Search

01 september 2023, Contains fulltext : 295971.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access), BACKGROUND: Consensus on resectability criteria for colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRLM) is lacking, resulting in differences in therapeutic strategies. This study evaluated variability of resectability assessments and local treatment plans for patients with initially unresectable CRLM by the liver expert panel from the randomised phase III CAIRO5 study. METHODS: The liver panel, comprising surgeons and radiologists, evaluated resectability by predefined criteria at baseline and 2-monthly thereafter. If surgeons judged CRLM as resectable, detailed local treatment plans were provided. The panel chair determined the conclusion of resectability status and local treatment advice, and forwarded it to local surgeons. RESULTS: A total of 1149 panel evaluations of 496 patients were included. Intersurgeon disagreement was observed in 50% of evaluations and was lower at baseline than follow-up (36% vs. 60%, p < 0.001). Among surgeons in general, votes for resectable CRLM at baseline and follow-up ranged between 0-12% and 27-62%, and for permanently unresectable CRLM between 3-40% and 6-47%, respectively. Surgeons proposed different local treatment plans in 77% of patients. The most pronounced intersurgeon differences concerned the advice to proceed with hemihepatectomy versus parenchymal-preserving approaches. Eighty-four percent of patients judged by the panel as having resectable CRLM indeed received local treatment. Local surgeons followed the technical plan proposed by the panel in 40% of patients. CONCLUSION: Considerable variability exists among expert liver surgeons in assessing resectability and local treatment planning of initially unresectable CRLM. This stresses the value of panel-based decisions, and the need for consensus guidelines on resectability criteria and technical approach to prevent unwarranted variability in clinical practice.

01 september 2023, Item does not contain fulltext

01 december 2021, Contains fulltext : 244864.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access), BACKGROUND: A uniform treatment strategy for patients suffering from early recurrence after local treatment of CRLM is currently lacking. The aim of this observational cohort study was to assess the potential survival benefit of repeat local treatment compared to systemic therapy in patients suffering from early recurrence of CRLM. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients who developed recurrent CRLM within 12 months after initial local treatment with curative intent were retrospectively identified in Amsterdam University Medical Centers between 2009-2019. Differences in overall and progression-free survival among treatment strategies were assessed using multivariable Cox regression analyses. RESULTS: A total of 135 patients were included. Median overall survival of 41 months [range 4-135] was observed in patients who received repeat local treatment, consisting of upfront or repeat local treatment after neoadjuvant systemic therapy, compared to 24 months [range 1-55] in patients subjected to systemic therapy alone (adjusted HR = 0.42 [95%-CI: 0.25-0.72]; P = .002). Prolonged progression-free survival was observed after neoadjuvant systemic therapy followed by repeat local treatment, as compared to upfront repeat local treatment in patients with recurrent CRLM within 4 months following initial local treatment of CRLM (adjusted HR = 0.36 [95%-CI: 0.15-0.86]; P = .021). CONCLUSION: Patients with early recurrence of CRLM should be considered for repeat local treatment strategies. A multimodality approach, consisting of neoadjuvant systemic therapy followed by repeat local treatment, appeared favorable in patients with recurrence within 4 months following initial local treatment of CRLM.