Effect of More vs Less Frequent Follow-up Testing on Overall and Colorectal Cancer-Specific Mortality in Patients With Stage II or III Colorectal Cancer: The COLOFOL Randomized Clinical Trial

Recurrence Risk after Radical Colorectal Cancer Surgery-Less Than before, But How High Is It?

Simple Summary

Evidence indicates that recurrence risk after colon cancer today is less than it was when trials performed decades ago showed that adjuvant chemotherapy reduces the risk and prolong disease-free and overall survival. After rectal cancer surgery, local recurrence rates have decreased but it is unclear if systemic recurrences have. After a systematic review of available literature reporting recurrence risks after curative colorectal cancer surgery we report that the risks are lower today than they were in the past and that this risk reduction is not solely ascribed to the use of adjuvant therapy. Adjuvant therapy always means overtreatment of many patients, already cured by the surgery. Fewer recurrences mean that progress in the care of these patients has happened but also that the present guidelines giving recommendations based upon old data must be adjusted. The relative gains from adding chemotherapy are not altered, but the absolute number of patients gaining is less.

Abstract

Adjuvant chemotherapy aims at eradicating tumour cells sometimes present after radical surgery for a colorectal cancer (CRC) and thereby diminish the recurrence rate and prolong time to recurrence (TTR). Remaining tumour cells will lead to recurrent disease that is usually fatal. Adjuvant therapy is administered based upon the estimated recurrence risk, which in turn defines the need for this treatment. This systematic overview aims at describing whether the need has decreased since trials showing that adjuvant chemotherapy provides benefits in colon cancer were performed decades ago. Thanks to other improvements than the administration of adjuvant chemotherapy, such as better staging, improved surgery, the use of radiotherapy and more careful pathology, recurrence risks have decreased. Methodological difficulties including intertrial comparisons decades apart and the present selective use of adjuvant therapy prevent an accurate estimate of the magnitude of the decreased need. Furthermore, most trials do not report recurrence rates or TTR, only disease-free and overall survival (DFS/OS). Fewer colon cancer patients, particularly in stage II but also in stage III, today display a sufficient need for adjuvant treatment considering the burden of treatment, especially when oxaliplatin is added. In rectal cancer, neo-adjuvant treatment will be increasingly used, diminishing the need for adjuvant treatment.

Impact of Surgical Resection on Metachronous Metastases of Colorectal Cancer According to Tumor Doubling Time

BACKGROUND/AIM

We aimed to elucidate the prognostic impact of tumor doubling time (DT) and radical surgery when classified by DT in patients with metachronous liver, lung, or peritoneal metastases of colorectal cancer (CRC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We reviewed the data of 1941 patients who underwent curative surgery for CRC and calculated DT for recurrences using computed tomography.

RESULTS

Short DT was an independent prognostic risk factor in liver (p<0.001) and peritoneal (p=0.03) metastases. Survival was significantly better in patients who underwent surgery than in those who did not, both in short and long DT groups in any metastatic organ (p<0.01). Patients with long DT gained significantly better prognostic benefit from surgery than those with short DT in liver (p=0.01) and peritoneal (p=0.04) metastases.

CONCLUSION

Surgery is recommended for resectable metastases, especially in patients with liver and peritoneal metastases with long DT.

A New Surveillance Algorithm After Resection of Colorectal Liver Metastases Based on Changes in Recurrence Risk and RAS Mutation Status

BACKGROUND

The optimal surveillance strategy after resection of colorectal liver metastases (CLM) is unknown. We evaluated changes in recurrence risk after CLM resection and developed a surveillance algorithm.

METHODS

Patients undergoing CLM resection during 1998 to 2015 were identified from a prospectively compiled database and analyzed if they had the potential for follow-up longer than the longest observed time to recurrence in this cohort. Changes in recurrence risk and risk factors for recurrence were evaluated. All statistical tests were 2-sided.

RESULTS

Among 2,105 patients who were initially identified and underwent CLM resection, the latest recurrence was observed at 87 months; 1,221 consecutive patients from 1998 through 2011 with the potential for at least 87 months of follow-up were included. The risk of recurrence was highest at 0 to 2 years after CLM resection, lower at 2 to 4 years after CLM resection, and steadily lower after 4 years after CLM resection. Factors associated with increased recurrence risk at the time of surgery were primary lymph node metastasis (hazard ratio [HR], 1.54; 95% CI, 1.21-1.97; P<.001), multiple CLM (HR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.06-1.63; P=.015), largest liver metastasis diameter >5 cm (HR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.23-2.19; P<.001), and RAS mutation (HR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.04-1.59; P=.020). In patients without recurrence at 2 years, the only factor still associated with increased recurrence risk was RAS mutation. In those patients, the recurrence rate at 4 years was 59.3% in patients with RAS mutation versus 27.8% in patients with RAS wild-type (P=.019).

CONCLUSIONS

For patients who have undergone CLM resection, we propose surveillance every 3 to 4 months during years 0 to 2, every 3 to 4 months (if mutant RAS) versus every 4 to 6 months (if RAS wild-type) during years 2 to 4, and every 6 to 12 months if recurrence-free at 4 years.

The factors that affect the mortality of emergency operated ASA 3 colon cancer patients

Introduction

colorectal cancers take third place among cancer-related deaths and 10-28% of these patients are admitted with the necessity of emergency surgical intervention. The main propose of this study was to investigate the factors affecting mortality in ASA 3 colorectal cancer patients who undergo emergency surgery.

Methods

between 2010 and 2017 ASA 3 patients who underwent emergency colon cancer surgery were included in the study. All of the study group was evaluated within the first 30-day time-frame. The results were obtained by a statistical comparison of the data of patients with and without mortality.

Results

one hundred and twenty eight patients included in the study. There was no statistical difference in the demographic data of the groups and the indications of the operation. The differences and durations of surgery also did not make any statistical difference. The complication rate was the same according to the Clavien-Dindo classification.

Conclusion

despite the screening programs applied in colorectal cancers, applications to emergency services and procedures performed under emergency conditions are still at high levels. Surgical operations, which have to be performed in patients with impaired metabolic status, carry major risks for patients, but their outcomes are also satisfactory for them.

Recurrence patterns in patients with Stage II melanoma: The evolving role of routine imaging for surveillance

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The relatively recent availability of effective systemic therapies for metastatic melanoma necessitates reconsideration of current surveillance patterns. Evidence supporting surveillance guidelines for resected Stage II melanoma is lacking. Prior reports note routine imaging detects only 21% of recurrent disease. This study aims to define recurrence patterns for Stage II melanoma to inform future surveillance guidelines.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study of patients with Stage II melanoma. We analyzed risk factors for recurrence and methods of recurrence detection. We also assessed survival. Yearly hazards of recurrence were visualized.

RESULTS

With a median follow-up of 4.9 years, 158 per 580 patients (27.2%) recurred. Overall, most recurrences were patient-detected (60.7%) or imaging-detected (27.3%). Routine imaging was important in detecting recurrence in patients with distant recurrences (adjusted rate 43.1% vs. 9.4% for local/in-transit; p = .04) and with Stage IIC melanoma (42.5% vs. 18.5% for IIA; p = .01). Male patients also self-detected recurrent disease less than females (52.1% vs. 76.8%; p < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

Routine imaging surveillance played a larger role in detecting recurrent disease for select groups in this cohort than noted in prior studies. In an era of effective systemic therapy, routine imaging should be considered for detection of asymptomatic relapse for select, high-risk patient groups.

Patterns of surveillance for colorectal cancer: Experience from a single large tertiary institution

AIM

Colorectal cancer surveillance is an essential part of care and should include clinical review and follow-up investigations. There is limited information regarding postoperative surveillance and survivorship care in the Australian context. This study investigated patterns of colorectal cancer surveillance at a large tertiary institution.

METHODS

A retrospective review of hospital records was conducted for all patients treated with curative surgery between January 2012 and June 2017. Provision of clinical surveillance, colonoscopy, computed tomography (CT), and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) within 24 months postoperatively were recorded. Kaplan-Meier estimates were used to evaluate time-to-surveillance review and associated investigations.

RESULTS

A total of 675 patients were included in the study. Median time to first postoperative clinical review was 20 days (95% confidence interval (CI), 18-21) with only 31% of patients having their first postoperative clinic review within 2 weeks. Median time to first CEA was 100 days (95% CI, 92-109), with 47% of patients having their CEA checked within the first 3 months, increasing to 68% at 6 months. Median time to first follow-up CT scan was 262 days (95% CI, 242-278) and for colonoscopy, 560 days (95% CI, 477-625). Poor uptake of surveillance testing was more prevalent in patients from older age groups, those with multiple comorbidities, and higher stage cancers.

CONCLUSION

Colorectal cancer surveillance is multi-disciplinary and involves several parallel processes, many of which lead to inconsistent follow-up. Further prospective work is required to identify the reasons for variation in care and which aspects are most important to cancer patients.

Less intensive surveillance after radical surgery for stage I-III colorectal cancer by focusing on the doubling time of recurrence

PURPOSE

To propose a new and improved surveillance schedule for colorectal cancer (CRC) patients by focusing on the recurrence rate, resectability, and especially, the tumor doubling time (DT) of recurrent tumors.

METHODS

The subjects of this retrospective review were 1774 consecutive patients who underwent radical surgery for stage I-III CRC between January, 2004 and December, 2015. We calculated the DT by measuring the tumor diameter using computed tomography (CT).

RESULTS

The median DT for recurrences in the liver, lung, peritoneum, and other locations were 35, 72, 85, and 36 days, respectively, (p < 0.001) and tumor growth rates differed according to the organs where recurrence developed. Multiple linear regression analysis showed that the DT was strongly associated with the relapse-free interval from primary surgery (p < 0.001), and that the DT in patients with recurrence detected ≥ 3 years after primary surgery was longer by 151.1 days than that in patients with recurrence detected within 1 year after primary surgery. We proposed a less intensive surveillance, which achieved an average cost reduction of 32.5% compared with conventional surveillance in Japan.

CONCLUSION

We propose a new and more cost-efficient surveillance schedule for CRC surgery patients in the clinical setting.

Cost-effectiveness of surveillance with CT colonography after resection of colorectal cancer

OBJECTIVE

Surveillance following colorectal cancer (CRC) resection uses optical colonoscopy (OC) to detect intraluminal disease and CT to detect extracolonic recurrence. CT colonography (CTC) might be an efficient use of resources in this situation because it allows for intraluminal and extraluminal evaluations with one test.

DESIGN

We developed a simulation model to compare lifetime costs and benefits for a cohort of patients with resected CRC. Standard of care involved annual CT for 3 years and OC for years 1, 4 and every 5 years thereafter. For the CTC-based strategy, we replace CT+OC at year 1 with CTC. Patients with lesions greater than 6 mm detected by CTC underwent OC. Detection of an adenoma 10 mm or larger was followed by OC at 1 year, then every 3 years thereafter. Test characteristics and costs for CTC were derived from a clinical study. Medicare costs were used for cancer care costs as well as alternative test costs. We discounted costs and effects at 3% per year.

RESULTS

For persons with resected stage III CRC, the standard-of-care strategy was more costly (US$293) and effective (2.6 averted CRC cases and 1.1 averted cancer deaths per 1000) than the CTC-based strategy, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of US$55 500 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. Our analysis was most sensitive to the sensitivity of CTC for detecting polyps 10 mm or larger and assumptions about disease progression.

CONCLUSION

In a simulation model, we found that replacing the standard-of-care approach to postdiagnostic surveillance with a CTC-based strategy is not an efficient use of resources in most situations.

Detection of circulating tumor DNA in patients of operative colorectal and gastric cancers

Liquid biopsy is a non-invasive tool to examine the genetic profile of tumors by identification of mutated circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA), which is often analyzed by next generation sequencing (NGS) or droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) assay. We first examined the ctDNA mutation in pre-operative plasma samples obtained from 154 colorectal cancer (CRC) and 46 gastric cancer (GC) patients, using the NGS-based panel assay. The overall detection rate of mutated ctDNA was 72.0% (144 of 200 patients), and the panel-based screening identified 207 and 47 mutations from CRC and GC patients, respectively. The ddPCR analysis was then performed on post-operative samples of 77 patients, and detection of mutated ctDNA was earlier than imaging-based diagnosis in all of 6 patients who showed the tumor recurrences after surgery. Our data also revealed that patients with positive post-operation ctDNA level showed significant shorter recurrence-free survival compared to the patients with negative ctDNA level (HR 14.9; 95% CI, 0.7-313.5; p < 0.0001). These findings suggested that screening of mutated ctDNA by liquid biopsy aids in identifying the patients at high risk of post-operative recurrence, and serial screening of ctDNA would allow to monitor the response after treatment and/or early detection of tumor recurrence.

The Landmark Series: Randomized Control Trials Examining Perioperative Chemotherapy and Postoperative Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Resectable Colorectal Liver Metastasis

Surgical resection remains the only curative treatment option for patients with colorectal liver metastases (CLM). However, the high recurrence rate after resection has led physicians to investigate multidisciplinary treatments combining surgery and medical therapy. Currently, the evidence to support medical therapy in patients with resectable CLM is limited. For patients with resectable CLM, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guidelines (version 2.2020) for colon and rectal cancer recommends either upfront surgery and postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy or preoperative chemotherapy followed by surgery and postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy. This article reviews randomized control trials regarding medical therapy before and after curative resection of CLM, and summarizes the updated long-term report of the New EPOC trial which investigated the addition of cetuximab to perioperative chemotherapy for patients with resectable CLM.

Feasibility of volatile organic compound in breath analysis in the follow-up of colorectal cancer: A pilot study

BACKGROUND

Colorectal carcinoma (CRC) has a worldwide incidence of 1.4 million patients and a large share in cancer-related mortality. After curative treatment, the risk of recurrence is 30-65%. Early detection may result in curative treatment. However, current follow-up (FU) examinations have low sensitivity ranging from 49 to 85% and are associated with high costs. Therefore, the search for a new diagnostic tool is justified. Analysis of volatile organic compound in exhaled air through an electronic nose (eNose) is a promising new patient-friendly diagnostic tool. We studied whether the eNose under investigation, the Aeonose™, is able to detect local recurrence or metastases of CRC.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study we included 62 patients, all of whom underwent curative treatment for CRC in the past 5 years. Thirty-six of them had no metastases and 26 had extraluminal local recurrence or metastases of CRC, detected during FU. Breath testing was performed and machine learning was used to predict extraluminal recurrences or metastases, and based on the receiver operating characteristics (ROC)-curve both sensitivity and specificity were calculated.

RESULTS

The eNose identified extra luminal local recurrences or metastases of CRC with a sensitivity and specificity of 0.88 (CI 0.69-0.97) and 0.75 (CI 0.57-0.87), respectively, with an overall accuracy of 0.81.

DISCUSSION

This eNose may be a promising tool in detecting extraluminal local recurrences or metastases in the FU of curatively treated CRC. However, a well-designed prospective study is warranted to show its accuracy and predictive value before it can be used in clinical practice.

Follow-up schedule for initial recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma after ablation based on risk classification

Background

To date, no standard follow-up guidelines exist regarding patients receiving ablation for initial recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We aimed to explore whether intensive follow-up could benefit these patients.

Methods

We reviewed the clinical data of patients who received complete ablation for initial HCC recurrence after curative treatments in our institution from January 2005 to June 2017. Risk factors for second recurrence of HCC were identified by univariate and multivariate analyses. Patients were classified into low- and high-risk groups according to the outcome of the classification and regression model. The patients were further categorized into short- (< 3 months) and long-interval (3–6 months) follow-up subgroups based on their surveillance in the first 2 years after complete ablation for initial recurrence. The Kaplan-Meier method with log-rank test was performed to compare the overall survival (OS) based on follow-up intervals in each risk group. We also validated our results by stratifying patients into subgroups with different numbers of risk factors and comparing the OS between patients with different follow-up intervals.

Results

A total of 361 patients were enrolled. The risk factors for secondary recurrence included the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stage at initial recurrence and first recurrence-free survival after curative treatments for primary HCC (p < 0.001 and p = 0.002). Two risk groups (low and high) were identified. In both the low- and high-risk groups, the OS of patients was not associated with intervals of follow-up (p = 0.29 and 0.49). No significant difference was found in the rates of BCLC 0/A stage, tumor location or curative treatments for the second recurrence by different follow-up intervals in each risk group (p = 0.34 and 0.87; p = 0.69 and 0.97). The same tendency was found in subgroups with 0/1/2 risk factors for secondary recurrence during validation.

Conclusion

The long-interval follow-up did not compromise the survival of patients with complete ablation for initial recurrent HCC.

Risk factors and predictors of lymph nodes metastasis and distant metastasis in newly diagnosed T1 colorectal cancer

Background

Lymph nodes metastasis (LNM) and distant metastasis (DM) are important prognostic factors in colorectal cancer (CRC) and determine the following treatment approaches. We aimed to find clinicopathological factors associated with LNM and DM, and analyze the prognosis of CRC patients with T1 stage.

Methods

A total of 17 516 eligible patients with T1 CRC were retrospectively enrolled in the study based on the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database during 2004‐2016. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify risk factors for LNM and DM. Unadjusted and adjusted Cox proportional hazard models were used to identify prognostic factors for overall survival. We performed the cumulative incidence function (CIF) to further determine the prognostic role of LNM and DM in colorectal cancer‐specific death (CCSD). LNM, DM, and OS nomogram were constructed based on these models and evaluated by the C‐index and calibration plots for discrimination and accuracy, respectively. The clinical utility of the nomograms was measured by decision curve analyses (DCAs) and subgroups with different risk scores.

Results

Tumor grade, mucinous adenocarcinoma, and age accounted for the first three largest proportion among the LNM nomogram scores (all, P < .001), whereas N stage, carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), and tumor size occupied the largest percentage in DM nomogram (all, P < .001). OS nomogram was formulated to visually to predict 3‐, 5‐, and 10‐ year overall survivals for patients with T1 CRC. The calibration curves showed an effectively predictive accuracy of prediction nomograms, of which the C‐index were 0.666, 0.874, and 0.760 for good discrimination, respectively. DCAs and risk subgroups revealed the clinical effectiveness of these nomograms.

Conclusions

Novel population‐based nomograms for T1 CRC patients could objectively and accurately predict the risk of LNM and DM, as well as OS for different stages. These predictive tools may help clinicians to make individual clinical decisions, before clinical management.

Virtual Colorectal Cancer Surveillance: Bringing Scope Rate to Target

BACKGROUND

Although endoscopy is recommended at 1 year after colorectal cancer (CRC) resection to detect locally recurrent CRC, earlier work at our Veterans Affairs (VA) facility demonstrated that 35% of patients achieve this metric.

STUDY DESIGN

The interdisciplinary team used quality improvement methods to standardize processes and implement a gastroenterology-managed virtual surveillance clinic. The intervention clinic was implemented in August 2014. Veterans who underwent resection for stage I to III CRC at a single VA facility from January 2010 to December 2017 were included, with those undergoing resection between January 2010 and July 2014 considered pre-intervention and those undergoing resection between August 2014 and December 2017 considered post-intervention. The primary endpoint was the proportion of eligible patients for whom endoscopy was completed within 1 year of resection. Secondary outcomes were the proportion of patients who completed endoscopy within 18 months of resection or at any time post-resection and time to surveillance endoscopy.

RESULTS

A total of 186 patients underwent resection for stage I to III CRC from 2010 to 2017; of these, 160 (86%) were eligible for endoscopy at 1-year post-resection (98 pre-intervention and 62 post-intervention). In the pre-intervention period, 30 of 98 patients (30.6%) underwent surveillance endoscopy within 1 year vs 31 of 62 (50.0%) post-intervention (p = 0.031). When evaluated at 18 months after resection, 56 of 98 patients (57.1%) in the pre-intervention group vs 52 of 62 (83.9%) in the post-intervention group underwent surveillance endoscopy (p = 0.001). Median time from resection to endoscopy decreased during the study period, from 1.19 years pre-intervention (interquartile range 0.93 to 1.74 years) to 1.0 years post-intervention (interquartile range 0.93 to 1.09 years) (p = 0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of a virtual surveillance clinic with standardized processes was associated with increased guideline-concordant endoscopic surveillance after CRC resection.

Statistics and measurable residual disease (MRD) testing: uses and abuses in hematopoietic cell transplantation

SERIES EDITORS' NOTE

The decision whether to recommend a transplant to someone with acute leukemia in first remission is complex and challenging. Diverse, often confounded co-variates interact to influence one's recommendation. Briefly, the decision metric can be viewed in three spheres: (1) subject-; (2) transplant-; and (3) disease-related co-variates. Subject-related co-variates include items such as age and comorbidities. Transplant-related co-variates include items such as donor-types, graft source, proposed conditioning and pre- and post-transplant immune suppression.But what of disease-related variables? Previously haematologists relied on co-variates such as WBC at diagnosis, chemotherapy cycles to achieve first remission, cytogenetics and most recently, mutation topography. However, these co-variates have largely been replaced by results of measurable residual disease (MRD)-testing. Many chemotherapy-only and transplant studies report strong correlations between results of MRD-testing on therapy outcomes such as cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR), leukemia-free survival (LFS) or survival. (CIR makes biological sense in a transplant context whereas LFS and survival do not give competing causes of death such as transplant-related mortality (TRM), graft-versus-host disease and interstitial pneumonia unrelated to relapse probability).This raises the question of how useful results are of MRD-testing in predicting CIR after transplants. Elsewhere we discussed accuracy and precision of MRD-testing in predicting outcomes of therapy of acute myeloid leukemia (Estey E, Gale RP. Leukemia 31:1255-1258, 2017; Hourigan CS, Gale RP, Gormley NJ, Ossenkoppele GJ, Walter RB. Leukemia 31:1482-1490, 2017). Briefly put, not terribly good. Although results of MRD-testing are often the most powerful predictor of CIR in multivariable analyses, the C-statistic (a measure of prediction accuracy) is often only about 0.75. This is much better than flipping a fair coin but far from ideal.In the typescript which follows, Othus and colleagues discuss statistical issues underlying MRD-testing in the context of haematopoietic cell transplants. We hope readers, especially haematologists who often need to make transplant recommendations to people with acute leukemia in first remission, will read it carefully and critically. The bottom line is MRD-test data are useful but considerable uncertainty is unavoidable with substantial false-positive and -negative rates. We need to acknowledge this uncertainty to ourselves and to the people we counsel. The authors quote Voltaire who said: Doubt is not a pleasant condition, but certainty is an absurd one. Sadly so, but we do the best we can. Robert Peter Gale, Imperial College London, and Mei-Jie Zhang, Medical College of Wisconsin and CIBMTR.

Cetuximab versus bevacizumab in metastatic colorectal cancer: a comparative effectiveness study

PURPOSE

Uncertainty exists regarding comparative effectiveness of cetuximab versus bevacizumab in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We conducted a retrospective head-to-head multi-cohort study comparing clinical outcomes from both antibodies METHODS: Cohorts were defined by treatment line and subgroups by (K)RAS status and tumour sidedness. Among other outcomes, we estimated and compared response rates, progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Between January 2010 and April 2018, 311 patients were included. Except for (K)RAS mutation status, baseline characteristics were balanced across treatment groups. In the full analysis of first and second-line cohorts, PFS (first-line: HR = 0.85; 95% CI 0.64 to 1.13; P = 0.26; second-line: HR = 1.16; 95% CI 0.74 to 1.83; P = 0.51) and OS (first-line: HR = 0.83; 95% CI 0.61 to 1.15; P = 0.26; second-line: HR = 0.88; 95% CI 0.56 to 1.38; P = 0.58) were similar between bevacizumab and cetuximab arms. In subgroup analyses of first-line therapy, we found a survival difference favouring bevacizumab in right-sided tumours (PFS: HR = 0.52; 95% CI 0.29 to 0.93; P = 0.025; OS: HR = 0.60; 95% CI 0.32 to 1.12; P = 0.11), but not in left-sided (HR = 1.04; 95% CI 0.75 to 1.46; P = 0.81; OS: HR = 0.94; 95% CI 0.65 to 1.36; P = 0.74), or (K)RAS wild-type tumours (PFS: HR = 0.91; 95% CI 0.60 to 1.40; P = 0.67; OS: HR = 0.79; 95% CI 0.50 to 1.25; P = 0.31). Response rates were similar across treatment groups, except for the subgroup of patients bearing right-sided primaries, where bevacizumab performed substantially better.

CONCLUSION

This study provides evidence suggesting bevacizumab and cetuximab lead to similar effectiveness outcomes in mCRC, except for right-sided tumours, where cetuximab seemed to show considerably poorer outcomes. Further research is needed to confirm these results.

The association of serum lipid levels with colorectal cancer recurrence

BACKGROUND

Biologic and epidemiologic evidence suggests that tumor cells depend on reprogrammed lipid metabolic function for survival and growth. Lipids may promote tumor recurrence by providing energy needed for proliferation. Studies have found associations of serum lipids with cancer incidence, mortality, and disease-free mortality, though they have yet to evaluate the prognostic potential of serum lipids for colorectal cancer (CRC) recurrence.

METHODS

341 Danish CRC patients who underwent surgical resection were actively followed between 2003-2011 from date of surgery until December 31, 2012, or death. Serum lipids including low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), and triglycerides (TG), were collected at regular intervals. Lipids were assigned as time-varying exposures evaluated with a one-year lag. Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess recurrence rate, adjusting for clinically relevant covariates. A restricted analysis was performed in a group of non-statin users (n = 236).

RESULTS

Among 341 CRC patients, increased HDL-C appeared to have a beneficial impact on recurrence-free survival (RFS) for CRC patients, especially among statin users (hazard ratio [HR] for 0.1 mmol/L increase = 0.58; 95 % confidence interval [CI]: 0.43, 0.78). Increased LDL-C and TG were not associated with RFS. Increased lipids showed a near-null effect on CRC recurrence [e.g. HR (95 % CI) for 0.1 mmol/L increase LDL = 1.01 (0.97, 1.19)] among non-statin users.

CONCLUSION

Serum lipid levels of LDL-C and TG do not appear to be associated with CRC recurrence. Further investigation of the role of HDL-C in CRC recurrence may be of interest based on the suggestive inverse association observed here.

TRIM72 Immunohistochemical Expression Can Predict Relapse in Colorectal Carcinoma

Large bowel adenocarcinoma is one of the most frequent human neoplasms and despite recent insights into the pathophysiology and molecular basis of this disease, mortality remains high in advanced and metastatic cases. Most guidelines recommend adjuvant chemotherapy for tumours involving lymph nodes, but not for patients with localized stage I or II disease. However, it is well known that approximately 20% of stage II colorectal carcinoma patients eventually recur, mainly with distant or peritoneal involvement and show bad prognosis. It would be important to predict which patients are at increased risk of recurrence to guide potential adjuvant therapy use in this controversial setting. In this sense, only microsatellite stability has been proposed as a predictive tool in some guidelines. The tripartite motif family protein 72 (TRIM72) is a ubiquitin ligase, involved in the cell membrane repair machinery and known to be associated to insulin resistance. Its potential role in colon cancer has recently been proposed. The aim of this study is to determine the potential predictive value of TRIM72 immunohistochemical expression in stage II colon carcinoma. We have retrospectively reviewed a series of 95 patients with stage II colon microsatellite stable carcinomas operated with a curative intent at a single large tertiary hospital in Madrid (Spain) between 2006 and 2012. None of the patients received adjuvant chemotherapy. We reviewed the histopathological slides and constructed a tissue microarray (TMA) of three representative areas to perform immunohistochemical staining for TRIM72. In our series 30 patients (31.7%) recurred after a median follow-up of 17.5 months. Lack of immunohistochemical expression of TRIM72 in the tumor was significantly and independently associated to recurrence. A recent report by Chen et al. has shown that TRIM72 can be measured in plasma for colon carcinoma detection as an alternative to CEA or CA19.9, with lower levels in patients with carcinoma. Our report is the first one to show that lower immunohistochemical expression of TRIM72 predicts recurrence in colon stage II carcinoma. We feel this predictive influence can be related to its crucial role as a central regulator in many signaling pathways (PI3K-AKT, ERK). As an ubiquitin ligase, the lack of TRIM72 could increase the levels of several potential oncogenic molecules and therefore lead to a more aggressive phenotype. It remains to be shown whether chemotherapy could change the clinical behaviour of this bad prognosis group. We propose TRIM72 immunohistochemical analysis as a potential tool to predict recurrence risk in stage II colon carcinoma patients. Our results should be confirmed in larger series, but could open the way to management strategies refinement in this early stage group of patients.

Evidence-based follow-up in colorectal cancer—quo vadis?

Colorectal cancer is the third most common and the third most lethal cancer disease in the western world. As most patients undergo treatment with curative intent at initial diagnosis, postoperative surveillance protocols have been established with the primary aim to detect possible disease recurrence in an early resectable stage. Various international guidelines recommend an intensive surveillance protocol over a 5-year time period. These guidelines are based on the reported significant benefit regarding overall patient survival, and on the observation that 90% of recurrences occur within the first 5 years following resection. Surveillance protocols include regular clinical examinations, measurement of the carcinoembryonic antigen, computed tomography scans and regular endoscopies. While there is plenty of evidence regarding the scheduling of endoscopies, the frequency of carcinoembryonic antigen measurements and computed tomography scans has been ever since under debate. The benefit of intensive compared to low frequency surveillance protocols regarding disease-specific survival has never been shown. Moreover, recent meta-analyses and randomized controlled trials challenge current guidelines. Intensive carcinoembryonic antigen assessment and computed tomography scan follow-up protocols seem to fail in generating better overall and disease-specific survival in colorectal cancer patients compared to less intensive surveillance strategies. This change over the last few decades parallels the treatment evolution of colorectal cancer from a primarily surgical to a multidisciplinary task. Instead of advocating a reduction of the follow-up intensity, these findings should stimulate the colorectal oncology field to move from a one-fits-all to a patient-centered surveillance.

Application of the Adaptive Validation Substudy Design to Colorectal Cancer Recurrence

Background

Among men and women diagnosed with colorectal cancer (CRC), 20-50% will develop a cancer recurrence. Cancer recurrences are not routinely captured by most population-based registries; however, linkage across Danish registries allows for the development of predictive models to detect recurrence. Successful application of such models in population-based settings requires validation against a gold standard to ensure the accuracy of recurrence identification.

Objective

We apply a recently developed validation study design for prospectively collected validation data to validate predicted CRC recurrences against gold standard diagnoses from medical records in an actively followed cohort of CRC patients in Denmark.

Methods

We use a Bayesian monitoring framework, traditionally used in clinical trials, to iteratively update classification parameters (positive and negative predictive values, and sensitivity and specificity) in an adaptive validation substudy design. This design allows determination of the sample size necessary to estimate the corresponding parameters and to identify when validation efforts can cease based on predefined criteria for parameter values and levels of precision.

Results

Among 355 men and women diagnosed with CRC in Denmark and actively followed semi-annually, there were 63 recurrences diagnosed by active follow-up and 70 recurrences identified by a predictive algorithm. The adaptive validation design met stopping criteria for the classification parameters after 120 patients had their recurrence information validated. This stopping point yielded parameter estimates for the classification parameters similar to those obtained when the entire cohort was validated, with 66% less patients needed for the validation study.

Conclusion

In this proof of concept application of the adaptive validation study design for outcome misclassification, we demonstrated the ability of the method to accurately determine when sufficient validation data have been collected. This method serves as a novel validation substudy design for prospectively collected data with simultaneous implementation of a validation study.

British Society of Gastroenterology/Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland/Public Health England post-polypectomy and post-colorectal cancer resection surveillance guidelines

These consensus guidelines were jointly commissioned by the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG), the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland (ACPGBI) and Public Health England (PHE). They provide an evidence-based framework for the use of surveillance colonoscopy and non-colonoscopic colorectal imaging in people aged 18 years and over. They are the first guidelines that take into account the introduction of national bowel cancer screening. For the first time, they also incorporate surveillance of patients following resection of either adenomatous or serrated polyps and also post-colorectal cancer resection. They are primarily aimed at healthcare professionals, and aim to address:Which patients should commence surveillance post-polypectomy and post-cancer resection?What is the appropriate surveillance interval?When can surveillance be stopped? two or more premalignant polyps including at least one advanced colorectal polyp (defined as a serrated polyp of at least 10 mm in size or containing any grade of dysplasia, or an adenoma of at least 10 mm in size or containing high-grade dysplasia); or five or more premalignant polyps The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) instrument provided a methodological framework for the guidelines. The BSG's guideline development process was used, which is National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) compliant.two or more premalignant polyps including at least one advanced colorectal polyp (defined as a serrated polyp of at least 10 mm in size or containing any grade of dysplasia, or an adenoma of at least 10 mm in size or containing high-grade dysplasia); or five or more premalignant polyps The key recommendations are that the high-risk criteria for future colorectal cancer (CRC) following polypectomy comprise either:two or more premalignant polyps including at least one advanced colorectal polyp (defined as a serrated polyp of at least 10 mm in size or containing any grade of dysplasia, or an adenoma of at least 10 mm in size or containing high-grade dysplasia); or five or more premalignant polyps This cohort should undergo a one-off surveillance colonoscopy at 3 years. Post-CRC resection patients should undergo a 1 year clearance colonoscopy, then a surveillance colonoscopy after 3 more years.

Temporal improvements in loco-regional failure and survival in patients with anal cancer treated with chemo-radiotherapy: treatment cohort study (1990-2014)

Background

We evaluated oncological changes in patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the anus (SCCA) treated by chemoradiotherapy (CRT) from a large UK institute, to derive estimates of contemporary outcomes.

Methods

We performed a treatment-cohort analysis in 560 patients with non-metastatic SCCA treated with CRT over 25 years. The primary outcomes were 3-year loco-regional failure (LRF), 5-year overall survival (OS), and 5-year cancer-specific survival (CSS). We developed prediction models; and overlaid estimates on published results from historic trials.

Results

Age distributions, proportions by gender and cT stage remained stable over time. The median follow-up was 61 (IQR: 36–79) months. Comparing the first period (1990–1994) with the last period (2010–2014), 3-year LRF declined from 33 to 16% (P_trends < 0.001); 5-year OS increased from 60% to 76% (P_trends = 0.001); and 5-year CCS increased from 62% in to 80% (P_trends = 0.001). For 2020, the models predicted a 3-year LRF of 14.7% (95% CIs: 0–31.3); 5-year OS of 74.7% (95% CIs: 54.6–94.9); and 5-year CSS of 85.7% (95% CIs: 75.3–96.0). Reported oncological outcomes from historic trials generally underestimated contemporary outcomes.

Conclusions

Current and predicted rates for 3-year LRF and 5-year survivals are considerably improved compared with those in historic trials.

Overall risk and risk factors for metachronous peritoneal metastasis after colorectal cancer surgery: a nationwide cohort study

Background

This study aimed to identify the cumulative incidence and risk factors of metachronous peritoneal metastasis (M‐PM) from colorectal cancer in patients who had intended curative treatment.

Methods

Patients with colorectal cancer were identified using the Danish Colorectal Cancer Group database for 2006–2015. The Danish Pathology Registry and the Danish National Patient Registry were used to identify M‐PM to 2017. Risk factors were estimated by multivariable absolute risk regression, treating death and other cancers as competing risks. Overall risk and risk differences (RDs) were estimated at 1, 3 and 5 years.

Results

In 22 586 patients with colorectal cancer, the overall risk of M‐PM was reported to be 0·9 (95 per cent c.i. 0·8 to 1·0) per cent at 1 year, 1·9 (1·8 to 2·1) per cent at 3 years and 2·2 (2·0 to 2·4) per cent at 5 years. Advanced tumour category ((y)pT4 versus (y)pT1) increased the RD of both M‐PM (2·9 (95 per cent c.i. 2·1 to 3·7) at 1 year and 6·0 (4·9 to 7·2) at 3 years) and lymph node involvement ((y)pN2 versus (y)pN0) (2·5 (1·8 to 3·2) at year and 4·3 (3·2 to 5·3) at 3 years). No further increase in risk was observed at 5 years. In a subanalysis, tumour‐involved resection margin (R1 versus R0) was associated with M‐PM with a RD of 3·9 (1·6 to 6·2) at 1 year and 5·9 (2·6 to 9·3) at 3 years.

Conclusion

The overall risk of M‐PM in patients with colorectal cancer is low, but is increased in advanced T and N status. Follow‐up of at least 3 years after colorectal cancer surgery may be necessary, given the potential curative treatment of early diagnosed M‐PM.

Major differences in follow-up practice of patients with colorectal cancer; results of a national survey in the Netherlands

BACKGROUND

The precise content and frequency of follow-up of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) is variable and guideline adherence is low. The aim of this study was to assess the view of colorectal surgeons on their local follow-up schedule and to clarify their opinions about risk-stratification and organ preserving therapies. Equally important, adherence to the Dutch national guidelines was determined.

METHODS

Colorectal surgeons were invited to complete a web-based survey about the importance and interval of clinical follow-up, CEA monitoring and the use of imaging modalities. Furthermore, the opinions regarding physical examination, risk-stratification, organ preserving strategies, and follow-up setting were assessed. Data were analyzed using quantitative and qualitative analysis methods.

RESULTS

A total of 106 colorectal surgeons from 52 general and 5 university hospitals filled in the survey, yielding a hospital response rate of 74% and a surgeon response rate of 42%. The follow-up of patients with CRC was mainly done by surgeons (71%). The majority of the respondents (68%) did not routinely perform physical examination during follow-up of rectal patients. Abdominal ultrasound was the predominant modality used for detection of liver metastases (77%). Chest X-ray was the main modality for detecting lung metastases (69%). During the first year of follow-up, adherence to the minimal guideline recommendations was high (99-100%). The results demonstrate that, within the framework of the guidelines, some respondents applied a more intensive follow-up and others a less intensive schedule. The majority of the respondents (77%) applied one single follow-up imaging schedule for all patients that underwent treatment with curative intent.

CONCLUSIONS

Dutch colorectal surgeons' adherence to minimal guideline recommendations was high, but within the guideline framework, opinions differed about the required intensity and content of clinical visits, the interval of CEA monitoring, and the importance and frequency of imaging techniques. This national survey demonstrates current follow-up practice throughout the Netherlands and highlights the follow-up differences of curatively treated patients with CRC.

Optimal Surveillance Frequency After CRS/HIPEC for Appendiceal and Colorectal Neoplasms: A Multi-institutional Analysis of the US HIPEC Collaborative

BACKGROUND

No guidelines exist for surveillance following cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS/HIPEC) for appendiceal and colorectal cancer. The primary objective was to define the optimal surveillance frequency after CRS/HIPEC.

METHODS

The U.S. HIPEC Collaborative database (2000-2017) was reviewed for patients who underwent a CCR0/1 CRS/HIPEC for appendiceal or colorectal cancer. Radiologic surveillance frequency was divided into two categories: low-frequency surveillance (LFS) at q6-12mos or high-frequency surveillance (HFS) at q2-4mos. Primary outcome was overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Among 975 patients, the median age was 55 year, 41% were male: 31% had non-invasive appendiceal (n = 301), 45% invasive appendiceal (n = 435), and 24% colorectal cancer (CRC; n = 239). With a median follow-up time of 25 mos, the median time to recurrence was 12 mos. Despite less surveillance, LFS patients had no decrease in median OS (non-invasive appendiceal: 106 vs. 65 mos, p < 0.01; invasive appendiceal: 120 vs. 73 mos, p = 0.02; colorectal cancer [CRC]: 35 vs. 30 mos, p = 0.8). LFS patients had lower median PCI scores compared with HFS (non-invasive appendiceal: 10 vs. 19; invasive appendiceal: 10 vs. 14; CRC: 8 vs. 11; all p < 0.01). However, on multivariable analysis, accounting for PCI score, LFS was still not associated with decreased OS for any histologic type (non-invasive appendiceal: hazard ratio [HR]: 0.28, p = 0.1; invasive appendiceal: HR: 0.73, p = 0.42; CRC: HR: 1.14, p = 0.59). When estimating annual incident cases of CRS/HIPEC at 375 for non-invasive appendiceal, 375 invasive appendiceal and 4410 colorectal, LFS compared with HFS for the initial two post-operative years would potentially save $13-19 M/year to the U.S. healthcare system.

CONCLUSIONS

Low-frequency surveillance after CRS/HIPEC for appendiceal or colorectal cancer is not associated with decreased survival, and when considering decreased costs, may optimize resource utilization.

Healthcare utilisation in general practice and hospitals in the year preceding a diagnosis of cancer recurrence or second primary cancer: a population-based register study

Background

The organisation of cancer follow-up is under scrutiny in many countries, and general practice is suggested to become more involved. A central focus is timely detection of recurring previous cancer and new second primary cancer. More knowledge on the patient pathway before cancer recurrence and second primary cancer is warranted to ensure the best possible organisation of follow-up. We aimed to describe the healthcare utilisation in the year preceding a diagnosis of cancer recurrence or second primary cancer.

Methods

This nationwide register study comprises patients diagnosed with bladder, breast, colorectal, endometrial, lung, malignant melanoma and ovarian cancer in Denmark in 2008–2016. The frequency of healthcare contacts during the 12 months preceding a cancer recurrence or second primary cancer was estimated and compared to the frequency of cancer survivors in cancer remission. The main analyses were stratified on sex and healthcare setting. Furthermore, two sub-analyses were stratified on 1) sex, healthcare setting and age group and on 2) sex, healthcare setting and comorbidity status.

Results

The study population consisted of 7832 patients with recurrence and 2703 patients with second primary cancer. On average, the patients were in contact with general practice one time per month in the 12th month preceding a new cancer diagnosis (recurrence or second primary cancer). Increasing contact rates were seen from 7 months before diagnosis in general practice and from 12 months before diagnosis in hospitals. This pattern was more pronounced in patients with cancer recurrence, younger patients and patients with no comorbidity. For instance, the contact rate ratios for hospital contacts in non-comorbid women with recurrence demonstrated 30% more contacts in the 12th month before recurrence and 127% more contacts in the 2nd month before recurrence.

Conclusions

The results show that cancer survivors are already seen in general practice on a regular basis. The increasing contact rates before a diagnosis of cancer recurrence or second primary cancer indicate that a window of opportunity exists for more timely diagnosis; this is seen in both general practice and in hospitals. Thus, cancer survivors may benefit from improvements in the organisation of cancer follow-up.

Report from the 20th annual Western Canadian Gastrointestinal Cancer Consensus Conference; Saskatoon, Saskatchewan; 28-29 September 2018

The 20th annual Western Canadian Gastrointestinal Cancer Consensus Conference was held in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, 28-29 September 2018. This interactive multidisciplinary conference is attended by health care professionals from across Western Canada (British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba) who are involved in the care of patients with gastrointestinal cancers. In addition, invited speakers from other provinces participate. Surgical, medical, and radiation oncologists, and allied health care professionals participated in presentations and discussion sessions for the purpose of developing the recommendations presented here. This consensus statement addresses current issues in the management of colorectal cancers.

YAP Levels Combined with Plasma CEA Levels Are Prognostic Biomarkers for Early-Clinical-Stage Patients of Colorectal Cancer

Background

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common cancers worldwide. Surgical operation is routinely applied to patients with CRC. An important part of postoperative care for patients is to assess the prognosis of patients, especially those with early-stage cancers. However, effective biomarkers for CRC prognosis remain inadequate. The purpose of this study was to assess the prognostic potential of Yes-associated protein (YAP) and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) in early-stage CRC.

Methods

A total of 116 matched pairs of CRC tissues and adjacent normal mucosae as well as 73 cases of metastatic lymph nodes were analyzed.

Results

The results show that CRC tissues exhibited higher YAP expression compared with the adjacent normal mucosae. Immunohistochemical analysis shows that YAP expression in the CRC or lymphatic metastatic tissues was clearly higher than that in normal mucosae (P < 0.01), whereas that in CRC tissues with lymphatic metastasis was higher than that in tissues without lymphatic metastasis (P < 0.05). YAP expression is associated with serosal invasion, lymphatic metastasis, lymph node ratio, remote metastasis, Dukes stage, and CEA levels (P < 0.05). YAP and CEA are independent predictors of the survival of CRC patients (P < 0.05 and P < 0.01). YAP predicted CRC prognosis primarily for patients with late-clinical-stage CRC (P=0.002), but not for patients with early-clinical-stage CRC (P=0.083). However, patients with high YAP and high CEA levels exhibited lower overall survival rates than those with low YAP expression in early-clinical-stage CRC (P < 0.001).

Conclusion

High YAP levels in the cancer tissues combined with high plasma CEA levels are potential biomarkers for predicting CRC prognosis in the early clinical stage.

Follow-up strategies following completion of primary cancer treatment in adult cancer survivors

BACKGROUND

Most cancer survivors receive follow-up care after completion of treatment with the primary aim of detecting recurrence. Traditional follow-up consisting of fixed visits to a cancer specialist for examinations and tests are expensive and may be burdensome for the patient. Follow-up strategies involving non-specialist care providers, different intensity of procedures, or addition of survivorship care packages have been developed and tested, however their effectiveness remains unclear.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review is to compare the effect of different follow-up strategies in adult cancer survivors, following completion of primary cancer treatment, on the primary outcomes of overall survival and time to detection of recurrence. Secondary outcomes are health-related quality of life, anxiety (including fear of recurrence), depression and cost.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, four other databases and two trials registries on 11 December 2018 together with reference checking, citation searching and contact with study authors to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised trials comparing different follow-up strategies for adult cancer survivors following completion of curatively-intended primary cancer treatment, which included at least one of the outcomes listed above. We compared the effectiveness of: 1) non-specialist-led follow-up (i.e. general practitioner (GP)-led, nurse-led, patient-initiated or shared care) versus specialist-led follow-up; 2) less intensive versus more intensive follow-up (based on clinical visits, examinations and diagnostic procedures) and 3) follow-up integrating additional care components relevant for detection of recurrence (e.g. patient symptom education or monitoring, or survivorship care plans) versus usual care.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methodological guidelines by Cochrane and Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC). We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. For each comparison, we present synthesised findings for overall survival and time to detection of recurrence as hazard ratios (HR) and for health-related quality of life, anxiety and depression as mean differences (MD), with 95% confidence intervals (CI). When meta-analysis was not possible, we reported the results from individual studies. For survival and recurrence, we used meta-regression analysis where possible to investigate whether the effects varied with regards to cancer site, publication year and study quality.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 53 trials involving 20,832 participants across 12 cancer sites and 15 countries, mainly in Europe, North America and Australia. All the studies were carried out in either a hospital or general practice setting. Seventeen studies compared non-specialist-led follow-up with specialist-led follow-up, 24 studies compared intensity of follow-up and 12 studies compared patient symptom education or monitoring, or survivorship care plans with usual care. Risk of bias was generally low or unclear in most of the studies, with a higher risk of bias in the smaller trials. Non-specialist-led follow-up compared with specialist-led follow-up It is uncertain how this strategy affects overall survival (HR 1.21, 95% CI 0.68 to 2.15; 2 studies; 603 participants), time to detection of recurrence (4 studies, 1691 participants) or cost (8 studies, 1756 participants) because the certainty of the evidence is very low. Non-specialist- versus specialist-led follow up may make little or no difference to health-related quality of life at 12 months (MD 1.06, 95% CI -1.83 to 3.95; 4 studies; 605 participants; low-certainty evidence); and probably makes little or no difference to anxiety at 12 months (MD -0.03, 95% CI -0.73 to 0.67; 5 studies; 1266 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). We are more certain that it has little or no effect on depression at 12 months (MD 0.03, 95% CI -0.35 to 0.42; 5 studies; 1266 participants; high-certainty evidence). Less intensive follow-up compared with more intensive follow-up Less intensive versus more intensive follow-up may make little or no difference to overall survival (HR 1.05, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.14; 13 studies; 10,726 participants; low-certainty evidence) and probably increases time to detection of recurrence (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.92; 12 studies; 11,276 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Meta-regression analysis showed little or no difference in the intervention effects by cancer site, publication year or study quality. It is uncertain whether this strategy has an effect on health-related quality of life (3 studies, 2742 participants), anxiety (1 study, 180 participants) or cost (6 studies, 1412 participants) because the certainty of evidence is very low. None of the studies reported on depression. Follow-up strategies integrating additional patient symptom education or monitoring, or survivorship care plans compared with usual care: None of the studies reported on overall survival or time to detection of recurrence. It is uncertain whether this strategy makes a difference to health-related quality of life (12 studies, 2846 participants), anxiety (1 study, 470 participants), depression (8 studies, 2351 participants) or cost (1 studies, 408 participants), as the certainty of evidence is very low.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence regarding the effectiveness of the different follow-up strategies varies substantially. Less intensive follow-up may make little or no difference to overall survival but probably delays detection of recurrence. However, as we did not analyse the two outcomes together, we cannot make direct conclusions about the effect of interventions on survival after detection of recurrence. The effects of non-specialist-led follow-up on survival and detection of recurrence, and how intensity of follow-up affects health-related quality of life, anxiety and depression, are uncertain. There was little evidence for the effects of follow-up integrating additional patient symptom education/monitoring and survivorship care plans.

Renin-angiotensin system blocker use and the risk of acute kidney injury after colorectal cancer surgery: a population-based cohort study

OBJECTIVES

It is unknown whether preoperative use of ACE inhibitors (ACE-I) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) affects the risk of acute kidney injury (AKI) after colorectal cancer (CRC) surgery. We assessed the impact of preoperative ACE-I/ARB use on risk of AKI after CRC surgery.

DESIGN

Observational cohort study. Patients were divided into three exposure groups-current, former and non-users-through reimbursed prescriptions within 365 days before the surgery. AKI within 7 days after surgery was defined according to the current Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcome consensus criteria.

SETTING

Population-based Danish medical databases.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 9932 patients undergoing incident CRC surgery during 2005-2014 in northern Denmark were included through the Danish Colorectal Cancer Group Database.

OUTCOME MEASURE

We computed cumulative incidence proportions (risk) of AKI with 95% CIs for current, former and non-users of ACE-I/ARB, including death as a competing risk. We compared current and former users with non-users by computing adjusted risk ratios (aRRs) using log-binomial regression adjusted for demographics, comorbidities and CRC-related characteristics. We stratified the analyses of ACE-I/ARB users to address any difference in impact within relevant subgroups.

RESULTS

Twenty-one per cent were ACE-I/ARB current users, 6.4% former users and 72.3% non-users. The 7-day postoperative AKI risk for current, former and non-users was 26.4% (95% CI 24.6% to 28.3%), 25.2% (21.9% to 28.6%) and 17.8% (17.0% to 18.7%), respectively. The aRRs of AKI were 1.20 (1.09 to 1.32) and 1.16 (1.01 to 1.34) for current and former users, compared with non-users. The relative risk of AKI in current compared with non-users was consistent in all subgroups, except for higher aRR in patients with a history of hypertension.

CONCLUSIONS

Being a current or former user of ACE-I/ARBs is associated with an increased risk of postoperative AKI compared with non-users. Although it may not be a drug effect, users of ACE-I/ARBs should be considered a risk group for postoperative AKI.

Phase II randomized clinical trial of endosonography and PET/CT versus clinical assessment only for follow-up after surgery for upper gastrointestinal cancer (EUFURO study)

Background

Upper gastrointestinal malignancies have a poor prognosis. There is no consensus on how patients should be followed after surgery. The authors hypothesized that a structured follow-up programme including endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) and [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) PET/CT would detect cancer recurrences, leading to more patients being eligible for therapy.

Methods

After surgery with curative intent for adenocarcinomas in the gastro-oesophageal junction, stomach or pancreas, patients were randomized 1 : 1 to standard clinical assessment in the outpatient clinic at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 months after operation, or clinical assessment plus imaging including [18F]FDG PET/CT and EUS. The primary endpoint was number of patients receiving oncological treatment for recurrence. Secondary endpoints were overall and progression-free survival, survival after recurrence detection of isolated locoregional recurrences and risk factors affecting survival.

Results

In total, 183 patients were enrolled, including 93 who underwent standard follow-up and 90 who had follow-up plus imaging. A recurrence was detected in 84 patients within 2 years after surgery (42 in each group), including 33 of 42 patients in the imaging group who were asymptomatic. Some 25 of 42 patients in the imaging group and 14 of 42 in the standard group received chemotherapy (P = 0·028). Although survival after detection of recurrence in asymptomatic patients was significantly longer than that for symptomatic patients (P &lt; 0·001), overall survival from date of surgery in the two treatment groups was comparable.

Conclusion

Follow-up after surgery for upper gastrointestinal cancer with EUS and PET/CT leads to detection of more asymptomatic cancer recurrences and patients referred for treatment without prolonging overall survival. Registration number: NCT02209415 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Follow-up strategies for patients treated for non-metastatic colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

This is the fourth update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2002 and last updated in 2016.It is common clinical practice to follow patients with colorectal cancer for several years following their curative surgery or adjuvant therapy, or both. Despite this widespread practice, there is considerable controversy about how often patients should be seen, what tests should be performed, and whether these varying strategies have any significant impact on patient outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect of follow-up programmes (follow-up versus no follow-up, follow-up strategies of varying intensity, and follow-up in different healthcare settings) on overall survival for patients with colorectal cancer treated with curative intent. Secondary objectives are to assess relapse-free survival, salvage surgery, interval recurrences, quality of life, and the harms and costs of surveillance and investigations.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, on 5 April 2109 we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and Science Citation Index. We also searched reference lists of articles, and handsearched the Proceedings of the American Society for Radiation Oncology. In addition, we searched the following trials registries: ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. We contacted study authors. We applied no language or publication restrictions to the search strategies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included only randomised controlled trials comparing different follow-up strategies for participants with non-metastatic colorectal cancer treated with curative intent.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Two review authors independently determined study eligibility, performed data extraction, and assessed risk of bias and methodological quality. We used GRADE to assess evidence quality.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 19 studies, which enrolled 13,216 participants (we included four new studies in this second update). Sixteen out of the 19 studies were eligible for quantitative synthesis. Although the studies varied in setting (general practitioner (GP)-led, nurse-led, or surgeon-led) and 'intensity' of follow-up, there was very little inconsistency in the results.Overall survival: we found intensive follow-up made little or no difference (hazard ratio (HR) 0.91, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.80 to 1.04: I² = 18%; high-quality evidence). There were 1453 deaths among 12,528 participants in 15 studies. In absolute terms, the average effect of intensive follow-up on overall survival was 24 fewer deaths per 1000 patients, but the true effect could lie between 60 fewer to 9 more per 1000 patients.Colorectal cancer-specific survival: we found intensive follow-up probably made little or no difference (HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.07: I² = 0%; moderate-quality evidence). There were 925 colorectal cancer deaths among 11,771 participants enrolled in 11 studies. In absolute terms, the average effect of intensive follow-up on colorectal cancer-specific survival was 15 fewer colorectal cancer-specific survival deaths per 1000 patients, but the true effect could lie between 47 fewer to 12 more per 1000 patients.Relapse-free survival: we found intensive follow-up made little or no difference (HR 1.05, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.21; I² = 41%; high-quality evidence). There were 2254 relapses among 8047 participants enrolled in 16 studies. The average effect of intensive follow-up on relapse-free survival was 17 more relapses per 1000 patients, but the true effect could lie between 30 fewer and 66 more per 1000 patients.Salvage surgery with curative intent: this was more frequent with intensive follow-up (risk ratio (RR) 1.98, 95% CI 1.53 to 2.56; I² = 31%; high-quality evidence). There were 457 episodes of salvage surgery in 5157 participants enrolled in 13 studies. In absolute terms, the effect of intensive follow-up on salvage surgery was 60 more episodes of salvage surgery per 1000 patients, but the true effect could lie between 33 to 96 more episodes per 1000 patients.Interval (symptomatic) recurrences: these were less frequent with intensive follow-up (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.86; I² = 66%; moderate-quality evidence). There were 376 interval recurrences reported in 3933 participants enrolled in seven studies. Intensive follow-up was associated with fewer interval recurrences (52 fewer per 1000 patients); the true effect is between 18 and 75 fewer per 1000 patients.Intensive follow-up probably makes little or no difference to quality of life, anxiety, or depression (reported in 7 studies; moderate-quality evidence). The data were not available in a form that allowed analysis.Intensive follow-up may increase the complications (perforation or haemorrhage) from colonoscopies (OR 7.30, 95% CI 0.75 to 70.69; 1 study, 326 participants; very low-quality evidence). Two studies reported seven colonoscopic complications in 2292 colonoscopies, three perforations and four gastrointestinal haemorrhages requiring transfusion. We could not combine the data, as they were not reported by study arm in one study.The limited data on costs suggests that the cost of more intensive follow-up may be increased in comparison with less intense follow-up (low-quality evidence). The data were not available in a form that allowed analysis.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The results of our review suggest that there is no overall survival benefit for intensifying the follow-up of patients after curative surgery for colorectal cancer. Although more participants were treated with salvage surgery with curative intent in the intensive follow-up groups, this was not associated with improved survival. Harms related to intensive follow-up and salvage therapy were not well reported.

Time from incident primary cancer until recurrence or second primary cancer: Risk factors and impact in general practice

OBJECTIVE

Specialised follow-up care after cancer treatment is changing towards increased involvement of general practice. To ensure timely detection of new cancer events, knowledge is warranted on the timing of cancer recurrence (CR) and second primary cancer (SPC), including risk factors for CR.

METHODS

This population-based register study included 67,092 patients diagnosed with malignant melanoma, bladder, lung, ovarian, endometrial, colorectal and breast cancer in Denmark in 2008-2016. The time from primary cancer to CR or SPC and risk factors for prolonged time to CR were analysed and stratified on sex and primary cancer type.

RESULTS

Cancer recurrence proportions ranged from 6% to 35%. The risk of CR increased profoundly within the first 3 years and then levelled off, except for breast cancer. A total of 3%-6% of patients had SPC, with monotonously increasing cumulative incidence proportions. Besides primary tumour characteristics, lower educational level, living alone and comorbidity were associated with earlier CR. For example, in female malignant melanoma, HRs and 95% confidence intervals were 0.47 (0.37-0.61) for high educational level, 1.40 (1.16-1.68) for living alone and 2.38 (1.53-3.70) for high comorbidity.

CONCLUSION

The results may inform stratified risk assessment in decision of frequency, location and duration of post-cancer follow-up care.

Development and Validation of a Prediction Model for Organ-Specific Recurrences After Curative Resection of Colon Cancer

BACKGROUND

Early detection of postoperative recurrence is beneficial for patients with cancer; however, optimal surveillance remains an issue. To optimize the follow-up plan, the estimation of an individual patient's risk of recurrence is indispensable.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to establish a statistical model for predicting the risk of organ-specific recurrence after curative resection of colon cancer.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective cohort study at a tertiary referral hospital.

SETTINGS

This study included 1720 patients with colon cancer treated at the University of Tokyo Hospital between 1997 and 2015. Data were retrospectively retrieved from patient medical charts. The risk score was developed using a competing risk model in a derivation cohort (973 patients treated in 1997-2009) and then validated in a validation cohort (747 patients treated in 2010-2015).

PATIENTS

Patients who underwent curative resection for stage I to III colon cancer were included.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The prediction of the incidence of postoperative liver and lung metastasis of colon cancer was measured.

RESULTS

The factors selected for the prediction model for liver metastasis included differentiation, T category, venous invasion, N category, and preoperative CEA level. The model for lung metastasis included sex, lymphatic invasion, venous invasion, N category, preoperative CEA level, and malignant bowel obstruction. During external validation, the area under the curve at 60 months was 0.78 (95% CI, 0.71-0.84) for liver metastasis and 0.72 (95% CI, 0.64-0.81) for lung metastasis.

LIMITATIONS

The generalizability of the model to different healthcare settings remains to be elucidated.

CONCLUSIONS

We developed a prediction model to estimate the risk of recurrence in the liver and lung after curative resection of colon cancer, which demonstrated good discrimination ability in the external validation cohort. Our model can aid clinicians and patients in customizing postoperative surveillance according to an individual patient's risk of organ-specific recurrence. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A977. DESARROLLO Y VALIDACIÓN DE UN MODELO DE PREDICCIÓN PARA RECURRENCIAS ESPECÍFICAS DESPUÉS DE RESECCIÓN CURATIVA DE UN CÁNCER DE COLON: La detección temprana de una recidiva postoperatoria es beneficiosa para los pacientes afectados de cáncer. Sin embargo, la mejor vigilancia sigue siendo un problema. Para optimizar el plan de seguimiento, la estimación del riesgo individual de recurrencia de un paciente es indispensable.

OBJETIVO

Establecer un modelo estadístico para predecir el riesgo de recurrencia en un organo específico luego de la resección curativa de un cáncer de colon. DISEÑO:: Estudio retrospectivo de cohortes en un hospital de referencia terciaria.

AJUSTES

Este estudio incluyó 1720 pacientes con cáncer de colon tratados en el Hospital de la Universidad de Tokio entre 1997 y 2015. Los datos se recuperaron retrospectivamente de las historias clinicas de los pacientes. La puntuación de riesgo fué desarrollada utilizando un modelo de riesgo competitivo en cohortes de derivación (973 pacientes tratados en 1997-2009) y luego se lo validó en cohortes de validación (747 pacientes tratados en 2010-2015).

PACIENTES

Todos aquellos casos que se sometieron a una resección curativa de cáncer de colon en estadio I-III RESULTADOS PRINCIPLES:: La predicción de la incidencia de metástasis hepáticas y pulmonares postoperatorias del cáncer de colon.

RESULTADOS

Los factores seleccionados para el modelo de predicción de metástasis hepáticas incluyeron diferenciación tumoral, categoría T, invasión venosa, categoría N y nivel de antígeno carcinoembrionario preoperatorio. El modelo de predicción de metástasis pulmonar incluyó el sexo del paciente, la invasión linfática, la invasión venosa, la categoría N, el nivel de antígeno carcinoembrionario preoperatorio y la obstrucción intestinal maligna. Durante la validación externa, el área inferior de la curva a 60 meses fue de 0,78 (intervalo de confianza del 95%: 0,71 a 0,84) para las metástasis hepáticas y de 0,72 (intervalo de confianza del 95%: 0,64 a 0,81) para las metástasis pulmonares.

LIMITACIONES

La generalización del presente modelo a diferentes entornos de atención en salud aún no ha podido ser dilucidado.

CONCLUSIONES

Desarrollamos un modelo de predicción para estimar el riesgo de recurrencia en el hígado y el pulmón después de resección curativa de cáncer de colon, éste modelo demostró una buena capacidad de discriminación en las cohortes de validación externa. El modelo puede ayudar a médicos y pacientes a personalizar la vigilancia postoperatoria de acuerdo con el riesgo individual de recurrencia específica en un órgano específico. Vea el Resumen del Video en http://links.lww.com/DCR/A977.

[Follow-up after rectal cancer treatment]

Along with the surgeon, the gastroenterologist and the general practitioner, the radiation oncologist is involved in the follow-up of patients with rectal cancer treated by radiation. Post-treatment follow-up is recommended by major professional expert groups and consists of clinical examination, monitoring of carcinoembryonic antigen, colonoscopy and computed tomography of the abdomen and pelvis. Three recent large phase III randomized trials demonstrated a lack of survival benefit from intensive follow-up strategies in comparison with minimal follow-up. However, a follow-up program is not only important for the detection of an early disease relapse but it can be also used for the identification and the management of long-term toxicity and sequalae related to rectal cancer treatment.

Analysis of Plasma Cell-Free DNA by Ultradeep Sequencing in Patients With Stages I to III Colorectal Cancer

Importance

Novel sensitive methods for detection and monitoring of residual disease can improve postoperative risk stratification with implications for patient selection for adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT), ACT duration, intensity of radiologic surveillance, and, ultimately, outcome for patients with colorectal cancer (CRC).

Objective

To investigate the association of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) with recurrence using longitudinal data from ultradeep sequencing of plasma cell-free DNA in patients with CRC before and after surgery, during and after ACT, and during surveillance.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this prospective, multicenter cohort study, ctDNA was quantified in the preoperative and postoperative settings of stages I to III CRC by personalized multiplex, polymerase chain reaction-based, next-generation sequencing. The study enrolled 130 patients at the surgical departments of Aarhus University Hospital, Randers Hospital, and Herning Hospital in Denmark from May 1, 2014, to January 31, 2017. Plasma samples (n = 829) were collected before surgery, postoperatively at day 30, and every third month for up to 3 years.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Outcomes were ctDNA measurement, clinical recurrence, and recurrence-free survival.

Results

A total of 130 patients with stages I to III CRC (mean [SD] age, 67.9 [10.1] years; 74 [56.9%] male) were enrolled in the study; 5 patients discontinued participation, leaving 125 patients for analysis. Preoperatively, ctDNA was detectable in 108 of 122 patients (88.5%). After definitive treatment, longitudinal ctDNA analysis identified 14 of 16 relapses (87.5%). At postoperative day 30, ctDNA-positive patients were 7 times more likely to relapse than ctDNA-negative patients (hazard ratio [HR], 7.2; 95% CI, 2.7-19.0; P < .001). Similarly, shortly after ACT ctDNA-positive patients were 17 times (HR, 17.5; 95% CI, 5.4-56.5; P < .001) more likely to relapse. All 7 patients who were ctDNA positive after ACT experienced relapse. Monitoring during and after ACT indicated that 3 of the 10 ctDNA-positive patients (30.0%) were cleared by ACT. During surveillance after definitive therapy, ctDNA-positive patients were more than 40 times more likely to experience disease recurrence than ctDNA-negative patients (HR, 43.5; 95% CI, 9.8-193.5 P < .001). In all multivariate analyses, ctDNA status was independently associated with relapse after adjusting for known clinicopathologic risk factors. Serial ctDNA analyses revealed disease recurrence up to 16.5 months ahead of standard-of-care radiologic imaging (mean, 8.7 months; range, 0.8-16.5 months). Actionable mutations were identified in 81.8% of the ctDNA-positive relapse samples.

Conclusions and Relevance

Circulating tumor DNA analysis can potentially change the postoperative management of CRC by enabling risk stratification, ACT monitoring, and early relapse detection.

Intensive follow-up strategies after radical surgery for nonmetastatic colorectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Intensive follow-up after surgery for colorectal cancers is common in clinical practice, but evidence of a survival benefit is limited.

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis on the effects of follow-up strategies for nonmetastatic colorectal cancer.

DATA SOURCES

We searched Medline, Embase, and CENTRAL databases through May 30, 2018.

STUDY SELECTION

We included randomized clinical trials evaluating intensive follow-up versus less follow-up in patients with nonmetastatic colorectal cancer.

INTERVENTIONS

Intensive follow-up.

MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES

Overall survival.

RESULTS

The analyses included 17 trials with a total of 8039 patients. Compared with less follow-up, intensive follow-up significantly improved overall survival in patients with nonmetastatic colorectal cancer after radical surgery (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.74-0.97, P = 0.01; I2 = 30%; high quality). Subgroup analyses showed that differences between intensive-frequency and intensive-test follow-up (P = 0.04) and between short interval and long interval of follow-up (P = 0.02) in favor of the former one.

LIMITATIONS

Clinical heterogeneity of interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with nonmetastatic colorectal cancer after curative resection, intensive follow-up strategy was associated with an improvement in overall survival compared with less follow-up strategy. Intensive-frequency follow-up strategy was associated with a greater reduction in mortality compared with intensive-test follow-up strategy.

Colorectal peritoneal metastases: Optimal management review

The peritoneum is a common site of dissemination for colorrectal cancer, with a poorer prognosis than other sites of metastases. In the last two decades, it has been considered as a locoregional disease progression and treated as such with curative intention treatments. Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is the actual reference treatment for these patients as better survival results have been reached as compared to systemic chemotherapy alone, but its therapeutic efficacy is still under debate. Actual guidelines recommend that the management of colorectal cancer with peritoneal metastases should be led by a multidisciplinary team carried out in experienced centers and consider CRS + HIPEC for selected patients. Accumulative evidence in the last three years suggests that this is a curative treatment that may improve patients disease-free survival, decrease the risk of recurrence, and does not increase the risk of treatment-related mortality. In this review we aim to gather the latest results from referral centers and opinions from experts about the effectiveness and feasibility of CRS + HIPEC for treating peritoneal disease from colorectal malignancies.

Patient-reported outcomes and health-related quality of life for cetuximab versus bevacizumab in metastatic colorectal cancer: a prospective cohort study

PURPOSE

Uncertainty exists regarding Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs) and Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treated with cetuximab or bevacizumab. We conducted a prospective cohort study comparing PROs and HRQoL from both therapies.

METHODS

We assessed PROs and HRQoL from patients treated with cetuximab or bevacizumab using QLQ-C30 and QLQ-CR29 questionnaires at three sequential time points, including baseline. Global Health Status (GHS), functional and symptom scales, and Overall Treatment Utility (derived from clinical and patient-reported outcomes) were compared for the two treatment strategies.

RESULTS

Between January 2017 and April 2018, 44 patients were allocated to cetuximab (n = 19) or bevacizumab (n = 25). Except for RAS mutation status, patient baseline characteristics were generally well balanced across treatment groups. A higher proportion of patients experienced a deterioration in GHS (≥ 10%) in cetuximab arm - 53.8% (95% CI 25.1-80.8%) at 6 weeks and 66.7% (95% CI 29.9-92.5%) at 12 weeks-comparing to bevacizumab cohort: 18.2% (95% CI 5.2-40.3%) at 6 weeks and 12.5% (95% CI:1.6-38.3%) at 12 weeks. Treatment utility rates at 6 and 12 weeks were, respectively, 88.6% and 69.8% for bevacizumab, compared to 49% and 19.1% for cetuximab (p = 0.004), a difference confirmed in subset analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with mCRC, cetuximab-containing regimens led to a progressive negative impact on PROs and global HRQoL, when compared to baseline and bevacizumab. Future research is needed to confirm these results. Our findings demonstrate the value of PROs when assessing comparative effectiveness of different treatment regimens.

Health and Economic Impact of Intensive Surveillance for Distant Recurrence After Curative Treatment of Colon Cancer: A Mathematical Modeling Study

BACKGROUND

Intensive surveillance strategies are currently recommended for patients after curative treatment of colon cancer, with the aim of secondary prevention of recurrence. Yet, intensive surveillance has not yielded improvements in overall patient survival compared with minimal follow-up, and more intensive surveillance may be costlier.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to estimate the quality-adjusted life-years, economic costs, and cost-effectiveness of various surveillance strategies after curative treatment of colon cancer.

DESIGN

A Markov model was calibrated to reflect the natural history of colon cancer recurrence and used to estimate surveillance costs and outcomes.

SETTINGS

This was a decision-analytic model.

PATIENTS

Individuals entered the model at age 60 years after curative treatment for stage I, II, or III colon cancer. Other initial age groups were assessed in secondary analyses.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

We estimated the gains in quality-adjusted life-years achieved by early detection and treatment of recurrence, as well as the economic costs of surveillance under various strategies.

RESULTS

Cost-effective strategies for patients with stage I colon cancer improved quality-adjusted life-expectancy by 0.02 to 0.06 quality-adjusted life-years at an incremental cost of $1702 to $13,019. For stage II, they improved quality-adjusted life expectancy by 0.03 to 0.09 quality-adjusted life-years at a cost of $2300 to $14,363. For stage III, they improved quality-adjusted life expectancy by 0.03 to 0.17 quality-adjusted life-years for a cost of $1416 to $17,631. At a commonly cited willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000 per quality-adjusted life-year, the most cost-effective strategy for patients with a history of stage I or II colon cancer was liver ultrasound and chest x-ray annually. For those with a history of stage III colon cancer, the optimal strategy was liver ultrasound and chest x-ray every 6 months with CEA measurement every 6 months.

LIMITATIONS

The study was limited by model structure assumptions and uncertainty around the values of the model's parameters.

CONCLUSIONS

Given currently available data and within the limitations of a model-based decision-analytic approach, the effectiveness of routine intensive surveillance for patients after treatment of colon cancer appears, on average, to be small. Compared with testing using lower cost imaging, currently recommended strategies are associated with cost-effectiveness ratios that indicate low value according to well-accepted willingness-to-pay thresholds in the United States. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A921.

Plasma microRNA Levels Combined with CEA and CA19-9 in the Follow-Up of Colorectal Cancer Patients

Colorectal cancer (CRC) ranks among the most common cancers worldwide. Surgical removal remains the best strategy for treatment of resectable tumors. An important part of caring for patients after surgery is monitoring for early detection of a possible relapse of the disease. Efforts are being made to improve the sensitivity and specificity of routinely used carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) with the use of additional biomarkers such as microRNAs. The aim of our study was to evaluate the prognostic potential of microRNAs and their use as markers of disease recurrence. The quantitative estimation of CEA, CA19-9, and 22 selected microRNAs (TaqMan Advanced miRNA Assays) was performed in 85 paired (preoperative and postoperative) blood plasma samples of CRC patients and in samples taken during the follow-up period. We have revealed a statistically significant decrease in plasma levels for miR-20a, miR-23a, miR-210, and miR-223a (p = 0.0093, p = 0.0013, p = 0.0392, and p = 0.0214, respectively) after surgical removal of the tumor tissue. A statistically significant relation to prognosis (overall survival; OS) was recorded for preoperative plasma levels of miR-20a, miR-21, and miR-23a (p = 0.0236, p = 0.0316, and p =0.0271, respectively) in a subgroup of patients who underwent palliative surgery. The best discrimination between patients with favorable and unfavorable outcomes was achieved by a combination of CEA, CA19-9 with miR-21, miR-20a, and miR-23a (p < 0.0001). The use of these microRNAs for early disease recurrence detection was affected by a low specificity in comparison with CEA and CA19-9. CEA and CA19-9 had high specificity but low sensitivity. Our results show the benefit of combining currently used standard biomarkers and microRNAs for precise prognosis estimation.

The Disease-Free Interval Between Resection of Primary Colorectal Malignancy and the Detection of Hepatic Metastases Predicts Disease Recurrence But Not Overall Survival

Introduction

The disease-free interval (DFI) between resection of primary colorectal cancer (CRC) and diagnosis of liver metastases is considered an important prognostic indicator; however, recent analyses in metastatic CRC found limited evidence to support this notion.

Objective

The current study aims to determine the prognostic value of the DFI in patients with resectable colorectal liver metastases (CRLM).

Methods

Patients undergoing first surgical treatment of CRLM at three academic centers in The Netherlands were eligible for inclusion. The DFI was defined as the time between resection of CRC and detection of CRLM. Baseline characteristics and Kaplan–Meier survival estimates were stratified by DFI. Cox regression analyses were performed for overall (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS), with the DFI entered as a continuous measure using a restricted cubic spline function with three knots.

Results

In total, 1374 patients were included. Patients with a shorter DFI more often had lymph node involvement of the primary, more frequently received neoadjuvant chemotherapy for CRLM, and had higher number of CRLM at diagnosis. The DFI significantly contributed to DFS prediction (p =0.002), but not for predicting OS (p =0.169). Point estimates of the hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) for a DFI of 0 versus 12 months and 0 versus 24 months were 1.284 (1.114–1.480) and 1.444 (1.180–1.766), respectively, for DFS, and 1.111 (0.928–1.330) and 1.202 (0.933–1.550), respectively, for OS.

Conclusion

The DFI is of prognostic value for predicting disease recurrence following surgical treatment of CRLM, but not for predicting OS outcomes.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1245/s10434-019-07481-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The association between post-treatment surveillance testing and survival in stage II and III colon cancer patients: An observational comparative effectiveness study

BACKGROUND

The best strategy for surveillance testing in stage II and III colon cancer patients following curative treatment is unknown. Previous randomized controlled trials have suffered from design limitations and yielded conflicting evidence. This observational comparative effectiveness research study was conducted to provide new evidence on the relationship between post-treatment surveillance testing and survival by overcoming the limitations of previous clinical trials.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database combined with Medicare claims (SEER-Medicare). Stage II and III colon cancer patients diagnosed from 2002 to 2009 and between 66 to 84 years of age were eligible. Adherence to surveillance testing guidelines-including carcinoembryonic antigen, computed tomography, and colonoscopy-was assessed for each year of follow-up and overall for up to three years post-treatment. Patients were categorized as More Adherent and Less Adherent according to testing guidelines. Patients who received no surveillance testing were excluded. The primary outcome was 5-year cancer-specific survival; 5-year overall survival was the secondary outcome. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) using generalized boosted models was employed to balance covariates between the two surveillance groups. IPTW-adjusted survival curves comparing the two groups were performed by the Kaplan-Meier method. Weighted Cox regression was used to obtain hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the relative risk of death for the Less Adherent group versus the More Adherent group.

RESULTS

There were 17,860 stage II and III colon cancer cases available for analysis. Compared to More Adherent patients, Less Adherent patients experienced slightly better 5-year cancer-specific survival (HR = 0.83, 95% CI 0.76-0.90) and worse 5-year noncancer-specific survival (HR = 1.61, 95% CI 1.43-1.82) for years 2 to 5 of follow-up. There was no difference between the groups in overall survival (HR = 1.04, 95% CI 0.98-1.10).

CONCLUSIONS

More surveillance testing did not improve 5-year cancer-specific survival compared to less testing and there was no difference between the groups in overall survival. The results of this study support a risk-stratified, shared decision-making surveillance strategy to optimize clinical and patient-centered outcomes for colon cancer patients in the survivorship phase of care.