Initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy within 8 weeks of elective colorectal resection improves overall survival regardless of reoperation

Clinical Practice Guideline: Recommendations for the Perioperative Management of Pancreatic and Colorectal Cancer Patients

BACKGROUND

Colorectal and pancreatic carcinoma are the most common cancers of the gastrointestinal tract. Their surgical treatment carries a high morbidity: complications arise in 25% to 30% of cases, often prolonging recovery times and delaying the initiation of adjuvant therapy, leading, in turn, to worse oncological outcomes. The goal of multimodal perioperative management (mPOM) is to lower the postoperative complication rate through a combination of perioperative measures.

METHODS

This guideline on the perioperative management of gastrointestinal tumors (POMGAT) meets all requirements for an S3 guideline as specified by the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany (Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Wissenschaftlichen Medizinischen Fachgesellschaften, AWMF). These include a systematic literature search, quality assessment of the included publications, an evaluation of the reliability of the evidence according to the GRADE approach, and a structured consensus process.

RESULTS

Meta-analyses have shown that mPOM lowers the complication rates of both pancreatic and colorectal resections (RD 0.96 with 95% confidence interval [0.92; 0.99] and RR 0.66 [0.54; 0.80], respectively). This shortens the hospital stay after pancreatic resections by a median of 2.33 days [-2.98; -1.69] and after colorectal resections by a median of 2.59 days [-3.22; -1.97].

CONCLUSION

Adherence to the POMGAT-S3 guideline for pancreatic and colorectal cancer surgery is associated with improved recovery, which can lead to a faster return to intended oncological treatment (RIOT) and thus to better long-term outcomes. These recommendations are not restricted to gastrointestinal cancer surgery; they can also be applied to visceral surgery for benign conditions, as well as to gynecological and urological operations.

Preoperative combined mechanical and oral antibiotic bowel preparation for preventing complications in elective colorectal surgery

BACKGROUND

The success of elective colorectal surgery is mainly influenced by the surgical procedure and postoperative complications. The most serious complications include anastomotic leakages and surgical site infections (SSI)s, which can lead to prolonged recovery with impaired long-term health.  Compared with other abdominal procedures, colorectal resections have an increased risk of adverse events due to the physiological bacterial colonisation of the large bowel. Preoperative bowel preparation is used to remove faeces from the bowel lumen and reduce bacterial colonisation. This bowel preparation can be performed mechanically and/or with oral antibiotics. While mechanical bowel preparation alone is not beneficial, the benefits and harms of combined mechanical and oral antibiotic bowel preparation is still unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the evidence for the use of combined mechanical and oral antibiotic bowel preparation for preventing complications in elective colorectal surgery.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL and trial registries on 15 December 2021. In addition, we searched reference lists and contacted colorectal surgery organisations.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of adult participants undergoing elective colorectal surgery comparing combined mechanical and oral antibiotic bowel preparation (MBP+oAB) with either MBP alone, oAB alone, or no bowel preparation (nBP). We excluded studies in which no perioperative intravenous antibiotic prophylaxis was given.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures as recommended by Cochrane. Pooled results were reported as mean difference (MD) or risk ratio (RR) and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) using the Mantel-Haenszel method. The certainty of the evidence was assessed with GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 21 RCTs analysing 5264 participants who underwent elective colorectal surgery. None of the included studies had a high risk of bias, but two-thirds of the included studies raised some concerns. This was mainly due to the lack of a predefined analysis plan or missing information about the randomisation process. Most included studies investigated both colon and rectal resections due to malignant and benign surgical indications. For MBP as well as oAB, the included studies used different regimens in terms of agent(s), dosage and timing.  Data for all predefined outcomes could be extracted from the included studies. However, only four studies reported on side effects of bowel preparation, and none recorded the occurrence of adverse effects such as dehydration, electrolyte imbalances or the need to discontinue the intervention due to side effects. Seventeen trials compared MBP+oAB with sole MBP. The incidence of SSI could be reduced through MBP+oAB by 44% (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.74; 3917 participants from 16 studies; moderate-certainty evidence) and the risk of anastomotic leakage could be reduced by 40% (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.99; 2356 participants from 10 studies; moderate-certainty evidence). No difference between the two comparison groups was found with regard to mortality (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.27 to 2.82; 639 participants from 3 studies; moderate-certainty evidence), the incidence of postoperative ileus (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.32; 2013 participants from 6 studies, low-certainty of evidence) and length of hospital stay (MD -0.19, 95% CI -1.81 to 1.44; 621 participants from 3 studies; moderate-certainty evidence). Three trials compared MBP+oAB with sole oAB. No difference was demonstrated between the two treatment alternatives in terms of SSI (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.34 to 2.21; 960 participants from 3 studies; very low-certainty evidence), anastomotic leakage (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.21 to 3.45; 960 participants from 3 studies; low-certainty evidence), mortality (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.30 to 3.50; 709 participants from 2 studies; low-certainty evidence), incidence of postoperative ileus (RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.68 to 2.33; 709 participants from 2 studies; low-certainty evidence) or length of hospital stay (MD 0.1 respectively 0.2, 95% CI -0.68 to 1.08; data from 2 studies; moderate-certainty evidence). One trial (396 participants) compared MBP+oAB versus nBP. The evidence is uncertain about the effect of MBP+oAB on the incidence of SSI as well as mortality (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.23 respectively RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.01 to 4.22; low-certainty evidence), while no effect on the risk of anastomotic leakages (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.33 to 2.42; low-certainty evidence), the incidence of postoperative ileus (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.81; low-certainty evidence) or the length of hospital stay (MD 0.1, 95% CI -0.8 to 1; low-certainty evidence) could be demonstrated.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on moderate-certainty evidence, our results suggest that MBP+oAB is probably more effective than MBP alone in preventing postoperative complications. In particular, with respect to our primary outcomes, SSI and anastomotic leakage, a lower incidence was demonstrated using MBP+oAB. Whether oAB alone is actually equivalent to MBP+oAB, or leads to a reduction or increase in the risk of postoperative complications, cannot be clarified in light of the low- to very low-certainty evidence. Similarly, it remains unclear whether omitting preoperative bowel preparation leads to an increase in the risk of postoperative complications due to limited evidence. Additional RCTs, particularly on the comparisons of MBP+oAB versus oAB alone or nBP, are needed to assess the impact of oAB alone or nBP compared with MBP+oAB on postoperative complications and to improve confidence in the estimated effect. In addition, RCTs focusing on subgroups (e.g. in relation to type and location of colon resections) or reporting side effects of the intervention are needed to determine the most effective approach of preoperative bowel preparation.

Phase III Prospectively Randomized Trial of Perioperative 5-FU After Curative Resection for Colon Cancer: An Intergroup Trial of the ECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research Group (E1292)

BACKGROUND

Studies suggest that adjuvant chemotherapy should be initiated at the earliest possible time. The Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) and Intergroup evaluated the effect of perioperative fluorouracil (5-FU) on overall survival (OS) for colon cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This phase III trial randomized patients to receive continuous infusional 5-FU for 7 days starting within 24 h after curative resection (arm A) or no perioperative 5-FU (arm B). Patients with Dukes' B3 and C disease received adjuvant chemotherapy per standard of care. The primary endpoint of the trial was overall survival in patients with Dukes' B3 and C disease. The secondary objective was to determine whether a week of perioperative infusion would affect survival in patients with Dukes' B2 colon cancer with no additional chemotherapy.

RESULTS

From August 1993 to May 2000, 859 patients were enrolled and 855 randomized (arm A: 427; arm B: 428). The trial was terminated early due to slow accrual. The median follow-up is 15.4 years (0.03-20.3 years). Among patients with Dukes' B3 and C disease, there was no statistically significant difference in OS [median 10.3 years (95% CI 8.4, 13.2) for perioperative chemotherapy and 9.3 years (95% CI 5.7, 12.3) for no perioperative therapy, one-sided log-rank p = 0.178, HR = 0.88 (95% CI 0.66, 1.16)] or disease-free survival (DFS). For patients with Dukes' B2 disease, there was also no significant difference in OS (median 16.1 versus 12.9 years) or DFS. There was no difference between treatment arms in operative complications. One week of continuous infusion of 5-FU was tolerable; 18% of arm A patients experienced grade 3 or greater toxicity.

Total Neoadjuvant Therapy Is a Predictor for Complete Pathological Response in Patients Undergoing Surgery for Rectal Cancer

INTRODUCTION

Total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) is a new therapeutic strategy in patients with rectal cancer. We examined the role of TNT, in addition to other pre-operative factors, as a predictor for pathologic complete response (pCR).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of all rectal cancer patients who underwent surgery between 2016 and 2021 was conducted. Patients were classified into two groups-pCR group and residual tumor group. Patient data were reviewed and entered into univariate and multivariate analyses to determine predictors of pCR.

RESULTS

A total of 172 patients were treated with neoadjuvant therapy and underwent surgery during the study period. Sixty patients (34.9%) were treated with TNT while 112 (65.1%) were treated with traditional neoadjuvant chemoradiation. The overall pCR rate was 25.6% (44 patients), with 31.6% (19 patients) in patients who received TNT compared to 22.3% (25 patients) in patients who received neoadjuvant chemoradiation (NCRT). Univariate analysis of clinical and radiological factors correlated with pCR demonstrated no significant differences between the two groups in cT stage (p = 0.46), cN stage (p = 0.52), positive circumferential resection margin (CRM) (p = 0.72), tumor location (p = 0.35), symptomatic presentation (p = 0.09), and anal sphincter involvement (p = 0.68). Multivariate logistic analysis demonstrated that only pre-operative TNT (OR:2.35; 95% CI 1.06-5.25; p = 0.03) was predictive of pCR, while extramural vascular invasion (EMVI) was a predictor for lower rates of pCR (OR: 0.28; 95% CI 0.09-0.9; p = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

Rectal cancer patients undergoing TNT prior to surgery have a higher chance of developing a complete pathologic response. Evaluation of this therapy should be continued and extended to larger numbers of patients to see if the differences we observed are real.

Clinical Significance of Early Carcinoembryonic Antigen Change in Patients With Nonmetastatic Colorectal Cancer

Background

This study aimed to evaluate the prognostic significance of preoperative, postoperative, and trajectory changes in carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) levels in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC).

Methods

This retrospective study included patients who underwent surgical resection for nonmetastatic CRC. The optimal cutoff values of preoperative CEA (CEA-pre), early postoperative CEA (CEA-post), and CEA level change (CEA-delta) were determined to maximize the differences in overall survival (OS) among groups. The patients were divided into three groups according to CEA-trend: normal, low CEA-pre; normalized, high CEA-pre/low CEA-post; elevated, high CEA-pre/high CEA-post. The integrated area under the curve (iAUC) was used to compare the discriminatory power of all variables.

Results

A total of 1019 patients diagnosed with stage I–III CRC were enrolled. The optimal cutoff values of CEA level were determined as 2.3 ng/mL for CEA-pre, 2.3 ng/mL for CEA-post, and -0.93 ng/mL for CEA-delta. Although subgroup dichotomization showed that CEA-pre, CEA-post, CEA-delta, and CEA-trend were all associated with OS in univariate analysis, CEA-trend was the only independent prognostic factor in multivariate analysis. The iAUC of CEA-trend was superior to that of CEA-pre, CEA-post, and CEA-delta. Compared with the normal group, the normalized group showed worse OS (p=.0007) in stage II patients but similar OS (p=.067) in stage III patients.

Conclusion

The optimal cutoff value of CEA level in the preoperative and postoperative periods was determined to be 2.3 ng/mL, and the combination of CEA-pre and CEA-post showed better prognostic stratification. However, its prognostic significance may differ depending on the CRC stage.

[Background, Necessity and Methodology of the S3 Guideline "Perioperative Management of Gastrointestinal Tumours (POMGAT)"]

Malignancies are among the most common diseases, especially in old age, and are responsible for 25% of all deaths in Germany. Especially carcinomas of the gastrointestinal tract can be cured in most cases only through extensive surgery with significant morbidity. About 25 years ago, the multimodal, perioperative Fast Track (FT) concept for reducing postoperative complications was introduced and additional elements were added in the following years. Meanwhile, there is growing evidence that adherence to the key elements of more than 70% leads to reduction in postoperative adverse events as well as a shorter hospital stay and could be associated with an improved oncological outcome. Despite the high level of awareness and the proven advantages of the FT concept, the implementation and maintenance of the measures is difficult and results in an adherence of only 20 - 40%. There are many reasons for this: In addition to a lack of interdisciplinary and interprofessional cooperation and the time consuming and extended logistical efforts, limited human resources are often listed as one of the main causes. We took these aspects as an opportunity and started to develop a S3 guideline for perioperative treatment to accelerate the recovery of patients with gastrointestinal malignancies. By creating a consensus- and evidence-based, multidisciplinary guideline, many of the problems listed above could probably be solved by optimising and standardising interdisciplinary care, which is particularly important in a setting with many different disciplines and their competing interests. Furthermore, the standardisation of the perioperative procedures will reduce the time and logistical effort. The presentation of the evidence allows increased transparency and justifies the additional personnel expenditure on hospital medicine and health insurance companies. In addition, the evidence-based quality indicators generated during the development of the guideline make it possible to include perioperative standards in certification systems and thus to measure and check the quality of perioperative care.

A Single Institution Propensity Score Weighted Analysis of Time to Chemotherapy After Minimally Invasive Versus Open Colorectal Surgery

BACKGROUND

Oncologic outcomes for colon cancer are optimal when chemotherapy is started within 6 to 8 weeks after surgery. The study objective was to investigate the impact of operative modality and urgency on the time interval from surgery to adjuvant chemotherapy.

METHODS

This is a retrospective institutional tumor registry cohort study of open and laparoscopic/robotic colorectal resections for stage II-IV cancer between April 2010 and January 2018. Primary outcome was time from surgery to chemotherapy. Predictor variables were adjusted for imbalances by propensity score weighting.

RESULTS

A total of 220 patients met inclusion criteria: 171 elective (108 laparoscopic/robotic and 63 open) and 49 urgent colectomies. After propensity score weighting, there was no significant difference in time to chemotherapy between elective minimally invasive and open surgical approaches (48 days vs. 58 days, P = .187). Only 68.9% of minimally invasive and 50.8% of open colectomy patients started chemotherapy within 8 weeks of surgery. There was a significant difference (P = .037) among surgical sites with rectal resections having the longest (55 days), and right colectomies having the shortest (46 days), time to chemotherapy. Patients who had urgent operations had significantly longer hospital length of stay (P < .001) and higher post-discharge emergency department visit rates (P < .001) than the elective operation group. However, there was no significant difference in time to chemotherapy.

DISCUSSION

Neither operative modality nor operative urgency resulted in a significant difference in postoperative time to initiating chemotherapy. Future efforts should be focused on identifying postoperative recovery criteria and optimum multidisciplinary communication methods that allow recovered patients to start chemotherapy sooner.

The influence of postoperative complications on long-term prognosis in patients with colorectal carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The impact of postoperative complications (POCs) on the long-term prognosis of patients with colorectal carcinoma was analysed with respect to their severity according to the Clavien-Dindo classification (CDC).

METHODS

The prospectively collected data of 2158 patients who underwent curative resection of a colorectal carcinoma (1168 rectal carcinomas, 990 colon carcinomas) without distant metastases from 1995 to 2014 were analysed. The POCs were documented in a standardized form and graded with the CDC. Patients who died postoperatively (CDC grade V, 1.7%) were excluded.

RESULTS

In total, 467 patients (21.6%) had POCs: CDC I, 141 (6.5%); CDC II, 162 (7.5%); CDC III, 112 (5.2%); and CDC IV, 52 (2.4%). More POCs and higher CDC grades were found in men, ASA III-IV patients, rectal carcinoma patients, and patients who underwent abdominoperineal excisions or multivisceral resections. The 5-year locoregional recurrence rate was 5.3% in patients without POCs and 6.6% in patients with POCs. It was highest in CDC III patients (12.9%), which was confirmed in multivariate analysis (HR 2.2; p = 0.005). The 5-year distant metastasis rate was 15.9% in CDC 0 patients and 19.5% in CDC I-IV patients. In multivariate analysis, distant metastasis was highest in CDC III patients (HR 1.7; p = 0.020). The 5-year overall survival rate was 83.5% in patients without POCs and 73.5% in patients with POCs. It was worst in CDC IV patients (63.1%), which was confirmed by multivariate analysis (HR 1.9; p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Patients with POCs after colorectal surgery have a poor long-term prognosis. As the CDC grade increases, survival deteriorates.

Impact of socioeconomic deprivation on short-term outcomes and long-term overall survival after colorectal resection for cancer

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to assess the effects of socioeconomic deprivation on short-term outcomes and long-term overall survival following major resection of colorectal cancer (CRC) at a tertiary hospital in England.

METHOD

This was an observational cohort study of patients undergoing resection for colorectal cancer from January 2010 to December 2017. Deprivation was classified into quintiles using the English Indices of Multiple Deprivation 2010. Primary outcome was overall complications (Clavien-Dindo grades 1 to 5). Secondary outcomes were the major complications (Clavien-Dindo 3 to 5), length of hospital stay and overall survival. Outcomes were compared between most affluent group and most deprived group. Multivariate regression models were used to establish the relationship taking into account confounding variables.

RESULTS

One thousand eight hundred thirty-five patients were included. Overall and major complication rates were 44.9% and 11.5% respectively in the most affluent, and 54.6% and 15.6% in the most deprived group. Most deprived group was associated with higher overall complications (odds ratio 1.48, 95% CI 1.13-1.95, p = 0.005), higher major complications (odds ratio 1.49, 1.01-2.23, p = 0.048) and longer hospital stay (adjusted ratio 1.15, 1.06-1.25, p < 0.001) when compared with most affluent group. Median follow period was 41 months (interquartile range 20-64.5). Most deprived group had poor overall survival compared with most affluent, but it was not significant at the 5% level (hazard ratio 1.27, 0.99-1.62, p = 0.055).

CONCLUSION

Deprivation was associated with higher postoperative complications and longer hospital stay following major resection for CRC. Its relationship with survival was not statistically significant.

Bringing 3D tumor models to the clinic - predictive value for personalized medicine

Current decision-guiding algorithms in cancer drug treatment are based on decades of research and numerous clinical trials. For the majority of patients, this data is successfully applied for a systemic disease management. For a number of patients however, treatment stratification according to clinically based risk criteria will not be sufficient. The most effective treatment options are ideally identified prior to the start of clinical drug therapy. This review will discuss the implementation of three-dimensional (3D) cell culture models as a preclinical testing paradigm for the efficacy of clinical cancer treatment. Patient tumor-derived cells in 3D cultures duplicate the individual tumor microenvironment with a minimum of confounding factors. Clinical implementation of such personalized tumor models requires a high quality of methodological and clinical validation comparable to other biomarkers. A non-systematic literature search demonstrated the small number of prospective studies that have been conducted in this area of research. This may explain the current reluctance of many physicians and insurance providers in implementing this type of assay into the clinical diagnostic routine despite potential benefit for patients. Achieving valid and reproducible results with a high level of evidence is central in improving the acceptance of preclinical 3D tumor models.