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

Identification of a ferroptosis-related gene signature predicting recurrence in stage II/III colorectal cancer based on machine learning algorithms

Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most prevalent cancer types globally. A survival paradox exists due to the inherent heterogeneity in stage II/III CRC tumor biology. Ferroptosis is closely related to the progression of tumors, and ferroptosis-related genes can be used as a novel biomarker in predicting cancer prognosis. Methods: Ferroptosis-related genes were retrieved from the FerrDb and KEGG databases. A total of 1,397 samples were enrolled in our study from nine independent datasets, four of which were integrated as the training dataset to train and construct the model, and validated in the remaining datasets. We developed a machine learning framework with 83 combinations of 10 algorithms based on 10-fold cross-validation (CV) or bootstrap resampling algorithm to identify the most robust and stable model. C-indice and ROC analysis were performed to gauge its predictive accuracy and discrimination capabilities. Survival analysis was conducted followed by univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses to evaluate the performance of identified signature. Results: The ferroptosis-related gene (FRG) signature was identified by the combination of Lasso and plsRcox and composed of 23 genes. The FRG signature presented better performance than common clinicopathological features (e.g., age and stage), molecular characteristics (e.g., BRAF mutation and microsatellite instability) and several published signatures in predicting the prognosis of the CRC. The signature was further stratified into a high-risk group and low-risk subgroup, where a high FRG signature indicated poor prognosis among all collected datasets. Sensitivity analysis showed the FRG signature remained a significant prognostic factor. Finally, we have developed a nomogram and a decision tree to enhance prognosis evaluation. Conclusion: The FRG signature enabled the accurate selection of high-risk stage II/III CRC population and helped optimize precision treatment to improve their clinical outcomes.

The implication of gut microbiota in recovery from gastrointestinal surgery

Recovery from gastrointestinal (GI) surgery is often interrupted by the unpredictable occurrence of postoperative complications, including infections, anastomotic leak, GI dysmotility, malabsorption, cancer development, and cancer recurrence, in which the implication of gut microbiota is beginning to emerge. Gut microbiota can be imbalanced before surgery due to the underlying disease and its treatment. The immediate preparations for GI surgery, including fasting, mechanical bowel cleaning, and antibiotic intervention, disrupt gut microbiota. Surgical removal of GI segments also perturbs gut microbiota due to GI tract reconstruction and epithelial barrier destruction. In return, the altered gut microbiota contributes to the occurrence of postoperative complications. Therefore, understanding how to balance the gut microbiota during the perioperative period is important for surgeons. We aim to overview the current knowledge to investigate the role of gut microbiota in recovery from GI surgery, focusing on the crosstalk between gut microbiota and host in the pathogenesis of postoperative complications. A comprehensive understanding of the postoperative response of the GI tract to the altered gut microbiota provides valuable cues for surgeons to preserve the beneficial functions and suppress the adverse effects of gut microbiota, which will help to enhance recovery from GI surgery.

Identification and validation of an inflammation-related lncRNAs signature for improving outcomes of patients in colorectal cancer

Background: Colorectal cancer is the fourth most deadly cancer worldwide. Although current treatment regimens have prolonged the survival of patients, the prognosis is still unsatisfactory. Inflammation and lncRNAs are closely related to tumor occurrence and development in CRC. Therefore, it is necessary to establish a new prognostic signature based on inflammation-related lncRNAs to improve the prognosis of patients with CRC. Methods: LASSO-penalized Cox analysis was performed to construct a prognostic signature. Kaplan-Meier curves were used for survival analysis and ROC curves were used to measure the performance of the signature. Functional enrichment analysis was conducted to reveal the biological significance of the signature. The R package "maftool" and GISTIC2.0 algorithm were performed for analysis and visualization of genomic variations. The R package "pRRophetic", CMap analysis and submap analysis were performed to predict response to chemotherapy and immunotherapy. Results: An effective and independent prognostic signature, IRLncSig, was constructed based on sixteen inflammation-related lncRNAs. The IRLncSig was proved to be an independent prognostic indicator in CRC and was superior to clinical variables and the other four published signatures. The nomograms were constructed based on inflammation-related lncRNAs and detected by calibration curves. All samples were classified into two groups according to the median value, and we found frequent mutations of the TP53 gene in the high-risk group. We also found some significantly amplificated regions in the high-risk group, 8q24.3, 20q12, 8q22.3, and 20q13.2, which may regulate the inflammatory activity of cancer cells in CRC. Finally, we identified chemotherapeutic agents for high-risk patients and found that these patients were more likely to respond to immunotherapy, especially anti-CTLA4 therapy. Conclusion: In short, we constructed a new signature based on sixteen inflammation-related lncRNAs to improve the outcomes of patients in CRC. Our findings have proved that the IRLncSig can be used as an effective and independent marker for predicting the survival of patients with CRC.

Reevaluating the Evidence for Intensive Postoperative Extracolonic Surveillance for Nonmetastatic Colorectal Cancer

OBJECTIVES

The FACS, GILDA, and COLOFOL trials have cast doubt on the value of intensive extracolonic surveillance for resected nonmetastatic colorectal cancer and by extension metastasectomy. We reexamined this pessimistic interpretation. We evaluate an alternative explanation: insufficient power to detect a realistically sized survival benefit that may be clinically meaningful.

METHODS

A microsimulation model of postdiagnosis colorectal cancer was constructed assuming an empirically plausible efficacy for metastasectomy and thus surveillance. The model was used to predict the large-sample mortality reduction expected for each trial and the implied statistical power. A potential recurrence imbalance in the FACS trial was investigated. Goodness of fit between model predictions and trial results were evaluated. Downstream life expectancy was estimated and power calculations performed for future trials evaluating surveillance and metastasectomy.

RESULTS

For all 3 trials, the model predicted a mortality reduction of ≤5% and power of <10%. The FACS recurrence imbalance likely led to a large relative bias (>2.5) in the hazard ratio for overall survival favoring control. After adjustment, both COLOFOL and FACS results were consistent with model predictions (P>.5). A 2.6 (95% credible interval 0.5-5.1) and 3.6 (95% credible interval 0.8-7.0) month increase in life expectancy is predicted comparing intensive extracolonic surveillance-routine computed tomography scans and carcinoembryonic antigen assays-with 1 computed tomography scan at 12 months or no surveillance, respectively. An adequately sized surveillance trial is not feasible. A metastasectomy trial should randomize at least 200 to 300 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Recent trial results do not warrant de novo skepticism of metastasectomy nor targeted extracolonic surveillance. Given the potential for clinically meaningful life-expectancy gain and significant uncertainty, a trial of metastasectomy is needed.

The immunomodulatory effect of ketamine in colorectal cancer surgery: a randomized-controlled trial

PURPOSE

Ketamine's inhibitory action on the N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor and anti-inflammatory effects may provide beneficial immunomodulation in cancer surgery. We investigated the effect of subanesthetic-dose ketamine as an adjunct to desflurane anesthesia on natural killer (NK) cell activity and inflammation in patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery.

METHODS

A total of 100 patients were randomly assigned to a control or ketamine group. The ketamine group received a bolus of 0.25 mg·kg^-1 ketamine five minutes before the start of surgery, followed by an infusion 0.05 mg·kg^-1·hr^-1 until the end of surgery; the control group received a similar amount of normal saline. We measured NK cell activity and proinflammatory cytokines (interleukin-6 [IL-6] and tumour necrosis factor-α [TNF-α]) before surgery and one, 24, and 48 hr after surgery. C-reactive protein (CRP) was measured before surgery and one, three, and five days after surgery. Carcinoembryonic antigen and cancer recurrence/metastasis were assessed two years after surgery.

RESULTS

The NK cell activity was significantly decreased after surgery in both groups, but the change was not different between groups in the linear mixed model analysis (P = 0.47). Changes in IL-6, TNF-α, CRP, and carcinoembryonic antigen levels were not different between groups (P = 0.27, 0.69, 0.99, and 0.97, respectively). Cancer recurrence within 2 years after surgery was similar between groups (10% vs 8%, P = 0.62).

CONCLUSIONS

Intraoperative low-dose ketamine administration did not convey any favourable impacts on overall postoperative NK cell activity, inflammatory responses, and prognosis in colorectal cancer surgery patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

www.clinicaltrial.gov (NCT03273231); registered 6 September 2017.

Intratumoural immune signature to identify patients with primary colorectal cancer who do not require follow-up after resection: an observational study

BACKGROUND

Following surgical and adjuvant treatment of primary colorectal cancer, many patients are routinely followed up with axial imaging (most commonly computerised tomography imaging) and blood carcinoembryonic antigen (a tumour marker) testing. Because fewer than one-fifth of patients will relapse, a large number of patients are followed up unnecessarily.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether or not the intratumoural immune signature could identify a cohort of patients with a relapse rate so low that follow-up is unnecessary.

DESIGN

An observational study based on a secondary tissue collection of the tumours from participants in the FACS (Follow-up After Colorectal Cancer Surgery) trial.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumour tissue was obtained from 550 out of 1202 participants in the FACS trial. Tissue microarrays were constructed and stained for cluster of differentiation (CD)3+ and CD45RO+ T lymphocytes as well as standard haematoxylin and eosin staining, with a view to manual and, subsequently, automated cell counting.

RESULTS

The tissue microarrays were satisfactorily stained for the two immune markers. Manual cell counting proved possible on the arrays, but manually counting the number of cores for the entire study was found to not be feasible; therefore, an attempt was made to use automatic cell counting. Although it is clear that this approach is workable, there were both hardware and software problems; therefore, reliable data could not be obtained within the time frame of the study.

LIMITATIONS

The main limitations were the inability to use machine counting because of problems with both hardware and software, and the loss of critical scientific staff. Findings from this research indicate that this approach will be able to count intratumoural immune cells in the long term, but whether or not the original aim of the project proved possible is not known.

CONCLUSIONS

The project was not successful in its aim because of the failure to achieve a reliable counting system.

FUTURE WORK

Further work is needed to perfect immune cell machine counting and then complete the objectives of this study that are still relevant.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN41458548.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 2. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Metachronous metastasis confined to isolated lymph node after curative treatment of colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

The incidence of lymph node metastasis (LNM) in colorectal cancer is known to be 2-6%, but little data are available regarding metachronous metastasis confined to isolated LN. The aim of this study is to determine the distribution of isolated LNM and the risk factors for survival of isolated LNM in colorectal cancer.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed consecutive patients with colorectal adenocarcinoma between January 2008 and December 2015 at a tertiary referral center. A total of 5902 patients with biopsy-proven colorectal adenocarcinoma treated via surgery were included. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards analysis was used to identify prognostic factors for overall survival.

RESULTS

Of the 5902 patients, recurrent cases were 1326. Among the relapsed patients, 301 patients had isolated LNM (22.69%). Para-aortic (48.8%), pelvic (29.9%), and Lung hilum (10.0%) were the most common sites of isolated LNM; there were statistically significant differences in the distribution of isolated LNM between the colon and rectal cancer (p = 0.02). Approximately 80% of isolated LNM were diagnosed within 3 years. Multidisciplinary therapy for LNM, diagnosis time to LNM, the T-stage, and histological type of primary cancer were identified as independent prognostic factors for overall survival.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that multidisciplinary management is a potentially effective treatment strategy for isolated LNM. Since time to LNM, the T-stage, and histological type are prognostic factors, an active follow-up program for colorectal cancer is required.

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.

The Role of the Intestinal Microbiome on Colorectal Cancer Pathogenesis and its Recurrence Following Surgery

Colorectal cancer is the result of multiple genetic mutations that drive normal cells to adenoma and then carcinoma. Recent technology has evolved to allow for an in-depth examination of the microbiota and it has become clear that many components of the intestinal microbiome play a role in promoting carcinogenesis. This review aims to describe the potential mechanisms that lead to the dysbiosis that initiates tumor formation and that influence the development of cancer recurrence following surgical resection. We further discuss how manipulation of the microbiome may be a future novel strategy to prevent both primary and secondary colorectal cancer. While we discuss how bacterial communities and individual strains can promote cancer, the microbiome is individualized, dynamic, and complex, and our understanding of its role in carcinogenesis is still in its infancy.

Natural agents inhibit colon cancer cell proliferation and alter microbial diversity in mice

The current study was undertaken to investigate the effect of differentially formulated polyphenolic compound Essential Turmeric Oil-Curcumin (ETO-Cur), and Tocotrienol-rich fraction (TRF) of vitamin E isomers on colorectal cancer (CRC) cells that produce aggressive tumors. Combinations of ETO-Cur and TRF were used to determine the combinatorial effects of ETO-Cur and TRF-mediated inhibition of growth of CRC cells in vitro and HCT-116 cells xenograft in SCID mice. 16S rRNA gene sequence profiling was performed to determine the outcome of gut microbial communities in mice feces between control and ETO-Cur-TRF groups. Bacterial identifications were validated by performing SYBR-based Real Time (RT) PCR. For metagenomics analysis to characterize the microbial communities, multiple software/tools were used, including Quantitative Insights into Microbial Ecology (QIIME) processing tool. We found ETO-Cur and TRF to synergize and that the combination of ETO-Cur-TRF significantly inhibited growth of HCT-116 xenografts in SCID mice. This was associated with a marked alteration in microbial communities and increased microbial OTU (operation taxonomic unit) number. The relative abundance of taxa was increased and the level of microbial diversity after 34 days of combinatorial treatment was found to be 44% higher over the control. Shifting of microbial family composition was observed in ETO-Cur-TRF treated mice as evidenced by marked reductions in Bacteroidaceae, Ruminococcaceae, Clostridiales, Firmicutes and Parabacteroids families, compared to controls. Interestingly, during the inhibition of tumor growth in ETO-Cur treated mice, probiotic Lactobacillaceae and Bifidobacteriaceae were increased by 20-fold and 6-fold, respectively. The relative abundance of anti-inflammatory Clostridium XIVa was also increased in ETO-Cur-TRF treated mice when compared with the control. Our data suggest that ETO-Cur-TRF show synergistic effects in inhibiting colorectal cancer cell proliferation in vitro and in mouse xenografts in vivo, and might induce changes in microbial diversity in mice.

Impact of a reduction in follow-up frequency on life expectancy in uterine cervical cancer patients

BACKGROUND

The appropriate interval of post-treatment follow-up appointments for uterine cervical cancer is unclear. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of reducing the frequency of post-treatment follow-up examinations on life expectancy and medical expenses in cervical cancer patients.

METHODS

Cervical cancer patients who were treated with radiotherapy between 2008 and 2017, underwent a less frequent follow-up program, and subsequently developed recurrent disease were included in consecutive group (CG). Non-randomized groups of cervical cancer patients who underwent a frequent follow-up program after radiotherapy between 1997 and 2007, and subsequently developed recurrent disease were also identified through a chart review and served as a comparison group (primary group [PG]). Clinical data regarding the primary disease, follow-up, recurrence, and survival were collected. Univariate and multivariate analyses of predictors of survival were performed.

RESULTS

A total of 263 recurrent cervical cancer patients (PG: 154, CG: 109) were included in the current study. A reduction in follow-up frequency of up to 40% did not increase the frequency of symptomatic recurrence (PG: vs. CG: 31.2% vs. 35.8%, p = 0.43) or reduce the median overall survival periods of recurrent cervical cancer patients (PG vs. CG: 32 months vs. 36 months, p = 0.15). However, the reduction in the follow-up frequency significantly reduced follow-up costs.

CONCLUSION

Reducing the frequency of follow-up by up to 40% did not result in shorter overall survival compared with a conventional follow-up program. The results of this study provide a rationale for future studies investigating the optimal follow-up schedule for patients with cervical cancer.

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.

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.

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.

Colonoscopy Surveillance After Colorectal Cancer: the Optimal Interval for Follow-Up

PURPOSE

Patients who have undergone curative surgery for colorectal cancer are at risk of developing a metachronous colorectal tumour or anastomotic recurrence. The aim of this study was to determine the incidence of recurrent colorectal cancer in a cohort of patients who participated in a colonoscopy surveillance programme.

METHODS

This single-centre retrospective observational cohort study included patients who underwent curative surgery for colorectal cancer between 2005 and 2015. All reports of postoperative colonoscopies were retrieved to calculate the incidence rates of recurrence and metachronous colorectal cancer.

RESULTS

Of 2420 patients, 1644 (67.9%) underwent at least one postoperative colonoscopy and 776 (32.1%) did not. In 1087 patients, colonoscopy was performed in the first 18 months after surgery, which detected 34 (3.1%) instances of metachronous colorectal tumours or anastomotic recurrence. Thirty-three additional patients were also diagnosed with recurrent colorectal cancer, but the tumours were detected by other diagnostic modalities or detected perioperatively, rather than by colonoscopy.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with a history of colorectal cancer have an increased risk for a second colorectal tumour. Therefore, we recommend a colonoscopic surveillance programme with the first colonoscopy performed 1 year after curative surgery, which is in accordance with national guidelines.

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.

Role of surveillance imaging and endoscopy in colorectal cancer follow-up: Quality over quantity?

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a prevalent disease and represents a major cause of morbidity and mortality in the developed world. Intensive post-treatment surveillance is routinely recommended by major expert groups for early stage (II and III) CRC survivors because previous meta-analyses showed a modest, but significant survival benefit. This practice has been recently challenged based on data emerging from several large phase III randomized trials that demonstrated a lack of survival benefit from intensive surveillance strategies. In addition, findings from cost-effectiveness analyses of such an approach are inconsistent. Data on real-world practice, specifically adherence to these follow-up guidelines, are also limited. The debate is especially controversial in resected stage IV patients where there are currently no clear guidelines for follow-up. In an era of personalized medicine, there may be a shift towards a more risk-adapted approach to better define the optimal follow-up strategy. In this article, we review the evidence and highlight the role of surveillance in CRC survivors.

Rectal Cancer Surveillance-Recurrence Patterns and Survival Outcomes from a Cohort Followed up Beyond 10 Years

AIM

The intensity and duration of surveillance for rectal cancer after surgical resection remain contentious. We evaluated the pattern of recurrences in a rectal cancer cohort followed up beyond 10 years.

METHODS

An analysis was performed on a retrospective database of 326 patients with rectal cancer who underwent curative surgical resection from 1999 to 2007. The above study duration was chosen to ensure at least 10 years of follow-up. Data on patient demographics, peri-operative details, and follow-up outcomes were extracted from the database. The pattern of recurrences and investigative modality that detected recurrences was identified. Patients were followed up until either year 2016 or the day of their demise.

RESULTS

Two hundred seventeen patients (66.6%) were male and 109 patients (33.3%) female. Median age was 64 years old. Close to a third of the patients received adjuvant therapy (34%). Among the 326 patients studied, 29.8% of (97/326) patients developed recurrence. 7.7% (25/326) had loco-regional recurrence while 22.1% (72/326) had distant metastasis. Median time to recurrence was 16 months (4-83) and 18 months (3-81), respectively. Computed tomography scan was the best modality to detect both loco-regional and distant recurrences (48% in loco-regional and 41.7% in distant metastasis). The most common site of distant metastasis is the lung (34.7%). The salvage rate for loco-regional and distant recurrences was 52 and 12.5%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The predominant pattern of recurrence in rectal cancer is distant disease. Surveillance regimes may need to be altered to increase early detection of distant metastases.

Adherence to postresection colorectal cancer surveillance at National Cancer Institute-designated Comprehensive Cancer Centers

Guidelines recommend surveillance after resection of colorectal cancer (CRC), but rates of adherence to surveillance are variable and have not been studied at National Cancer Institute (NCI)‐designated Comprehensive Cancer Centers. The aim of this study was to determine rates of adherence to standard postresection CRC surveillance recommendations including physician visits, carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), computed tomography (CT), and colonoscopy after CRC resection at three NCI‐designated centers.

Data on patients with resected CRC from 2010 to 2017 were reviewed. Adherence to physician visits was defined as having at least two visits within 14 months after surgical resection. CEA adherence was defined as having at least four CEA levels drawn within 14 months. CT and colonoscopy adherence were defined as completing each between 10 and 14 months from surgical resection. Chi‐square test and logistic regression analyses were performed for overall adherence and adherence to individual components.

A total of 241 CRC patients were included. Overall adherence was 23%. While adherence to physician visits was over 98%, adherence to CEA levels, CT, and colonoscopy were each less than 50%. Center was an independent predictor of adherence to CEA, CT, and/or colonoscopy. Stage III disease predicted CT adherence, while distance traveled of 40 miles or less predicted colonoscopy adherence.

Overall adherence to postresection CRC guideline‐recommended care is low at NCI‐designated centers. Adherence rates to surveillance vary by center, stage, and distance traveled for care. Understanding factors associated with adherence is critical to ensure CRC patients benefit from postresection surveillance.

Association Between Intensity of Posttreatment Surveillance Testing and Detection of Recurrence in Patients With Colorectal Cancer

Importance

Surveillance testing is performed after primary treatment for colorectal cancer (CRC), but it is unclear if the intensity of testing decreases time to detection of recurrence or affects patient survival.

Objective

To determine if intensity of posttreatment surveillance is associated with time to detection of CRC recurrence, rate of recurrence, resection for recurrence, or overall survival.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A retrospective cohort study of patient data abstracted from the medical record as part of a Commission on Cancer Special Study merged with records from the National Cancer Database. A random sample of patients (n=8529) diagnosed with stage I, II, or III CRC treated at a Commission on Cancer-accredited facilities (2006-2007) with follow-up through December 31, 2014.

Exposures

Intensity of imaging and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) surveillance testing derived empirically at the facility level using the observed to expected ratio for surveillance testing during a 3-year observation period.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was time to detection of CRC recurrence; secondary outcomes included rates of resection for recurrent disease and overall survival.

Results

A total of 8529 patients (49% men; median age, 67 years) at 1175 facilities underwent surveillance imaging and CEA testing within 3 years after their initial CRC treatment. The cohort was distributed by stage as follows: stage I, 25.0%; stage II, 35.2%; and stage III, 39.8%. Patients treated at high-intensity facilities-4188 patients (49.1%) for imaging and 4136 (48.5%) for CEA testing-underwent a mean of 2.9 (95% CI, 2.8-2.9) imaging scans and a mean of 4.3 (95% CI, 4.2-4.4) CEA tests. Patients treated at low-intensity facilities-4341 patients (50.8%) for imaging and 4393 (51.5%) for CEA testing-underwent a mean of 1.6 (95% CI, 1.6-1.7) imaging scans and a mean of 1.6 (95% CI, 1.6-1.7) CEA tests. Imaging and CEA surveillance intensity were not associated with a significant difference in time to detection of cancer recurrence. The median time to detection of recurrence was 15.1 months (IQR, 8.2-26.3) for patients treated at facilities with high-intensity imaging surveillance and 16.0 months (IQR, 7.9-27.2) with low-intensity imaging surveillance (difference, -0.95 months; 95% CI, -2.59 to 0.68; HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.90-1.09) and was 15.9 months (IQR, 8.5-27.5) for patients treated at facilities with high-intensity CEA testing and 15.3 months (IQR, 7.9-25.7) with low-intensity CEA testing (difference, 0.59 months; 95% CI, -1.33 to 2.51; HR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.90-1.11). No significant difference existed in rates of resection for cancer recurrence (HR for imaging, 1.22; 95% CI, 0.99-1.51 and HR for CEA testing, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.91-1.39) or overall survival (HR for imaging, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.94-1.08 and HR for CEA testing, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.89-1.03) among patients treated at facilities with high- vs low-intensity imaging or CEA testing surveillance.

Conclusions and Relevance

Among patients treated for stage I, II, or III CRC, there was no significant association between surveillance intensity and detection of recurrence.

Trial Registration

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02217865.

Post-treatment surveillance testing of patients with colorectal cancer and the association with survival: protocol for a retrospective cohort study of the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database

INTRODUCTION

Although the colorectal cancer (CRC) mortality rate has significantly improved over the past several decades, many patients will have a recurrence following curative treatment. Despite this high risk of recurrence, adherence to CRC surveillance testing guidelines is poor which increases cancer-related morbidity and potentially, mortality. Several randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with varying surveillance strategies have yielded conflicting evidence regarding the survival benefit associated with surveillance testing. However, due to differences in study protocols and limitations of sample size and length of follow-up, the RCT may not be the best study design to evaluate this relationship. An observational comparative effectiveness research study can overcome the sample size/follow-up limitations of RCT designs while assessing real-world variability in receipt of surveillance testing to provide much needed evidence on this important clinical issue. The gap in knowledge that this study will address concerns whether adherence to National Comprehensive Cancer Network CRC surveillance guidelines improves survival.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Patients with colon and rectal cancer aged 66-84 years, who have been diagnosed between 2002 and 2008 and have been included in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare database, are eligible for this retrospective cohort study. To minimise bias, patients had to survive at least 12 months following the completion of treatment. Adherence to surveillance testing up to 5 years post-treatment will be assessed in each year of follow-up and overall. Binomial regression will be used to assess the association between patients' characteristics and adherence. Survival analysis will be conducted to assess the association between adherence and 5-year survival.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study was approved by the National Cancer Institute and the Institutional Review Board of the University of Central Florida. The results of this study will be disseminated by publishing in the peer-reviewed scientific literature, presentation at national/international scientific conferences and posting through social media.

Variation in routine follow-up care after curative treatment for head-and-neck cancer: a population-based study in Ontario

Background

The actual practices of routine follow-up after curative treatment for head-and-neck cancer are unknown, and existing guidelines are not evidence-based.

Methods

This retrospective population-based study used administrative data to describe 5 years of routine follow-up care in 3975 head-and-neck cancer patients diagnosed between 2007 and 2012 in Ontario.

Results

The mean number of visits per year declined during the follow-up period (from 7.8 to 1.9, p < 0.001). The proportion of patients receiving visits in concordance with guidelines ranged from 80% to 45% depending on the follow-up year. In at least 50% of patients, 1 head, neck, or chest imaging test was performed in the first follow-up year; that proportion subsequently declined (p < 0.001). Factors associated with follow-up practices included comorbidity, tumour site, treatment, geographic region, and physician specialty (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

Given current practice variation and the absence of an evidence-based standard, the challenge in identifying a single optimal follow-up strategy might be better addressed with a harmonized approach to providing individualized follow-up care.

What carcinoembryonic antigen level should trigger further investigation during colorectal cancer follow-up? A systematic review and secondary analysis of a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Following primary surgical and adjuvant treatment for colorectal cancer, many patients are routinely followed up with blood carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) testing.

OBJECTIVE

To determine how the CEA test result should be interpreted to inform the decision to undertake further investigation to detect treatable recurrences.

DESIGN

Two studies were conducted: (1) a Cochrane review of existing studies describing the diagnostic accuracy of blood CEA testing for detecting colorectal recurrence; and (2) a secondary analysis of data from the two arms of the FACS (Follow-up After Colorectal Surgery) trial in which CEA testing was carried out.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

The secondary analysis was based on data from 582 patients recruited into the FACS trial between 2003 and 2009 from 39 NHS hospitals in England with access to high-volume services offering surgical treatment of metastatic recurrence and followed up for 5 years. CEA testing was undertaken in general practice.

RESULTS

In the systematic review we identified 52 studies for meta-analysis, including in aggregate 9717 participants (median study sample size 139, interquartile range 72-247). Pooled sensitivity at the most commonly recommended threshold in national guidelines of 5 µg/l was 71% [95% confidence interval (CI) 64% to 76%] and specificity was 88% (95% CI 84% to 92%). In the secondary analysis of FACS data, the diagnostic accuracy of a single CEA test was less than was suggested by the review [area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) 0.74, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.80]. At the commonly recommended threshold of 5 µg/l, sensitivity was estimated as 50.0% (95% CI 40.1% to 59.9%) and lead time as about 3 months. About four in 10 patients without a recurrence will have at least one false alarm and six out of 10 tests will be false alarms (some patients will have multiple false alarms, particularly smokers). Making decisions to further investigate based on the trend in serial CEA measurements is better (AUC for positive trend 0.85, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.91), but to maintain approximately 70% sensitivity with 90% specificity it is necessary to increase the frequency of testing in year 1 and to apply a reducing threshold for investigation as measurements accrue.

LIMITATIONS

The reference standards were imperfect and the main analysis was subject to work-up bias and had limited statistical precision and no external validation.

CONCLUSIONS

The results suggest that (1) CEA testing should not be used alone as a triage test; (2) in year 1, testing frequency should be increased (to monthly for 3 months and then every 2 months); (3) the threshold for investigating a single test result should be raised to 10 µg/l; (4) after the second CEA test, decisions to investigate further should be made on the basis of the trend in CEA levels; (5) the optimal threshold for investigating the CEA trend falls over time; and (6) continuing smokers should not be monitored with CEA testing. Further research is needed to explore the operational feasibility of monitoring the trend in CEA levels and to externally validate the proposed thresholds for further investigation.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42015019327 and Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN93652154.

FUNDING

The main FACS trial and this substudy were funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Emergency resection surgery for colorectal cancer: Patterns of recurrent disease and survival

AIM

To evaluate prognostic pathological factors associated with early metachronous disease and adverse long-term survival in these patients.

METHODS

Clinical and histological features were analysed retrospectively over an eight-year period for prognostic impact on recurrent disease and overall survival in patients undergoing curative resection of a primary colorectal cancer.

RESULTS

A total of 266 patients underwent curative surgery during the study period. The median age of the study cohort was 68 year (range 26 to 91) with a follow-up of 7.9 years (range 4.6 to 12.6). Resection was undertaken electively in 225 (84.6%) patients and emergency resection in 35 (13.2%). Data on timing of surgery was missing in 6 patients. Recurrence was noted in 67 (25.2%) during the study period and was predominantly early within 3 years (82.1%) and involved hepatic metastasis in 73.1%. Emergency resection (OR = 3.60, P = 0.001), T4 stage (OR = 4.33, P < 0.001) and lymphovascular invasion (LVI) (OR = 2.37, P = 0.032) were associated with higher risk of recurrent disease. Emergency resection, T4 disease and a high lymph node ratio (LNR) were strong independent predictors of adverse long-term survival.

CONCLUSION

Emergency surgery is associated with adverse disease free and long-term survival. T4 disease, LVI and LNR provide strong independent predictive value of long-term outcome and can inform surveillance strategies to improve outcomes.

Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum (JSCCR) guidelines 2016 for the treatment of colorectal cancer

Japanese mortality due to colorectal cancer is on the rise, surpassing 49,000 in 2015. Many new treatment methods have been developed during recent decades. The Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum Guidelines 2016 for the treatment of colorectal cancer (JSCCR Guidelines 2016) were prepared to show standard treatment strategies for colorectal cancer, to eliminate disparities among institutions in terms of treatment, to eliminate unnecessary treatment and insufficient treatment, and to deepen mutual understanding between health-care professionals and patients by making these Guidelines available to the general public. These Guidelines were prepared by consensus reached by the JSCCR Guideline Committee, based on a careful review of the evidence retrieved by literature searches, and in view of the medical health insurance system and actual clinical practice settings in Japan. Therefore, these Guidelines can be used as a tool for treating colorectal cancer in actual clinical practice settings. More specifically, they can be used as a guide to obtaining informed consent from patients and choosing the method of treatment for each patient. As a result of the discussions held by the Guideline Committee, controversial issues were selected as Clinical Questions, and recommendations were made. Each recommendation is accompanied by a classification of the evidence and a classification of recommendation categories based on the consensus reached by the Guideline Committee members. Here we present the English version of the JSCCR Guidelines 2016.

Prospective Trial Evaluating the Surgical Anastomosis at One-Year Colorectal Cancer Surveillance: CT Colonography Versus Optical Colonoscopy and Implications for Patient Care

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of CT colonography versus optical colonoscopy for neoplastic involvement at the surgical anastomosis 1 year after curative-intent colorectal cancer resection.

DESIGN, SETTING, PATIENTS, AND INTERVENTIONS

Two hundred one patients (mean age, 58.6 years; 117 men, 84 women) underwent same-day contrast-enhanced CT colonography and colonoscopy approximately 1 year (mean, 12.1 months; median, 11.9 months) after colorectal cancer resection as part of a prospective, multicenter trial. All patients enrolled were without clinical evidence of disease and considered low risk for recurrence (stage I-III).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Suspected neoplastic lesions within 5 cm of the colonic anastomosis were recorded at CT colonography, with subsequent colonoscopy performed for the same, with segmental unblinding of colonography findings. Anastomotic region biopsy or polypectomy was performed at the endoscopist's discretion.

RESULTS

None of the 201 patients had intraluminal anastomotic cancer recurrence or advanced neoplasia (or metachronous cancers). CT colonography detected extramural perianastomotic recurrence in 2 patients (1.0%); neither was detected at colonoscopy. Only 2 patients (1.0%; 2/201) were called positive at CT colonography for intraluminal anastomotic nondiminutive lesions (7- to 8-mm polyps), which were confirmed at colonoscopy but nonneoplastic at histopathology. At optical colonoscopy, the anastomosis was deemed abnormal and/or biopsied in 10.0% (20/201), yielding only 1 nondiminutive benign neoplasm (7-mm tubular adenoma).

LIMITATIONS

The lack of luminal cancer recurrence in our lower-risk cohort precludes assessment of sensitivity for detection, rendering the study underpowered in this regard. Potential cost savings of combined CT/CT colonography over the standard CT/colonoscopy approach were not assessed.

CONCLUSIONS

Relevant intraluminal anastomotic pathology appears to be very uncommon 1 year after colorectal cancer resection in lower-risk cohorts. Unlike colonoscopy, diagnostic contrast-enhanced CT colonography effectively evaluates both the intra- and extraluminal aspects of the anastomosis. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A471.

Psychological effects of the intensified follow-up of the CEAwatch trial after treatment for colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

The aim of the study was to evaluate psychological effects of the state-of-art intensified follow-up protocol for colorectal cancer patients in the CEAwatch trial.

METHOD

At two time points during the CEAwatch trial questionnaires regarding patients' attitude towards follow-up, patients' psychological functioning and patients' experiences and expectations were sent to participants by post. Linear mixed models were fitted to assess the influences and secular trends of the intensified follow-up on patients' attitude towards follow-up and psychological functioning. As secondary outcome, odds ratios were calculated using ordinal logistic mixed model to compare patients' experiences to their expectations, as well as their experiences at two different time points.

RESULTS

No statistical significant effects of the intensified follow-up were found on patients' attitude towards the follow-up and psychological functioning variables. Patients had high expectations of the intensified follow-up and their experiences at the second time point were more positive compared to the scores at the first time point.

CONCLUSION

The intensified follow-up protocol posed no adverse effects on patients' attitude towards follow-up and psychological functioning. In general, patients were more nervous and anxious at the start of the new follow-up protocol, had high expectations of the new follow-up protocol and were troubled by the nuisances of the blood sample testing. As they spent more time in the follow-up and became more adapted to it, the nervousness and anxiety decreased and the preference for the frequent blood test became high in replacement of conversations with the doctors.

A randomised controlled trial to assess the cost-effectiveness of intensive versus no scheduled follow-up in patients who have undergone resection for colorectal cancer with curative intent

BACKGROUND

Intensive follow-up after surgery for colorectal cancer is common practice but lacks a firm evidence base.

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether or not augmenting symptomatic follow-up in primary care with two intensive methods of follow-up [monitoring of blood carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) levels and scheduled imaging] is effective and cost-effective in detecting the recurrence of colorectal cancer treatable surgically with curative intent.

DESIGN

Randomised controlled open-label trial. Participants were randomly assigned to one of four groups: (1) minimum follow-up (n = 301), (2) CEA testing only (n = 300), (3) computerised tomography (CT) only (n = 299) or (4) CEA testing and CT (n = 302). Blood CEA was measured every 3 months for 2 years and then every 6 months for 3 years; CT scans of the chest, abdomen and pelvis were performed every 6 months for 2 years and then annually for 3 years. Those in the minimum and CEA testing-only arms had a single CT scan at 12-18 months. The groups were minimised on adjuvant chemotherapy, gender and age group (three strata).

SETTING

Thirty-nine NHS hospitals in England with access to high-volume services offering surgical treatment of metastatic recurrence.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 1202 participants who had undergone curative treatment for Dukes' stage A to C colorectal cancer with no residual disease. Adjuvant treatment was completed if indicated. There was no evidence of metastatic disease on axial imaging and the post-operative blood CEA level was ≤ 10 µg/l.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcome Surgical treatment of recurrence with curative intent. Secondary outcomes Time to detection of recurrence, survival after treatment of recurrence, overall survival and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained.

RESULTS

Detection of recurrence During 5 years of scheduled follow-up, cancer recurrence was detected in 203 (16.9%) participants. The proportion of participants with recurrence surgically treated with curative intent was 6.3% (76/1202), with little difference according to Dukes' staging (stage A, 5.1%; stage B, 7.4%; stage C, 5.6%; p = 0.56). The proportion was two to three times higher in each of the three more intensive arms (7.5% overall) than in the minimum follow-up arm (2.7%) (difference 4.8%; p = 0.003). Surgical treatment of recurrence with curative intent was 2.7% (8/301) in the minimum follow-up group, 6.3% (19/300) in the CEA testing group, 9.4% (28/299) in the CT group and 7.0% (21/302) in the CEA testing and CT group. Surgical treatment of recurrence with curative intent was two to three times higher in each of the three more intensive follow-up groups than in the minimum follow-up group; adjusted odds ratios (ORs) compared with minimum follow-up were as follows: CEA testing group, OR 2.40, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02 to 5.65; CT group, OR 3.69, 95% CI 1.63 to 8.38; and CEA testing and CT group, OR 2.78, 95% CI 1.19 to 6.49. Survival A Kaplan-Meier survival analysis confirmed no significant difference between arms (log-rank p = 0.45). The baseline-adjusted Cox proportional hazards ratio comparing the minimum and intensive arms was 0.87 (95% CI 0.67 to 1.15). These CIs suggest a maximum survival benefit from intensive follow-up of 3.8%. Cost-effectiveness The incremental cost per patient treated surgically with curative intent compared with minimum follow-up was £40,131 with CEA testing, £43,392 with CT and £85,151 with CEA testing and CT. The lack of differential impact on survival resulted in little difference in QALYs saved between arms. The additional cost per QALY gained of moving from minimum follow-up to CEA testing was £25,951 and for CT was £246,107. When compared with minimum follow-up, combined CEA testing and CT was more costly and generated fewer QALYs, resulting in a negative incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (-£208,347) and a dominated policy.

LIMITATIONS

Although this is the largest trial undertaken at the time of writing, it has insufficient power to assess whether or not the improvement in detecting treatable recurrence achieved by intensive follow-up leads to a reduction in overall mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Rigorous staging to detect residual disease is important before embarking on follow-up. The benefit of intensive follow-up in detecting surgically treatable recurrence is independent of stage. The survival benefit from intensive follow-up is unlikely to exceed 4% in absolute terms and harm cannot be absolutely excluded. A longer time horizon is required to ascertain whether or not intensive follow-up is an efficient use of scarce health-care resources. Translational analyses are under way, utilising tumour tissue collected from Follow-up After Colorectal Surgery trial participants, with the aim of identifying potentially prognostic biomarkers that may guide follow-up in the future.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN41458548.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 21, No. 32. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Survival analysis of the CEAwatch multicentre clustered randomized trial

BACKGROUND

The CEAwatch randomized trial showed that follow-up with intensive carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) monitoring (CEAwatch protocol) was better than care as usual (CAU) for early postoperative detection of colorectal cancer recurrence. The aim of this study was to calculate overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS).

METHODS

For all patients with recurrence, OS and DSS were compared between patients detected by the CEAwatch protocol versus CAU, and by the method of detection of recurrence, using Cox regression models.

RESULTS

Some 238 patients with recurrence were analysed (7·5 per cent); a total of 108 recurrences were detected by CEA blood test, 64 (55·2 per cent) within the CEAwatch protocol and 44 (41·9 per cent) in the CAU group (P = 0·007). Only 16 recurrences (13·8 per cent) were detected by patient self-report in the CEAwatch group, compared with 33 (31·4 per cent) in the CAU group. There was no significant improvement in either OS or DSS with the CEAwatch protocol compared with CAU: hazard ratio 0·73 (95 per cent 0·46 to 1·17) and 0·78 (0·48 to 1·28) respectively. There were no differences in survival when recurrence was detected by CT versus CEA measurement, but both of these methods yielded better survival outcomes than detection by patient self-report.

CONCLUSION

There was no direct survival benefit in favour of the intensive programme, but the CEAwatch protocol led to a higher proportion of recurrences being detected by CEA-based blood test and reduced the number detected by patient self-report. This is important because detection of recurrence by blood test was associated with significantly better survival than patient self-report, indirectly supporting use of the CEAwatch protocol.

The association of p53 expression levels with clinicopathological features and prognosis of patients with colon cancer following surgery

The present study aimed to examine the association of p53 expression levels with clinicopathological features and prognosis of patients with colon cancer following surgery. The present study included 484 patients with colon cancer that underwent colon resection between December 2003 and December 2011. All follow-ups were censored in December 2013 with a median follow-up time of 43 months. Kaplan-Meier survival curves and Cox regression analysis were used to determine predictors for overall survival rate. p53 expression status (positive or negative) was significantly different between patient groups when categorized by age distribution, disease course, tumor location, maximum tumor diameter, depth of tumor invasion, Dukes' stage, distant metastasis and lymph node (LN) metastasis (P<0.05). Cox regression analysis revealed that age, surgery type, histological subtypes, tumor size, tumor location, LN metastasis, distant metastases, Dukes' stage and p53 expression status are independent factors influencing the survival rate of patients with colon cancer following surgery (P<0.05). Therefore, the present study revealed that the loss of p53 expression levels in tumors was associated with aggressive clinicopathological characteristics in patients with colon cancer.

Colorectal Cancer: Postoperative Follow-up and Surveillance

Follow-up and surveillance form an important aspect of care in patients with colorectal cancers (CRC). Most recurrences will occur within 2 years of surgery and 90% by 5 years. Follow up protocols have not been well defined in stage I disease and the approach should be individualized. As 40% of patients with stages II and III will develop recurrences, intensive postoperative follow-up strategy is recommended for them. It includes visit to the clinician for clinical examination, serum carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), computed tomography (CT) of the chest and abdomen, colonoscopy, and flexible proctosigmoidoscopy in rectal cancers. Surveillance should be undertaken in those who are medically fit for repeat surgical procedures or for chemoradiotherapy. The concept of intensive post operative surveillance is based on the fact that some of these patients can have resectable/curable recurrence.

Screening and Surveillance of Colorectal Cancer Using CT Colonography

OPINION STATEMENT

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a common cancer among throughout the world with the highest rates in developed countries such as the USA. There is ample evidence demonstrating the beneficial effects of colorectal cancer screening and, largely thanks to screening initiatives and insurance coverage, epidemiologic analyses show a steady decline in both CRC incidence and mortality rates over the last several decades. However, screening rates for CRC in the US remain low and approximately 1 in 3 adults between the ages of 50 and 75 years has not undergone any form of CRC screening, highlighting the need for additional accurate, minimally invasive, and acceptable screening options. Computed tomography colonography (CTC) has emerged as a viable alternative to existing CRC screening tests and research continues to enhance our knowledge regarding the ability of CTC to play a meaningful role in optimizing CRC screening in areas where it is available. This review highlights recent publications of salient research in the field of CTC. CTC continues to evolve, with lower radiation doses and greater evidence of its ability to identify clinical relevant colonic and extracolonic abnormalities. Recent evidence has bolstered the currently recommended CTC screening interval of 5 years and has reiterated the cost-effectiveness of CTC as a CRC screening examination. Additionally, emerging evidence suggests a role for CTC as a polyp and CRC surveillance modality as well as a preoperative adjunct in patients with established CRC. Data supporting the safety and patient acceptance of CTC also has continued to accumulate and CTC has recently been endorsed as an appropriate test for CRC screening in multiple important guidelines and recommendations. CTC is poised to become an important option in the CRC screening and surveillance arena.

[Disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in rheumatoid arthritis patients with a history of colorectal cancer]

BACKGROUND

Cells of the adaptive immune system are relevant for the anti-tumor immune response; therefore, the basal therapy with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD) in rheumatoid arthritis patients with a history of gastrointestinal cancer must be carefully considered.

OBJECTIVE

This article presents the evidence regarding colorectal cancer (CRC) and rheumatoid arthritis.

METHOD AND RESULTS

The article is based on a PubMed search as well as a search in congress abstracts of the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) and the American College of Rheumatology (ACR). Current recommendations regarding screening and follow-up of CRC are summarized for clinically active rheumatologists. The current status of therapy and future therapeutic options are presented. The lower incidence of CRC in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients and the incidence under treatment with various DMARDs are described. The treatment options for RA patients in different tumor situations, e.g. during cytostatic therapy, palliative and curative situations are discussed, as well as the available evidence. In spite of the unsatisfactory level of evidence, conclusions and practical considerations for use by rheumatologists in clinical practice are discussed.

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

BACKGROUND

It is common clinical practice to follow patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) 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. This is the second update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2002 and first updated in 2007.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of intensive follow-up for patients with non-metastatic colorectal cancer treated with curative intent.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched CENTRAL (2016, Issue 3), MEDLINE (1950 to May 20th, 2016), Embase (1974 to May 20th, 2016), CINAHL (1981 to May 20th, 2016), and Science Citation Index (1900 to May 20th, 2016). We also searched reference lists of articles, and handsearched the Proceedings of the American Society for Radiation Oncology (2011 to 2014). In addition, we searched the following trials registries (May 20th, 2016): ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. We further contacted study authors. No language or publication restrictions were applied to the search strategies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently determined trial eligibility, performed data extraction, and assessed methodological quality.

MAIN RESULTS

We studied 5403 participants enrolled in 15 studies. (We included two new studies in this second update.) 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 no evidence of a statistical effect with intensive follow-up (hazard ratio (HR) 0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78 to 1.02; I² = 4%; P = 0.41; high-quality evidence). There were 1098 deaths among 4786 participants enrolled in 12 studies.Colorectal cancer-specific survival: this did not differ with intensive follow-up (HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.12; I² = 0%; P = 0.45; moderate-quality evidence). There were 432 colorectal cancer deaths among 3769 participants enrolled in seven studies.Relapse-free survival: we found no statistical evidence of effect with intensive follow-up (HR 1.03, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.18; I² = 5%; P = 0.39; moderate-quality evidence). There were 1416 relapses among 5253 participants enrolled in 14 studies.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%; P = 0.14; high-quality evidence). There were 457 episodes of salvage surgery in 5157 participants enrolled in 13 studies.Interval (symptomatic) recurrences: these were less frequent with intensive follow-up (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.86; I² = 66%; P = 0.007; moderate-quality evidence). Three hundred and seventy-six interval recurrences were reported in 3933 participants enrolled in seven studies.Intensive follow-up did not appear to affect quality of life, anxiety, nor depression (reported in three studies).Harms from colonoscopies did not differ with intensive follow-up (RR 2.08, 95% CI 0.11 to 40.17; moderate-quality evidence). In two studies, there were seven colonoscopic complications in 2112 colonoscopies.

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 group, this was not associated with improved survival. Harms related to intensive follow-up and salvage therapy were not well reported.

Incidence, Patterns, and Predictors of Locoregional Recurrence in Colon Cancer

BACKGROUND

Locoregional recurrence (LR) in colon cancer is uncommon but often incurable, while the factors associated with it are unclear. The purpose of this study was to identify patterns and predictors of LR after curative resection for colon cancer.

METHODS

All patients who underwent colon cancer resection with curative intent between 1994 and 2008 at a tertiary referral center were identified from a prospectively maintained institutional database. The association of LR with clinicopathologic and treatment characteristics was determined using univariable and multivariable analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 1397 patients were included with a median follow-up of 7.8 years; 635 (45%) were female, and the median age was 69 years. LR was detected in 61 (4.4%) patients. Median time to LR was 21 months. On multivariable analysis, the independent predictors of LR were disease stage [hazard ratio (HR) for Stage II 4.6, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.05-19.9, HR for Stage III 10.8, 95% CI 2.6-45.8], bowel obstruction (HR 3.8, 95% CI 1.9-7.4), margin involvement (HR 4.1, 95% CI 1.9-8.6), lymphovascular invasion (HR 1.9, 95% CI 1.06-3.5), and local tumor invasion (fixation to another structure, perforation, or presence of associated fistula, HR 2.2, 95% CI 1.1-4.5). Adjuvant chemotherapy was not associated with reduced LR in patients with either Stage II or Stage III tumors.

CONCLUSIONS

Adherence to oncologic surgical principles in colon cancer resection results in low rates of LR, which is associated with tumor-dependent factors. Recognition of these factors can help to determine appropriate postoperative surveillance.

Survivorship care plans for people with colorectal cancer: do they reflect the research evidence?

AIM

In the present study, we synthesized the published literature about the psychosocial aspects of colorectal cancer (crc) survivorship to support an update of the evidentiary base of the survivorship care plans (scps) created in our jurisdiction.

METHODS

The psychosocial topics identified in the crc scps created by two different initiatives in our province were used as search criteria: quality of life (qol), sexual function, fatigue, and lifestyle behaviors. An umbrella review was conducted to retrieve the best possible evidence. Only reviews that investigated the intended outcomes in crc survivors and those with moderate-to-high methodologic quality scores were included.

RESULTS

Of 462 retrieved reports, eight reviews met the inclusion criteria for the synthesis. Of those eight, six investigated the challenges of crc survivors and two investigated the effect of physical activity on survivor well-being. Our results indicate that emotional and physical challenges are common in crc survivors and that physical activity is associated with clinically important benefits for the fatigue and physical functioning of crc survivors.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study findings update the evidence and indicate that existing scps in our province concerning the physical and emotional challenges of crc survivors reflect the evidence at the time of their issue. However, the literature concerning cancer risks specific to crc survivors is lacking. Although systematic reviews are considered to be the "gold standard" in knowledge synthesis, our findings suggest that much remains to be done in the area of synthesis research to better guide practice in cancer survivorship.

Optimizing adjuvant therapy and survivorship care of stage III colon cancer

The MOSAIC trial demonstrated nearly a decade ago that the addition of oxaliplatin to 5-fluorouracil improves outcomes in the adjuvant treatment of colon cancer, but no new agents have been shown to be superior to standard FOLFOX therapy. Oncologists have refined the use of oxaliplatin containing regimens to optimize outcomes, improved patient selection for multi-agent chemotherapy and expanded survivorship care to meet the needs of the growing number of survivors. In this article, we review the historical contexts of current therapy, appropriate staging investigations, the importance of timely initiation of therapy and key survivorship issues. We also discuss exciting opportunities for change, including reduced duration of adjuvant chemotherapy and the use of circulating tumor cells and DNA in surveillance.

The role of periodic serum CA19-9 test in surveillance after colorectal cancer surgery

BACKGROUND

The serum carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) test is mainly used for postoperative surveillance of colorectal cancer patients in Western and Japanese guidelines, but evidence to support the use of CA19-9 is scarce.

METHODS

We analyzed the cohort data from 22 institutions of the Japanese Study Group for Postoperative Follow-up of Colorectal Cancer. Patients who had undergone curative surgery for primary colorectal cancer (pathological stage I-III) between 1997 and 2006 were eligible for analysis. Sensitivities of CEA and CA19-9 at the time of recurrence and the contribution of CA19-9 to detecting recurrences were assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 17,833 patients were eligible, and the overall recurrence rate was 18 %. The sensitivity of CA19-9 in detecting recurrence was lower than that of CEA (29 vs. 57 %). Among patients with recurrence, recurrences were first suspected in 96 % using standard surveillance modalities (CEA elevation, CT scan, clinic visit, and colonoscopy), whereas recurrences were suspected because of CA19-9 elevation in an estimated 1.3 % of patients. With regard to prognosis after recurrences, the sensitivity of CA19-9 was lower than that of CEA in the detection of surgically treatable recurrences (22 vs. 49 %). In terms of overall survival after recurrences, CA19-9 and CEA had almost comparable hazard ratios (1.66 and 1.48, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggested that the sensitivity of serum CA19-9 test is low, and that adding it to the current standard surveillance strategies is not beneficial.

Tumor markers used in monitoring the tumor recurrence in patients with colorectal cancer

Background and aims

The aim of this study was to investigate the value of serum carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and carbohydrate antigen (CA 19-9) correlated with some tissue molecules as predictive markers for recurrence in colon cancer.

Methods

A total of 30 patients diagnosed with colon cancer stage II or III who underwent optimal surgery were enrolled in study. Tumor markers CEA and CA 19-9 were determined before surgery. Tumor samples were prepared using tissue microarray kit (TMA) then stained for different cellular markers (Ki 67, HER2, BCL2, CD56, CD4, CD8) and analyzed using Inforatio programme for quantitative determination. All patients received standard adjuvant treatment, which consisted of eight cycles chemotherapy type XELOX. The patients were followed up for 3 years.

Results

Upon 3 years follow-up, 67% of patients developed tumor relapse, the most common site of metastasis being the liver. No correlations were observed between either serum or tissue tumor markers and the risk of tumor relapse.

Conclusion

Over 50% of patients with colon cancer who had optimal treatment developed metastasis. No statistically significant predictive value for investigated molecules was found. Future studies are needed to confirm the use of molecular markers in monitoring patients with colorectal cancer

Is Survival for Patients with Resectable Lung Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Comparable to Those with Resectable Liver Disease? Results from the South Australian Metastatic Colorectal Registry

BACKGROUND

Hepatic resection for colorectal (CRC) metastasis is considered a standard of care. Resection of metastasis isolated to lung also is considered potentially curable, although there is still some variation in recommendations. We explore outcomes for patients undergoing lung resection for mCRC, with the liver resection group as the comparator.

METHODS

South Australian (SA) metastatic CRC registry data were analysed to assess patient characteristics and survival outcomes for patients suitable for lung or liver resection.

RESULTS

A total of 3241 patients are registered on the database to December 2014. One hundred two (3.1 %) patients were able to undergo a lung resection compared with 420 (12.9 %) who had a liver resection. Of the lung resection patients, 62 (61 %) presented with lung disease only, 21 % initially presented with liver disease only, 11 % had both lung and liver, and 7 % had brain or pelvic disease resection. Of these patients, 79 % went straight to surgery without any neoadjuvant treatment and 34 % had lung resection as the only intervention. Chemotherapy for metastatic disease was given more often to liver resection patients: 76.9 versus 53.9 %, p = 0.17. Median overall survival is 5.6 years for liver resection and has not been reached for lung resection (hazard ratio 0.82, 95 % confidence interval 0.54-1.24, p = 0.33).

CONCLUSIONS

Lung resection was undertaken in 3.1 % of patients with mCRC in our registry. These data provide further support for long-term survival after lung resection in mCRC, survival that is at least comparable to those who undergo resection for liver metastasis in mCRC.

The Value of Continuity between Primary Care and Surgical Care in Colon Cancer

BACKGROUND

Improving continuity between primary care and cancer care is critical for improving cancer outcomes and curbing cancer costs. A dimension of continuity, we investigated how regularly patients receive their primary care and surgical care for colon cancer from the same hospital and whether this affects mortality and costs.

METHODS

Using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program Registry (SEER)-Medicare data, we performed a retrospective cohort study of stage I-III colon cancer patients diagnosed between 2000 and 2009. There were 23,305 stage I-III colon cancer patients who received primary care in the year prior to diagnosis and underwent operative care for colon cancer. Patients were assigned to the hospital where they had their surgery and to their primary care provider's main hospital, and then classified according to whether these two hospitals were same or different. Outcomes examined were hazards for all-cause mortality, subhazard for colon cancer specific mortality, and generalized linear estimate for costs at 12 months, from propensity score matched models.

RESULTS

Fifty-two percent of stage I-III colon patients received primary care and surgical care from the same hospital. Primary care and surgical care from the same hospital was not associated with reduced all-cause or colon cancer specific mortality, but was associated with lower inpatient, outpatient, and total costs of care. Total cost difference was $8,836 (95% CI $2,746-$14,577), a 20% reduction in total median cost of care at 12 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Receiving primary care and surgical care at the same hospital, compared to different hospitals, was associated with lower costs but still similar survival among stage I-III colon cancer patients. Nonetheless, health care policy which encourages further integration between primary care and cancer care in order to improve outcomes and decrease costs will need to address the significant proportion of patients receiving health care across more than one hospital.

Circulating cell-free nucleic acids and platelets as a liquid biopsy in the provision of personalized therapy for lung cancer patients

Lung cancer is the predominant cause of cancer-related mortality in the world. The majority of patients present with locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Treatment for NSCLC is evolving from the use of cytotoxic chemotherapy to personalized treatment based on molecular alterations. Unfortunately, the quality of the available tumor biopsy and/or cytology material is not always adequate to perform the necessary molecular testing, which has prompted the search for alternatives. This review examines the use of circulating cell-free nucleic acids (cfNA), consisting of both circulating cell-free (tumoral) DNA (cfDNA-ctDNA) and RNA (cfRNA), as a liquid biopsy in lung cancer. The development of sensitive and accurate techniques such as Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS); Beads, Emulsion, Amplification, and Magnetics (BEAMing); and Digital PCR (dPCR), have made it possible to detect the specific genetic alterations (e.g. EGFR mutations, MET amplifications, and ALK and ROS1 translocations) for which targeted therapies are already available. Moreover, the ability to detect and quantify these tumor mutations has enabled the follow-up of tumor dynamics in real time. Liquid biopsy offers opportunities to detect resistance mechanisms, such as the EGFR T790M mutation in the case of EGFR TKI use, at an early stage. Several studies have already established the predictive and prognostic value of measuring ctNA concentration in the blood. To conclude, using ctNA analysis as a liquid biopsy has many advantages and allows for a variety of clinical and investigational applications.

Symptomatic and Asymptomatic Colon Cancer Recurrence: A Multicenter Cohort Study

PURPOSE

Follow-up after colorectal cancer treatment with curative intent aims to detect recurrences and metachronous tumors in a timely manner. The objective of this study is to assess how recurrent disease presents and is diagnosed within scheduled follow-up according to the national guideline for the Netherlands.

METHODS

In a retrospective study of consecutive patients with colorectal cancer who were treated in 2 hospitals in the Netherlands, we identified patients with colon cancer who underwent surgery with curative intent between January 2007 and December 2012. Patients who developed recurrent disease were included for further analyses.

RESULTS

From a total of 446 patients who were been treated for colon carcinoma with curative intent, 74 developed recurrent disease (17%). In 43 of those patients (58%), recurrent disease was detected during a scheduled follow-up visit, with 41 (95%) being asymptomatic. Tumor marker testing, imaging, and colonoscopy identified all of these recurrences. In the remaining 31 patients with recurrent disease (42%), recurrence was found during non-scheduled interval visits; 26 (84%) of these patients were symptomatic. The most prevalent symptoms were abdominal pain, altered defecation, and weight loss. Patients with asymptomatic recurrences had a significantly higher overall survival compared with patients with symptomatic recurrences.

CONCLUSIONS

In this cohort, 42% of the recurrences after initial curative treatment for colon cancer were found during non-scheduled interval visits, mainly based on symptoms. Primary care physicians who take care of patients whose colon cancer might recur should be aware of the relatively high rate of symptomatic recurrences and of typical presenting symptoms.

Impact of the Surveillance Interval on the Survival of Patients Who Undergo Curative Surgery for Gastric Cancer

BACKGROUND

For patients who undergo gastrectomy for gastric cancer, systematic follow-up evaluation to detect recurrent lesions is recommended, although the benefits of a surveillance program using short-term imaging studies have not been evaluated.

METHODS

This study reviewed the clinical data of patients who underwent curative surgery for gastric cancer using a prospective database. Patients with recurrence were classified according to surveillance interval as follows: ≤3, 3-6, and 6-12 months.

RESULTS

Of the 2785 patients who underwent curative surgery for gastric cancer, 376 (13.5 %) had intraabdominal recurrences, excluding the stomach. Multivariable analysis showed that a short surveillance interval did not increase the post-recurrence survival duration (with 6-12 months as the reference: ≤3 months: hazard ratio [HR] 0.954; 95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.689-1.323; 3-6 months: HR 0.994, 95 % CI 0.743-1.330). In addition, short surveillance intervals did not increase overall survival (with 6-12 months as the reference: ≤3 months: HR 0.969; 95 % CI 0.699-1.342; 3-6 months: HR 0.955; 95 % CI 0.711-1.285). In contrast to the surveillance interval, age, cancer stage, symptoms at recurrence, and recurrence time after gastrectomy were factors associated with both post-recurrence survival and overall survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the detection of recurrence before symptoms helped to prolong both post-recurrence survival and overall survival, shortening the surveillance interval to less than 6 months did not improve either the patient's post-recurrence survival or overall survival. Hence, it is not recommended that asymptomatic patients undergo surveillance involving imaging studies more often than once a year.