[Risk factors for lymphatic metastasis from pT1 colorectal adenocarcinoma]

Clinicopathological characteristics of T1 colorectal cancer without background adenoma

AIM

Background adenoma (BGA) is defined as benign adenomatous tissue contiguous to resected carcinomas, and the absence of BGA in a tumour is considered a histological criterion of de novo cancers. The present study aimed to identify the clinicopathological characteristics of T1 colorectal cancer (CRC) without BGA.

METHOD

A retrospective review was carried out of prospectively collected data from two centres: the National Cancer Center, Korea; and Chonnam National University Hwasun Hospital, Korea. A total of 590 patients with T1 CRC, treated by endoscopic or surgical resection between January 2001 and August 2011, were enrolled. Details regarding gender, age, tumour location, endoscopic gross type, tumour size, depth of submucosal (SM) invasion, angiolymphatic invasion, tumour grade, budding and lymph node (LN) metastasis were evaluated with regard to the presence or absence of BGA.

RESULTS

BGA was absent in 197 (33.4%) patients. Tumour size <20 mm, flat or depressed type, deep SM depth and tumour budding were associated with the absence of BGA in univariate and multivariate analyses (P < 0.05). In surgically resected patients, LN metastases were significantly associated with the absence of BGA (P = 0.022).

CONCLUSION

T1 CRC without BGA presented several characteristics of small size (<20 mm), flat or depressed type, deep SM depth (SM 2/3), LN metastasis and tumour budding. These results indicate that de novo cancers may have a more invasive potential.

[Standardized and structured histopathological evaluation of colorectal polyps: a practical checklist against the background of the new WHO classification]

Gastroenterologists removing colorectal polyps expect standardized and well-structured pathological reports, providing them with all relevant data for the further clinical management of the patient. Over the last year, a task force of clinicians and pathologists has developed a checklist to improve and harmonize endoscopic and pathological reporting of colorectal polyps. This checklist concentrates more on concrete recommendations from evidence-based guidelines and established international classifications for daily practice rather than detailed molecular pathological pathways of carcinogenesis. These recommendations are based on the current S3 guidelines for colorectal cancer (the chapter entitled "Management of colorectal polyps"), the histomorphological consensus manuscript of the GI working group of the German Society for Pathology, as well as the current WHO classification for tumors of the digestive system.

Annex to Quirke et al. Quality assurance in pathology in colorectal cancer screening and diagnosis: annotations of colorectal lesions

Multidisciplinary, evidence-based European Guidelines for quality assurance in colorectal cancer screening and diagnosis have recently been developed by experts in a pan-European project coordinated by the International Agency for Research on Cancer. The full guideline document includes a chapter on pathology with pan-European recommendations which take into account the diversity and heterogeneity of health care systems across the EU. The present paper is based on the annex to the pathology chapter which attempts to describe in greater depth some of the issues raised in the chapter in greater depth, particularly details of special interest to pathologists. It is presented here to make the relevant discussion known to a wider scientific audience.

Quality assurance in pathology in colorectal cancer screening and diagnosis—European recommendations

In Europe, colorectal cancer is the most common newly diagnosed cancer and the second most common cause of cancer deaths, accounting for approximately 436,000 incident cases and 212,000 deaths in 2008. The potential of high-quality screening to improve control of the disease has been recognized by the Council of the European Union who issued a recommendation on cancer screening in 2003. Multidisciplinary, evidence-based European Guidelines for quality assurance in colorectal cancer screening and diagnosis have recently been developed by experts in a pan-European project coordinated by the International Agency for Research on Cancer. The full guideline document consists of ten chapters and an extensive evidence base. The content of the chapter dealing with pathology in colorectal cancer screening and diagnosis is presented here in order to promote international discussion and collaboration leading to improvements in colorectal cancer screening and diagnosis by making the principles and standards recommended in the new EU Guidelines known to a wider scientific community.

Colorectal carcinoma: the management of polyps, (neo)adjuvant therapy, and the treatment of metastases

BACKGROUND

Colorectal carcinoma (CRC) is the second most common type of cancer in Germany. In view of recent major changes in the diagnosis and treatment of CRC, the S3 guideline for CRC published in its full version in 2004 was partially updated in 2008 and again in 2009.

METHOD

The literature was systematically searched for all articles published from 2004 onward concerning polyp management, (neo-)adjuvant treatment, and treatment of metastatic disease. Evidence-based recommendations were developed in a consensus conference.

RESULTS

For some patients who have undergone polypectomy, the time to follow-up with colonoscopy can be lengthened. In UICC stage III colon cancer, adjuvant chemotherapy with an oxaliplatin-based regimen is recommended. In stage II colon cancer, adjuvant chemotherapy should be considered mainly when risk factors are present. In stages II and III, neo-adjuvant therapy should be given before resection in rectal cancer. In patients with metastatic disease, the use of all possible treatment options results in a median overall survival time of 24 months. In some patients with primarily non-resectable liver metastases, systemic treatment may enable a secondary, potentially curative resection. Therapeutic agents are chosen individually on the basis of clinical factors including the goal of treatment, the patient's general condition, and tumor molecular markers.

CONCLUSION

The S3 guideline contains evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of colorectal carcinoma. Broad implementation of the guideline will be essential for improved patient care.

Local excision for more advanced rectal tumors

Over the past 20 years, local excision (LE) of T1 rectal cancer was increasingly established and represents an oncologically established technique. In contrast, the situation for T2 tumors is less clear and has only been investigated in small patient collectives. LE for T2 tumors is thus discussed controversially.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In addition to our own patients with T2 rectal cancer treated locally (n=40), we have analysed the local recurrence (LR) rates after LE alone (n=124), after immediate conventional radical reoperation (n=29), after adjuvant (chemo)-radiotherapy (n=294) and those after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) (n=269) using a PubMed search.

RESULTS

LR rates of low-grade T2 tumors after R0 resection by LE alone was 19%. If additional prognostically unfavorable findings were present, the LR rate rose to 52%. By immediate radical reoperation the LR rate was decreased to 7%, whereas that after adjuvant therapy was 16%. In contrast, LE of more advanced tumors after nCRT resulted in LR rates of 9%.

DISCUSSION

LE alone of T2 rectal cancer should not be performed, and after adjuvant chemoradiotherapy the risk of developing LR was also high. In cases with unexpected T2 finding after LE, immediate conventional reoperation can represent an adequate oncological therapy, because it reveals comparable results to those obtained by primary radical resection. First results after nCRT followed by LE showed favorable results with low LR rates. If the indication for LE of T2 cancers can be extended to patients after nCRT in the future will have to be determined in prospective mutlticentre studies.

No prognostic impact of isolated lymphovascular invasion after radical resection of rectal cancer--results of a multicenter observational study

BACKGROUND

The prognostic impact of isolated lymphovascular invasion (LVI) after radical resection of rectal cancer is controversially discussed. However, it could be relevant to decide for an adjuvant treatment.

AIM

The aim of the analysis was, based on the data of an observational study, to determine the prognostic relevance of the isolated LVI.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients after radical resection of rectal cancer with no hemangioinvasion were subdivided in three groups: I-no LVI, no lymph node metastases (LNM); II-positive LVI, no LNM; III-positive LNM. Five-year local recurrence rate, distant metastases-free and disease-free survival were determined uni- and multivariate.

RESULTS

Patients, n = 846, were studied (I, n = 471; II, n = 75; III, n = 300). The univariate comparison between the groups revealed the following 5-year results: local recurrence rate: 9.4 vs 10.0 vs 14.0%; distant metastases-free survival: 84.1 vs 82.5 vs 49.3%; disease-free survival: 83.2 vs 80.7 vs 45.5%. The differences between groups I and III were significant, but not between groups I and II. The determined higher disease-free survival rate in group II vs group III was significant (P = 0.041), but the differences in local recurrence rate and rate of distant metastases did not reach statistical significance. The multivariate analysis revealed no impact of the isolated LVI on the oncological outcome.

CONCLUSION

The isolated LVI has no independent prognostic impact on the local recurrence rate and long-term survival after radical resection of rectal cancer. Based on this finding, no indication for an adjuvant treatment in these patients can be derived.

The influence of histopathologic criteria on the long-term prognosis of locally excised pT1 rectal carcinomas: results of local excision (transanal endoscopic microsurgery) and immediate reoperation

PURPOSE

Local excision of early rectal cancer is a controversial issue, which is in part because of differences in the evaluation of histopathologic criteria. This prospective study was designed to determine prognostic factors for recurrences and the need for reoperation.

METHODS

In 105 of 118 patients with pT1 carcinomas and local excision, results of recurrence rates and ten-year cancer-free survival were studied separately according to different histologic criteria (R0, R1, Rx, R < or = 1 mm, high-/low-risk situation), tumor localization (anterior, posterior, lateral wall and third of rectum), size, and degree of resection (full-thickness/partial wall). Patients were grouped into local excision (n = 89) and local excision followed by reoperation (n = 21). Risk classification was performed by division into "low-risk" carcinomas after local R0-resection (Group A) and unfavorable histologic results after local resection (R1, Rx, R < or = 1 mm, high-risk situation; Group B).

RESULTS

Local recurrence rates after local R0-resection of low-risk carcinomas were 6 percent, whereas patients in Group B with local resection were 39 percent. The recurrence risk in those patients was significantly reduced to 6 percent by reoperation (P = 0.015). In addition, ten-year, cancer-free survival was 93 percent in Group B after reoperation compared with 89 percent in patients of Group A after local excision alone.

CONCLUSIONS

Local R0-resection in cases with low-risk pT1 carcinomas represents an oncologically adequate therapy, which results in similar survival rates compared with primary radical surgery of pT1N0M0 rectal carcinomas. High recurrence rates are observed in tumors with unfavorable histologic result (Group B) requiring further treatment. In these cases immediate reoperation reduces the recurrence rate to 6 percent.