The lack of selection criteria for surgery in patients with non-colorectal non-neuroendocrine liver metastases

Recent advancements in management for noncolorectal, nonneuroendocrine hepatic metastases

BACKGROUND

Owing to the heterogeneity of underlying primary tumors, noncolorectal, nonneuroendocrine metastases to the liver (NCNNMLs), although relatively rare, pose major challenges to treatment and long-term management. Despite being considered the gold standard for colorectal cancer liver metastases, the role of surgical resection for NCNNML remains controversial. Furthermore, advancements in locoregional treatment modalities, such as ablation and various chemotherapeutic modalities, have contributed to the treatment of patients with NCNNML.

METHODS

This was a comprehensive review of literature that used Medline/PubMed, Google Scholar, the Cochrane Library, and the Web of Science, which were accessed between 2014 and 2024.

RESULTS

NCNNMLs are rare tumor entities with varied presentation and outcomes. A multidisciplinary approach, which includes chemotherapy, surgery, and interventional radiologic techniques, can be implemented with good results.

CONCLUSION

Given the complex nature of NCNNML, its management should be highly individualized and multidisciplinary. Locoregional treatments, such as surgical resection and/or ablation, may be more appropriate for select patients and should be offered as a viable therapeutic option for a subset of individuals.

Influence of Covariates on 18F-FDG PET/CT Diagnostic Accuracy for Liver Metastasis

(1) Background: 18F-FDG PET/CT diagnostic accuracy for liver metastasis (LM) could be influenced by technical parameters, lesion size, and the patient's covariates. This retrospective study aimed to evaluate these covariates' impact on PET/CT sensitivity. (2) Methods: Consecutive patients with suspected LMs who underwent 18F-FDG PET/CT scans were included. PET/CT scans were interpreted visually. The reference standard integrated histopathological and imaging follow-up. Logistic regression modeling and average marginal predictions were used to calculate per-lesion diagnostic performance measures with cluster robust 95% confidence intervals and to assess the covariates' impact on PET/CT sensitivity. (3) Results: We included 192 patients with 330 lesions. 18F-FDG PET/CT exhibited a per-lesion sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of 86%, 79%, 91%, and 69%, respectively. In multivariate analysis, TOF PET/CT exhibited a higher sensitivity than non-TOF PET/CT (91% vs. 78%, p = 0.02). Sensitivity was reduced for lesions < 10 mm compared to larger lesions (56% vs. 93%, p < 0.001). A 5 kg/m2 increase in BMI led to an average 5% sensitivity reduction (p < 0.001). Age, sex, blood glucose level below 11 mmol/L, and liver density did not significantly impact sensitivity (p > 0.05). (4) Conclusions: 18F-FDG PET/CT sensitivity might be reduced with non-TOF PET, lesions < 10 mm, and higher BMI.

Histopathological growth pattern of liver metastases as an independent marker of metastatic behavior in different primary cancers

Surgical resection can lead to prolonged survival in patients with isolated liver metastases (LM) from various primary cancers. However, there are currently no validated predictive markers to discriminate between these oligo/argometastatic patients, who will benefit from surgery, and those with diffuse metastatic behavior in whom surgery will be futile. To evaluate whether the tumor microenvironment, or histopathological growth pattern (HGP), of LM reflects the type of metastatic progression independently of the origin of the primary cancer, we analyzed a combined series of patients who underwent surgery for colorectal LM (N=263) or non-colorectal LM (N=66). HGPs of LM were scored in each patient to distinguish between desmoplastic HGP (all LM showing a complete encapsulated pattern) and non-desmoplastic HGP (at least one LM with some infiltrating-replacement component). In the entire series, 5-year overall and progression-free survival were, 44.5% and 15.5%, respectively, with no significant differences between colorectal and non-colorectal LM. In patients with desmoplastic HGP, 5-year overall and progression-free survival were 57% and 32%, respectively, as compared to 41% and 12%, respectively, in patients with non-desmoplastic-HGP (p=0.03 and 0.005). Irrespective of cancer origin and compared to traditional risk factors, desmoplastic HGP was the most significant predictor for better post-operative overall survival (adjusted HR: 0.62; 95% CI: [0.49-0.97]; p=0.035) and progression-free survival (adjusted HR: 0.61; 95% CI: [0.42-0.87], p=0.006). This suggests that the HGP of LM may represent an accurate marker that reflects the mode of metastatic behavior, independently of primary cancer type.

Influence of the tumor site and histopathology after resection for non-colorectal non-neuroendocrine liver metastases. A single center experience

INTRODUCTION

It remains unclear whether liver resection is justified in patients with non-colorectal non-neuroendocrine liver metastases (NCNNLM). A single-center study was conducted to analyse overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and potential prognostic factors in patients with different types of NCNNLM.

METHOD

A retrospective analysis of all patients who underwent liver resection of NCNNLM from January 2006 to July 2019 was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 62 patients were analyzed. 82.3% presented metachronous metastases and 74.2% were unilobar. The most frequent primary tumor site (PTS) were breast (24.2%), urinary tract (19.4%), melanoma (12.9%), and pancreas (9.7%). The most frequent primary tumor pathologies were breast carcinoma (24.2%), non-breast adenocarcinoma (21%), melanoma (12.9%) and sarcoma (12.9%). The most frequent surgical procedure performed was minor hepatectomy (72.6%). R0 resection was achieved in 79.5% of cases. The major complications' rate was 9.7% with a 90-day mortality rate of 1.6%. The 1, 3 and 5-year OS/DFS rate were 65%/28%, 45%/36% and 46%/28%, respectively. We identified the response to neoadjuvant therapy and PTS as possible prognostic factors for OS (P =0.06) and DFS (P =0.06) respectively.

CONCLUSION

Based on the results of our series, NCNNLM resection produces beneficial outcomes in terms of OS and DFS. PTS and the response to neoadjuvant therapy could be the main prognostic factors after resection.

Surgery for Liver Metastasis of Non-Colorectal and Non-Neuroendocrine Tumors

Surgery has become well established for patients with colorectal and neuroendocrine liver metastases. However, the value of this procedure in non-colorectal and non-neuroendocrine metastases (NCRNNELMs) remains unclear. We analyzed the outcomes of patients that underwent liver surgery for NCRNNELMs and for colorectal liver metastases (CRLMs) between 2012 and 2017 at our institution. Prognostic factors of overall and recurrence-free survival were analyzed, and a comparison of survival between two groups was performed. Seventy-three patients (30 NCRNNELM and 43 CRLM) were included in this study. Although the mean age, extrahepatic metastases, and rate of reoperation were significantly different between the groups, recurrence-free survival was comparable. The 5-year overall survival rates were 38% for NCRNNELM and 55% for CRLM. In univariate analysis, a patient age of ≥60 years, endodermal origin of the primary tumor, and major complications were negative prognostic factors. Resection for NCRNNELM showed comparable results to resection for CRLM. Age, the embryological origin of the primary tumor, and the number of metastases might be the criteria for patient selection.

Histopathological growth patterns of resected non-colorectal, non-neuroendocrine liver metastases: a retrospective multicenter studyss

BACKGROUND

Distinct Histopathological Growth Patterns can be identified in liver metastases from melanoma, breast and colorectal cancers. For each of these distinct liver metastasis types the HGP has proven a biomarker for survival after partial hepatectomy, with the desmoplastic type marking favourable prognosis. Whether HGPs can be considered a pan-cancer phenomenon remains unknown. This study therefore evaluates the presence of HGPs and their prognostic value across non-colorectal non-neuroendocrine liver metastases.

METHODS

A retrospective multicentre cohort study was performed in patients who underwent curative intent resection of non-colorectal non-neuroendocrine liver metastasis. HGPs were assessed on Haematoxylin and Eosin slides according to consensus guidelines and classified as desmoplastic or non-desmoplastic. Overall- and recurrence-free survival were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox regression analysis.

RESULTS

In total, 132 patients with liver metastasis from 25 different tumour types were eligible for analysis, of which 26 (20%) had a desmoplastic HGP. Five-year OS and RFS (95%CI) were 53% (36-78%) versus 40% (30-53%), and 33% (19-61%) versus 15% (9-27%) for patients with desmoplastic compared to non-desmoplastic metastases, respectively (p = 0.031 & p = 0.004). On multivariable analysis (adjusted HR [95%CI]) a desmoplastic HGP was prognostic for both OS (0.46 [0.25-0.86]) and RFS (0.38 [0.21-0.69]).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that HGPs apply to liver metastases across a wide variety of primary tumour origins. They hold a prognostic value in these cases, suggesting that HGPs could represent a pan-cancer biomarker for survival after surgical resection of liver metastases.

Development and validation of prognostic nomograms for patients with colon neuroendocrine neoplasms

BACKGROUND

Colon neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) have one of the poorest median overall survival (OS) rates among all NENs. The American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) staging system-currently the most commonly used prediction model-has limited prediction accuracy because it does not include parameters such as age, sex, and treatment. The aim of this study was to construct nomograms containing various clinically important parameters to predict the prognosis of patients with colon NENs more accurately.

METHODS

Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database, we performed a retrospective analysis of colon NENs diagnosed from 1975 to 2016. Data were collected from 1196 patients; almost half were female (617/1196, 51.6%), and the average age was 61.94 ± 13.05 years. Based on the age triple cut-off values, there were 396 (33.1%), 408 (34.1%), and 392 (32.8%) patients in age groups 0-55 years, 55-67 years, and ≥ 68 years, respectively. Patients were randomized into training and validation cohorts (3:1). Independent prognostic factors were used for construction of nomograms to precisely predict OS and cancer-specific survival (CSS) in patients with colon NENs.

RESULTS

Multivariate analysis showed that age ≥ 68 years, sex, tumor size, grade, chemotherapy, N stage, and M stage were independent predictors of OS. In the validation cohort, the Concordance index (C-index) values of the OS and CSS nomograms were 0.8345 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.8044-0.8646) and 0.8209 (95% CI, 0.7808-0.861), respectively. C-index also indicated superior performance of both nomograms (C-index 0.8347 for OS and 0.8668 for CSS) compared with the AJCC TNM classification (C-index 0.7159 for OS and 0.7366 for CSS).

CONCLUSIONS

We established and validated new nomograms for more precise prediction of OS and CSS in patients with colon NENs to facilitate individualized clinical decisions.

Surgical treatment of liver metastases from non-colorectal non-neuroendocrine carcinomas

Introduction

In the literature, results after surgical treatment of non-colorectal non-neuroendocrine liver metastases (NCNNLM) are reported that are often inferior to those from colorectal liver metastases. The selection of patients with favorable tumor biology is currently still a matter of discussion.

Materials/methods

The retrospective data analysis was based on data that were collected for the multicenter study “Role of surgical treatment for non-colorectal liver metastases” in county Thuringia.

Results

For the study, 637 patients were included from 1995 to 2018. 5 and 10-year survival of R0 resected patients were 33% and 19%, respectively. In the multi-variate analysis of the entire group, sex, timing, disease-free interval, number of metastases, R-classification as well as lymph node status of the primary lesion showed an independent statistical influence on the 5-year survival. In the group of R0 resected patients, disease-free interval, number of metastases and lymph node status of the primary lesion influenced the 5-year survival in the multi-variate analysis. In kidney malignancies, R-classification, timing and number of liver metastases were statistically significant in the multi-variate analysis of the 5-year survival, in mamma carcinomas only the R-classification.

Conclusion

The Adam score identifies some risk factors which influence prognosis in most but not in all tumor entities. For kidney cancer and breast cancer it can be simplified.