advanced tumours. Although chemoradiotherapy does lead to the downsizing and -staging of these tumours, a very clear effect on sphincter-preserving surgery and the negative resection margin has not been proven. Aiming to decrease distant metastasis and improve overall survival for locally advanced rectal cancer, systemic chemotherapy can be added to radiotherapy, known as total neoadjuvant treatment (TNT). High complete response rates, both pathological (pCR) and clinical (cCR), are reported after TNT. Patients who follow a Watch & Wait program after a cCR can potentially avoid surgical morbidity and colostomy. For both early and more advanced tumours, trials are now investigating optimal regimens in an attempt to offer organ preservation as much as possible. Multidisciplinary deliberation should include patient preference, treatment toxicity, and likelihood of end colostomy, but also the burden of intensive surveillance in a W&W program. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Standard treatment for patient with peritoneal metastases from colorectal cancer is cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). In recent years, the efficacy of oxaliplatin-based HIPEC has been challenged. An intensified HIPEC (oxaliplatin+irinotecan) in combination with early postoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy (EPIC) has shown increased recurrence-free survival in retrospective studies. The aim of this trial is to develop a new HIPEC/EPIC regimen and evaluate its effect on morbidity, oncological outcome, and quality-of-life (QoL). This study is designed as a combined phase I/III multicenter randomized trial (RCT) of patients with peritoneal metastases from colorectal cancer eligible for CRS-HIPEC. An initial phase I dose escalation study, designed as a 3+3 stepwise escalation, will determine the maximum tolerable dose of 5-Fluorouracil (5-FU) as 1-day EPIC, enrolling a total of 15–30 patients in 5 dose levels. In the phase III efficacy study, patients are randomly assigned intraoperatively to either the standard treatment with oxaliplatin HIPEC (control arm) or oxaliplatin/irinotecan-HIPEC in combination with single dose of 1-day 5-FU EPIC (experimental arm). 5-FU is administered intraoperatively after CRS-HIPEC and closure of the abdomen. The primary endpoint is 12-month recurrence-free survival. Secondary endpoints include 5-year overall survival, 5-year recurrence-free survival (registry based), postoperative complications, and QoL up to 3 years after study treatment. This phase I/III trial aims to identify a more effective treatment of colorectal peritoneal metastases by combination of HIPEC and EPIC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: The primary therapeutic option for anal cancer treatment is chemoradiotherapy resulting in 80% survival. The aim of this study was to assess long‐term bowel function impairment and anal pain at 3 and 6 years after anal cancer diagnosis, based on a hypothesis of an increase in impairment over time. A secondary aim was to investigate if chemoradiotherapy increased the risk for bowel impairment, compared to radiotherapy alone. Method: The ANal CAncer study (ANCA) consists of a national Swedish cohort of patients diagnosed with anal cancer between 2011–2013. Patients within the study were invited to respond to a study‐specific questionnaire at 3‐ and 6‐years after diagnosis. Descriptive analyses for the primary endpoint and ordinal logistic regressions for secondary endpoint were performed. Results: A total of 388 patients (84%) were included in the study. At 3 years of follow‐up, 264 patients were alive. A total of 195 of these patients (74%) answered a study specific questionnaire, and at 6 years 154 patients (67%). Fifty‐seven percent experienced bowel urgency at both 3 and 6 years. There was an increased risk for repeated bowel movement within 1 h (OR 2.44 [95% CI: 1.08–5.61, p = 0.03]) at 3 years in patients who had been treated by chemoradiation compared to radiotherapy alone. Conclusions: Impairment in bowel function and anal pain after anal cancer treatment should be expected and remains after 6 years. This suggests that long‐term follow‐up may be necessary in some form after customary follow‐up. The addition of chemotherapy increases long‐term side effects of bowel function. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In rectal cancer, watch and wait for patients with a cCR after neoadjuvant treatment has an established evidence base. However, there is a lack of consensus on the definition and management of a near-cCR. This study aimed to compare outcomes in patients who achieved a cCR at first reassessment versus later reassessment. Methods: This registry study included patients from the International Watch & Wait Database. Patients were categorized as having a cCR at first reassessment or at later reassessment (that is near-cCR at first reassessment) based on MRI and endoscopy. Organ preservation, distant metastasis-free survival, and overall survival rates were calculated. Subgroup analyses were done for nearcCR groups based on the response evaluation according to modality. Results: A total of 1010 patients were identified. At first reassessment, 608 patients had a cCR; 402 had a cCR at later reassessment. Median follow-up was 2.6 years for patients with a cCR at first reassessment and 2.9 years for those with a cCR at later reassessment. The 2-year organ preservation rate was 77.8 (95 per cent c.i. 74.2 to 81.5) and 79.3 (75.1 to 83.7) per cent respectively (P = 0.499). Similarly, no differences were found between groups in distant metastasis-free survival or overall survival rate. Subgroup analyses showed a higher organ preservation rate in the group with a near-cCR categorized exclusively by MRI. Conclusion: Oncological outcomes for patients with a cCR at later reassessment are no worse than those of patients with a cCR at first reassessment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Non-operative management of rectal cancer is increasingly being used in selected patients. Most reports include patients treated with chemoradiotherapy (CRT) before inclusion into a Watch & Wait (W&W) programme. The aim of this study was to report outcomes from a single-centre W&W programme involving a large cohort of patients. Methods: Patients treated with chemoradiotherapy (CRT) or short-course radiotherapy (SCRT) with or without chemotherapy, between 2008 and 2020, who showed signs of a clinical complete response (cCR) were reviewed. Patients were assessed using digital rectal examination, flexible endoscopy, carcinoembryonic antigen measurement, MRI, and CT imaging, discussed at the multidisciplinary tumour board meeting, and followed up in a dedicated W&W programme as from 2015. Outcomes including regrowth and 3-year survival (time to regrowth or death) were prospectively evaluated. Results: Of 142 patients who were assessed, 88 fulfilled the criteria for cCR. Treatment before cCR included CRT, SCRT with chemotherapy, and SCRT alone in 16 (18 per cent), 28 (32 per cent), and 44 (50 per cent) patients, respectively. Patients treated with CRT and SCRT with chemotherapy had more advanced clinical T- and N-stage, compared with patients treated with SCRT alone (clinical T-stage > 2: 81 per cent and 89 per cent versus 47 per cent, respectively; clinical N-stage > 0: 75 per cent and 93 per cent versus 68 per cent, respectively). Overall rate of regrowth was 19 per cent, with 31 per cent, 21 per cent, and 14 per cent following CRT, SCRT with chemotherapy, and SCRT alone, respectively. Uni- and multivariable analyses evaluating the clinical parameters revealed no statistically significant associations with risk of local regrowth. All but one patient with regrowth underwent salvage surgery. The 3-year survival rate (death with regrowth as competing risk) was 93 per cent, with no significant difference between treatment groups. Conclusion: In this cohort of W&W patients, the vast majority received SCRT with or without chemotherapy and results consistent with previous W&W reports were obtained. No statistically significant differences in terms of regrowth rate were obtained when comparing CRT, SCRT with chemotherapy, and SCRT alone. SCRT can induce sustained cCR and may precede a W&W strategy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: Approximately 25% of anal cancer patients undergo abdominoperineal excision or more extensive surgery. Following surgery, a high perineal complication rate has been reported. Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) is an evidence‐based multimodal interventional programme introduced to mitigate the risk of complications. This study aims to describe perineal healing in relation to ERAS compliance, type of resection and method of perineal reconstruction in patients with anal cancer after salvage surgery. Method: This is a retrospective cohort study including all patients undergoing abdominal surgery for squamous cell anal cancer in Stockholm between January 2005 and December 2015. Data collection was from registers supplemented by chart review. All patients were followed until death or 1 year after surgery. The associations between ERAS compliance, patient and treatment characteristics and perineal wound healing were evaluated using logistic regression. Results: In total, 101 patients (67 women) were included, of whom 72 were ERAS compliant. Of patients alive, healing after surgery occurred in 61/98 and 84/89 at 3 months and 1 year, respectively. Perineal healing at 3 months was statistically significantly associated with younger age and type of perineal reconstruction (in favour of vertical rectus abdominis myocutaneous flap). No associations were observed at 1 year but almost all wounds were healed. Conclusion: Age and type of perineal reconstruction appear to be significantly associated with improved healing at 3 months whereas compliance to an ERAS protocol and type of resection do not. Nearly all patients had a fully healed perineal wound 1 year after surgery for anal cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: Surgical treatment of colorectal cancer with synchronous colorectal liver metastases (SCRLM) can follow three different strategies with regard to the timing of liver resection. The aim of this study was to describe the selection of surgical strategy, focusing on differences between colon and rectal cancer with SCRLM, postoperative morbidity/mortality and survival. Method: This was a retrospective population‐based study of patients with SCRLM registered in the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry in the Stockholm/Gotland region during 2010–2017 and treated with surgical resection of the primary tumour and liver metastases (LM). Patients were followed for 5 years or censored at 22 November 2018. Results: A total of 238 patients met the inclusion criteria during the study period. Patients with rectal cancer were treated with the 'liver first' strategy in 70% of cases, whereas the main treatment strategies for colonic tumours were 'simultaneous resection' (44%) and 'primary first' (37%). Rectal cancer had a superior 5‐year survival rate compared with colon tumours with SCRLM (62 vs. 47%; p = 0.033). There was no difference in survival between treatment strategies irrespective of primary tumour location. Postoperative complications occurred most commonly among rectal tumours treated with simultaneous resection (p = 0.024). Conclusion: Patients with rectal cancer and SCRLM were more often treated with the 'liver first' strategy than patients with colon cancer. Patients with rectal cancer and SCRLM where both primary tumour and LM were operated on had significantly better survival than corresponding patients with colon cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The performance of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) interpretation and communication of findings and its implication on treatment decisions has not fully been explored in rectal cancer. Purpose: To investigate in a region the adherence to MRI protocol standards and the relation between MRI interpretation and selection to preoperative therapy in rectal cancer. Material and Methods: Data on consecutive patients who underwent elective rectal cancer surgery in the region from January to June 2010 were obtained from the National Colorectal Cancer Registry. Pretherapeutic MRI images were re-evaluated. Agreement between the original reports and the re-evaluation was compared using Cohen's kappa coefficient. Results: Among the 94 patients included, 81 (86%) had pretherapeutic MRI in accordance with defined imaging guidelines. In 34% of the original MR reports, data on extramural venous invasion (mrEMVI) and mrT category were not reported. Complete tumor staging was not possible because of missing data in 33 (35%) of the patients. The agreement between the original MR reports and the re-evaluation regarding tumor stage was moderate (κ = 0.48). For decided treatment compared to recommended preoperative treatment according to the re-evaluation, the agreement was fair (κ = 0.33). Conclusion: Established MRI protocol standards were not universally applied. Missing data and inadequacies in original MRI reports resulted in moderate agreement between the original report and the re-evaluation indicating a risk of inappropriate treatment selection. The results call for further educational efforts in rectal cancer MRI acquisition and repeated audits of image protocol adherence and interpretation quality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: This study aimed to describe the short-term perineal healing rates in patients with perineal reconstruction using a biological mesh following extralevator abdominoperineal excision (elAPE). Methods: In a retrospective, descriptive single-centre cohort study, 88 consecutive patients treated with elAPE and perineal closure using a biological mesh between January 2011 and December 2015 were reviewed. All available data from electronic hospital records was collected. Patients were followed for 1 year following surgery and perineal wound status assessed at 3 months and at 1 year. Results: In total, 63 patients were male and all but 8 patients were treated for primary rectal cancer. All patients but 3 had received radiotherapy prior to surgery. Multivisceral excisions were performed in 19 patients. Omentoplasty was performed in 55 patients and 3 different types of meshes were used during the study period. At 3 months, 58 patients (66%) had a healed perineum. No association was detected between patient, tumour or perioperative characteristics and perineal wound status at 3 months. At 1 year, 4 patients were deceased and among the remaining 84, the perineal wound was healed in 77 patients (92%). Conclusion: The use of biological meshes in perineal reconstruction following elAPE is feasible and safe, and the perineal wound is healed in the majority of the patients within 3 months. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims: Previous studies describing the cumulative failure rate after reconstructive surgery in patients with inflammatory bowel disease have been restricted to specific hospitals, and the generalizability of these results in a population-based setting is unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate the cumulative failure rate and risk factors for failure after reconstructive surgery in patients with inflammatory bowel disease. Methods: The study cohort includes all patients with inflammatory bowel disease in Sweden who underwent colectomy in 2000 through 2013 who were later treated with reconstructive surgery with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis or ileorectal anastomosis. Each patient was followed from admission for reconstructive surgery until admission for failure (a diverting stoma or permanent stoma), date of death, migration or December 31, 2013. Cumulative failure distributions were obtained with the Kaplan-Meier method, and multivariable Cox regression models were used to calculate the risk of failure. Results: Of the 1809 patients with inflammatory bowel disease treated with colectomy and reconstructive surgery, 83% had ulcerative colitis. During follow-up, 270 patients failed, and the cumulative failure rate was 4.1%, 13.2%, and 15.3% after 1, 3, and 5 years, respectively. The risk of failure was lower after treatment with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis than with ileorectal anastomosis [hazard ratio (95% confidence interval): 0.72 (0.56-0.93)]. Gender, hospital volume, and timing of reconstruction were not significantly associated with the risk of failure. Conclusions: The 5-year cumulative failure rate in a nationwide setting was 15.3%, and hospital volume was not associated with the risk of failure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives To report complications after colonoscopy and surgery in patients with neoplasia detected through a population based colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programme in the capital region of Sweden. Methods Patients who after a positive FOBT screening result underwent colonoscopy from 1 January 2008 to 30 June 2012 were included. Mortality and complications within 30 days after colonoscopy or subsequent surgery were identified through national registers, and complications were assessed through review of medical charts. Complications were graded using the Clavien-Dindo classification. Results After 2984 colonoscopies, the complication rate was 1%. The risk of post-polypectomy bleeding was 14/1000. The risk of perforation was 1/1000 after a diagnostic colonoscopy and 2.5/1000 after a colonoscopy with polypectomy. One patient developed a post-polypectomy syndrome. There was one death which was not related to the colonoscopy. After surgery for 37 adenomas and 155 CRCs, the total complication rates were 27% and 50%, respectively. The rate of anastomotic leakage was 13% and 12% after surgery for adenomas and CRC, respectively. There were no deaths after surgery. The overall complication rate after colonoscopy and surgery for adenomas and cancer was 4%. Conclusions Overall complication rates were acceptable and mortality low; however, the rate of anastomotic leakage after surgery for both adenomas and CRC was higher than expected. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Current standard for most of the locally advanced rectal cancers is preoperative chemoradiotherapy, and, variably per institution, postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy. Short-course preoperative radiation with delayed surgery has been shown to induce tumour down-staging in both randomized and observational studies. The concept of neo-adjuvant chemotherapy has been proven successful in gastric cancer, hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer and is currently tested in primary colon cancer.Methods and Design: Patients with rectal cancer with high risk features for local or systemic failure on magnetic resonance imaging are randomized to either a standard arm or an experimental arm. The standard arm consists of chemoradiation (1.8 Gy x 25 or 2 Gy x 25 with capecitabine) preoperatively, followed by selective postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy. Postoperative chemotherapy is optional and may be omitted by participating institutions. The experimental arm includes short-course radiotherapy (5 Gy x 5) followed by full-dose chemotherapy (capecitabine and oxaliplatin) in 6 cycles before surgery. In the experimental arm, no postoperative chemotherapy is prescribed. Surgery is performed according to TME principles in both study arms. The hypothesis is that short-course radiotherapy with neo-adjuvant chemotherapy increases disease-free and overall survival without compromising local control. Primary end-point is disease-free survival at 3 years. Secondary endpoints include overall survival, local control, toxicity profile, and treatment completion rate, rate of pathological complete response and microscopically radical resection, and quality of life.Discussion: Following the advances in rectal cancer management, increased focus on survival rather than only on local control is now justified. In an experimental arm, short-course radiotherapy is combined with full-dose chemotherapy preoperatively, an alternative that offers advantages compared to concomitant chemoradiotherapy with or without postoperative chemotherapy. In a multi-centre setting this regimen is compared to current standard with the aim of improving survival for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01558921. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this study was to assess the outcomes of patients undergoing pelvic exenteration (PE) for recurrent gynecologic malignancy.A retrospective review using all medical records of 28 consecutive patients who underwent PE between January 2002 and December 2011 at a single institution was conducted. Complications were graded according to Clavien-Dindo. Overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were estimated by the method of Kaplan-Meier.Pelvic exenteration was performed for recurrent cancer in all patients. Distribution of primaries was as follows: cervix (n = 10), vagina (n = 5), ovary (n = 5), uterus (n = 4), tube (n = 2), Bartholin gland (n = 1), and vulva (n = 1). In all but 1 case, PE was performed with curative intent. Pelvic exenteration was total (n = 11), anterior (n = 2), or posterior (n = 15). Reconstructive procedures included urinary tract (n = 13), gastrointestinal tract (n = 26), pelvic floor (n = 6), and vagina (n = 5). There was no postoperative mortality within 30 days. All patients developed 1 or several early complications of various grades, and 22 patients (79%) developed late complications. Twelve patients (43%) underwent reoperation because of complications to PE, and 2 patients died within follow-up as a consequence of their PE. A complete tumor resection (R0) was obtained in 23 patients (82%). With a median follow-up of 27 months (range, 2-110 months), the 5-year OS and DFS rates were 70% and 41%, respectively. R0 resection was associated with increased OS (P < 0.001) and DFS (P = 0.015).Pelvic exenteration for recurrent gynecologic malignancies can be associated with long-term survival in selected patients. However, postoperative complications are common and can be lethal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose. To analyze 251 patients (101 males and 150 females) diagnosed with ano-rectal malignant melanoma (ARMM) reported to the Swedish National Cancer Registry during 1960-1999. Methods. Incidence, gender and age profiles, primary anatomical sites and density of the melanomas along with geographic distribution, and prognosis were investigated. Results. The age-standardized incidence of ARMM was significantly higher for females (1.0 per 106 females) than for males (0.7 per 106 males) throughout the 40-year-period. The incidence increased with age peaking at 75-84 years in both genders. 54% of the tumours were primary in the anal canal, 24% engaged the whole ano-rectal unit and 10% were located at the anal verge (11% unknown primary site). Although ARMM were rare in absolute numbers, their density (number of tumours/square unit) was higher than that of cutaneous malignant melanomas (CMM) on average. No linkage between the geographic distribution of ARMM and population density was found. The prognosis was very poor albeit with a significant gender difference with a five-year survival rate of 10.6% for males and 15.7% for females. The survival rates for both genders improved during the 40-year-period but significantly more for females than males. Conclusion. The reason(s) for the difference in incidence and prognosis according to gender is unknown. The majority of ARMM emerged primary in the anal canal and a primary location exclusively in the colonic mucosa of the rectum is questionable. The higher density of ARMM as compared to the average density of CMM tallies with the result of our previous studies on vulvar melanoma and might be instrumental in exploring non-UV light associated factors in melanoma genesis. The concentration of patients with anal squamous cell carcinoma to population-dense urban areas, as previously reported, was not found in cases of ARMM. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An introduction is presented in which the editor discusses papers presented in the issue regarding the European Society of Coloproctology's cohort studies including the study methodology, the open access protocols, and study on colorectal surgery.