Search

This study aimed to create a new prognostic score integrating the systemic inflammatory response to predict survival in patients treated with curative intent for colorectal liver metastases (CLM). We identified independent prognostic factors in patients who underwent liver surgery for CLM in a tertiary centre in the United Kingdom (UK) between 2010 and 2015. A pre- and a postoperative score (Liverpool score) were created by combining these factors to stratify patients into different risk groups. These new scores were validated in an international cohort of 219 patients from China and France. Multivariate cox regression analysis of the 364 patients of the UK cohort identified 6 preoperative and 1 postoperative prognostic factors for overall survival (OS): American society of anaesthesiologists (ASA) score, location and node status of the primary tumour, number and size of CLM, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and resection margin. Both pre- and postoperative scores can be calculated with an online calculator at https://jscalc.io/calc/PXatrmjfrEFpYy2t. Using the pre-operative model on the UK cohort, median OS was 61.22 (50.23, not reached) months in the low-risk group (n = 162) and 30.36 (23.68, 35.95) months in the high-risk group (n = 162, p < 0.0001). The same difference was observed in the validation cohort. The Liverpool score outperformed previously published scoring system with a c-index of 0.619 pre-operatively and of 0.637 post-operatively. We developed a new prognostic score based on clinicopathologic characteristics including the site of the primary tumour location and on measurement of the systemic inflammatory response which could help to tailor patients' management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background This study sought to evaluate the impact of the advancements in clinical care, obtained over the last 20 years, for patients aged 70 and older undergoing liver resection for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). Methods Consecutive patients age 70 or older who underwent liver resection for CRLM at Aintree University Hospital (Liverpool, UK) between May 2008 and May 2015 were compared to a dataset of consecutive patients, meeting the same criteria, between 1990 and 2007. An enhanced recovery programme after surgery (ERAS) combined with cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) was introduced in January 2008. Results The proportion of patients over 70 years undergoing liver resection for CRLM increased over the study period (6% in 1990, 16.3% in 2000, 26.5% in 2005 and 25.8% in 2007). The patients in the later group were more often treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (58 vs 34, p = 0.006) and underwent parenchymal sparing surgery, resulting in fewer major hepatectomies (51 vs 111, p < 0.001) and less perioperative morbidity (49 vs 70, p = 0.043) and mortality (3 vs 9, p = 0.229). Although there was shorter disease free survival (DFS) in the later group (DFS at 1, 3 and 5 years was 52.1%, 31.6%, 29% vs. 71.8%, 49.1%, 44.0%)(p < 0.01), similar overall survival (OS) was achieved (OS at 1, 3 and 5 years was 85.4%, 51.6%, 32.8% vs. 81.7%, 42.1%, 27.3%)(p = 0.21). Conclusions This study demonstrates that, with modern management (ERAS, CPET, neoadjuvant chemotherapy and parenchymal sparing surgery), a greater number of patients with CRLM, over the age of seventy, can undergo liver resection, with improved perioperative outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text Objective: To determine the impact of RAS mutation status on the traditional clinical score (t-CS) to predict survival after resection of colorectal liver metastases (CLM). Background: The t-CS relies on the following factors: primary tumor nodal status, disease-free interval, number and size of CLM, and carcinoembryonic antigen level. We hypothesized that the addition of RAS mutation status could create a modified clinical score (m-CS) that would outperform the t-CS. Methods: Patients who underwent resection of CLM from 2005 through 2013 and had RAS mutation status and t-CS factors available were included. Multivariate analysis was used to identify prognostic factors to include in the m-CS. Log-rank survival analyses were used to compare the t-CS and the m-CS. The m-CS was validated in an international multicenter cohort of 608 patients. Results: A total of 564 patients were eligible for analysis. RAS mutation was detected in 205 (36.3%) of patients. On multivariate analysis, RAS mutation was associated with poor overall survival, as were positive primary tumor lymph node status and diameter of the largest liver metastasis >50 mm. Each factor was assigned 1 point to produce a m-CS. The m-CS accurately stratified patients by overall and recurrence-free survival in both the initial patient series and validation cohort, whereas the t-CS did not. Conclusions: Modifying the t-CS by replacing disease-free interval, number of metastases, and CEA level with RAS mutation status produced an m-CS that outperformed the t-CS. The m-CS is therefore a simple validated tool that predicts survival after resection of CLM. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Concern exists regarding the use of hepatectomy to treat colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM) in octogenarians due to prior studies suggesting elevated morbidity and mortality. Cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) within pre-operative assessment and enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) have both been shown to be associated with low morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing hepatectomy. This study sought to compare the outcomes of octogenarians with patients aged 70–79 undergoing hepatectomy for CRLM, within a center utilizing both CPET and ERAS. Methods Consecutive patients age 70 or older who underwent hepatectomy for CRLM at Aintree University Hospital (Liverpool,UK), between May 2008 and May 2015 were identified from a prospectively maintained cancer database. Data were extracted and comparisons drawn. Results 127 patients aged 70–79 years and 34 octogenarians underwent respectively 137 and 35 hepatectomy for CRLM. There was no difference in hospital stay (6 days), morbidity and mortality between the groups. OS at 1, 3 and 5 years were 86.7%, 55% and 35.8% for those aged 70–79 compared to 79.4%, 37.3% and 20.4% for the octogenarians (p=0.127). DFS at 1,3 and 5 years was 52.5%, 31.7% and 31.7% for 70–79 group compared to 46.2%, 31.5% and 16.8% for the octogenarians (p=0.838). On multivariate analysis major hepatectomy was associated with an increased risk of post-operative complications, inferior OS and DFS. Chronological age was not a predictor of postoperative complications, poorer OS or DFS. Conclusions Appropriately selected octogenarians can have similar postoperative outcomes to patients aged 70–79 when undergoing hepatectomy for CRLM using ERAS combined with CPET. This study advocates using CPET and ERAS in the selection and management of octogenarian patients with CRLM undergoing hepatectomy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Liver-limited recurrence after resection of colorectal liver metastases is a frequent occurrence, and can in some cases be treated with curative intent. Although surgical re-resection remains standard of care, there is growing interest in the role of ablation in this setting. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes after curative-intent ablation and resection in patients with recurrent colorectal liver metastases. Methods We retrospectively analysed data from 366 consecutive patients who underwent liver resection for colorectal liver metastases between June 2010 and August 2015. Sixty-four developed liver-limited recurrence which was treated with curative intent, thirty-three (51.6%) by ablation and 31 (48.4%) by repeat resection. Results Patient groups were well matched, with surgically resected patients showing higher pre-operative carcinoembryonic antigen levels and larger metastases. There were fewer post-operative complications and shorter length of stay in the ablation group (p < 0.02). After a median follow-up of 36.2 months, median overall survival was the same for both the resected and ablated groups at 33.3 months. Median progression-free survival was longer for patients treated with surgery (10.2 months) compared to ablation (4.3 months) (p = 0.002). Conclusions Ablation or resection for liver-limited recurrence after surgery for colorectal liver metastases is associated with improved overall survival compared with systemic chemotherapy alone, and should always be considered for patients with resectable liver recurrence. Although ablation seemed to be associated with a shorter progression-free survival, post-procedure morbidity was significantly lower. The choice between ablation and resection should therefore be made on a personalised basis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

About 25% of patients with colorectal cancer develop liver metastases after resection of the primary tumor, and surgical resection of the metastases offers the only opportunity for long-term survival. However, only 20% of patients present with resectable disease. Deciding which patients should be offered surgery, and which should receive additional treatment in the form of perioperative chemotherapy, is complex. For the majority of patients who present with technically irresectable liver-limited disease, systemic downsizing chemotherapy offers the only opportunity to reach surgery and potential cure. Molecular analysis of tumor tissue is improving patient stratification, allowing more appropriate treatment selection, but is not yet a regular part of clinical practice. Decision making is limited by a lack of clear prospective evidence, and so multidisciplinary team assessment is essential to optimize outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The majority of patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer have either metastatic disease at presentation or subsequently develop metastases. In patients with resectable metastases the prognosis is good with approximately 50% of patients surviving 5 years. Unfortunately the majority of patients are not suitable for surgery with curative intent at the time of presentation. Utilizing multimodal therapies a number of patients have been successfully converted to potentially curative surgery, and survival in these patients has been shown to be comparable to patients with initially resectable disease. Over the past two decades, the expansion of therapeutic options for treating colorectal cancer has meant it is increasingly feasible to convert patients with initially irresectable disease to curative intent surgery. The successful navigation of this pathway relies of appropriate timed and delivered therapy. This strategy involves accurate staging, and treatment that can include systemic chemotherapy, hepatic artery chemotherapy, chemoembolization, thoracic surgery, and advanced hepatic surgical techniques. Achieving high rates of conversion should be seen as a marker of successful multidisciplinary team working and highquality clinical care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: Computed tomography (CT), positron emission tomography CT (PET-CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) all play a role in the management of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM), but inappropriate over investigation can lead to delays in treatment and additional cost. This study aimed to determine the optimal sequence for pre-operative imaging pathway to minimise delays to treatment and healthcare costs. Methods: All patients with colorectal liver metastases referred to a single tertiary liver specialist multidisciplinary team (MDT) between 2008 and 2011 were examined. Primary data of clinical and radiological outcomes of all patients were analysed. These data were used to construct and test 3 hypothetical imaging strategies – ‘Upfront’, ‘Sequential’ and ‘Hybrid’ models. Results: Six hundred and forty four consecutive patients were included. One hundred and sixty five patients were excluded for curative resection following the initial CT review. Subsequently 167/433 patients did not proceed to hepatectomies. Eighty (47.9%) of these patients had extra-hepatic disease identified on PET-CT, and 29 were due to the exclusion by MRI liver. A resectable pattern of liver disease on initial CT did not exclude patients with occult disease on PET-CT. Based on cost analysis, assessment of initial CT, followed by MDT with subsequent PET-CT and MRI imaging thereafter (Hybrid model), was associated with the shortest time-to-decision and lowest cost. Conclusions: Resectable pattern of liver metastases should not solely be used to determine the application of PET-CT for staging. Hybrid model is associated with the lowest cost and shortest time-to-treatment. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Introduction: Seventy-six percentages of patients with a newly diagnosed colorectal carcinoma are between 65 and 85 years old. A substantial proportion will develop liver metastases, for which resection is the only potential curative treatment. This study was conducted to investigate both the feasibility, and short- and long-term outcomes of liver resection for colorectal liver metastases in elderly patients. Methods: Between August 1990 and April 2007 data were prospectively collected on patients over 70 years of age who underwent a liver resection for colorectal liver metastases in a single centre. Results: One hundred and eighty-one liver resections were performed in 178 consecutive patients (median age 74 years). Thirty-four patients (18.8%) received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (all FOLFOX) prior to liver surgery and the majority (57.5%) of liver resections involved more than two Couinaud''s segments. Median hospital stay was 13 days, 70 (38.5%) patients had postoperative complications, and overall in hospital mortality was 4.9% (9 patients). Overall- and disease-free survival rates at 1, 3 and 5 years were 86.1%, 43.2% and 31.5% and 65.8%, 26% and 16%, respectively. In multivariate analysis: T3 primary staging; major liver resections; more than three liver lesions; and the occurrence of postoperative complications were associated with inferior overall survival. Conclusions: Liver resection for colorectal liver metastases in elderly patients is safe and may offer long-time survival to a substantial percentage of patients. We strongly recommend considering senior patients for surgical treatment whenever possible. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]