Search

The benefit of elective primary tumor resection for non-curable stage IV colorectal cancer (CRC) remains largely undefined. We wanted to identify risk factors for postoperative complications and short survival. Using a prospective database, we analyzed potential risk factors in 233 patients, who were electively operated for non-curable stage IV CRC between 1996 and 2002. Patients with recurrent tumors, resectable metastases, emergency operations, and non-resective surgery were excluded. Risk factors for increased postoperative morbidity and limited postoperative survival were identified by multivariate analyses. Patients with colon cancer (CC = 156) and rectal cancer (RC = 77) were comparable with regard to age, sex, comorbidity, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, carcinoembryonic antigen levels, hepatic spread, tumor grade, resection margins, 30-day mortality (CC 5.1%, RC 3.9%) and postoperative chemotherapy. pT4 tumors, carcinomatosis, and non-anatomical resections were more common in colon cancer patients, whereas enterostomies (CC 1.3%, RC 67.5%, p < 0.0001), anastomotic leaks (CC 7.7%, RC 24.2%, p = 0.002), and total surgical complications (CC 19.9%, RC 40.3%, p = 0.001) were more frequent after rectal surgery. Independent determinants of an increased postoperative morbidity were primary rectal cancer, hepatic tumor load >50%, and comorbidity >1 organ. Prognostic factors for limited postoperative survival were hepatic tumor load >50%, pT4 tumors, lymphatic spread, R1–2 resection, and lack of chemotherapy. Palliative resection is associated with a particularly unfavorable outcome in rectal cancer patients presenting with a locally advanced tumor (pT4, expected R2 resection) or an extensive comorbidity, and in all CRC patients who show a hepatic tumor load >50%. For such patients, surgery might be contraindicated unless the tumor is immediately life-threatening. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Laparoscopic surgery of colon cancer has been accepted to be oncologically adequate compared with open resection. However, the situation in rectal cancer remains unclear, because anatomy and complex surgical procedures might specifically influence the long-term outcome. This study was designed to analyze perioperative and long-term outcome of patients with rectal cancer after laparoscopic vs. open access surgery. A total of 389 patients (1998–2005) were prospectively analyzed; 114 patients had laparoscopic beginning, and 25 patients had conversion and were separately analyzed. Eighty-nine patients remained in the laparoscopic group and 275 had open access surgery. Both groups were comparable regarding age, gender, tumor localization, stage, and complications. Differences were found in harvested lymph nodes (laparoscopic 13.5/open access 16.9; P = 0.001) and hospitalization (15.1/18.7 days; P = 0.037). Local recurrence rate and metachronous metastasis were comparable. In patients with deep anterior resection with total mesenteric excision, favorable long-term survival in the laparoscopic group was found ( P = 0.035, log-rank). Minimally invasive surgery is equivalent in the treatment of rectal cancer and shows advantages of shorter hospitalization and faster recovery. Especially in patients with low rectal cancer, minimally invasive surgery with exact preparation of the total mesenteric excision seems to be favorable compared with open access surgery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Variations in compliance with rectal cancer treatment guidelines and the effect of quality indicators on long-term outcomes were investigated with data from the Munich Cancer Registry. Patients diagnosed between 1996 and 1998 with an invasive primary rectal tumor which was resected were included in these analyses (n=884). Median follow up was 5.7 years. Relative and overall survival was examined. Adjusted survival was predicted by UICC stage, grade, age, local recurrence, and residual tumor status. UICC III patients receiving the recommended adjuvant therapy had a significant survival advantage in the multivariate model; UICC II patients did not. Even if there were no significant survival differences there were significant treatment and outcome (regarding local recurrence) variations between hospitals. The variations between hospitals refer to different quality indicators in the individual hospitals. The outcome (regarding survival) appears good in Munich and is comparable with other population studies. Fewer local recurrences, better reporting of the TME technique, greater use of combined therapy and fewer stomas, however, may improve the quality of care in Munich. Variations in care between hospitals should therefore be monitored and controlled. Detailed and frequent feedback to the clinicians is vital to improve quality of care and is possible with cancer registries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

PURPOSE: The epidermal growth factor receptor and its various ligands (epidermal growth factor, transforming growth factor-alpha, amphiregulin, heparin-binding epidermal growth factor, heregulin, and betacellulin) have been implicated in growth and regeneration of intestinal mucosa and might be related to the development and progression of gastrointestinal tumors. Although some studies have investigated levels of epidermal growth factor receptor by radioligand binding studies, none of them have further analyzed these levels in patients with rectal cancer and investigated their prognostic value. METHODS: We quantitatively determined tumor epidermal growth factor receptor levels in 38 patients with colorectal cancer compared with adjacent normal mucosa by iodine-125–labeled epidermal growth factor binding studies and Scatchard analysis. Patients were followed up for 49.5 ± 32.2 (range, 2–120) months. RESULTS: Epidermal growth factor receptor capacity was increased in invasive colorectal carcinomas according to T classification (P < 0.001), tumors with lymph node infiltration (P = 0.038), and advanced International Union Against Cancer stage (P < 0.001). Survival of colorectal cancer was reduced in patients with advanced International Union Against Cancer stage (P < 0.001), tumors with positive lymph nodes (P < 0.001), and tumors with elevated epidermal growth factor receptor levels (P = 0.024). In rectal cancer patients, poor prognosis was associated with advanced International Union Against Cancer stage (P = 0.029), tumors with lymph node infiltration (P = 0.040), and increased epidermal growth factor receptor levels (P = 0.002). Multivariate Cox regression analysis indicated that elevated levels of epidermal growth factor receptor were an independent predictor of reduced survival in patients with rectal cancer (P = 0.005). CONCLUSION: The epidermal growth factor receptor/ligand system appears to be involved in tumor development and tumor progression of colorectal carcinomas, with prognostic implication especially in patients with invasive rectal carcinomas. These patients might take advantage of therapies that specifically block epidermal growth factor receptor–mediated signal transduction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]