Association between the number of retrieved lymph nodes and demographic/tumour-related characteristics in colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Clinical practice guidelines recommend retrieving at least 12 lymph nodes for correct staging in colorectal cancer. However, it is difficult to retrieve adequate lymph nodes because of various factors. We aimed to evaluate the association between the number of retrieved lymph nodes and demographic/tumour-related characteristics in colorectal cancer.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis of primary studies.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane and Web of Science were searched from January 2016 to June 2023.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

Studies that evaluated the association between retrieved lymph nodes and demographic/tumour-related characteristics in colorectal cancer were included.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

OR with 95% conference intervals was extracted and pooled.

RESULTS

A total of 54 studies containing 2 05 821 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The results showed that fewer nodes were retrieved from elderly patients (OR=0.70, 95% CI (0.54 to 0.90), p=0.005), and from tumours located in the left colon than in the right colon (OR=0.43, 95% CI (0.33 to 0.56), p<0.001). More lymph nodes were obtained from females than males (OR=1.15, 95% CI (1.04 to 1.28), p=0.006), from the advanced T stage (T3+T4) than T1+T2 stage (OR=1.57, 95% CI (1.25 to 1.97), p<0.001) and from the N2 stage than N0 stage (OR=1.32, 95% CI (1.15 to 1.51), p<0.001). Body mass index, ethnicity, N1 stage, M stage, tumour differentiation and lymph-vascular invasion were not significantly associated with the lymph node yield.

CONCLUSIONS

The study results suggest that clinicians have an increased opportunity to retrieve sufficient lymph nodes for accurate pathological staging to guide treatment decisions in patients with colorectal cancer who are young, female, with tumours located in the right colon, advanced T stage and N2 stage.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients undergoing colonic resection for locally advanced nonmetastatic colon cancer: A nationwide propensity score matched cohort study

AIM

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) for nonmetastatic colon cancer is not routinely used, and is currently only recommended as a treatment option for a subgroup of patients with T4b colon cancers in clinical guidelines. However, NCT may cause downstaging of the tumour, increase resectability, eradicate micrometastases and thereby improve long-term outcomes for patients with nonmetastatic colon cancer. The aim of this study was to investigate the short-term postoperative outcomes in a nationwide cohort of patients with locally advanced colon cancer (LACC) receiving NCT.

METHOD

Using the Danish Colorectal Cancer Group Database, data were retrieved on patients diagnosed with LACC (defined as clinical T3 with extramural tumour invasion >5 mm or T4) and treated with resection with a curative intent between 2015 and 2019. Propensity score matching (PSM) in a 1:1 ratio was performed to compare short-term surgical and oncological outcomes in patients receiving NCT with patients operated on without receiving NCT.

RESULTS

A total of 179 LACC patients were treated with NCT and 1131 were not. After PSM, 145 patients remained in each group. We found no significant differences in any short-term postoperative outcomes between the two groups. We found significant differences in favour of NCT regarding radicality and pathological N category [86% vs. 81% R0 (P = 0.029) and 51% vs. 46% pN0 (P = 0.017), respectively].

CONCLUSION

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for LACC does not result in worse short-term postoperative outcomes and may increase the R0 rate as well as node-negative disease. Results on long-term benefits including survival are awaited from several ongoing randomized controlled trials.

The efficiency of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in colon cancer with mismatch repair deficiency

Colon cancers with mismatch repair deficiency (dMMR) have specific clinicopathologic characteristics compared with mismatch repair proficiency (pMMR); however, the effect of MMR status on the efficiency of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) remains unclear. In our study, 439 dMMR and 26 pMMR colon cancer patients with or without NCT from 2010 to 2017 were retrospectively collected. Clinicopathological features, treatment response, and survival were compared between different groups. In the dMMR group, patients with NCT were likely to have higher CEA (abnormal CEA: 51.6% vs. 17.4%, p < 0.001), more multiorgan resection (38.7% vs. 16.8%, p = 0.006), and larger postoperative tumor diameter (7.26 vs. 6.21, p = 0.033) than those without NCT, but nearly half of cT4b patients who had NCT (42.9%, 9/21) avoid multiorgan resection. pT4 stage (HR, 14.97; 95% CI, 1.88-118.92; p = 0.010), number of positive lymph nodes (HR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.09-1.26; p < 0.001), and tumor deposit (HR, 6.73; 95% CI, 2.08-21.74; p = 0.001) were independent prognosis factors of disease-free survival (DFS). For the advanced tumor subset, there is no significant difference between patients with or without NCT for OS (p = 0.13) and DFS (p = 0.11), although the survival rate of NCT was higher than non-NCT patients. Moreover, tumor regression grade was similar between dMMR and pMMR patients who had NCT. This study showed that NCT was more likely to be employed in dMMR patients with advanced tumors and may reduce the rate of multiorgan resection for cT4b dMMR patients. More large-scaled researches are needed to further explore if MMR status could predict the efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with colon cancer.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced colon cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

There is increasing evidence to support the use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in locally advanced colon cancer (LACC). However, its safety, efficacy and side effect profile is yet to be completely elucidated. This review aims to assess NAC regimens, duration, compare completion rates, intra-operative and post-operative complication profiles and oncological outcomes, in order to provide guidance for clinical practice and further research.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE and MEDLINE were searched for a systematic review of the literature from 2000 to 2020. Eight eligible studies were included, with a total of 1213 patients, 752 (62%) of whom received NAC. Of the eight studies analysed, two were randomised controlled trials comparing neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by oncological resection to upfront surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy, three were prospective single-arm phase II trials analysing neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery only, one was a retrospective study comparing neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery versus surgery first followed by adjuvant chemotherapy and the remaining two were single-arm retrospective studies of neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery.

RESULTS

All cases of LACC were determined and staged by computed tomography; majority of the studies defined LACC as T3 with extramural depth of 5 mm or more, T4 and/or nodal positivity. NAC administered was either folinic acid, fluorouracil and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) or capecitabine and oxaliplatin (XELOX) with the exception of one study which utilised 5-fluorouracil and mitomycin. Most studies had NAC completion rates of above 83% with two notable exceptions being Zhou et al. and The Colorectal Cancer Chemotherapy Study Group of Japan who both recorded a completion rate of 52%. Time to surgery from completion of NAC ranged on average from 16 to 31 days. The anastomotic leak rate in the NAC group ranged from 0 to 4.5%, with no cases of postoperative mortality. The R0 resection rate in the NAC group was 96.1%. Meta-analysis of both RCTs included in this study showed that neoadjuvant chemotherapy increased the likelihood of a negative resection margin T3/4 advanced colon cancer (pooled relative risk of 0.47 with a 95% confidence interval) with no increase in adverse consequence of anastomotic leak, wound infection or return to theatre.

CONCLUSIONS

Our systematic review and meta-analysis show that NAC is safe with an acceptable side effect profile in the management of LACC. The current data supports an oncological benefit for tumour downstaging and increased in R0 resection rate.

An observational study of patho-oncological outcomes of various surgical methods in total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a single center analysis

BACKGROUND

Total mesorectal excision (TME) with or without neoadjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) is the treatment for rectal cancer (RC). Recently, the use of conventional laparoscopic surgery (LS) or robotic-assisted surgery (RS) has been on a steady increase cases. However, various oncological outcomes from different surgical approaches are still under investigation.

METHODS

This is a retrospective observational study comprising 300 consecutive RC patients who underwent various techniques of TME (RS, n = 88; LS, n = 37; Open surgery, n = 175) at a single center of real world data to compare the pathological and oncological outcomes, with a median follow-up of 48 months.

RESULTS

Upon multivariate analysis, histologic grade (P = 0.016), and stage (P < 0.001) were the independent factors of circumferential resection margin (CRM) involvement. The Kaplan-Meier survival analysis determined RS, early pathologic stage, negative CRM involvement, and pathologic complete response to be significantly associated with better overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) (all P < 0.05). Multivariable analyses observed the surgical method (P = 0.037), histologic grade (P = 0.006), and CRM involvement (P = 0.043) were the independent factors of DFS, whereas histologic grade (P = 0.011) and pathologic stage (P = 0.022) were the independent prognostic variables of OS.

CONCLUSIONS

This study determined that RS TME is feasible because it has less CRM involvement and better oncological outcomes than the alternatives have. The significant factors influencing CRM and prognosis depended on the histologic grade, tumor depth, and pre-operative CCRT. RS might be an acceptable option owing to the favorable oncological outcomes for patients with RC undergoing TME.

Palliative surgical bypass is superior to palliative endoscopic stenting in patients with malignant gastric outlet obstruction: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Gastrojejunostomy (GJ) and self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) are the two most common palliative treatment options for patients with malignant gastric outlet obstruction (GOO). Randomised trials and retrospective studies have shown discrepant results, so that there is still a controversy regarding the optimal treatment of GOO.

METHODS

Medline, Web of Science and Cochrane Library were systematically searched for studies comparing GJ to SEMS in patients with malignant GOO. Primary outcomes were survival and postoperative mortality. Secondary outcomes were frequency of re-interventions, major complications, time to oral intake and length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven studies, with a total of 2.354 patients, 1.306 (55.5%) patients in the SEMS and 1.048 (44.5%) patients in the GJ group, were considered suitable for inclusion. GJ was associated with significantly longer survival than SEMS (mean difference 43 days, CI 12.00, 73.70, p = 0.006). Postoperative mortality (OR 0.55, CI 0.27, 1.16, p = 0.12) and major complications (OR 0.73, CI 0.5, 1.06, p = 0.10) were similar in both groups. The frequency of re-interventions, however, was almost three times higher in the SEMS group (OR 2.95, CI: 1.70, 5.14, p < 0.001), whereas the mean time to oral intake and length of hospital stay were shorter in the SEMS group (mean differences - 5 days, CI - 6.75, - 3.05 days, p < 0.001 and - 10 days, CI - 11.6, - 7.9 days, p < 0.001, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with malignant GOO and acceptable performance status should be primarily considered for a palliative GJ rather than SEMS.