The utility of monitoring carcinoembyronic antigen during systemic therapy for advanced colorectal cancer

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for colorectal liver metastases: A contemporary review of the literature

Colorectal carcinoma (CRC) is one of the leading causes of cancer-related deaths worldwide, and up to 50% of patients with CRC develop colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). For these patients, surgical resection remains the only opportunity for cure and long-term survival. Over the past few decades, outcomes of patients with metastatic CRC have improved significantly due to advances in systemic therapy, as well as improvements in operative technique and perioperative care. Chemotherapy in the modern era of oxaliplatin- and irinotecan-containing regimens has been augmented by the introduction of targeted biologics and immunotherapeutic agents. The increasing efficacy of contemporary systemic therapies has led to an expansion in the proportion of patients eligible for curative-intent surgery. Consequently, the use of neoadjuvant strategies is becoming progressively more established. For patients with CRLM, the primary advantage of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) is the potential to down-stage metastatic disease in order to facilitate hepatic resection. On the other hand, the routine use of NCT for patients with resectable metastases remains controversial, especially given the potential risk of inducing chemotherapy-associated liver injury prior to hepatectomy. Current guidelines recommend upfront surgery in patients with initially resectable disease and low operative risk, reserving NCT for patients with borderline resectable or unresectable disease and high operative risk. Patients undergoing NCT require close monitoring for tumor response and conversion of CRLM to resectability. In light of the growing number of treatment options available to patients with metastatic CRC, it is generally agreed that these patients are best served at tertiary centers with an expert multidisciplinary team.

Threshold Change in CEA as a Predictor of Non-Progression to First-Line Systemic Therapy in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Patients With Elevated CEA

BACKGROUND

Carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) levels are used in conjunction with imaging to monitor response to systemic therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We sought to identify a threshold for CEA change from baseline to predict progressive disease (PD) in mCRC patients receiving first-line therapy.

METHODS

Patients from trials collected in the ARCAD database were included if baseline CEA was at least 10 ng/mL and repeat CEA was available within 14 days of first restaging scan. Optimal cutoffs for CEA change were identified by receiver operating characteristic analysis. Prediction performance of cutoffs was evaluated by sensitivity, specificity, and negative predictive value. Analyses were conducted by treatment class: chemotherapy alone, chemotherapy with anti-VEGF antibody, and chemotherapy with anti-EGFR antibody.

RESULTS

A total of 2643 mCRC patients treated with systemic therapy were included. Median percent change of CEA from baseline to first restaging for patients with complete response, partial response, or stable disease (non-PD) and PD was -53.1% and +23.6% for chemotherapy alone (n = 957) and -71.7% and -45.3% for chemotherapy with anti-VEGF antibody (n = 1355). The optimal area under the curve cutoff for differentiating PD from non-PD on first restaging was -7.5% for chemotherapy alone and -62.0% for chemotherapy with anti-VEGF antibody; chemotherapy alone, adjusted odds ratio = 6.51 (95% CI = 3.31 to 12.83, P < .001), chemotherapy with anti-VEGF antibody, adjusted odds ratio = 3.45 (95% CI = 1.93 to 6.18, P < .001). A 99% negative predictive value clinical cutoff for prediction of non-PD would avoid CT scan at first restaging in 21.0% of chemotherapy alone and 16.2% of chemotherapy with anti-VEGF antibody-treated patients. Among patients with stable disease on first restaging, those with decreased CEA from baseline had statistically significantly improved progression-free and overall survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Change in CEA from baseline to first restaging can accurately predict non-progression and correlates with long-term outcomes in patients receiving systemic chemotherapy.

P.R.O.P.S. - A novel Pre-Operative Predictive Score for unresectability in patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases being considered for cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC)

Background

Twenty to thirty percent of planned cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS and HIPEC) procedures are abandoned intra-operatively. Pre-operative factors associated with unresectability identified previously were used to develop a Pre-Operative Predictive Score (PROPS), which was compared with current selection criteria—Peritoneal Surface Disease Severity Score (PSDSS), Verwaal’s Prognostic Score (PS) and Colorectal Peritoneal Metastases Prognostic Surgical Score (COMPASS), to determine which score provides the best prediction for unresectability.

Methods

Fifty-six patients with peritoneal metastases of colorectal origin were included. Beta-coefficient values of significant variables (p < 0.05) were determined from multivariate analysis to develop PROPS. PROPS, PSDSS, PS and COMPASS were compared using a receiver operating characteristic curve to calculate its accuracy, sensitivity and specificity.

Results

PROPS consisted of nine patient and tumour factors which were categorised into three groups: (i) poor tumour biology: previous inadequate resection, underwent multiple lines of chemotherapy and poorly differentiated or signet cell histology; (ii) heavy tumour burden: abdominal distension, palpable abdominal mass and computed tomography findings of ascites, small bowel disease and/or omental thickening; and (iii) active tumour proliferation: elevated tumour markers. Overall, PROPS achieved 86% accuracy with 100% sensitivity and 68% specificity, PSDSS achieved 85% accuracy with 100% sensitivity and 63% specificity, PS achieved 73% accuracy with 100% sensitivity and 68% specificity and COMPASS achieved 61% accuracy with 27% sensitivity and 100% specificity.

Conclusions

PROPS is more effective in predicting unresectability as compared to PSDSS, PS and COMPASS, and has the added advantage of using solely pre-operative factors.

Clinical significance and prognostic value of serum sHER-2/neu levels in patients with solid tumors

The purpose of this study was to determine HER-2/neu in the serum of patients with solid tumors and to investigate its potential usefulness in predicting the clinical course of the disease. At the same time, we compared the ability of serum HER-2/neu, CA15.3, CA12-5, CA19-9, carcino embryonic antigen (CEA), and alpha-feto-protein (AFP) in breast, colorectal, and lung cancer patients. Forty, thirty-six, and twenty-three patients with lung, colon and breast cancer were included in this study, respectively. Serum levels of HER-2/neu, CA15.3, CA12-5, CA19-9, CEA, and AFP were measured. Her-2 neu levels were significantly higher in the breast cancer groups than colorectal and lung cancer and controls groups (P < 0.01). There is no significant difference when compared with others groups (P > 0.05). There was a positive correlation between the HER-2/neu and CA15-3 values in breast cancer groups. We found 0.75(0.59-0.90) for Her-2/neu from the area under the curve (AUC). P-value for breast cancer is 0.003, and we discovered that 9 ng/ml was the best inersection point. In this situation, we calculated that sensitivity was 65.2%, specificity was 100%, positive predictive value was 100%, negative predictive value 75.8%, and accuracy was 83.4%. These findings indicate that serum HER2/neu levels are clinically valuable in monitoring metastatic breast cancer and non-small cell lung cancer patients. Prognosis of breast cancer provides an additional value over the commonly used CA15-3 test. Measurements of levels of serum HER-2/neu provide prognostic and predictive information to the clinician and can especially be used for monitoring metastatic breast cancer patients. Further clinical validation is needed to confirm these findings.