Search

Objectives: To examine the needs, perceptions and influencing factors according to former adult intensive care unit patients and relatives with regard to family participation in essential care in the unit., Research Design: A qualitative interpretive descriptive study using inductive thematic analysis., Setting: Twelve pairs of former Dutch patients and their relatives were interviewed within two months after the patient's discharge from the unit between December 2017 and April 2018., Findings: Four themes emerged: the family's history, the patient's condition, supporting the patient and supporting the relative. The family's history, in particular the relationship with the patient and former experience with care, determined the level of participation in essential care. The level of participation was also influenced by the patient's condition, more specifically level of consciousness, stability of the patient's situation and length of the patient's stay. The third theme, supporting the patient, related to presence/being able to 'be there' for the patient and a mostly positive attitude towards family participation. The last theme was supporting the relative, with three subthemes associated with relatives' needs and perceptions: (dis)comfort with participation in essential care, need for invitation and support, and concern about the possible strain experienced by relatives., Conclusion: Supporting the patient and supporting the relative are reflecting the needs and perceptions of patients and relatives regarding family participation in essential care. Both the family's history and the patient's condition influence the relative's level of participation. Intensive care unit nurses and other healthcare providers could take these themes into account when encouraging family participation in essential care., Implications for Clinical Practice: Patients' and relatives' needs and perceptions of family participation in essential care in the intensive care unit vary. Family participation in essential care is influenced by the family's history and the patient's condition. Healthcare providers could take these findings into account when implementing family participation in essential care., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Aims and Objectives: To systematically review interventions and outcomes regarding family participation in essential care in adult intensive care units., Background: Patients and relatives may benefit from family participation in essential care activities., Design: An integrative literature review., Methods: The following databases were systematically searched from inception to January 25, 2021: PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane, Web of Science and reference lists of included articles. Studies were included when reporting on family participation in essential care activities in intensive care including interventions and outcomes. Quality of the studies was assessed with the Kmet Standard Quality Assessment Criteria. Interventions were assessed, using the TIDieR framework. Data were extracted and synthesised narratively., Results: A total of 6698 records were screened, and 322 full-text studies were assessed. Seven studies were included, describing an intervention to support family participation. Four studies had a pretest-posttest design, two were pilot feasibility studies and one was observational. The quality of the studies was poor to good, with Kmet-scores: 0.50-0.86 (possible score: 0-1, 1 being the highest). Five studies offered various essential care activities. One study provided sufficient intervention detail. Outcome measures among relatives varied from mental health symptoms to satisfaction, supportiveness, comfort level and experience. Two studies measured patient outcomes: delirium and pressure ulcers. Among ICU healthcare providers, perception, comfort level and experience were assessed. Since outcome measures varied, only narrative synthesis was possible. Family participation is associated with a reduction of anxiety and PTSD symptoms., Conclusion: Intervention descriptions of family participation in essential care activities are generally inadequate and do not allow comparison and replication. Participation of relatives was associated with a significant reduction in mental health symptoms. Other outcome measures varied, therefore, the use of additional outcome measures with validated measurement instruments should be considered., Relevance to Clinical Practice: The review contributed further insight into interventions aiming at family participation in essential care activities in the intensive care unit and their outcomes., No Patient or Public Contribution: Neither patients nor public were involved., (© 2023 The Authors. Journal of Clinical Nursing published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Family participation in essential care activities may benefit both patients and relatives., Objectives: In this integrative review, we aimed to identify needs, perceptions, preferences, and capacities regarding family participation in essential care in intensive care units (ICUs) from the patient's, relatives', and ICU healthcare providers' perspective., Review Method Used: An integrative review method was used., Data Sources: PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane, Web of Science, and reference lists of included articles were searched, from inception to January 25, 2021., Review Methods: We included studies on family participation in essential care activities during ICU stay which reported associated needs, perceptions, preferences and capacities. Quality assessment was performed with the Kmet Standard Quality Assessment Criteria developed for evaluating primary research papers in a variety of fields, and an extensive qualitative thematic analysis was performed on the results., Results: Twenty-seven studies were included. Quality scores varied from 0.45 to 0.95 (range: 0-1). Patients' needs, perceptions, preferences, and capacities are largely unknown. Identified themes on needs and perceptions were relatives' desire to help the patient, a mostly positive attitude among all involved, stress regarding patient safety, perceived beneficial effects, relatives feeling in control-ICU healthcare providers' concerns about loss of control. Preferences for potential essential care activities vary. Relatives want an invitation and support from ICU healthcare providers. Themes regarding capacities were knowledge, skills, education and training, and organisational conditions., Conclusions: Implementation of family participation in essential care requires education and training of relatives and ICU healthcare providers to address safety and quality of care concerns, though most studies lack further specification., (Copyright © 2022 Australian College of Critical Care Nurses Ltd. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Compare oncological long-term and short-term outcomes between patients with distal cT2NO rectal cancer treated with chemoradio-therapy and local excision (CRT + LE) and patients treated with total mesorectal excision (TME)., Summary Background Data: Previous studies showed that CRT + LE is equivalent to TME in local tumor control and survival for T2N0 rectal cancer., Methods: Seventy-nine patients with cT2N0 rectal adenocarcinoma treated with CRT + LE in the ACOSOG Z6041 trial were compared to a cohort of 79 patients with pT2N0 tumors treated with upfront TME in the Dutch TME trial. Survival, short-term outcomes, and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) were compared between groups., Results: Three patients (4%) in the CRT + LE group required abdominoperineal resection, compared with 31 (40%) in the TME group. Forty TME patients (51%) required a permanent stoma. CRT-related toxicity occurred in 43% of the CRT + LE patients; however, TME patients had a higher rate of complications requiring reoperation (1 vs 9%; P = 0 .03). Five-year disease-free survival {88.2% [confidence interval (CI), 77.7%-93.9%] vs 88.3% [CI, 78.7%-93.7%]; P = 0.88} and overall survival [90.3% (CI, 80.8%-95.3%) vs 88.4% (CI, 78.9%-93.8%); P = 0 .82] were similar in the 2 groups. Compared to baseline, overall HRQOL decreased in the CRT + LE group and improved in the TME group. In both groups, patients with sphincter preservation had worse HRQOL scores 1 year after surgery. Conclusions: In patients who underwent CRT + LE, oncological outcomes were similar to those of patients who underwent TME, with fewer complications requiring reoperation but significant CRT toxicity. Although overall HRQOL decreased in the CRT + LE group and improved in TME patients, when considering anorectal function, results were worse in both groups., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Neoadjuvant therapy before surgical resection is indicated for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. However, a significant number of patients show minimal or no response to neoadjuvant therapy. Unfortunately, we are currently unable to predict response and identify non-responding patients before neoadjuvant treatment is given. Genomic mutational status might provide valuable prognostic information. However, it is unclear whether predictions based on genomic mutational status in single preoperative biopsies are reliable due to intra-tumoral heterogeneity. In this study we aim to investigate the reliability of genomic mutations found in single pre-operative biopsies by comparing genomic mutations to four other locations within the same tumor using next generation sequencing. Rectal cancer patients undergoing primary resection without neoadjuvant therapy were included. From each patient, one biopsy, two deep and two superficial samples were obtained and sequenced using a targeted next generation sequencing gene panel. Concordance between these five samples was assessed. In this feasibility study we included 11 patients. In 7 out of 11 (64%) patients, all 5 samples showed concordant mutations. In 4 out of 11 patients (36%) discordant mutations were observed. In conclusion, assessment of mutational status on a single pre-operative biopsy shows discordance with tumor tissue from other locations in 36% of cases. These results warrant careful interpretation of biopsy material analysis, as these might be influenced by tumor heterogeneity.

Background: Watch and wait is a novel management strategy in patients with rectal cancer who have a clinical complete response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Surveillance of these patients is generally intensive, because local regrowth (with the potential for salvage) occurs in 25% of patients, and distant metastases occur in 10% of patients. It is unclear for how long these patients should be followed up. To address this issue, we did conditional survival modelling using the International Watch & Wait Database (IWWD), which is a large-scale registry of patients with a clinical complete response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy who have been managed by a watch-and-wait strategy., Methods: We did a retrospective, multicentre registry study using a dataset from the IWWD, which includes data from 47 clinics across 15 countries. We selected patients (aged ≥18 years) with rectal cancer who had a clinical complete response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and who were subsequently managed by a watch-and-wait strategy between Nov 25, 1991, and Dec 31, 2015. Patients who had not achieved a clinical complete response or who had undergone any surgical procedure were excluded. The criteria used for defining a clinical complete response and the specific surveillance strategies were at the discretion of each participating centre. We used conditional survival modelling to estimate the probability of patients remaining free of local regrowth or distant metastasis for an additional 2 years after sustaining a clinical complete response or being distant metastasis-free for 1, 3, and 5 years from the date of the decision to commence watch and wait. The primary outcomes were conditional local regrowth-free survival at 3 years, and conditional distant metastasis-free survival at 5 years., Findings: We identified 793 patients in the IWWD with clinical complete response who had been managed by a watch-and-wait strategy. Median follow-up was 55·2 months (IQR 36·0-75·6). The probability of remaining free from local regrowth for an additional 2 years if a patient had a sustained clinical complete response for 1 year was 88·1% (95% CI 85·8-90·9), for 3 years was 97·3% (95·2-98·6), and for 5 years was 98·6% (97·6-100·0). The probably of remaining free from distant metastasis for a further 2 years in patients who had a clinical complete response without distant metastasis for 1 year was 93·8% (92·3-95·9), for 3 years was 97·8% (96·6-99·3), and for 5 years was 96·6% (94·0-98·9)., Interpretation: These results suggest that the intensity of active surveillance in patients with rectal cancer managed by a watch-and-wait approach could be reduced if they achieve and maintain a clinical complete response within the first 3 years of starting this approach., Funding: European Registration of Cancer Care, financed by the European Society of Surgical Oncology, the Champalimaud Foundation Lisbon, the Bas Mulder Award, granted by the Alpe d'HuZes Foundation and the Dutch Cancer Society, the European Research Council Advanced Grant, and the National Institute of Health and Research Manchester Biomedical Research Centre., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Several factors are included in decision making for treatment of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer, including a trade-off between risks and gains of both clinical and functional outcomes. However, it is largely unknown which outcomes are most important to patients and whether this differs between patients and clinicians., Methods: Both clinicians and patients treated for locally advanced rectal cancer were invited to fill out an online questionnaire, including a choice-based conjoint experiment. Participants were presented 14 comparisons of two hypothetical case presentations, characterized by different treatments and outcomes of care (6 attributes) and were asked to select the case with the best outcome at that moment. Hierarchical Bayes Estimation was used to calculate the relative importance (RI) of each of the six attributes., Results: In total, 94 patients and 128 clinicians completed the questionnaire. For patients, avoiding surgery with permanent stoma was most important (RI 24.4, 95%CI 21.88-26.87) and a 2-year difference in disease-free survival was least important (RI 5.6, 95%CI 4.9-6.2). Clinicians assigned highest importance to avoiding severe and daily worries about cancer recurrence (RI 30.7, 95%CI 29.1-32.4), while this was ranked 4th by patients (RI 17.9, 95%CI 16.5-19.4, p < 0.001)., Conclusion: When confronted with different outcomes within one case description, patients find the duration of disease free survival the least important. In addition, considerable differences were found between the importance assigned by patients and clinicians to clinical and functional outcomes, most notably in avoiding surgery with permanent stoma and worries about recurrence., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd, BASO ~ The Association for Cancer Surgery, and the European Society of Surgical Oncology. All rights reserved.)

Objective: This study aimed to assess psychological functioning, quality of life, and regret about screening after a positive fecal immunochemical test (FIT) and subsequent colonoscopy, and to evaluate changes over time., Methods: This is a prospective cohort study. Individuals aged 55 to 75 with a positive FIT that were referred for colonoscopy between July 2017 and November 2018, were invited to complete questionnaires related to psychological distress and health-related quality of life at three predefined time points: before colonoscopy, after histopathology result notification, and after 6 months. Four questionnaires were used: the Psychological Consequences Questionnaire (PCQ), the six-item Cancer Worry Scale (CWS), the Decision Regret Scale (DRS), and the 36-item Short-Form (SF-36)., Results: A total of 1066 participants out of 2151 eligible individuals were included. Patients with cancer showed a significant increase in psychological dysfunction (P = .01) and cancer worry (P = .008) after colonoscopy result notification, and a decline to pre-colonoscopy measurements after 6 months. In the no-cancer groups, psychological dysfunction and cancer worry significantly decreased over time (P < .05) but there was no ongoing decline. After 6 months, 17% of participants with no cancer experienced high level of cancer worry (CWS ≥ 10). Yet, only 5% reported high level of regret about screening participation (DRS > 25). A good global quality of life was reported in participants with no cancer., Conclusion: Some psychological distress remains up to 6 months after colonoscopy in participants who tested false-positive in the Dutch bowel cancer screening program., (© 2020 The Authors. Psycho-Oncology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Preoperative chemoradiotherapy (CRT) followed by total mesorectal excision is widely accepted as the standard of care for high-risk rectal cancer. Adjuvant chemotherapy is advised in several international guidelines, although the survival benefit remains unclear and compliance is poor. The current multidisciplinary approach has led to major improvements in local control, yet the occurrence of distant metastases has not decreased accordingly. The combination of short-course radiotherapy (SCRT) and chemotherapy in the waiting period before surgery might have several benefits, including higher compliance, downstaging and better effect of systemic therapy., Methods: This is an investigator-initiated, international multicentre randomized phase III trial. High-risk rectal cancer patients were randomized to SCRT followed by chemotherapy (6 cycles CAPOX or alternatively 9 cycles FOLFOX4) and subsequent surgery, or long-course radiotherapy (25-28 × 2-1.8 Gy) with concomitant capecitabine followed by surgery and optional postoperative chemotherapy (8 cycles CAPOX or 12 cycles FOLFOX4) according to local institutions' policy. The primary endpoint is time to disease-related treatment failure. Here, we report the compliance, toxicity and postoperative complications in both study groups., Findings: Between June 2011 and June 2016, 920 patients were enrolled. Of these, 901 were evaluable (460 in the experimental arm and 441 in the standard arm). All patients in the experimental arm received 5 × 5 Gy radiotherapy, and 84% of all patients received at least 75% of the prescribed chemotherapy. In the standard arm, the compliance for CRT was 93% and 58% for postoperative chemotherapy. Toxicity ≥grade 3 occurred in 48% of patients in the experimental arm, compared to 25% of patients in the standard arm during preoperative treatment and 35% of patients during postoperative chemotherapy. No statistically significant differences in surgical procedures or postoperative complications were observed., Interpretation: High compliance (84%) of preoperative systemic treatment could be achieved with the experimental approach. Although considerable toxicity was observed during preoperative therapy, this did not lead to differences in surgical procedures or postoperative complications. Longer follow-up time is needed to assess the primary endpoint and related outcomes., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: In the West, pre-treatment abnormal lateral lymph nodes (LLN+) in patients with a low locally advanced rectal cancer (AJCC Stage III), are treated with neoadjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy (nCRT), without a lateral lymph node dissection (LLND). It has been suggested, however, that LLN+ patients have higher local recurrence (LR) rates than similarly staged patients with abnormal mesorectal lymph nodes only (LLN-), but no comparative data exist. Therefore, we conducted this international multi-center study in the Netherlands and Australia of Stage III rectal cancer patients with either LLN+ or LLN- to compare oncological outcomes from both groups. Materials and Methods: Patients with Stage III low rectal cancer with (LLN+ group) or without (LLN- group) abnormal lateral lymph nodes on pre-treatment MRI were included. Patients underwent nCRT followed by rectal resection surgery with curative intent between 2009 and 2016 with a minimum follow-up of 2-years. No patient had a LLND. Propensity score matching corrected differences in baseline characteristics. Results: Two hundred twenty-three patients could be included: 125 in the LLN+ group and 98 in the LLN- group. Between groups, there were significant differences in cT-stage and in the rate of adjuvant chemotherapy administered. Propensity score matching resulted in 54 patients in each group, with equal baseline characteristics. The 5-year LR rate in the LLN+ group was 11 vs. 2% in the LLN- group ( P = 0.06) and disease-free survival (DFS) was 64 vs. 76%, respectively ( P = 0.09). Five-year overall survival was similar between groups (73 vs. 80%, respectively; P = 0.90). Conclusions: In Western patients with Stage III low rectal cancer, there is a trend toward worse LR rate and DFS rates in LLN+ patients compared to similarly staged LLN- patients. These results suggest that LLN+ patients may currently not be treated optimally with nCRT alone, and the addition of LLND requires further consideration., (Copyright © 2019 Haanappel, Kroon, Schaap, Bedrikovetski, Dudi-Venkata, Lee, Thomas, Liu, van der Valk, Rutten, Beets, Kusters and Sammour.)

Background: Adjuvant chemotherapy after curative resection for rectal cancer is the standard of care in several American and European guidelines., Objective: The aim of this study was to examine the differences in health-related quality of life over time between patients with rectal cancer who were treated with adjuvant chemotherapy or observation., Design: This is a randomized controlled phase III trial., Settings: Health-related quality-of-life assessments were conducted in Dutch patients from 43 institutes., Patients: Patients with stage II or III rectal cancer who underwent preoperative (chemo)radiotherapy followed by curative surgery (the SCRIPT trial) were included., Interventions: Patients were randomly assigned to adjuvant capecitabine monotherapy for 8 cycles or observation. Health-related quality of life was assessed using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer C30 and CR38 questionnaires at 1 month after surgery (before the start of chemotherapy), and 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery., Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome measure was the difference in quality of life at 6 months after surgery, just after completion of adjuvant chemotherapy for patients in the treatment group. Second, the difference in health-related quality of life at 12 months after surgery was examined. A statistically significant difference of 5 points was considered clinically relevant., Results: Health-related quality-of-life results of 226 of 233 patients were available. At T3, overall quality of life (C30 summary score) was worse for patients treated with chemotherapy compared with observation (mean 82.3 versus 86.9, p = 0.006), but the difference was not clinically relevant. Patients treated with adjuvant chemotherapy reported clinically relevant worse physical functioning (mean 78.3 versus 87.0, p < 0.001) and more reports of fatigue and dyspnea (35.7 versus 21.0 and 17.1 versus 6.7, p < 0.001). All differences were resolved at 12 months postsurgery., Limitations: A selection of relatively fit patients willing to be randomly assigned may limit the generalizability of the results., Conclusions: Although inferior health-related quality of life was reported just after completion of adjuvant chemotherapy, no persistent deterioration in quality of life was detected. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A907.

Background: The neoadjuvant rectal score (NAR) was developed as a surrogate endpoint for overall survival in patients with rectal cancer after neoadjuvant treatment. We aimed to validate the NAR score in patients from the Netherlands Cancer Registry database., Patients and Methods: We studied patients with rectal cancer treated with long-course neoadjuvant therapy followed by surgery in the Netherlands between 2007 and 2014. The probability of concordance with overall survival and the goodness of fit of several models were evaluated using Harrell's concordance index (c index) and the Akaike information criterion (AIC), which is used to compare the quality of statistical models., Results: The NAR score resulted in a c index of 0.665. We found that single pathologic parameters (pT or pN) have similar concordance as the NAR formula (c index of 0.663 and 0.655, respectively). A combination of pT and pN resulted in better concordance with the true endpoint, overall survival (c index 0.684), and a simple Cox regression model with the 3 parameters included in the NAR formula (cT, pT, and pN) improved the concordance even more (c index 0.689). When the AIC index was compared for all models, the NAR score model showed the worst fit to the true endpoint., Conclusion: We found no additional value for using the NAR formula as a surrogate endpoint for overall survival in rectal cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant therapy., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Up to 38% of pancreatic and periampullary cancer patients undergoing curative intended surgery turn out to have incurable disease. Therefore, staging laparoscopy (SL) prior to laparotomy is advised to spare patients the morbidity, inconvenience and expense of futile major surgery. The aim of this study was to assess the added value of SL with laparoscopic ultrasonography (LUS) and laparoscopic near-infrared fluorescence imaging (LFI)., Methods: All patients undergoing curative intended surgery of pancreatic or periampullary cancer were included prospectively in this single arm study. Patients received an intravenous infusion of 10 mg indocyanine green (ICG) one or two days prior to surgery to allow LFI. Suspect lesions were analyzed via biopsy or resection. Follow-up visits after surgery occurred every three months., Results: A total of 25 patients were included. Suspect lesions were identified in 7 patients: liver metastases (n = 2; identified by inspection, LUS, and LFI), peritoneal metastases (n = 1; identified by inspection only), and benign lesions (n = 4; identified by inspection or LUS). Quality of LFI was good in 67% (10/15) of patients dosed one day and 89% (8/9) dosed two days prior to surgery. A futile laparotomy was averted in 3 patients (12%). Following SL the primary tumor was resected in 20 patients. Two patients (10%) developed metastases within 3 months after resection., Conclusions: Despite current preoperative imaging modalities metastases are still identified during surgery. This study shows limited added value of LUS during SL in patients with pancreatic or periampullary cancer. LFI was of added value due to its high negative predictive value in case of suspect hepatic lesions identified by inspection., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Background: The strategy of watch and wait (W&W) in patients with rectal cancer who achieve a complete clinical response (cCR) after neoadjuvant therapy is new and offers an opportunity for patients to avoid major resection surgery. However, evidence is based on small-to-moderate sized series from specialist centres. The International Watch & Wait Database (IWWD) aims to describe the outcome of the W&W strategy in a large-scale registry of pooled individual patient data. We report the results of a descriptive analysis after inclusion of more than 1000 patients in the registry., Methods: Participating centres entered data in the registry through an online, highly secured, and encrypted research data server. Data included baseline characteristics, neoadjuvant therapy, imaging protocols, incidence of local regrowth and distant metastasis, and survival status. All patients with rectal cancer in whom the standard of care (total mesorectal excision surgery) was omitted after neoadjuvant therapy were eligible to be included in the IWWD. For the present analysis, we only selected patients with no signs of residual tumour at reassessment (a cCR). We analysed the proportion of patients with local regrowth, proportion of patients with distant metastases, 5-year overall survival, and 5-year disease-specific survival., Findings: Between April 14, 2015, and June 30, 2017, we identified 1009 patients who received neoadjuvant treatment and were managed by W&W in the database from 47 participating institutes (15 countries). We included 880 (87%) patients with a cCR. Median follow-up time was 3·3 years (95% CI 3·1-3·6). The 2-year cumulative incidence of local regrowth was 25·2% (95% CI 22·2-28·5%), 88% of all local regrowth was diagnosed in the first 2 years, and 97% of local regrowth was located in the bowel wall. Distant metastasis were diagnosed in 71 (8%) of 880 patients. 5-year overall survival was 85% (95% CI 80·9-87·7%), and 5-year disease-specific survival was 94% (91-96%)., Interpretation: This dataset has the largest series of patients with rectal cancer treated with a W&W approach, consisting of approximately 50% data from previous cohort series and 50% unpublished data. Local regrowth occurs mostly in the first 2 years and in the bowel wall, emphasising the importance of endoscopic surveillance to ensure the option of deferred curative surgery. Local unsalvageable disease after W&W was rare., Funding: European Registration of Cancer Care financed by European Society of Surgical Oncology, Champalimaud Foundation Lisbon, Bas Mulder Award granted by the Alpe d'Huzes Foundation and Dutch Cancer Society, and European Research Council Advanced Grant., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Fluorescence imaging is a technique that uses near-infrared light combined with a fluorescent contrast agent to visualise specific tissue structures. This technique can be used to visualise vital anatomical structures, sentinel nodes, primary tumours and metastases during surgery or laparoscopic procedures. The development of various tumour-specific contrast agents has led to an increase in indications for the use of fluorescence imaging.

Background: Tumour-targeted fluorescence imaging has the potential to advance current practice of oncological surgery by selectively highlighting malignant tissue during surgery. Carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) is overexpressed in 90% of colorectal cancers and is a promising target for colorectal cancer imaging. We aimed to assess the tolerability of SGM-101, a fluorescent anti-CEA monoclonal antibody, and to investigate the feasibility to detect colorectal cancer with intraoperative fluorescence imaging., Methods: We did an open-label, pilot study in two medical centres in the Netherlands. In the dose-escalation cohort, we included patients (aged ≥18 years) with primary colorectal cancer with increased serum CEA concentrations (upper limit of normal of ≥3 ng/mL) since diagnosis, who were scheduled for open or laparoscopic tumour resection. In the expansion cohort, we included patients (aged ≥18 years) with recurrent or peritoneal metastases of colorectal cancer, with increasing serum concentrations of CEA since diagnosis, who were scheduled for open surgical resection. We did not mask patients, investigators, or anyone from the health-care team. We assigned patients using a 3 + 3 dose design to 5 mg, 7·5 mg, or 10 mg of SGM-101 in the dose-escalation cohort. In the expansion cohort, patients received a dose that was considered optimal at that moment of the study but not higher than the dose used in the dose-escalation cohort. SGM-101 was administered intravenously for 30 min to patients 2 or 4 days before surgery. Intraoperative imaging was done to identify near-infrared fluorescent lesions, which were resected and assessed for fluorescence. The primary outcome was tolerability and safety of SGM-101, assessed before administration and continued up to 12 h after dosing, on the day of surgery, the first postoperative day, and follow-up visits at the day of discharge and the first outpatient clinic visit. Secondary outcomes were effectiveness of SGM-101 for detection of colorectal cancer, assessed by tumour-to-background ratios (TBR); concordance between fluorescent signal and tumour status of resected tissue; and diagnostic accuracy in both cohorts. This trial is registered with the Nederlands Trial Register, number NTR5673, and ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02973672., Findings: Between January, 2016, and February, 2017, 26 patients (nine in the dose-escalation cohort and 17 in the expansion cohort) were included in this study. SGM-101 did not cause any treatment-related adverse events, although three possibly related mild adverse events were reported in three (33%) of nine patients in the dose-escalation cohort and five were reported in three (18%) of 17 patients in the expansion cohort. Five moderate adverse events were reported in three (18%) patients in the expansion cohort, but they were deemed unrelated to SGM-101. No changes in vital signs, electrocardiogram, or laboratory results were found after administration of the maximum dose of 10 mg of SGM-101 in both cohorts. A dose of 10 mg, administered 4 days before surgery, showed the highest TBR (mean TBR 6·10 [SD 0·42] in the dose-escalation cohort). In the expansion cohort, 19 (43%) of 43 lesions were detected using fluorescence imaging and were not clinically suspected before fluorescent detection, which changed the treatment strategy in six (35%) of 17 patients. Sensitivity was 98%, specificity was 62%, and accuracy of fluorescence intensity was 84% in the expansion cohort., Interpretation: This study presents the first clinical use of CEA-targeted detection of colorectal cancer and shows that SGM-101 is safe and can influence clinical decision making during the surgical procedure for patients with colorectal cancer., Funding: Surgimab., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Abdominoperineal resection (APR) is associated with high incidence of surgical wound infections. The use of incisional negative-pressure wound therapy (iNPWT) is known to reduce wound infections for several surgical indications. The aim of this pilot study was to investigate the potential of a new portable negative-pressure therapy device on perineal wound healing in patients undergoing APR. Approach: A new single-use incisional negative-pressure therapy device was applied in 10 patients. A negative pressure of -80 mmHg was continued for 7 days postsurgery. Incidence of wound complications and time to wound healing were compared with a historical control group of 10 patients undergoing APR in 2014, treated with conventional wound care. Results: Patient characteristics were comparable in both groups. Mean 1.6 dressings were used per patient. A wound complication was diagnosed in seven patients versus six in the control group. Wound infections were diagnosed median 11.5 days after surgery, compared with 10.5 days in the control group. Duration of wound healing was shorter in the study group (median 8.5 weeks vs. 13 weeks). Innovation: This is the first study to report on the use of this iNPWT device for patients who underwent APR for rectal cancer. Conclusion: In this study, iNPWT did not reduce wound complications. Wound infections occurred slightly later and seemed to have a less severe clinical course. After treatment with iNPWT, the duration of wound healing was shorter., Competing Interests: No competing financial interests exist. The content of this article was expressly written by the authors listed. No ghostwriters were used to write this article.