Is follow-up of colorectal cancer patients worthwhile?

Patient-centered developments in colon- and rectal cancer with a multidisciplinary international team: From translational research to national guidelines

Rarely, scientific developments centered around the patient as a whole are published. Our multidisciplinary group, headed by gastrointestinal surgeons, applied this research philosophy considering the most important aspects of the diseases "colon- and rectal cancer" in the long-term developments. Good expert cooperation/knowledge at the Comprehensive Cancer Center Ulm (CCCU) were applied in several phase III trials for multimodal treatments of primary tumors (MMT) and metastatic diseases (involving nearly 2000 patients and 64 centers), for treatment individualization of MMT and of metastatic disease, for psycho-oncology/quality of life involving the patients' wishes, and for disease prevention. Most of the targets initially were heavily rejected/discussed in the scientific communities, but now have become standards in treatments and national guidelines or are topics in modern translational research protocols involving molecular biology for e.g., "patient centered individualized treatment". In this context we also describe the paths we had to tread in order to realize our new goals, which at the end were highly beneficial for the patients from many points of view. This description is also important for students and young researchers who, with an actual view on our recent developments, might want to know how medical progress was achieved.

Characteristics Associated With Nonreceipt of Surveillance Testing and the Relationship With Survival in Stage II and III Colon Cancer

We investigated characteristics of patients with colon cancer that predicted nonreceipt of posttreatment surveillance testing and the subsequent associations between surveillance status and survival outcomes. This was a retrospective cohort study of the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database combined with Medicare claims. Patients diagnosed between 2002 and 2009 with disease stages II and III and who were between 66 and 84 years of age were eligible. A minimum of 3 years' follow-up was required, and patients were categorized as having received any surveillance testing (any testing) versus none (no testing). Poisson regression was used to obtain risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals for the relative likelihood of No Testing. Cox models were used to obtain subdistribution hazard ratios with 95% confidence intervals for 5- and 10-year cancer-specific and noncancer deaths. There were 16,009 colon cancer cases analyzed. Patient characteristics that predicted No Testing included older age, Black race, stage III disease, and chemotherapy. Patients in the No Testing group had an increased rate of 10-year cancer death that was greater for patients with stage III disease (subdistribution hazard ratio = 1.79, 95% confidence interval: 1.48, 2.17) than those with stage II disease (subdistribution hazard ratio = 1.41, 95% confidence interval: 1.19, 1.66). Greater efforts are needed to ensure all patients receive the highest quality medical care after diagnosis of colon cancer.

Surveillance Colonoscopy in Older Stage I Colon Cancer Patients and the Association With Colon Cancer-Specific Mortality

OBJECTIVES

Guideline-issuing groups differ regarding the recommendation that patients with stage I colon cancer receive surveillance colonoscopy after cancer-directed surgery. This observational comparative effectiveness study was conducted to evaluate the association between surveillance colonoscopy and colon cancer-specific mortality in early stage patients.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database combined with Medicare claims. Surveillance colonoscopy was assessed as a time-varying exposure up to 5 years after cancer-directed surgery with the following groups: no colonoscopy, one colonoscopy, and ≥ 2 colonoscopies. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to balance covariates. The time-dependent Cox regression model was used to obtain inverse probability of treatment weighting-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for 5- and 10-year colon cancer, other cancer, and noncancer causes of death.

RESULTS

There were 8,783 colon cancer cases available for analysis. Overall, compared with patients who received one colonoscopy, the no colonoscopy group experienced an increased rate of 10-year colon cancer-specific mortality (HR = 1.63; 95% CI 1.31-2.04) and noncancer death (HR = 1.36; 95% CI 1.25-1.49). Receipt of ≥ 2 colonoscopies was associated with a decreased rate of 10-year colon cancer-specific death (HR = 0.60; 95% CI 0.45-0.79), other cancer death (HR = 0.68; 95% CI 0.53-0.88), and noncancer death (HR = 0.69; 95% CI 0.62-0.76). Five-year cause-specific HRs were similar to 10-year estimates.

DISCUSSION

These results support efforts to ensure that stage I patients undergo surveillance colonoscopy after cancer-directed surgery to facilitate early detection of new and recurrent neoplastic lesions.

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.

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.

Prognostic significance of p53-expression in colorectal carcinoma as measured by a luminometric immunoassay

Background: Mutations of the TP53 gene induce the production of abnormal p53-protein with a prolonged half-life allowing its detection by monoclonal antibodies. In the following study we examined if elevated levels of p53 correlate with worse prognosis in colorectal cancer.

Methods: We have quantified the protein, using an immunoluminometric assay, in 144 cytosols of primary sporadic colorectal cancer tissues and in 96 specimen of normal mucosa.

Results: In 112 samples (77.8%) the p53-expression was higher than the cut-off-value of 0.15 ng p53 per mg total protein. Luminometric immunoassay did not correlate with various clinicopathological parameters. Follow-up ranged from 2.4 to 54.3 (mean 25.3) months. During this period, 61 patients developed recurrences of whom 39 died of the underlying disease. Neither univariate nor multivariate analysis showed any statistically significant differences in prognosis between high and low p53 expression.

Conclusion: Our investigation revealed that p53-overexpression as measured by a luminometric immunoassay, is not a useful predictor of prognosis in patients with colorectal adenocarcinoma. Overcoming the limit of semiquantitative immunohistochemistry for p53-protein quantitative immunoluminometry may be useful elucidating the relation between serum p53-antibodies and p53 in cytosols.

Synuclein gamma predicts poor clinical outcome in colon cancer with normal levels of carcinoembryonic antigen

Background

Synuclein gamma (SNCG), initially identified as a breast cancer specific gene, is aberrantly expressed in many different malignant tumors but rarely expressed in matched nonneoplastic adjacent tissues. In this study, we investigated the prognostic potential of SNCG in colon cancer particularly in the patients with normal carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) levels.

Methods

SNCG levels were assessed immunohistochemically in cancer tissues from 229 colon adenocarcinoma patients with a mean follow-up of 44 months. Correlations between SNCG levels and clinicopathologic features, preoperative serum CEA level, and clinical outcome were analyzed statistically using SPSS.

Results

SNCG levels in colon adenocarcinoma were closely associated with intravascular embolus and tumor recurrence but independent of preoperative serum CEA levels. SNCG expression was an independent prognostic factor of a shorter disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) (P < 0.0001). Multivariate analysis revealed that both tissue SNCG and serum CEA were independent prognostic factors of DFS (P = 0.001, <0.0001, respectively) for 170 patients with colon adenocarcinomas. Importantly, SNCG remained a prognostic determinant of DFS and OS (P = 0.001, 0.002) for 97 patients with normal preoperative serum CEA level.

Conclusions

Our results suggest for the first time that SNCG is a new independent predicator for poor prognosis in patients with colon adenocarcinoma, including those with normal CEA levels. Combination of CEA with SNCG improves prognostic evaluation for patients with colon adenocarcinoma.

Surgical management of locally advanced and locally recurrent colon cancer

Locally advanced and locally recurrent colon cancers pose a surgical challenge with tumors extending into surrounding structures and organs. Anticipation of the need for an extended surgical resection, often with multivisceral en bloc organ removal, is critical for surgical planning. For both primary and recurrent tumors, postsurgical long-term survival is achievable but only after complete resection. The role of neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapy continues to be redefined in this era of biologic chemotherapeutics, and multimodality therapy holds promise in aiding resection and improving postsalvage survival.

Surveillance endoscopy does not improve survival for patients with local and regional stage colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic surveillance is recommended and widely practiced after definitive treatment for colorectal cancer, yet to the authors' knowledge there is little evidence supporting its benefit. The purpose of the current study was to estimate the impact of endoscopic surveillance on colorectal cancer-specific survival for persons with localized or regional colorectal cancer. The population included Medicare patients (age >or=65 years) who were diagnosed with local or regional stage colorectal cancer between 1986 and 1996.

METHODS

The current study was a retrospective case-control study. Cases were defined as those individuals who died of colorectal cancer and controls were defined as those with colorectal cancer who did not die of colorectal cancer; controls were frequency matched to cases. Surveillance was defined as the use of colonoscopy, flexible sigmoidoscopy, or barium enema >or=6 months after diagnosis. Logistic regression was used to control for endoscopic procedure, race, comorbidity index at the time of diagnosis, and types of initial treatments after surgery.

RESULTS

The analysis group contained 8130 cases (29%) and 20,079 controls (71%). The average time to first bowel surveillance for those with at least 1 surveillance examination was 15.9 months after the diagnosis (median, 13 months). In the regression analysis, surveillance endoscopy was not found to be associated with improved colorectal cancer-specific survival (odds ratio of 1.01; 95% confidence interval, 0.95-1.06 [P=0.85]). Setting the surveillance interval to 12 months and 15 months rather than 6 months after diagnosis did not appear to influence the results.

CONCLUSIONS

Surveillance endoscopy does not appear to influence colorectal cancer-specific mortality in patients age >65 years who are diagnosed with localized or regional stage colorectal cancer.

Outcome of follow-up colon examination among a population-based cohort of colorectal cancer patients

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The benefit of colonoscopy in the follow-up of colorectal cancer survivors is uncertain, and findings of surveillance colonoscopy are not well-characterized. We sought to estimate survival among colorectal cancer patients according to receipt of a follow-up colon examination and to describe the findings of such exams.

METHODS

We studied health maintenance organization enrollees with colorectal cancer who underwent surgical resection. Mortality was estimated by using survival analysis, and findings of colon examinations were determined by review of pathology reports.

RESULTS

One thousand two patients were eligible for study; 5-year survival was higher (76.8%) for patients who had at least one follow-up exam than for patients who did not undergo follow-up (52.2%, P < .0001). In multivariate analysis, colon examination remained independently associated with improved survival (hazard ratio, 0.58; 95% confidence interval, 0.44-0.75). Twenty patients (3.1%) were diagnosed with a second colorectal cancer, including 9 cancers detected within 18 months of initial cancer diagnosis. Advanced neoplasia was more common (15.5%) among patients followed up between 36-60 months after diagnosis compared with patients followed up within 18 months (6.9%, P = .02). History of adenomas was associated with advanced neoplasia on follow-up (P = .002). Patients with advanced neoplasia on initial follow-up were at high risk for advanced neoplasia on subsequent examinations (13/16, 81%).

CONCLUSIONS

After colorectal cancer resection, patients have a high risk of interval cancers, some of which represent missed lesions at initial diagnosis. Therefore, surveillance colonoscopy within 1 year of initial diagnosis is warranted. After adjusting for key variables, endoscopic surveillance is associated with improved survival.

Tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinases-1 in the postoperative monitoring of colorectal cancer

The aim of this study was to investigate whether the pre- and postoperative plasma levels of tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinases-1 (TIMP-1) were associated with outcome in colorectal cancer (CRC). Pre- and postoperative plasma TIMP-1 from 280 curatively resected CRC patients and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) in corresponding serum samples were measured and correlated with patient outcome (death, local recurrence (LR) and distant metastases (DM)). The results showed that the course of plasma TIMP-1 from pre- to postoperative levels correlated with patient outcome (P=0.005). However, postoperative plasma TIMP-1 alone was strongly associated with patient outcome, high TIMP-1 predicting short survival (P=0.002). Combining postoperative TIMP-1 and CEA demonstrated that high TIMP-1 and CEA levels predicted poor outcome (P<0.0001); multivariate analysis identifying both parameters as strong prognostic factors for survival, LR and DM (P<0.0001). In conclusion, postoperative plasma TIMP-1 predicts patient outcome both alone and in combination with CEA. Postoperative TIMP-1 may be a marker of residual disease after primary surgery for CRC.

Colorectal liver metastases: CT, MR imaging, and PET for diagnosis--meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To perform a meta-analysis to obtain sensitivity estimates of computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance (MR) imaging, and fluorine 18 fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) for detection of colorectal liver metastases on per-patient and per-lesion bases.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and CANCERLIT databases and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched for relevant original articles published from January 1990 to December 2003. Criteria for inclusion of articles were as follows: Articles were reported in the English, German, or French language; CT, MR imaging, or FDG PET was performed to identify and characterize colorectal liver metastases; histopathologic analysis (surgery, biopsy, or autopsy), intraoperative observation (manual palpatation, intraoperative ultrasonography [US]), and/or follow-up US was the reference standard; and data were sufficient for calculation of true-positive or false-negative values. A random-effects linear regression model was used to obtain sensitivity estimates in assessment of liver metastases.

RESULTS

Of 165 identified relevant articles, 61 fulfilled all inclusion criteria. Sensitivity estimates on a per-patient basis for nonhelical CT, helical CT, 1.5-T MR imaging, and FDG PET were 60.2%, 64.7%, 75.8%, and 94.6%, respectively; FDG PET was the most accurate modality. On a per-lesion basis, sensitivity estimates for nonhelical CT, helical CT, 1.0-T MR imaging, 1.5-T MR imaging, and FDG PET were 52.3%, 63.8%, 66.1%, 64.4%, and 75.9%, respectively; nonhelical CT had lowest sensitivity. Estimates of gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging and superparamagnetic iron oxide (SPIO)-enhanced MR imaging were significantly better, compared with nonenhanced MR imaging (P = .019 and P < .001, respectively) and with helical CT with 45 g of iodine or less (P = .02 and P < .001, respectively). For lesions of 1 cm or larger, SPIO-enhanced MR imaging was the most accurate modality (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

FDG PET had significantly higher sensitivity on a per-patient basis, compared with that of the other modalities, but not on a per-lesion basis. Sensitivity estimates for MR imaging with contrast agent were significantly superior to those for helical CT with 45 g of iodine or less.

Colon cancer

Colon cancer is one of the leading tumours in the world and is considered among the big killers, together with lung, prostate and breast cancer. In the recent years very important advances occurred in the field of treatment of this frequent disease: adjuvant chemotherapy was demonstrated to be effective, chiefly in stage III patients, and surgery was optimized in order to achieve the best results with a low morbidity. Several new target-oriented drugs are under evaluation and some of them (cetuximab and bevacizumab) have already exhibited a good activity/efficacy, mainly in combination with chemotherapy. The development of updated recommendations for the best management of these patients is crucial in order to obtain the best results, not only in clinical research but also in everyday practice. This report summarizes the most important achievements in this field and provides the readers useful suggestions for their professional practice.

Colon cancer: survival after curative surgery

Several new aspects have evolved during the past years concerning factors that influence survival in surgically and medically treated colon cancer patients that are relevant to the treating team for the treatment strategy and patient's choice. The 5-year-survival rates dependent on UICC stages/substages (I: 68%-100%, II: 58%-90%, III: 33%-76%, IV: <5%-9%) show remarkable variations between published reports, surgical hospital units, individual surgeons, and continents (USA vs Europe). Those variations may be due to surgical techniques, training status, hospital and individual case volume, and, also, referral patterns and statistical evaluation methods. Survival times and cure rates are significantly improved by adjuvant chemotherapy in UICC III and in substages of UICC II (e.g. UICC II B) by 5%-12%, when compared with surgical controls. In three recently published trials standard adjuvant chemotherapy was further improved by increased survival rates, e.g. from 59% to 71% in stage III and IIB patients. Molecular and genetic factors, such as thymidylate synthase (TS), microsatellite instability (MSI) or loss of chromosome 18q/"DCC" might have an independent impact on prognosis in the spontaneous course, and TS could help to better select patients for adjuvant chemotherapy.

Rectal cancer

Rectal cancer is an important tumour from an epidemiological point of view and represents the benchmark for an optimal use of integrated treatments (surgery, radiotherapy and chemotherapy) in the oncological practice. Performing radio-chemotherapy (best if preoperatively), medical and radiation oncologists are now able to increase survival, to decrease the occurrence of pelvic recurrence and to ameliorate the quality of life of patients. Updated recommendations for the management of these patients are here reported.

Colorectal cancer patterns of care in the Western Sydney and Wentworth Area Health Services

INTRODUCTION

Colorectal cancer is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in Australia. Recent clinical trials show that the recurrence of colorectal cancer decreases with chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy in advanced disease. The present study aimed to document the patterns of care by the type of treatment, document the preoperative investigations and provide results to the Area Health Services.

METHODS

A prospective data collection was initiated in May 1994 and ended in May 1996 in the Western Sydney and Wentworth Area Health Services of New South Wales. Deaths and recurrences were followed up until July 2002.

RESULTS

There were 253 colon cancers, 107 rectal cancers and 10 patients with tumours in both the colon and rectum. Forty-one surgeons performed 299 curative procedures with 78% of them performing one to four procedures annually. One hundred and twenty-two patients had non-fatal complications and six (2%) died postoperatively. Twenty-eight per cent of rectal cancer patients underwent abdomino-perineal resection and 56% underwent low anterior resection. Forty-five per cent of rectal cancer patients and 51% of colon cancer patients who were potentially eligible received appropriate adjuvant therapy. Ninety-one per cent of patients who received chemotherapy had no or mild toxicity. By the end of follow-up period, 30% of rectal cancer patients and 24% of colon cancer patients had developed recurrence. At last follow up, 197 patients had died. Median overall survival from time of diagnosis was 73 months. Overall 5-year survival for colonic and rectal cancers was 50% and 57%, respectively. For the 299 patients who had curative procedures, the 5-year survival was 63% and 62% for colonic and rectal cancers, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Colorectal cancer patients who were eligible for and received adjuvant therapy had significantly better survival. Rectal cancer patients whose tumours only required low anterior resection had a better survival than those who needed an abdomino-perineal resection. High-volume surgeons have less postoperative complications than low-volume surgeons. The high proportion of late presentations seen in colon cancer patients supports the need for screening to improve early detection.

Intraoperative radiotherapy in the multimodality approach to colorectal cancer

The addition of intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) to the multimodality approach for the treatment of locally advanced and locally recurrent colorectal cancer seems to result in improvements in local control and long-term survival. Local control and survival are most likely in patients in whom a gross total resection is accomplished. Peripheral nerve is the dose-limiting structure for patients treated with IORT. Further improvements in local control require the addition of dose modifiers during external beam radiotherapy or IORT. Distant relapse remains problematic, and effective systemic therapy is necessary to significantly improve long-term survival.

Follow-up after colorectal cancer surgery

Although most institutions offer some kind of follow-up to patients operated on for colorectal cancer, its value with respect to prolonged survival has been challenged. However, improved results of liver surgery and chemotherapy make it reasonable to assume that a follow-up programme leading to detection of more asymptomatic recurrences would result in improved survival. Liver metastases and extramural local recurrences are the most common secondary lesions and 5-year survival rates of about 30% are reported after radical resection. From these observations a survival benefit could be expected when follow-up is directed to these forms of recurrence. From six randomized studies, six comparative cohort studies and four meta-analyses it can be concluded that an intensive follow-up programme results in more recurrences being resected for cure and about a 10% higher 5-year survival rate compared with less intensive or no follow-up. However, the differences in the follow-up protocols make it difficult to conclude how a follow-up programme should be designed. Liver imaging and carcinoembryonic antigen assay should probably be included, while the yield of frequent colonoscopies is small. A follow-up regimen based on these principles is suggested. Future studies should focus on which tests are the most cost-effective for follow-up after colorectal cancer resection.

Clinical and sociodemographic factors associated with colon surveillance among patients with a history of colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Substantial variability in the use of colon surveillance among colorectal cancer survivors has been reported. This study sought to examine trends in the use of colon surveillance among patients who have had colorectal cancer and to investigate factors associated with utilization.

METHODS

Health maintenance organization enrollees with a diagnosis of local or regional colon or rectal cancer between January 1993 and December 1999 were studied. Receipt of a colon examination by colonoscopy or by flexible sigmoidoscopy, together with barium contrast radiography of the colon was determined from automated clinical records, and rates of colon surveillance were estimated by using survival analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 1002 patients with a diagnosis of colorectal cancer met inclusion criteria for the study. Colon examinations were performed in 61% of patients within 18 months of diagnosis and in 80% of patients within 5 years of diagnosis. The median time from diagnosis to first colon surveillance examination (14 months) was unchanged over the study period, but the interval between first and second surveillance examinations increased by 17 months (p<0.001). Patients over 80 years of age (relative risk=0.32; 95% CI[0.22, 0.45]) and those with rectal cancer (relative risk=0.80; 95% CI[0.66, 0.97]) were less likely to undergo surveillance. Higher socioeconomic status (relative risk=1.29; 95% CI[1.03, 1.61]) and being married (relative risk=1.27; 95% CI[1.05, 1.53]) were associated with greater utilization. There was lower utilization among African American patients (relative risk=0.70; p=0.14) and increased utilization among other minorities (relative risk=1.47; p=0.06).

CONCLUSIONS

There is substantial variability in the use of colon examination for surveillance in patients with a history of colorectal cancer, and clinical and sociodemographic factors appear to influence the likelihood of surveillance.

Carcinoembryonic antigen mRNA in the mesenteric vein is not a predictor of hepatic metastasis in patients with resectable colorectal cancer: a long-term study

PURPOSE

The clinical value of carcinoembryonic antigen messenger ribonucleic acid in the draining venous blood has been controversial because of short observation period. The authors prospectively investigated the clinical significance of detection of carcinoembryonic antigen messenger ribonucleic acid in the draining venous blood to predict hepatic metastases in patients with resectable colorectal cancer.

METHODS

Drainage venous blood from 80 patients who underwent curative resections for colorectal cancer were obtained immediately before surgery to determine the presence of cancer cells by means of reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction.

RESULTS

After an average follow-up period of 52.1 months, 7 of the 35 patients (20 percent) with positive carcinoembryonic antigen messenger ribonucleic acid had hepatic metastases, whereas 2 of the 45 patients (4.5 percent) with negative carcinoembryonic antigen messenger ribonucleic acid had hepatic metastases. The cumulative probability of hepatic metastatic recurrence rate differed significantly between two patient groups with positive or negative carcinoembryonic antigen messenger ribonucleic acid expression in the drainage vein (log-rank, 4.900; P = 0.0269). However, 28 of the 35 patients (80 percent) with positive carcinoembryonic antigen messenger ribonucleic acid did not have hepatic metastases. Additionally, Cox proportional hazards models identified the presence of lymph node metastases as the only independent predictor of hepatic metastatic recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

This study failed to demonstrate the high predictive value of carcinoembryonic antigen messenger ribonucleic acid detection in the draining venous blood for the development of hepatic metastases. However, the authors demonstrated that the presence of cancer cells in the draining venous blood was the essential and initial step to the development of hepatic metastasis.

Follow-up of patients with curatively resected colorectal cancer: a practice guideline

BACKGROUND

A systematic review was conducted to evaluate the literature regarding the impact of follow-up on colorectal cancer patient survival and, in a second phase, recommendations were developed.

METHODS

The MEDLINE, CANCERLIT, and Cochrane Library databases, and abstracts published in the 1997 to 2002 proceedings of the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology were systematically searched for evidence. Study selection was limited to randomized trials and meta-analyses that examined different programs of follow-up after curative resection of colorectal cancer where five-year overall survival was reported. External review by Ontario practitioners was obtained through a mailed survey. Final approval of the practice guideline report was obtained from the Practice Guidelines Coordinating Committee.

RESULTS

Six randomized trials and two published meta-analyses of follow-up were obtained. Of six randomized trials comparing one follow-up program to a more intense program, only two individual trials detected a statistically significant survival benefit favouring the more intense follow-up program. Pooling of all six randomized trials demonstrated a significant improvement in survival favouring more intense follow-up (Relative Risk Ratio 0.80 (95%CI, 0.70 to 0.91; p = 0.0008). Although the rate of recurrence was similar in both of the follow-up groups compared, asymptomatic recurrences and re-operations for cure of recurrences were more common in patients with more intensive follow-up. Trials including CEA monitoring and liver imaging also had significant results, whereas trials not including these tests did not.

CONCLUSION

Follow-up programs for patients with curatively resected colorectal cancer do improve survival. These follow-up programs include frequent visits and performance of blood CEA, chest x-rays, liver imaging and colonoscopy, however, it is not clear which tests or frequency of visits is optimal. There is a suggestion that improved survival is due to diagnosis of recurrence at an earlier, asymptomatic stage which allows for more curative resection of recurrence. Based on this evidence and consideration of the biology of colorectal cancer and present practices, a guideline was developed. Patients should be made aware of the risk of disease recurrence or second bowel cancer, the potential benefits of follow-up and the uncertainties requiring further clinical trials. For patients at high-risk of recurrence (stages IIb and III) clinical assessment is recommended when symptoms occur or at least every 6 months the first 3 years and yearly for at least 5 years. At the time of those visits, patients may have blood CEA, chest x-ray and liver imaging. For patients at lower risk of recurrence (stages I and Ia) or those with co-morbidities impairing future surgery, only visits yearly or when symptoms occur. All patients should have a colonoscopy before or within 6 months of initial surgery, and repeated yearly if villous or tubular adenomas >1 cm are found; otherwise repeat every 3 to 5 years. All patients having recurrences should be assessed by a multidisciplinary team in a cancer centre.

The prevalence of patients with colorectal carcinoma under care in the U.S

BACKGROUND

Prevalence usually is defined as the proportion of individuals alive who previously had a diagnosis of the disease, regardless of whether the individuals still are receiving treatment or are cured. The objective of this study was to estimate the proportion of elderly patients with colorectal carcinoma (CRC) in the U.S. that actually were receiving care for their disease as a better quantification of the burden of CRC.

METHODS

The authors used data from the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program linked to Medicare claims. Four phases of CRC care were defined: initial diagnosis and treatment, postdiagnostic monitoring, treatment for recurrent/metastatic disease, and terminal care. CRC care prevalence measures by phase were extrapolated to the U.S. population age 65 years and older.

RESULTS

For all patients with CRC who were diagnosed between 1975 and 1996, 62% received at least 1 service related to their CRC in 1996, and patients received an average of 2.1 months per person of CRC care. Among the U.S. population age 65 years and older, 1.81% had 1 diagnosis of CRC, and (1.81% x 0.62%) = 1.12% received at least 1 service related to their CRC. This translated to 380,783 individuals who received care and 1,210,121 person months of care during 1996.

CONCLUSIONS

To the authors' knowledge, this is the first report in which care prevalence has been estimated directly. The classification of CRC care by phases of care provides a very detailed picture of the amount of care delivered in the U.S. population. Person-month estimates can be used to estimate the cost of CRC.

The preoperative assessment and postoperative surveillance of patients with colon and rectal cancer

Many advances have been made in the field of colorectal cancer follow-up since the pioneering efforts of Wangensteen and others with second-look operations in the 1950s. The understanding of the biology and natural history of colorectal malignancy has been advanced. Diagnostic methods for detection of recurrent disease have also advanced tremendously with CEA monitoring, immunoscintigraphy. CT, MRI, and PET imaging. As has been discussed in this article, however, no strategy of postoperative follow-up has been shown unequivocally to produce improved survival benefit or cure rate. It is quite possible that benefit will be shown, but well-controlled trials will be required. Cost considerations will likely prove important, because the rate of detection of curable disease will likely.be low. Quality of life issues will also be important in such trials. Better treatment and outcome ol recurrent disease would provide a strong rationale for vigorous postoperative surveillance. New recommendations are currently evolving [54]. Early diagnosis seems likely to enhance the curability of both local and distant relapses and second primary tumors. Furthermore, there may be a survival and quality of life advantage that results from the early institution of chemotherapy, even for those tumors found to be inoperable [55]. In devising a plan for follow-up in patients, it is important to recognize the anatomic and temporal patterns of recurrence as well as their relationships to the initial tumor staging. Although there is little proof that the identification of recurrent disease in follow-up programs increases the likelihood of resectability, cure, or prolonged survival, many physicians have witnessed successful treatment of recurrent colorectal cancer. These anecdotal experiences, the unproven belief that follow-up is beneficial, and traditions imparted during training are among the likely motivating factors for most physicians caring for colorectal cancer patients.

Follow-up of patients with colorectal cancer: numbers needed to test and treat

Follow-up after curative treatment of patients with colorectal cancer has as its main aims the quality assessment of the treatment given, patient support, and improved outcome by the early detection and treatment of cancer recurrence. How often, and to what extent, the final aim, improved survival, is indeed realised is so far unclear. A literature search was performed to provide quantitative estimates for the main determinants of the effectiveness of the follow-up. Data were extracted from a total of 267 articles and databases, and were aggregated using modern meta-analytic methods. In order to provide one more colorectal cancer patient with long-term survival through follow-up, 360 positive follow-up tests and 11 operations for colorectal cancer recurrence are needed. In the remaining 359 tests and 10 operations, either no gains are achieved or harm is done. As the third aim of colorectal cancer follow-up, improved survival, is realised in only few patients, follow-up should focus less on diagnosis and treatment of recurrences. It should be of limited intensity and duration (3 years), and the search for preclinical cancer recurrence should primarily be performed by carcino-embryonic antigen (CEA) testing and ultrasound (US). The focus of colorectal cancer follow-up should shift from the early detection of recurrence towards quality assessment and patient support. As support that is as good or even better can be provided by a patient's general practitioner (GP) or by specialised nursing personnel, there is no need for routine follow-up to be performed by the surgeon.

The Mayo Clinic experience with multimodality treatment of locally advanced or recurrent colon cancer

BACKGROUND

Patients with incompletely resected locally advanced and recurrent colon cancers have a dismal prognosis. Since 1981, 100 colon cancer patients have been treated with combination therapy including surgical resection, chemotherapy, and external plus intraoperative radiotherapy.

METHODS

A prospective computerized intraoperative radiation database identified patients for this retrospective review. Data collection included patient demographics, tumor and treatment variables, and morbidity, recurrence, and survival statistics.

RESULTS

The mean age was 55.2 years. Follow-up was available for all patients. Fifty-nine patients have died. Median follow-up of survivors was 70.5 months. Twenty-five patients with locally advanced colon cancer had a median survival of 38.2 months and a 5-year survival of 49%. Eleven of these patients are still free of disease. Seventy-three patients treated for recurrent colon carcinoma had a median survival of 33.3 months from the time of recurrence, with a 5-year survival of 24.7%. Twenty-one are alive without evidence of recurrence. The 38 patients with recurrent disease whose disease was completely resected had a 37.4% 5-year survival.

CONCLUSIONS

A multimodality approach using en-bloc surgical resection with radiotherapy and chemotherapy affords some patients with locally advanced and recurrent colon cancer a chance for long-term survival.

Bowel surveillance patterns after a diagnosis of colorectal cancer in Medicare beneficiaries

BACKGROUND

Postoperative colon surveillance has been recommended for patients with a diagnosis of local/regional colorectal cancer. The extent to which these recommendations are followed in practice is poorly characterized. Patterns of surveillance after surgery for colorectal cancer were determined by using a large population-based database.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study with cancer registry data linked to Medicare claims. Identified were 52,283 patients treated for local/regional colorectal cancer between 1986 and 1996, and surveillance patterns through 1998 were determined. Surveillance patterns were analyzed by using survival analysis and by computing the proportion of surviving patients who underwent procedures during 4 time periods after treatment: 2 to 14 months, 15 to 50 months, 51 to 86 months and more than 87 months.

RESULTS

Median times to first through fifth surveillance events were 20, 14, 15, 15, and 15 months, respectively. For 17% of the cohort there was no surveillance event. Younger patients were more likely to undergo surveillance. Surveillance patterns were not affected by stage. The proportions of the cohort that underwent no surveillance during the 4 respective time periods were 54%, 52%, 60%, and 69%. The percentages of patients who underwent surveillance annually or more frequently in the latter 3 time periods, respectively, were 19%, 10%, and 5%, or 11% overall, treating the data for the 3 events as a whole. Over the period from 1986 to 1998, the proportion of patients who had no surveillance procedures gradually decreased, whereas the proportion of those who underwent procedures annually or more frequently remained relatively constant.

CONCLUSIONS

During the period from 1986 to 1998 there was low utilization of postdiagnosis colon surveillance in a substantial proportion of elderly patients with a diagnosis of local/regional colorectal cancer. Over time there was a trend toward increasing receipt of any surveillance procedures. The percentages of patients undergoing surveillance annually or more frequently did not change between earlier and later periods.

Stratifying risk factors for follow-up: a comparison of recurrent and nonrecurrent colorectal cancer

INTRODUCTION

The selection of patients for individualized follow-up and adjuvant therapy after curative resection of colorectal carcinoma depends on finding reliable prognostic criteria for recurrence. However, such criteria are not universally accepted, and follow-up is often standardized for all patients without regard for each individual's level of risk of recurrence. Such a system of follow-up is not cost-effective.

METHODS

A comparison of operative findings, pathologic features, and follow-up data of 1,731 cases of nonrecurrent colorectal cancer (821 colon, 910 rectum) with 357 cases of recurrent colorectal cancer (164 colon, 193 rectum) following potentially curative surgery was made, and results were analyzed to ascertain criteria for stratifying follow-up according to risk factors.

RESULTS

Single-factor analysis showed that Dukes staging and tumor invasion were significantly associated with recurrence in both rectal and colon carcinoma. Tumor fixation and grading were additional significant factors in rectal cancer. Recurrence rates, time to recurrence, site of recurrence (locoregional vs. distant), and pattern of metastatic spread were not significantly affected by original tumor site. Recurrence was not significantly affected by patient age and gender. Individual surgeon performance in this series had also no significant effects on tumor recurrence. With multivariate analysis only, Dukes staging and tumor invasion into adjacent tissues were found to be independent adverse prognostic factors for recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

Dukes staging and tumor penetration into adjacent tissues are the only significant adverse prognostic factors for tumor recurrence of colonic and rectal carcinoma. Tumor grade and tumor fixation are additional adverse prognostic factors in rectal cancer. Guidelines for follow-up may be based on these factors and follow-up thus stratified according to risk of developing recurrence.

Fluorouracil plus leucovorin as effective adjuvant chemotherapy in curatively resected stage III colon cancer: results of the trial adjCCA-01

PURPOSE

Adjuvant postoperative treatment with fluorouracil (5-FU) and levamisole in curatively resected stage III colon cancer significantly reduces the risk of cancer recurrence and improves survival. Biochemical modulation of 5-FU with leucovorin has resulted in increased remission rates in metastatic colorectal cancer, thus reflecting an increased tumor-cell kill. The impact of 5-FU plus leucovorin on survival and tumor recurrence was analyzed in comparison with the effects of 5-FU plus levamisole in the prospective multicentric trial adjCCA-01.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with a curatively resected International Union Against Cancer stage III colon cancer were stratified according to T, N, and G category and randomly assigned to receive one of the two adjuvant treatment schemes: 5-FU 400 mg/m(2) body-surface area intravenously in the first chemotherapy course, then 450 mg/m(2) x 5 days; 12 cycles, plus leucovorin 100 mg/m(2) (arm A), or 5-FU plus levamisole (Moertel scheme; arm B).

RESULTS

Six hundred eighty (96.9%) of 702 patients enrolled onto this study were eligible. After a median follow-up time of 46.5 months, the 5-FU plus leucovorin combination significantly improved disease-free survival (P =.037) and significantly decreased overall mortality (P =.0089) in comparison with 5-FU plus levamisole. In a multivariate proportional hazards model, adjuvant chemotherapy emerged as a significant prognostic factor for survival (P =.0059) and disease-free survival (P =.03). Adjuvant treatment with 5-FU plus levamisole as well as with 5-FU plus leucovorin was generally well tolerated; only a minority of patients experienced grade 3 and 4 toxicities.

CONCLUSION

After a curative resection of a stage III colon cancer, adjuvant treatment with 5-FU plus leucovorin is generally well tolerated and significantly more effective than 5-FU plus levamisole in reducing tumor relapse and improving survival.

Decision analysis for the cost-effective management of recurrent colorectal cancer

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether the use of [(18)F]2-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG PET) in addition to computed axial tomography (CT) is helpful in managing recurrent colorectal cancer (CRC).

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

There is no consensus on a management algorithm for CRC. However, when recurrence is suspected, CT is generally used for further evaluation and staging of disease.

METHODS

The authors used decision trees based on theoretical models to assess the cost-effectiveness of a CT + FDG PET strategy for the diagnosis and management of recurrent CRC compared with a CT-alone strategy. These theoretical models focus on patients with hepatic recurrence who are potentially curable through surgical hepatic resection. The population entering the decision trees consisted of patients with CRC who had undergone surgical resection of their primary CRC and who were suspected of having recurrence based on elevated levels of carcinoembryonic antigen.

RESULTS

The CT + FDG PET strategy was found to be cost-effective for managing patients with elevated carcinoembryonic antigen levels who were candidates for hepatic resection. The CT + FDG PET strategy was higher in mean cost by $429 per patient but resulted in an increase in the mean life expectancy of 9.527 days per patient.

CONCLUSIONS

These results show, through rigorous decision tree analysis, the potential cost-effectiveness of FDG PET in the management of recurrent CRC. The decision trees can be used to model various features of the management of recurrent CRC, including the cost-effectiveness of other newly emerging technologies.

Radioimmunoguided surgery for recurrent colorectal cancer manifested by isolated CEA elevation

BACKGROUND

Carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) is a sensitive marker for detecting recurrent colorectal carcinoma. An asymptomatic rise of CEA can precede by several months the detection of recurrent cancer by standard imaging modalities. Yet, surgeons are hesitant to operate solely on the basis of an observed increase in CEA. We investigated the ability of radioimmunoguided surgery to enhance the surgeon's capability of detecting intraabdominal disease in these patients.

METHODS

Nineteen patients who underwent radioimmunoguided surgery for suspected tumor recurrence based solely on elevated CEA were included in the study. They underwent colonoscopy and CT of the abdomen and chest, all of which were negative. They then underwent scintigraphy scan with an anti-CEA monoclonal antibody (MoAb) labeled with (99m)Tc or Indium I-111. All patients were injected with the CC49 MoAb (an anti-TAG-72 tumor-associated glycoprotein) labeled with (125)I three weeks before surgery. During surgery, traditional exploration was followed by survey with a gamma-detecting probe.

RESULTS

Traditional surgical exploration identified 26 recurrent tumors: 7 hepatic, 8 pelvic, 6 retroperitoneal, 3 colonic, 1 splenic, and 1 anastomotic. Radioimmunoguided surgical exploration confirmed all recurrent tumors and identified additional tumor sites in seven patients that resulted in changing the surgical plan. CEA scans correlated with intraabdominal findings in seven patients. Abdominal pathology did not correlate completely with the scans in three patients, and CEA scan results were undetermined in two patients.

CONCLUSION

Patients with elevated CEA and no other findings should be operated upon without delay, and radioimmunoguided surgery should be used to enhance the surgeon's knowledge of the extent of disease.

Is (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in recurrent colorectal cancer a contribution to surgical decision making?

BACKGROUND

Accuracy of (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) and contribution to surgical decision making in recurrent or metastatic colorectal cancer were evaluated.

METHODS

One hundred whole-body PET tests in colorectal cancer patients (1994 to 1998) were compared with computed tomography (CT), liver ultrasonography, and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) test. Mean follow-up was 12 months.

RESULTS

Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of FDG-PET for malignant findings were, respectively, 98%, 90% and 95%; for 87 CT scans, 91%, 72%, and 82%; for 98 CEA tests, 76%, 90%, and 82%; for detection of liver metastases with PET, 100%, 99%, and 99%; and for 68 ultrasound tests, 87%, 96%, and 93%. PET accuracy for local recurrence was 96%. Additional information was provided by PET in 86% of cases (abdomen, thorax, liver). PET influenced surgical decisions in 61% of cases.

CONCLUSION

FDG-PET adds relevant accuracy to the conventional staging of patients with colorectal cancer and may cost-effectively help to select the appropriate treatment.

Influence of the surgical treatment on local recurrence of rectal cancer: a prospective study (1980-1992)

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The incidence of locoregional recurrences (LR) following radical surgery of rectal cancer varies from 5% to 30% according to the literature. The purpose of this prospective study was to compare the outcome of the Abdomino-Perineal Excision (APE) vs. the Anterior Resection (AR) in a consecutive series of 188 patients who underwent surgery for cure from 1980 to the end of 1992 (81 APE and 107 AR), followed for 5 years, evaluating their influence on the incidence of the recurrences.

METHODS

The patients were enrolled at random in the two surgical groups, provided that a radical excision of the tumour, with only two limits: the level of the lesion from the anal verge and the presence of a severe incontinence instrumentally proven. TNM, Dukes staging, grading, and tumour location were statistically evaluated. Further primary suture vs. packing of the perineal wound in APE and handsewn vs. stapled anastomosis in AR were compared in relation with the incidence of LR.

RESULTS

The overall local recurrence rate was 19.2% (32/167), in details 19.7% for APE and 18.5% for AR. Similar recurrence rates were observed following both procedures, matching the patients according to the Dukes stage and different details of techniques. A slight statistically significant difference was found as far as the tumour location is concerned in the group treated with anterior resection (p = <0.05) because of the higher recurrence observed in AR performed for tumours of the lower third of the rectum in comparison with the more proximal level.

CONCLUSIONS

The AA conclude that the choice of the right surgical procedure in the rectal carcinoma depends on the characteristics of the tumour and the conditions of the patients, provided that the oncologic indications were respected, because recurrence and survival rate are independent from the surgical approaches.

Colorectal cancer follow-up: a reassessment of empirical evidence on effectiveness

Colorectal cancer is an important cause of death in the Western world, with a propensity of cancer recurrence even after resection with curative intent. Active follow-up has been advocated as a means to detect cancer recurrence at an earlier stage and thereby improve the survival of colorectal cancer patients. The present study assesses published evidence on the effectiveness of follow-up. Articles were obtained from a 20-year Medline search and from cross-references between articles. Articles were included, scored for quality, and extracted by explicit criteria. Regression analysis and chi-squared analysis was performed to assess (1) whether detection of recurrence at earlier asymptomatic disease stage leads to better post-treatment prognosis, and (2) whether active follow-up does improve overall (quality adjusted) survival, as compared to symptom-guided care only. The relationship between disease stage of recurrence (symptoms, number and size) and survival was analysed from 42 articles, 10 of which provided adequate data. Absence of symptoms and small number of recurrence were significantly related to better survival, smaller size insignificantly so. The potential of active follow-up seemed related to a marginally better outcome, larger gains being found in lower quality studies. Available data do suggest that survival gains vary between 0.5 and 2%, 1% seeming to be a best estimate of overall survival gain. Neither the notion that earlier detection of recurrences does significantly improve outcome, nor the hope that active follow-up provides a statistically and clinically significant gain in (quality adjusted) survival, are so far supported by adequate evidence. Colorectal cancer follow-up still fails to meet the criteria for evidence based medicine.

Postoperative management of stage II/III colon cancer: a decision analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Two separate decisions must be made for the management of patients with resected stage II/III colon cancer: whether to begin adjuvant chemotherapy and whether patients should be included in a follow-up protocol consisting of regular monitoring of carcinoembryonic antigen level and of colonoscopy and imaging. The standard management for these patients is adjuvant chemotherapy for stage III patients and follow-up for stage II/III patients with resected colon cancer.

METHODS

Decision analysis was used to compare the effectiveness (5-year survival rate) and cost-effectiveness ratio of 7 strategies of treatment and follow-up.

RESULTS

The most cost-effective strategies were adjuvant chemotherapy for all patients with stage II/III resected colon cancer, with either no follow-up or follow-up only for patients aged less than 75 years with a seric preoperative carcinoembryonic antigen level of >5 ng/mL (5-year survival, 62.3% or 62.7%; cost per surviving patient, $8254 or $8657, respectively). The order of efficacy of the strategies was insensitive to changes in the values of the studied variables. The method of follow-up does little to improve 5-year survival but adds substantial cost.

CONCLUSIONS

The current standard strategy may not be the most cost-effective strategy for the management of patients with resected colon cancer.

Influence of follow-up on health-related quality of life after radical surgery for colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

The possible benefit for patients of follow-up examinations after curative surgery for colorectal cancer is at present not proven. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the influence of follow-up examinations on health-related quality of life and to assess the attitude of the patients to check-ups.

METHODS

A total of 350 patients who had had curative surgery for colorectal cancer and who had been subsequently randomized to either frequent follow-up or virtually no follow-up completed the Nottingham Health Profile and a second questionnaire assessing their attitude to the follow-up visits.

RESULTS

The patients who were receiving more frequent follow-up had greater confidence in the check-ups, but the improvement in the health-related quality of life was only marginally better than that of those receiving few follow-up visits.

CONCLUSION

The relatively small benefit for health-related quality of life does not justify expensive frequent routine examinations after surgery for colorectal cancer. The Nottingham Health Profile proved to be a reliable instrument within this patient group.

Role of follow-up in management of local recurrences of colorectal cancer: a prospective, randomized study

PURPOSE

This prospective, randomized, single-center study was designed to evaluate the influence of follow-up on detection and resectability of local recurrences and on survival after radical surgery for colorectal cancer.

METHODS

Between 1987 and 1990, 207 consecutive patients who underwent curative resections for primary untreated large-bowel carcinoma were randomly assigned to a conventional follow-up group (Group A; n = 103) and to an intense follow-up group (Group B; n = 104). All the patients were followed up prospectively, and the outcome was known for all of them at five years. Patients in Group A were seen at six-month intervals for one year, and once a year thereafter. Patients in Group B were checked every three months during the first two years, at six-month intervals for the next three years, and once a year thereafter.

RESULTS

Of the 103 patients in Group A, local recurrence was detected in 20; 9 (13 percent) of these patients had colon cancer, and 11 (29 percent) had rectal cancer. Of the 104 patients in Group B, local recurrence was detected in 26; 12 (16 percent) of these patients had colon cancer, and 14 (45 percent) had rectal cancer. Twelve cases (60 percent) of local recurrence in Group A and 24 cases (92 percent) in Group B were detected at scheduled visits (P < 0.05). Local recurrences were detected earlier in patients of Group B (10.3 +/- 2.7 vs. 20.2 +/- 6.1 months; P < 0.0003). Curative re-resection was possible in 2 patients (10 percent) in Group A, 1 with colon cancer and 1 with rectal cancer, and in 17 patients (65 percent) in Group B, 6 with colon cancer and 11 with rectal cancer (P < 0.01). Of the Group B patients who had curative re-resections of local recurrence, 8 (47 percent) were disease-free and long-term survivors as of the last follow-up, and 2 (11.7 percent) were alive, but with a new recurrence. The 2 patients in Group A who had curative re-resections died as a result of cancer. The five-year survival rate in Group A was 58.3 percent and in Group B was 73.1 percent. The difference is statistically significant (P < 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Our data support use of an intense follow-up plan after primary resection of large-bowel cancer, at least in patients with rectal cancer.

Postsurgical surveillance of colon cancer: preliminary cost analysis of physician examination, carcinoembryonic antigen testing, chest x-ray, and colonoscopy

OBJECTIVE

This study is the first to examine the relative and absolute costs of physician examination, carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) assessment, chest x-ray, and colonoscopy in detecting recurrent disease in patients who have undergone surgical resection for primary colon carcinoma.

METHODS

Of the 1356 Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group patients in Intergroup Protocol 0089 who underwent surgical resection for Dukes' B2 and C colon carcinoma, 421 patients who developed recurrent disease were reviewed. Follow-up testing was performed according to protocol guidelines, with the cost of each test equal to 1995 Medicare reimbursement. Follow-up was defined as the time to recurrence for the 421 patients in whom disease recurred (mean 18.6 months) or up to 5 years for the additional 930 patients in whom disease did not recur (mean 38.6 months). Patients were divided into three categories: nonrecurrent, recurrent but not resectable, and recurrent but resectable with curative intent. The estimated mean cost of each test in detecting group 3 (recurrent but resectable) patients was calculated.

RESULTS

Of the 421 patients who developed recurrent disease, 96 underwent surgical resection of their disease with curative intent (group 3). For group 3 patients, the first indication of recurrent disease was CEA testing (30), chest x-ray (12), colonoscopy (14), and other (40). Of the 40 "other" patients, 24 presented with symptoms. Routine physician examination, however, failed to identify a single resectable recurrence, and the total cost for physician examination was $418,615. The detection rate for CEA testing was 2.2%, the total cost was $170,880, and the cost per recurrence was $5,696. The detection rate for chest x-ray was 0.9%, the total cost was $120,934, and the cost per recurrence was $10,078. The detection rate of colonoscopy was 1%, the total cost was $641,344, and the cost per recurrence was $45,810.

CONCLUSIONS

CEA measurement was the most cost-effective test in detecting potentially curable recurrent disease. Physician visits were useful only in the evaluation of symptoms; a routine physician examination had no added benefit.

Value of postoperative surveillance after radical surgery for colorectal cancer: results of a cohort study

PURPOSE

Early detection of recurrence after curative resection for primary colorectal cancer should improve patients' prognosis. However, the usefulness of postoperative surveillance programs has not been clarified yet. The present cohort study was aimed at assessing the effectiveness of systematic follow-up in patients with colorectal cancer who were operated on for cure, regarding both rate of tumor recurrence amenable to curative-intent surgery and rate of survival.

METHODS

One hundred ninety-nine colorectal cancer patients who underwent radical primary surgery were followed according a well-defined postoperative surveillance program, which consisted of laboratory studies (including serum carcinoembryonic antigen assay) every three months, physical examination and abdominal ultrasound or computed tomography every six months, and chest radiograph and total colonoscopy once per year. Cohorts were defined according to patients' compliance with the proposed follow-up program. A multivariate regression model was constructed to predict survival.

RESULTS

One hundred forty patients were considered to be compliant with the surveillance program, whereas the remaining 59 patients occasionally attended follow-up investigations or did not comply at all. Although there were no differences in the overall recurrence rate (38 vs. 41 percent; P = 0.52), curative-intent reoperation was possible in 18 patients (34 percent) of those with tumor recurrence in the compliant cohort but in only 3 patients (12 percent) in the noncompliant cohort (P = 0.05). Similarly, the probability of survival was higher in the compliant cohort, both regarding overall (63 vs. 37 percent at 5 years; P < 0.001) and cancer-related (69 vs. 49 percent at 5 years; P < 0.02) rates. Cox regression analysis disclosed that only a more advanced TNM stage (odds ratio, 8.17; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.13-59.29) and noncompliance with the postoperative surveillance program (odds ratio, 2.32; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.50-3.60) had an independent negative impact on survival.

CONCLUSION

Systematic postoperative surveillance in patients with colorectal cancer who were operated on for cure increases both the rate of tumor recurrence amenable to curative-intent surgery and rate of survival.

Yearly colonoscopy, liver CT, and chest radiography do not influence 5-year survival of colorectal cancer patients

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Guidelines on the type and frequency of follow-up of patients after curative surgery for colorectal cancer are unclear. The aim of this study was to determine the survival benefit of a planned follow-up program.

METHODS

Three hundred twenty-five patients who underwent curative resection of colorectal cancer were prospectively randomized to either intensive or standard follow-up. After stratification according to Dukes' stage and site in the colon or rectum, patients were randomized to intensive follow-up of yearly colonoscopy, computerized tomography (CT) of the liver, and chest radiography and clinical review and simple screening vs. structured clinical review and simple screening tests only.

RESULTS

On completion of 5-year follow-up, there was no significant difference in survival between the two groups. Yearly colonoscopy failed to detect any asymptomatic local recurrences. Only one asymptomatic curable metachronous colon tumor was detected. Liver CT resulted in earlier detection of hepatic metastases but did not increase the number of curative hepatectomies. Only 1 patient had an asymptomatic CT-detected liver metastasis, and another had an asymptomatic chest radiography-detected lung metastasis. Both had curative resections.

CONCLUSIONS

Yearly colonoscopy, liver CT, and chest radiography will not improve survival from colorectal cancer when added to symptom and simple screening review.

Independently predictive prognostic variables after resection for colorectal carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Clinical variables such as surgical morbidity, comorbidity and follow-up have been claimed to influence ultimate survival in patients who have resection for colorectal cancer. It is unclear whether the effect of clinical covariates is confounding or independent. We have attempted to build a comprehensive model, which is capable of testing the dependence and importance of prognostic factors.

METHODS

A consecutive series of patients admitted between 1970 and 1988 and followed until 1992 had data recorded about presentation, pathology, hospitalization, aftercare and long-term outcome. The patients were also divided into two approximately equal groups that were cared for by one and seven surgeons, respectively. Clinical and pathological covariates were built into a Cox (multivariate) proportional hazard model of crude survival. This was achieved with the SPSS advanced statistical package version 6.1. Comparison between groups was then performed of clinical and pathological factors and subsequent cancer management.

RESULTS

There were 207 patients whose average age was 75 years, median survival was 43 months and operative mortality was 4%. The Cox model was robust. Covariates that had independent survival effects were pathological stage (P = 0.0000), grade (P = 0.014), age (P = 0.018), heart disease (P = 0.001), and group (P = 0.0008). Some of the dependent variables were symptoms, type of surgery, complications and length of stay. The groups, however, were well matched for age, stage, substage and comorbidity. Furthermore there were no substantial differences in mortality, complications or follow-up frequency. There was a significant survival difference (P = 0.0003) between groups, which was restricted to patients who were in clinicopathological stages B and C. Within stages B and C there was a significant (P = 0.008) survival difference between patients who were or were not treated for recurrent disease. Diagnosis of recurrence was pursued more aggressively (P < 0.01), and decisions to treat recurrent disease were made more frequently in group 1 (P = 0.0002).

CONCLUSIONS

Pathology, comorbidity and management of recurrence all have a significant independent effect upon crude survival after colorectal carcinoma resection.

Preoperative and postoperative imaging for colorectal cancer

Management and survival in colorectal cancer are dictated by the extent of the disease at the initial diagnosis. Technological advances over the past 25 years have improved the ability to accurately preoperatively stage these lesions and detect recurrence. This article reviews the focus on the utility of computerized tomography, magnetic resonance, endoscopic ultrasound, and newer imaging methods including PET scan and monoclonal antibodies in the management of colorectal carcinoma.

What is the risk factor for metachronous colorectal carcinoma?

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to determine the risk factors for developing metachronous colorectal carcinoma and to determine an adequate postoperative colonoscopic surveillance.

METHODS

Two hundred eighty-four patients, examined by routine colonoscopy after resection for colorectal carcinoma, were reviewed. Clinical and pathologic factors were assessed by multiple logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

One hundred eighty-three patients with synchronous adenoma or carcinoma at the initial operation had a significantly higher incidence of both metachronous adenoma and carcinoma than the 101 patients without a synchronous lesion. Other clinical factors including age, gender, tumor stage, tumor site, and tumor grade were not significant for an increased incidence of metachronous carcinoma. The presence of synchronous lesions proved to be the only risk factor (relative risk, 3.293; P = 0.0155) for developing metachronous carcinoma. Metachronous carcinoma was detected in 30 patients (10.6 percent) and completely removed from all patients. Mucosal carcinoma was found in 25 patients (8.8 percent) and invasive carcinoma in 5 patients (1.8 percent). All five invasive carcinomas were detected in asymptomatic patients having synchronous lesion. Four patients required a second operation for metachronous carcinoma more than 13 months following the first.

CONCLUSION

The risk factor for developing metachronous carcinoma is the presence of synchronous adenoma or carcinoma at the initial operation. To detect metachronous carcinoma at a curable stage, annual colonoscopic surveillance should be performed for high-risk patients.

A prospective randomized study of follow-up after radical surgery for colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

The possible benefit for patients from follow-up examinations after curative surgery for colorectal cancer is unproven. The purpose of this study was to determine whether survival is improved by frequent follow-up examinations.

METHODS

A total of 597 patients less than 76 years old treated with radical surgery for colorectal cancer were included in the study from 1983 to 1994. Patients were randomized to frequent follow-up (group 1) or virtually no follow-up (group 2) with examinations at 5 and 10 years.

RESULTS

Group 1 comprised 290 patients, group 2 contained 307. Recurrence was equally frequent (26 per cent), but the time of diagnosis was 9 months earlier in group 1; also, more recurrences were asymptomatic in group 1 and more patients had new surgery with curative intent (P = 0.02). However, no improvement in overall survival or in cancer-related survival resulted.

CONCLUSION

Patients subjected to intensive follow-up have recurrence diagnosed earlier, and have more operations for recurrence, but the survival results suggest that any major improvement by intensive follow-up is unlikely.