Search

Peritoneal metastases (PM) are common in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We aimed to characterize patients with mCRC and PM from a clinical and molecular perspective using the American Association of Cancer Research Genomics Evidence Neoplasia Information Exchange (GENIE) Biopharma Collaborative (BPC) registry. Patients' tumor samples underwent targeted next-generation sequencing. Clinical characteristics and treatment outcomes were collected retrospectively. Overall survival (OS) from advanced disease and progression-free survival (PFS) from start of cancer-directed drug regimen were estimated and adjusted for the left truncation bias. A total of 1,281 patients were analyzed, 244 (19%) had PM at time of advanced disease. PM were associated with female sex [OR: 1.67; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.11-2.54; P = 0.014] and higher histologic grade (OR: 1.72; 95% CI: 1.08-2.71; P = 0.022), while rectal primary tumors were less frequent in patients with PM (OR: 0.51; 95% CI: 0.29-0.88; P < 0.001). APC occurred less frequently in patients with PM (N = 151, 64% vs. N = 788, 79%) while MED12 alterations occurred more frequently in patients with PM (N = 20, 10% vs. N = 32, 4%); differences in MED12 were not significant when restricting to oncogenic and likely oncogenic variants according to OncoKB. Patients with PM had worse OS (HR: 1.45; 95% CI: 1.16-1.81) after adjustment for independently significant clinical and genomic predictors. PFS from initiation of first-line treatment did not differ by presence of PM. In conclusion, PM were more frequent in females and right-sided primary tumors. Differences in frequencies of MED12 and APC alterations were identified between patients with and without PM. PM were associated with shorter OS but not with PFS from first-line treatment., Significance: Utilizing the GENIE BPC registry, this study found that PM in patients with colorectal cancer occur more frequently in females and right-sided primary tumors and are associated with worse OS. In addition, we found a lower frequency of APC alterations and a higher frequency in MED12 alterations in patients with PM., (© 2024 The Authors; Published by the American Association for Cancer Research.)

Objective: To provide recommendations for a surveillance regimen that leads to the largest overall survival benefit for patients after curative treatment for Stage I-IV colon and rectal cancer., Methods: Consistent with the Program in Evidence-Based Care's standard approach, guideline databases, i.e., MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and PROSPERO, were systematically searched. Then, we drafted recommendations and methodology experts performed an internal review of the resulting draft recommendations, which was followed by an external review by targeted experts and intended users., Results: Four systematic reviews and two randomized controlled trials were identified that provided evidence for recommendations., Conclusions: For patients with stage I-III colon cancer, a medical history and physical examination should be performed every six months for three years; computed tomography (CT) of the chest-abdomen-pelvis (CT CAP) should be performed at one and three years, or one CT CAP could be performed at 18 months; the use of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) is optional if CT imaging is being performed; and surveillance colonoscopy should be performed one year after the initial surgery. The frequency of subsequent surveillance colonoscopy should be dictated by previous findings, but generally, colonoscopies should be performed every five years if the findings are normal. There was insufficient evidence to support these recommendations for patients with rectal cancer, Stage IV colon cancer, and patients over the age of 75 years. Patients should be informed of current recommendations and the treating physician should discuss the specific risks and benefits of each recommendation with their patients.

Objective: To provide recommendations for preferred models of follow-up care for stage I-IV colorectal (CRC) cancer survivors in Ontario; to identify signs and symptoms of potential recurrence and when to investigate; and to evaluate patient information and support needs during the post-treatment survivorship period., Methods: Consistent with the Program in Evidence-Based Medicine's standardized approach, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and PROSPERO databases were systematically searched. The authors drafted recommendations and revised them based on the comments from internal and external reviewers., Results: Four guidelines, three systematic reviews, three randomized controlled trials, and three cohort studies provided evidence to develop recommendations., Conclusions: Colorectal cancer follow-up care is complex and requires multidisciplinary, coordinated care delivered by the cancer specialist, primary care provider, and allied health professionals. While there is limited evidence to support a shared care model for follow-up, this approach is deemed to be best suited to meet patient needs; however, the roles and responsibilities of care providers need to be clearly defined, and patients need to know when and how to contact them. Although there is insufficient evidence to recommend any individual or combination of signs or symptoms as strong predictor(s) of recurrence, patients should be educated about these and know which care provider to contact if they develop any new or concerning symptoms. Psychosocial support and empathetic, effective, and coordinated communication are most valued by patients for their post-treatment follow-up care. Continuing professional education should emphasize the importance of communication skills and coordination of communication between the patient, family, and healthcare providers.

Objective: To evaluate the association between repeated faecal occult blood testing and advanced colorectal cancer risk at population level in Canada., Methods: A retrospective cohort study of all Ontario residents aged 56-74 diagnosed with colorectal cancer from 1 April 2007 to 31 March 2010, identified using health administrative data. The primary outcome was stage IV colorectal cancer, and primary exposure was faecal occult blood testing use within five years prior to colorectal cancer diagnosis. Patients were categorized into four mutually exclusive groups based on their exposure to faecal occult blood testing in the five years prior to colorectal cancer diagnosis: none, pre-diagnostic, repeated, and sporadic. Logistic regression was utilized to adjust for confounders., Results: Of 7753 patients (median age 66, interquartile range 61-70, 62% male) identified, 1694 (22%) presented with stage I, 2056 (27%) with stage II, 2428 (31%) with stage III, and 1575 (20%) with stage IV colorectal cancer. There were 4092 (53%) with no record of prior faecal occult blood testing, 1485 (19%) classified as pre-diagnostic, 1693 (22%) as sporadic, and 483 (6%) as repeated faecal occult blood testing. After adjusting for confounders, patients who had repeated faecal occult blood testing were significantly less likely to present with stage IV colorectal cancer at diagnosis (Odds ratio 0.46, 95% Confidence Interval 0.34-0.62) than those with no prior faecal occult blood testing., Conclusions: Repeated faecal occult blood testing is associated with a decreased risk of advanced colorectal cancer. Our findings support the use of organized screening programmes that employ repeated faecal occult blood testing to improve colorectal cancer outcomes at population level.

Objective: The potential for cancers to not be detected on colonoscopy is increasingly recognised, but little is known about patient outcomes. The objective of this study was to assess the outcomes of patients diagnosed with postcolonoscopy colorectal cancers (PCCRCs)., Design: We conducted a population-based retrospective cohort study, including all patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer (CRC) in Ontario, Canada from 2003 to 2009. Patients were categorised into three groups: DETECTED (diagnosed within 6 months of first colonoscopy), PCCRC (diagnosed 6-36 months after first colonoscopy) or NOSCOPE (no colonoscopy within 36 months of diagnosis). Univariate and multivariable analyses were conducted to study overall survival, surgical treatment, emergency presentation and surgical complications., Results: Overall, 45 104 patients were included, with 2804 being classified as having a PCCRC. Compared with the DETECTED group, PCCRC was associated with a significantly higher likelihood of stage IV disease (17.2% vs 12.9%), worse overall survival (5 year OS: 60.8% vs 68.3%, p<0.0001; adjusted HR: 1.25, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.32, p<0.0001), a higher likelihood of emergency presentation (OR: 2.86, 95% CI 2.56 to 3.13, p<0.001) and lower likelihood of surgical resection (OR: 0.61, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.67, p<0.001). However, patients with PCCRC had significantly better outcomes than those in the NOSCOPE group (stage IV: 37.1%, 5 year OS: 38.9%), Conclusions: Compared with CRC detected by colonoscopy, PCCRCs are associated with a higher risk of emergent presentation, a lower likelihood of surgical resection and most notably, significantly worse oncological outcomes. However, they have better outcomes than patients with no recent colonoscopy., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/)

Objective: To evaluate the role of intraoperative ablation as an adjunct to resection in patients with recurrent colorectal liver metastases (rCLM)., Methods: All patients undergoing curative-intent reoperative surgery for rCLM from 1992 to 2009 at a tertiary cancer center were included. Overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) were compared between patients treated with resection alone or in combination with ablation., Results: A total of 112 reoperative hepatectomies were performed, of which 16 were combined with ablation. The proportion of patients treated with resection and ablation increased from 0% to 41%. Patients undergoing resection and ablation had a greater tumor burden (median, 4 vs. 1, p < 0.0001) and higher baseline clinical risk scores (median, 3 vs. 2, p = 0.065) than patients undergoing resection alone. Patients undergoing resection and ablation had lower intraoperative blood loss than patients undergoing resection alone (344 vs. 877 ml, p = 0.018). Five-year OS from the time of surgery was 48.6%. In multivariable analysis, there was no significant difference in OS or RFS based on the treatment modality., Conclusion: In patients with rCLM, the use of intraoperative ablation can extend the limits of surgical resection in patients with disease that might otherwise not be amenable to complete resection.

Liver metastases are the most common site of distant failure after curative resection of colorectal cancer and a source of significant cancer-related morbidity and mortality. Currently, imaging and conventional histopathologic features, such as T-stage and N-stage, are used by clinicians to inform prognosis and guide adjuvant treatment to reduce the risk of developing distant metastases. However, these tools only have a moderate ability to predict the development of liver metastases. Novel methods, including the detection of circulating tumor cells and carcinoembryonic antigens in serum, have been developed, and their prognostic and predictive characteristics have been assessed. In addition, several molecular and genetic markers in the primary tumor have been studied. Unfortunately, these studies are often small and their results have been mixed, yielding no consistent sets of externally validated predictors of colorectal liver metastases. For widespread clinical relevance, future tests need to be independently carried out on large independent patient samples.

Liver resection has clearly been established as the standard treatment for resectable colorectal liver metastases. This article will review the expanding role for hepatectomy in this disease. Faster and safer hepatectomies are allowing combined resections of the primary cancer and synchronous hepatic metastases. Effective neoadjuvant chemotherapy, as well as increasing data demonstrating effectiveness and safety of combined hepatectomy and ablative therapies, have further expanded the pool of patients now selected for resection. The end result is that increasing numbers of patients are undergoing acceptably aggressive surgical therapies with extension of life and possible cure. Successful multimodality therapies are also now allowing for long-term survival even in patients not cured of cancer. The prolonged survival of most patients treated by hepatectomy has allowed a long-term analysis of the patterns of recurrence, which emphasize the importance of controlling liver disease for prolongation of life. These improvements in treatments for hepatic metastases have come with a precipitous escalation of the costs of care. This will likely require that future clinical trials and algorithms of care not only be based on cancer outcome data but also on value analysis of treatment and follow-up regimens.

Background: Practice guidelines recommend en bloc multivisceral resection (MVR) for all involved organs in patients with locally advanced adherent colorectal cancer (LAACRC) to reduce local recurrence and improve survival. We found that MVR was performed in one-third of eligible American patients in the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results cancer registry but that study could not identify factors amenable to quality improvement. This study was conducted to examine rates, and predictors of MVR among Canadian patients with LAACRC., Methods: Rates of MVR were examined by observational study. Eligible patients were aged 20-74 years who had surgery for nonmetastatic LAACRC from July 1997 to December 2000. Patient, tumor, surgeon, and hospital characteristics were extracted from medical records. Summary statistics were compared by type of surgery (MVR, partial MVR, standard resection). To identify factors associated with MVR we analyzed operative notes and transcripts from interviews with general surgeons using standard qualitative methods., Results: Factors associated with MVR included fewer years in practice, preoperative treatment planning, involvement of surgical consultants, and access to diagnostic imaging and systems to enable preoperative multidisciplinary planning. Judgments regarding the nature of peritumoral adhesions, resectability, and personal technical skill may mediate decision-making. Many surgeons would prefer to refer patients than undertake complicated, lengthy cases., Conclusion: Further research is required to validate these findings in larger studies and among patients undergoing surgery for conditions other than LAACRC, and evaluate strategies to improve rates of MVR through enhanced individual awareness and system capacity.

Background: Evidence-based guidelines recommend multivisceral resection for patients with locally advanced adherent colorectal cancer because it reduces local recurrence and improves survival. However, this procedure can increase morbidity compared with standard resection and may not be practiced uniformly. We performed a population-based study to examine surgical practice and outcomes among patients with locally advanced adherent colorectal cancer in the United States., Methods: Patients who were 18 years or older and who had surgical resection for nonmetastatic, locally advanced adherent colorectal cancer from January 1, 1988, through December 31, 2002, were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) registry. Logistic regression was used to examine patient, tumor, and geographic factors associated with multivisceral resection. Cumulative early mortality (i.e., at 1 and 6 months after diagnosis) and 5-year survival were obtained from Kaplan-Meier estimates; adjusted risks of death were calculated using Cox proportional hazards models. All statistical tests were two-sided., Results: We identified 8380 patients who underwent surgical resection for locally advanced adherent colorectal cancer, of whom 33.3% were managed with multivisceral resection. Among colon cancer patients, younger age at diagnosis, female sex, SEER region, node negativity, and left-sided tumors were independently associated with having had a multivisceral resection. Among rectal cancer patients, younger age at diagnosis and female sex were positively and statistically significantly associated with multivisceral resection, whereas receipt of neoadjuvant radiation was inversely and statistically significantly associated with multivisceral resection. Compared with standard resection, multivisceral resection was associated with improved overall survival for patients with colon (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.89, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.83 to 0.96) and rectal (HR = 0.81, 95% CI = 0.70 to 0.94) cancer, with no associated increase in early mortality., Conclusions: The majority of patients with locally advanced colorectal cancer did not receive a multivisceral resection. The geographic variation in the application of this procedure in patients with colon cancer suggests that local organizational structures and processes of care may play an important role in patient treatment and, therefore, prognosis.