1
|
van der Ven RGFM, van den Heuvel TBM, Rovers KPB, Nienhuijs SW, Boerma D, van Grevenstein WMU, Hemmer PHJ, Kok NFM, Madsen EVE, de Reuver P, Tuynman JB, van Erning FN, de Hingh IHJT. ASO Visual Abstract: Towards Equal Access to Cytoreductive Surgery with Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy and Survival in Patients with Isolated Colorectal Peritoneal Metastases-A Nationwide Population-Based Study. Ann Surg Oncol 2024:10.1245/s10434-024-15261-5. [PMID: 38658412 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-024-15261-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 04/26/2024]
Affiliation(s)
- Roos G F M van der Ven
- Department of Research and Development, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (IKNL), Utrecht, The Netherlands.
- Department of Health Services Research, Faculty of Health, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
- Department of Oncology and Developmental Biology (GROW), Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
| | - Teun B M van den Heuvel
- Department of Oncology and Developmental Biology (GROW), Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Koen P B Rovers
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Simon W Nienhuijs
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Djamila Boerma
- Department of Surgery, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | | | - Patrick H J Hemmer
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Niels F M Kok
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Eva V E Madsen
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Philip de Reuver
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Jurriaan B Tuynman
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Felice N van Erning
- Department of Research and Development, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (IKNL), Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Ignace H J T de Hingh
- Department of Research and Development, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (IKNL), Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Oncology and Developmental Biology (GROW), Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
van der Ven RGFM, van den Heuvel TBM, Rovers KPB, Nienhuijs SW, Boerma D, van Grevenstein WMU, Hemmer PHJ, Kok NFM, Madsen EVE, de Reuver P, Tuynman JB, van Erning FN, de Hingh IHJT. Towards Equal Access to Cytoreductive Surgery with Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy and Survival in Patients with Isolated Colorectal Peritoneal Metastases: A Nationwide Population-Based Study. Ann Surg Oncol 2024:10.1245/s10434-024-15131-0. [PMID: 38453767 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-024-15131-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/18/2023] [Accepted: 02/17/2024] [Indexed: 03/09/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Before 2016, patients with isolated synchronous colorectal peritoneal metastases (PMCRC) diagnosed in expert centers had a higher odds of undergoing cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) and better overall survival (OS) than those diagnosed in referring centers. Nationwide efforts were initiated to increase awareness and improve referral networks. METHODS This nationwide study aimed to evaluate whether the between-center differences in odds of undergoing CRS-HIPEC and OS have reduced since these national efforts were initiated. All patients with isolated synchronous PMCRC diagnosed between 2009 and 2021 were identified from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Associations between hospital of diagnosis and the odds of undergoing CRS-HIPEC, as well as OS, were assessed using multilevel multivariable regression analyses for two periods (2009-2015 and 2016-2021). RESULTS In total, 3948 patients were included. The percentage of patients undergoing CRS-HIPEC increased from 17.2% in 2009-2015 (25.4% in expert centers, 16.5% in referring centers), to 23.4% in 2016-2021 (30.2% in expert centers, 22.6% in referring centers). In 2009-2015, compared with diagnosis in a referring center, diagnosis in a HIPEC center showed a higher odds of undergoing CRS-HIPEC (odds ratio [OR] 1.64, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.02-2.67) and better survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0.80, 95% CI 0.66-0.96). In 2016-2021, there were no differences in the odds of undergoing CRS-HIPEC between patients diagnosed in HIPEC centers versus referring centers (OR 1.27, 95% CI 0.76-2.13) and survival (HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.76-1.32). CONCLUSION Previously observed differences in odds of undergoing CRS-HIPEC were no longer present. Increased awareness and the harmonization of treatment for PMCRC may have contributed to equal access to care and a similar chance of survival at a national level.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Roos G F M van der Ven
- Department of Research and Development, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (IKNL), Utrecht, The Netherlands.
- Department of Health Services Research, Faculty of Health, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
- Department of Oncology and Developmental Biology (GROW), Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
| | - Teun B M van den Heuvel
- Department of Oncology and Developmental Biology (GROW), Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Koen P B Rovers
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Simon W Nienhuijs
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Djamila Boerma
- Department of Surgery, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | | | - Patrick H J Hemmer
- Department of Surgery, Division of Surgical Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Niels F M Kok
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Eva V E Madsen
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Philip de Reuver
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Jurriaan B Tuynman
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Felice N van Erning
- Department of Research and Development, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (IKNL), Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Ignace H J T de Hingh
- Department of Research and Development, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (IKNL), Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Oncology and Developmental Biology (GROW), Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Zwart K, van der Baan FH, Punt CJA, Wensink GE, Bolhuis K, Laclé MM, van Grevenstein WMU, Hagendoorn J, de Hingh IH, Koopman M, Vink G, Roodhart J. Survival of Patients with Deficient Mismatch Repair Versus Proficient Mismatch Repair Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Receiving Curative-Intent Local Treatment of Metastases in a Nationwide Cohort. Ann Surg Oncol 2023; 30:6762-6770. [PMID: 37528303 PMCID: PMC10506947 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-023-13974-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/28/2023] [Accepted: 07/03/2023] [Indexed: 08/03/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND It is unclear whether curative-intent local therapy of metastases is of similar benefit for the biological distinct subgroup of patients with deficient mismatch repair (dMMR) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) compared with proficient mismatch repair (pMMR) mCRC. PATIENTS AND METHODS In this nationwide study, recurrence-free (RFS) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed in patients with dMMR versus pMMR mCRC who underwent curative-intent local treatment of metastases between 2015 and 2018. Subgroup analyses were performed for resection of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) and cytoreductive surgery ± hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS ± HIPEC). Multivariable regression was conducted. RESULTS Median RFS was 11.1 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 8.5-41.1 months] for patients with dMMR tumors compared with 8.9 months (95% CI 8.1-9.8 months) for pMMR tumors. Two-year RFS was higher in patients with dMMR versus pMMR (43% vs. 21%). Results were similar within subgroups of local treatment (CRLM and CRS ± HIPEC). Characteristics differed significantly between patients with dMMR and pMMR mCRC; however, multivariable analysis continued to demonstrate dMMR as independent factor for improved RFS [hazard ratio (HR): 0.57, 95% CI 0.38-0.87]. Median OS was 33.3 months for dMMR mCRC compared with 43.5 months for pMMR mCRC, mainly due to poor survival of patients with dMMR in cases of recurrence in the preimmunotherapy era. CONCLUSION Patients with dMMR eligible for curative-intent local treatment of metastases showed a comparable to more favorable RFS compared with patients with pMMR, with a clinically relevant proportion of patients remaining free of recurrence. This supports local treatment as a valuable treatment option in patients with dMMR mCRC and can aid in shared decision-making regarding upfront local therapy versus immunotherapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Koen Zwart
- Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Frederieke H van der Baan
- Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Epidemiology, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Cornelis J A Punt
- Department of Epidemiology, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - G Emerens Wensink
- Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Karen Bolhuis
- Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam University Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Medical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Miangela M Laclé
- Department of Pathology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | | | - Jeroen Hagendoorn
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Ignace H de Hingh
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
- Department of Research and Development, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (IKNL), Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Miriam Koopman
- Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Geraldine Vink
- Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Research and Development, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (IKNL), Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Jeanine Roodhart
- Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Zwart K, van der Baan FH, Punt CJA, Wensink GE, Bolhuis K, Laclé MM, van Grevenstein WMU, Hagendoorn J, de Hingh IH, Koopman M, Vink G, Roodhart J. ASO Visual Abstract: Survival of Patients with Deficient Mismatch Repair Versus Proficient Mismatch Repair Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Receiving Curative-Intent Local Treatment of Metastases in a Nationwide Cohort. Ann Surg Oncol 2023; 30:6773-6774. [PMID: 37580618 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-023-14118-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 08/16/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Koen Zwart
- Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Frederieke H van der Baan
- Department of Epidemiology, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Cornelis J A Punt
- Department of Epidemiology, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - G Emerens Wensink
- Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Karen Bolhuis
- Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam University Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Medical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Miangela M Laclé
- Department of Pathology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | | | - Jeroen Hagendoorn
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Ignace H de Hingh
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
- Department of Research and Development, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (IKNL), Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Miriam Koopman
- Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Geraldine Vink
- Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Research and Development, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (IKNL), Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Jeanine Roodhart
- Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Swartjes H, Qaderi SM, Teerenstra S, Custers JAE, Elferink MAG, van Wely BJ, Burger JWA, van Grevenstein WMU, van Duijvendijk P, Verdaasdonk EGG, de Roos MAJ, Coupé VMH, Vink GR, Verhoef C, de Wilt JHW. Towards patient-led follow-up after curative surgical resection of stage I, II and III colorectal cancer (DISTANCE-trial): a study protocol for a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial. BMC Cancer 2023; 23:838. [PMID: 37679735 PMCID: PMC10483744 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-023-11297-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/09/2023] [Accepted: 08/13/2023] [Indexed: 09/09/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Colorectal cancer (CRC) is among the most frequently diagnosed cancers. Approximately 20-30% of stage I-III CRC patients develop a recurrent tumour or metastases after curative surgical resection. Post-operative follow-up is indicated for the first five years after curative surgical resection. As intensified follow-up after curative surgical resection has shown no effect on survival, patient organisations and policy makers have advocated for a more patient-centred approach to follow-up. The objective of this study is to successfully implement patient-led, home-based follow-up (PHFU) in six hospitals in The Netherlands, with as ultimate aim to come to a recommendation for a patient-centred follow-up schedule for stage I-III CRC patients treated with surgical resection with curative intent. METHODS This study is designed as a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial (SW-CRT) in six participating centres. During the trial, three centres will implement PHFU after six months; the other three centres will implement PHFU after 12 months of inclusion in the control group. Eligible patients are those with pT2-4N0M0 or pT1-4N1-2M0 CRC, who are 18 years or older and have been free of disease for 12 months after curative surgical resection. The studied intervention is PHFU, starting 12 months after curative resection. The in-hospital, standard-of-care follow-up currently implemented in the participating centres functions as the comparator. The proportion of patients who had contact with the hospital regarding CRC follow-up between 12-24 months after curative surgical resection is the primary endpoint of this study. Quality of life, fear of cancer recurrence, patient satisfaction, cost-effectiveness and survival are the secondary endpoints. DISCUSSION The results of this study will provide evidence on whether nationwide implementation of PHFU for CRC in The Netherlands will be successful in reducing contact between patient and health care provider. Comparison of PROMs between in-hospital follow-up and PHFU will be provided. Moreover, the cost-effectiveness of PHFU will be assessed. TRIAL REGISTRATION Dutch Trail Register (NTR): NL9266 (Registered on January 1st, 2021).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hidde Swartjes
- Department of Surgery, Radboud university medical center, 6500, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Seyed M Qaderi
- Department of Surgery, Radboud university medical center, 6500, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Steven Teerenstra
- Department for Health Evidence, Radboud university medical center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Jose A E Custers
- Department of Medical Psychology, Radboud university medical center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Marloes A G Elferink
- Department of Research and Development, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organization, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Bob J van Wely
- Department of Surgery, Ziekenhuis Bernhoven, Uden, The Netherlands
| | | | | | | | | | - Marnix A J de Roos
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery and Surgical Oncology, Rijnstate Hospital, Arnhem, The Netherlands
| | - Veerle M H Coupé
- Department of Epidemiology and Data Science Amsterdam Public Health, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Geraldine R Vink
- Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Cornelis Verhoef
- Department of Surgical Oncology and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Johannes H W de Wilt
- Department of Surgery, Radboud university medical center, 6500, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Verweij ME, Tanaka MD, Kensen CM, van der Heide UA, Marijnen CAM, Janssen T, Vijlbrief T, van Grevenstein WMU, Moons LMG, Koopman M, Lacle MM, Braat MNGJA, Chalabi M, Maas M, Huibregtse IL, Snaebjornsson P, Grotenhuis BA, Fijneman R, Consten E, Pronk A, Smits AB, Heikens JT, Eijkelenkamp H, Elias SG, Verkooijen HM, Schoenmakers MMC, Meijer GJ, Intven M, Peters FP. Towards Response ADAptive Radiotherapy for organ preservation for intermediate-risk rectal cancer (preRADAR): protocol of a phase I dose-escalation trial. BMJ Open 2023; 13:e065010. [PMID: 37321815 PMCID: PMC10277084 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-065010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/23/2022] [Accepted: 05/07/2023] [Indexed: 06/17/2023] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Organ preservation is associated with superior functional outcome and quality of life (QoL) compared with total mesorectal excision (TME) for rectal cancer. Only 10% of patients are eligible for organ preservation following short-course radiotherapy (SCRT, 25 Gy in five fractions) and a prolonged interval (4-8 weeks) to response evaluation. The organ preservation rate could potentially be increased by dose-escalated radiotherapy. Online adaptive magnetic resonance-guided radiotherapy (MRgRT) is anticipated to reduce radiation-induced toxicity and enable radiotherapy dose escalation. This trial aims to establish the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of dose-escalated SCRT using online adaptive MRgRT. METHODS AND ANALYSIS The preRADAR is a multicentre phase I trial with a 6+3 dose-escalation design. Patients with intermediate-risk rectal cancer (cT3c-d(MRF-)N1M0 or cT1-3(MRF-)N1M0) interested in organ preservation are eligible. Patients are treated with a radiotherapy boost of 2×5 Gy (level 0), 3×5 Gy (level 1), 4×5 Gy (level 2) or 5×5 Gy (level 3) on the gross tumour volume in the week following standard SCRT using online adaptive MRgRT. The trial starts on dose level 1. The primary endpoint is the MTD based on the incidence of dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) per dose level. DLT is a composite of maximum one in nine severe radiation-induced toxicities and maximum one in three severe postoperative complications, in patients treated with TME or local excision within 26 weeks following start of treatment. Secondary endpoints include the organ preservation rate, non-DLT, oncological outcomes, patient-reported QoL and functional outcomes up to 2 years following start of treatment. Imaging and laboratory biomarkers are explored for early response prediction. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION The trial protocol has been approved by the Medical Ethics Committee of the University Medical Centre Utrecht. The primary and secondary trial results will be published in international peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER WHO International Clinical Trials Registry (NL8997; https://trialsearch.who.int).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maaike E Verweij
- Department of Radiation-Oncology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Max D Tanaka
- Department of Radiation-Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Chavelli M Kensen
- Department of Radiation-Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Uulke A van der Heide
- Department of Radiation-Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Corrie A M Marijnen
- Department of Radiation-Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Tomas Janssen
- Department of Radiation-Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Tineke Vijlbrief
- Department of Radiation-Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Leon M G Moons
- Department of Gastroenterology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Miriam Koopman
- Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Miangela M Lacle
- Department of Pathology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Manon N G J A Braat
- Department of Radiology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Myriam Chalabi
- Department of Medical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Monique Maas
- Department of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Inge L Huibregtse
- Department of Gastroenterology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Petur Snaebjornsson
- Department of Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Remond Fijneman
- Department of Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Esther Consten
- Department of Surgery, Meander Medical Centre, Amersfoort, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Apollo Pronk
- Department of Surgery, Diakonessenhuis Utrecht Zeist Doorn, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Anke B Smits
- Department of Surgery, Sint Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Joost T Heikens
- Department of Surgery, Hospital Rivierenland, Tiel, The Netherlands
| | - Hidde Eijkelenkamp
- Department of Radiation-Oncology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Sjoerd G Elias
- Department of Epidemiology, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Helena M Verkooijen
- Department of Radiation-Oncology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | | | - Gert J Meijer
- Department of Radiation-Oncology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Martijn Intven
- Department of Radiation-Oncology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Femke P Peters
- Department of Radiation-Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Verweij ME, Franzen J, van Grevenstein WMU, Verkooijen HM, Intven MPW. Timing of rectal cancer surgery after short-course radiotherapy: national database study. Br J Surg 2023; 110:839-845. [PMID: 37172197 PMCID: PMC10364516 DOI: 10.1093/bjs/znad113] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/11/2022] [Revised: 02/13/2023] [Accepted: 03/29/2023] [Indexed: 05/14/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Previous randomized trials found that a prolonged interval between short-course radiotherapy (SCRT, 25 Gy in 5 fractions) and surgery for rectal cancer (4-8 weeks, SCRT-delay) results in a lower postoperative complication rate and a higher pCR rate than SCRT and surgery within a week (SCRT-direct surgery). This study sought to confirm these results in a Dutch national database. METHODS Patients with intermediate-risk rectal cancer (T3(mesorectal fascia (MRF)-) N0 M0 and T1-3(MRF-) N1 M0) treated with either SCRT-delay (4-12 weeks) or SCRT-direct surgery in 2018-2021 were selected from a Dutch national colorectal cancer database. Confounders were adjusted for using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). The primary endpoint was the 90-day postoperative complication rate. Secondary endpoints included the pCR rate. Endpoints were compared using log-binomial and Poisson regression. RESULTS Some 664 patients were included in the SCRT-direct surgery and 238 in the SCRT-delay group. After IPTW, the 90-day postoperative complication rate was comparable after SCRT-direct surgery and SCRT-delay (40.1 versus 42.3 per cent; risk ratio (RR) 1.1, 95 per cent c.i. 0.9 to 1.3). A pCR occurred more often after SCRT-delay than SCRT-direct surgery (10.7 versus 0.4 per cent; RR 39, 11 to 139). CONCLUSION There was no difference in surgical complication rates between SCRT-delay and SCRT-direct, but SCRT-delay was associated with more patients having a pCR.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maaike E Verweij
- Division of Imaging and Oncology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Jolien Franzen
- Division of Imaging and Oncology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | | | - Helena M Verkooijen
- Division of Imaging and Oncology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Martijn P W Intven
- Division of Imaging and Oncology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
de Mul N, Verlaan D, Ruurda JP, van Grevenstein WMU, Hagendoorn J, de Borst GJ, Vriens MR, de Bree R, Zweemer RP, Vogely C, Haitsma Mulier JLG, Vernooij LM, Reitsma JB, de Zoete MR, Top J, Kluijtmans JAJ, Hoefer IE, Noordzij P, Rettig T, Marsman M, de Smet AMGA, Derde L, van Waes J, Rijsdijk M, Schellekens WJM, Bonten MJM, Slooter AJC, Cremer OL. Cohort profile of PLUTO: a perioperative biobank focusing on prediction and early diagnosis of postoperative complications. BMJ Open 2023; 13:e068970. [PMID: 37076142 PMCID: PMC10124280 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-068970] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 04/21/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Although elective surgery is generally safe, some procedures remain associated with an increased risk of complications. Improved preoperative risk stratification and earlier recognition of these complications may ameliorate postoperative recovery and improve long-term outcomes. The perioperative longitudinal study of complications and long-term outcomes (PLUTO) cohort aims to establish a comprehensive biorepository that will facilitate research in this field. In this profile paper, we will discuss its design rationale and opportunities for future studies. PARTICIPANTS Patients undergoing elective intermediate to high-risk non-cardiac surgery are eligible for enrolment. For the first seven postoperative days, participants are subjected to daily bedside visits by dedicated observers, who adjudicate clinical events and perform non-invasive physiological measurements (including handheld spirometry and single-channel electroencephalography). Blood samples and microbiome specimens are collected at preselected time points. Primary study outcomes are the postoperative occurrence of nosocomial infections, major adverse cardiac events, pulmonary complications, acute kidney injury and delirium/acute encephalopathy. Secondary outcomes include mortality and quality of life, as well as the long-term occurrence of psychopathology, cognitive dysfunction and chronic pain. FINDINGS TO DATE Enrolment of the first participant occurred early 2020. During the inception phase of the project (first 2 years), 431 patients were eligible of whom 297 patients consented to participate (69%). Observed event rate was 42% overall, with the most frequent complication being infection. FUTURE PLANS The main purpose of the PLUTO biorepository is to provide a framework for research in the field of perioperative medicine and anaesthesiology, by storing high-quality clinical data and biomaterials for future studies. In addition, PLUTO aims to establish a logistical platform for conducting embedded clinical trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER NCT05331118.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nikki de Mul
- Department of Anaesthesiology, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Intensive Care Medicine, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Julius Center, Department of Epidemiology, Program of Infectious Diseases, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Diede Verlaan
- Department of Intensive Care Medicine, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Julius Center, Department of Epidemiology, Program of Infectious Diseases, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Jelle P Ruurda
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Upper Gastro-Intestinal Surgery, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | | | - Jeroen Hagendoorn
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Hepatobilliary and Pancreatic Surgery, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Gert-Jan de Borst
- Department of Vascular Surgery, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Menno R Vriens
- Department of Endocrine and Surgical Oncology, Cancer Center, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Remco de Bree
- Department of Head and Neck Surgical Oncology, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Ronald P Zweemer
- Department of Gynaecological Oncology, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Charles Vogely
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Jelle L G Haitsma Mulier
- Department of Intensive Care Medicine, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Julius Center, Department of Epidemiology, Program of Infectious Diseases, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Lisette M Vernooij
- Department of Anaesthesiology, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Intensive Care Medicine, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, Antonius Ziekenhuis Nieuwegein, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Johannes B Reitsma
- Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Marcel R de Zoete
- Department of Medical Microbiology, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Janetta Top
- Department of Medical Microbiology, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Jan A J Kluijtmans
- Department of Medical Microbiology, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Imo E Hoefer
- Central Diagnostic Laboratory, Universitair Medisch Centrum, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Peter Noordzij
- Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, Antonius Ziekenhuis Nieuwegein, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Thijs Rettig
- Department of Anesthesiology, Intensive Care and Pain Medicine, Amphia Hospital site Molengracht, Breda, The Netherlands
| | - Marije Marsman
- Department of Anaesthesiology, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | | | - Lennie Derde
- Department of Intensive Care Medicine, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Judith van Waes
- Department of Anaesthesiology, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Mienke Rijsdijk
- Department of Anaesthesiology, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Willem Jan M Schellekens
- Department of Anaesthesiology, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Anaesthesiology, Cantonal Hospital Aarau, Aarau, Switzerland
| | - Marc J M Bonten
- Julius Center, Department of Epidemiology, Program of Infectious Diseases, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Arjen J C Slooter
- Department of Intensive Care Medicine, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Olaf L Cremer
- Department of Intensive Care Medicine, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Verweij ME, Hoendervangers S, von Hebel CM, Pronk A, Schiphorst AHW, Consten ECJ, Smits AB, Heikens JT, Verdaasdonk EGG, Rozema T, Verkooijen HM, van Grevenstein WMU, Intven MPW. Patient- and physician-reported radiation-induced toxicity of short-course radiotherapy with a prolonged interval to surgery for rectal cancer. Colorectal Dis 2023; 25:24-30. [PMID: 36054676 PMCID: PMC10087149 DOI: 10.1111/codi.16315] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/14/2022] [Revised: 08/08/2022] [Accepted: 08/16/2022] [Indexed: 02/02/2023]
Abstract
AIM A prolonged interval (>4 weeks) between short-course radiotherapy (25 Gy in five fractions) (SCRT-delay) and total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer has been associated with a decreased postoperative complication rate and offers the possibility of organ preservation in the case of a complete tumour response. This prospective cohort study systematically evaluated patient-reported bowel dysfunction and physician-reported radiation-induced toxicity for 8 weeks following SCRT-delay. METHOD Patients who were referred for SCRT-delay for intermediate risk, oligometastatic or locally advanced rectal cancer were included. Repeated measurements were done for patient-reported bowel dysfunction (measured by the low anterior resection syndrome [LARS] questionnaire and categorized as no, minor or major LARS) and physician-reported radiation-induced toxicity (according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0) before start of treatment (baseline), at completion of SCRT and 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 8 weeks thereafter. RESULTS Fifty-one patients were included; 31 (61%) were men and the median age was 67 years (range 44-91). Patient-reported bowel dysfunction and physician-reported radiation-induced toxicity peaked at weeks 1-2 after completion of SCRT and gradually declined thereafter. Major LARS was reported by 44 patients (92%) at some time during SCRT-delay. Grade 3 radiation-induced toxicity was reported in 17 patients (33%) and concerned predominantly diarrhoea. No Grade 4-5 radiation-induced toxicity occurred. CONCLUSION During SCRT-delay, almost every patient experiences temporary mild-moderate radiation-induced toxicity and major LARS, but life-threatening toxicity is rare. SCRT-delay is a safe alternative to SCRT-direct surgery that should be proposed when counselling rectal cancer patients on neoadjuvant strategies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maaike E Verweij
- Division of Imaging and Oncology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Sieske Hoendervangers
- Division of Imaging and Oncology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.,Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, Den Bosch, The Netherlands
| | - Charlotte M von Hebel
- Division of Imaging and Oncology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Apollo Pronk
- Department of Surgery, Diakonessenhuis, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | | | - Esther C J Consten
- Department of Surgery, Meander Medical Centre, Amersfoort, The Netherlands.,Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Anke B Smits
- Department of Surgery, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Joost T Heikens
- Department of Surgery, Rivierenland Hospital, Tiel, The Netherlands
| | | | - Tom Rozema
- Department of Radiotherapy, Verbeeten Institute, Tilburg, The Netherlands
| | - Helena M Verkooijen
- Division of Imaging and Oncology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | | | - Martijn P W Intven
- Division of Imaging and Oncology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Buskermolen M, Naber SK, Toes-Zoutendijk E, van der Meulen MP, van Grevenstein WMU, van Leerdam ME, Spaander MCW, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I. Impact of surgical versus endoscopic management of complex nonmalignant polyps in a colorectal cancer screening program. Endoscopy 2022; 54:871-880. [PMID: 35130576 DOI: 10.1055/a-1726-9144] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND When complex nonmalignant polyps are detected in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs, patients may be referred directly to surgery or may first undergo additional endoscopy for attempted endoscopic removal by an expert. We compared the impact of both strategies on screening effectiveness and costs. METHODS We used MISCAN-Colon to simulate the Dutch screening program, and projected CRC deaths prevented, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained, and costs for two scenarios: 1) surgery for all complex nonmalignant polyps; 2) attempted removal by an expert endoscopist first. We made the following assumptions: 3.9 % of screen-detected large nonmalignant polyps were complex; associated surgery mortality was 0.7 %; the rate of successful removal by an expert was 87 %, with 0.11 % mortality. RESULTS The screening program was estimated to prevent 11.2 CRC cases (-16.7 %) and 10.1 CRC deaths (-27.1 %), resulting in 32.9 QALYs gained (+ 17.2 %) per 1000 simulated individuals over their lifetimes compared with no screening. The program would also result in 2.1 surgeries for complex nonmalignant polyps with 0.015 associated deaths per 1000 individuals. If, instead, these patients were referred to an expert endoscopist first, only 0.2 patients required surgery, reducing associated deaths by 0.013 at the expense of 0.003 extra colonoscopy deaths. Compared with direct referral to surgery, referral to an expert endoscopist gained 0.2 QALYs and saved €12 500 per 1000 individuals in the target population. CONCLUSION Referring patients with complex polyps to an expert endoscopist first reduced some surgery-related deaths while substantially improving cost-effectiveness of the screening program.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maaike Buskermolen
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Steffie K Naber
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Esther Toes-Zoutendijk
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Miriam P van der Meulen
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Monique E van Leerdam
- Department of Gastroenterology, Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Manon C W Spaander
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Buskermolen M, Naber SK, Toes-Zoutendijk E, van der Meulen MP, van Grevenstein WMU, van Leerdam ME, Spaander MCW, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I. Correction: Impact of surgical versus endoscopic management of complex nonmalignant polyps in a colorectal cancer screening program. Endoscopy 2022; 54:C14. [PMID: 35231940 DOI: 10.1055/a-1773-7066] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/10/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Maaike Buskermolen
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Steffie K Naber
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Esther Toes-Zoutendijk
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Miriam P van der Meulen
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Monique E van Leerdam
- Department of Gastroenterology, Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Manon C W Spaander
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Bond MJG, Hamers PAH, Vink GR, van Grevenstein WMU, Laclé MM, van Smeden M, Koopman M, Roodhart JML, Punt CJA, May AM. External validation of the MSKCC nomogram to estimate five-year overall survival after surgery for stage I-III colon cancer in a Dutch population. Acta Oncol 2022; 61:560-565. [PMID: 35253593 DOI: 10.1080/0284186x.2022.2044514] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/01/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION The Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Centre (MSKCC) nomogram has been developed to estimate five-year overall survival (OS) after curative-intent surgery of colon cancer based on age, sex, T stage, differentiation grade, number of positive and examined regional lymph nodes. This is the first evaluation of the performance of the MSKCC model in a European population regarding prediction of OS. MATERIAL AND METHODS Population-based data from patients with stage I-III colon cancer diagnosed between 2010 and 2016 were obtained from the Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR) for external validation of the MSKCC prediction model. Five-year survival probabilities were estimated for all patients in our dataset by using the MSKCC prediction equation. Histogram density plots were created to depict the distribution of the estimated probability and prognostic index. The performance of the model was evaluated in terms of its overall performance, discrimination, and calibration. RESULTS A total of 39,805 patients were included. Five-year OS was 71.9% (95% CI 71.5; 72.3) (11,051 events) with a median follow up of 5.6 years (IQR 4.1; 7.7). The Brier score was 0.10 (95% CI 0.10; 0.10). The C-index was 0.75 (95% CI 0.75; 0.76). The calibration measures and plot indicated that the model slightly overestimated observed mortality (observed/expected ratio = 0.86 [95% CI 0.86; 0.87], calibration intercept = -0.14 [95% CI -0.16; -0.11], and slope 1.07 [95% CI 1.05; 1.09], ICI = 0.04, E50 = 0.04, and E90 = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS The external validation of the MSKCC prediction nomogram in a large Dutch cohort supports the use of this practical tool in the European patient population. These personalised estimated survival probabilities may support clinicians when informing patients about prognosis. Adding potential relevant prognostic factors to the model, such as primary tumour location, might further improve the model.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marinde J. G. Bond
- Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Patricia A. H. Hamers
- Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Geraldine R. Vink
- Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Research and Development, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | | | - Miangela M. Laclé
- Department of Pathology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Maarten van Smeden
- Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Miriam Koopman
- Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Jeanine M. L. Roodhart
- Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Cornelis J. A. Punt
- Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Anne M. May
- Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Rovers KP, Bakkers C, Nienhuijs SW, Burger JWA, Creemers GJM, Thijs AMJ, Brandt-Kerkhof ARM, Madsen EVE, van Meerten E, Tuynman JB, Kusters M, Versteeg KS, Aalbers AGJ, Kok NFM, Buffart TE, Wiezer MJ, Boerma D, Los M, de Reuver PR, Bremers AJA, Verheul HMW, Kruijff S, de Groot DJA, Witkamp AJ, van Grevenstein WMU, Koopman M, Nederend J, Lahaye MJ, Kranenburg O, Fijneman RJA, van 't Erve I, Snaebjornsson P, Hemmer PHJ, Dijkgraaf MGW, Punt CJA, Tanis PJ, de Hingh IHJT. Perioperative Systemic Therapy vs Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy Alone for Resectable Colorectal Peritoneal Metastases: A Phase 2 Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Surg 2021; 156:710-720. [PMID: 34009291 DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2021.1642] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/19/2023]
Abstract
Importance To date, no randomized clinical trials have investigated perioperative systemic therapy relative to cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) alone for resectable colorectal peritoneal metastases (CPM). Objective To assess the feasibility and safety of perioperative systemic therapy in patients with resectable CPM and the response of CPM to neoadjuvant treatment. Design, Setting, and Participants An open-label, parallel-group phase 2 randomized clinical trial in all 9 Dutch tertiary centers for the surgical treatment of CPM enrolled participants between June 15, 2017, and January 9, 2019. Participants were patients with pathologically proven isolated resectable CPM who did not receive systemic therapy within 6 months before enrollment. Interventions Randomization to perioperative systemic therapy or CRS-HIPEC alone. Perioperative systemic therapy comprised either four 3-week neoadjuvant and adjuvant cycles of CAPOX (capecitabine and oxaliplatin), six 2-week neoadjuvant and adjuvant cycles of FOLFOX (fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin), or six 2-week neoadjuvant cycles of FOLFIRI (fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan) and either four 3-week adjuvant cycles of capecitabine or six 2-week adjuvant cycles of fluorouracil with leucovorin. Bevacizumab was added to the first 3 (CAPOX) or 4 (FOLFOX/FOLFIRI) neoadjuvant cycles. Main Outcomes and Measures Proportions of macroscopic complete CRS-HIPEC and Clavien-Dindo grade 3 or higher postoperative morbidity. Key secondary outcomes were centrally assessed rates of objective radiologic and major pathologic response of CPM to neoadjuvant treatment. Analyses were done modified intention-to-treat in patients starting neoadjuvant treatment (experimental arm) or undergoing upfront surgery (control arm). Results In 79 patients included in the analysis (43 [54%] men; mean [SD] age, 62 [10] years), experimental (n = 37) and control (n = 42) arms did not differ significantly regarding the proportions of macroscopic complete CRS-HIPEC (33 of 37 [89%] vs 36 of 42 [86%] patients; risk ratio, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.88-1.23; P = .74) and Clavien-Dindo grade 3 or higher postoperative morbidity (8 of 37 [22%] vs 14 of 42 [33%] patients; risk ratio, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.31-1.37; P = .25). No treatment-related deaths occurred. Objective radiologic and major pathologic response rates of CPM to neoadjuvant treatment were 28% (9 of 32 evaluable patients) and 38% (13 of 34 evaluable patients), respectively. Conclusions and Relevance In this randomized phase 2 trial in patients diagnosed with resectable CPM, perioperative systemic therapy seemed feasible, safe, and able to induce response of CPM, justifying a phase 3 trial. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02758951.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Koen P Rovers
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Cancer Institute, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - Checca Bakkers
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Cancer Institute, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - Simon W Nienhuijs
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Cancer Institute, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - Jacobus W A Burger
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Cancer Institute, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - Geert-Jan M Creemers
- Department of Medical Oncology, Catharina Cancer Institute, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - Anna M J Thijs
- Department of Medical Oncology, Catharina Cancer Institute, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | | | - Eva V E Madsen
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Esther van Meerten
- Department of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Jurriaan B Tuynman
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, location VUMC, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Miranda Kusters
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, location VUMC, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Kathelijn S Versteeg
- Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, location VUMC, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Arend G J Aalbers
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Niels F M Kok
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Tineke E Buffart
- Department of Gastrointestinal Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Marinus J Wiezer
- Department of Surgery, Sint Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - Djamila Boerma
- Department of Surgery, Sint Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - Maartje Los
- Department of Medical Oncology, Sint Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - Philip R de Reuver
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Andreas J A Bremers
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Henk M W Verheul
- Department of Medical Oncology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Schelto Kruijff
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Derk Jan A de Groot
- Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Arjen J Witkamp
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | | | - Miriam Koopman
- Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Joost Nederend
- Department of Radiology, Catharina Cancer Institute, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - Max J Lahaye
- Department of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Onno Kranenburg
- Cancer Center, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Remond J A Fijneman
- Department of Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Iris van 't Erve
- Department of Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Petur Snaebjornsson
- Department of Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Patrick H J Hemmer
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Marcel G W Dijkgraaf
- Department of Epidemiology and Data Science, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Cornelis J A Punt
- Department of Epidemiology, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Pieter J Tanis
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Ignace H J T de Hingh
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Cancer Institute, Eindhoven, the Netherlands.,GROW-School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | | |
Collapse
|
14
|
van Ginkel MPH, Schijven MP, van Grevenstein WMU, Schreuder HWR. Bimanual Fundamentals: Validation of a New Curriculum for Virtual Reality Training of Laparoscopic Skills. Surg Innov 2020; 27:523-533. [PMID: 32865136 PMCID: PMC8580384 DOI: 10.1177/1553350620953030] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/22/2023]
Abstract
Background. To determine face and construct validity for the new
Bimanual Fundamentals curriculum for the Simendo® Virtual Reality
Laparoscopy Simulator and prove its efficiency as a training and objective
assessment tool for surgical resident’s advanced psychomotor skills.
Methods. 49 participants were recruited: 17 medical
students (novices), 15 residents (intermediates), and 17 medical specialists
(experts) in the field of gynecology, general surgery, and urology in 3 tertiary
medical centers in the Netherlands. All participants performed the 5 exercises
of the curriculum for 3 consecutive times on the simulator. Intermediates and
experts filled in a questionnaire afterward, regarding the reality of the
simulator and training goals of each exercise. Statistical analysis of
performance was performed between novices, intermediates, and experts.
Parameters such as task time, collisions/displacements, and path length right
and left were compared between groups. Additionally, a total performance score
was calculated for each participant. Results. Face validity
scores regarding realism and training goals were overall positive (median scores
of 4 on a 5-point Likert scale). Participants felt that the curriculum was a
useful addition to the previous curricula and the used simulator would fit in
their residency programs. Construct validity results showed significant
differences on the great majority of measured parameters between groups. The
simulator is able to differentiate between performers with different levels of
laparoscopic experience. Conclusions. Face and construct
validity for the new Bimanual Fundamental curriculum for the Simendo virtual
reality simulator could be established. The curriculum is suitable to use in
resident’s training programs to improve and maintain advanced psychomotor
skills.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Martijn P H van Ginkel
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 8124University Medical Center Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | | | | | - Henk W R Schreuder
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Cancer Center, 8124University Medical Center Utrecht, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
van de Graaf FW, Lange MM, Spakman JI, van Grevenstein WMU, Lips D, de Graaf EJR, Menon AG, Lange JF. Comparison of Systematic Video Documentation With Narrative Operative Report in Colorectal Cancer Surgery. JAMA Surg 2020; 154:381-389. [PMID: 30673072 DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2018.5246] [Citation(s) in RCA: 27] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Abstract
Importance Despite ongoing advances in the field of colorectal surgery, the quality of surgical treatment is still variable. As an intrinsic part of surgical quality, the technical information regarding the surgical procedure is reflected only by the narrative operative report (NR), which has been found to be subjective and regularly omits important information. Objective To investigate systematic video recording (SVR) as a potential improvement in quality and safety with regard to important information in colorectal cancer surgery. Design, Setting, and Participants The Imaging for Quality Control Trial was a prospective, observational cohort study conducted between January 12, 2016, and October 30, 2017, at 3 centers in the Netherlands. The study group consisted of 113 patients 18 years or older undergoing elective laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer. These patients were case matched and compared with cases from a historical cohort that received only an NR. Interventions Among study cases, participating surgeons were requested to systematically capture predefined key steps of the surgical procedure intraoperatively on video in short clips. Main Outcomes and Measures The SVRs and NRs were analyzed for adequacy with respect to the availability of important information regarding the predefined key steps. Adequacy of the reported information was defined as the proportion of key steps with available and sufficient information in the report. Adequacy of the SVR and NR was compared between the study and control groups, with the SVR alone and as an adjunct to the NR in the study group vs NR alone in the control group. Results Of the 113 study patients, 69 women (61.1%) were included; mean (SD) age was 66.3 (9.8) years. In the control group, a mean (SD) of 52.5% (18.3%) of 631 steps were adequately described in the NR. In the study group, the adequacy of both the SVR (78.5% [16.5%], P < .001) and a combination of the SVR with NR (85.1% [14.6%], P < .001) was significantly superior to NR alone. The only significant difference between the study and historical control groups regarding postoperative and pathologic outcomes was a shorter postoperative mean (SD) length of stay in favor of the study group (8.0 [7.7] vs 8.6 [6.8] days; P = .03). Conclusions and Relevance Use of SVR in laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery as an adjunct to the NR might be superior in documenting important steps of the operation compared with NR alone, adding to the overall availability of necessary intraoperative information and contributing to quality control and objectivity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Floyd W van de Graaf
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Marilyne M Lange
- Department of Pathology, Free University Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Jolanda I Spakman
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospitals, Hertogenbosch, the Netherlands
| | | | - Daan Lips
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospitals, Hertogenbosch, the Netherlands
| | - Eelco J R de Graaf
- Department of Surgery, IJsselland Hospital, Capelle aan den IJssel, the Netherlands
| | - Anand G Menon
- Department of Surgery, IJsselland Hospital, Capelle aan den IJssel, the Netherlands.,Department of Surgery, Havenziekenhuis, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Johan F Lange
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.,Department of Surgery, IJsselland Hospital, Capelle aan den IJssel, the Netherlands.,Department of Surgery, Havenziekenhuis, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Couwenberg AM, Intven MPW, Hoendervangers S, van der Sluis FJ, van Westreenen HL, Marijnen CAM, van Grevenstein WMU, Verkooijen HM. The effect of time interval from chemoradiation to surgery on postoperative complications in patients with rectal cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 2019; 45:1584-1591. [PMID: 31053479 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2019.04.016] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/12/2019] [Revised: 03/19/2019] [Accepted: 04/24/2019] [Indexed: 01/28/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND A prolonged time interval between chemoradiation and total mesorectal excision (TME) may render more rectal cancer patients eligible for organ-sparing approaches but may also cause more pelvic fibrosis and surgical morbidity. We estimated the effect of time interval on postoperative complications and other surgical outcomes in rectal cancer patients. METHODS This is a population-based cohort study using data of the Dutch Colorectal Audit. Rectal cancer patients treated with chemoradiation followed by TME after an interval of 3-20 weeks were selected (n = 6,268). Time interval from completion of chemoradiation to TME was categorized into 3-6, 7-8, 9-10, 11-12 and 13-20 weeks. Outcomes included postoperative complication (any, and stratified by medical and surgical complications), reintervention, intraoperative complication, incomplete resection, positive circumferential margin (CRM) and pathological complete response (pCR). The interval of 7-8 weeks was the reference group. RESULTS Prolonged time intervals were not associated with a higher risk of a postoperative complication (any, surgical or medical), reintervention, and incomplete resection. Intraoperative complications were however more common after 11-12 weeks than after 7-8 weeks (odds ratio (OR) = 1.79, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.20-2.69). The interval of 9-10 weeks was associated with less CRM positive resections, and 9-10 and 13-20 weeks with more pCR (relative to 7-8 weeks, OR = 0.74, 95%CI = 0.56-0.98; OR = 1.28, 95%CI = 1.04-1.58; and OR = 1.33, 95%CI = 1.04-1.71, respectively). CONCLUSIONS Compared with 7-8 weeks, longer time intervals up to 13-20 weeks between chemoradiation and TME are not associated with more postoperative complications or more positive resection margins. Accordingly, prolonging the interval aiming for organ-sparing treatment is safe.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alice M Couwenberg
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584, CX Utrecht, the Netherlands.
| | - Martijn P W Intven
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584, CX Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Sieske Hoendervangers
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584, CX Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | | | | | - Corrie A M Marijnen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, 2333, ZA Leiden, the Netherlands
| | | | - Helena M Verkooijen
- Imaging Division, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584, CX Utrecht, the Netherlands; University of Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | | |
Collapse
|
17
|
Rovers KP, Bakkers C, Simkens GAAM, Burger JWA, Nienhuijs SW, Creemers GJM, Thijs AMJ, Brandt-Kerkhof ARM, Madsen EVE, Ayez N, de Boer NL, van Meerten E, Tuynman JB, Kusters M, Sluiter NR, Verheul HMW, van der Vliet HJ, Wiezer MJ, Boerma D, Wassenaar ECE, Los M, Hunting CB, Aalbers AGJ, Kok NFM, Kuhlmann KFD, Boot H, Chalabi M, Kruijff S, Been LB, van Ginkel RJ, de Groot DJA, Fehrmann RSN, de Wilt JHW, Bremers AJA, de Reuver PR, Radema SA, Herbschleb KH, van Grevenstein WMU, Witkamp AJ, Koopman M, Haj Mohammad N, van Duyn EB, Mastboom WJB, Mekenkamp LJM, Nederend J, Lahaye MJ, Snaebjornsson P, Verhoef C, van Laarhoven HWM, Zwinderman AH, Bouma JM, Kranenburg O, van 't Erve I, Fijneman RJA, Dijkgraaf MGW, Hemmer PHJ, Punt CJA, Tanis PJ, de Hingh IHJT. Perioperative systemic therapy and cytoreductive surgery with HIPEC versus upfront cytoreductive surgery with HIPEC alone for isolated resectable colorectal peritoneal metastases: protocol of a multicentre, open-label, parallel-group, phase II-III, randomised, superiority study (CAIRO6). BMC Cancer 2019; 19:390. [PMID: 31023318 PMCID: PMC6485075 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-019-5545-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 77] [Impact Index Per Article: 15.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/11/2019] [Accepted: 03/28/2019] [Indexed: 02/08/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Upfront cytoreductive surgery with HIPEC (CRS-HIPEC) is the standard treatment for isolated resectable colorectal peritoneal metastases (PM) in the Netherlands. This study investigates whether addition of perioperative systemic therapy to CRS-HIPEC improves oncological outcomes. Methods This open-label, parallel-group, phase II-III, randomised, superiority study is performed in nine Dutch tertiary referral centres. Eligible patients are adults who have a good performance status, histologically or cytologically proven resectable PM of a colorectal adenocarcinoma, no systemic colorectal metastases, no systemic therapy for colorectal cancer within six months prior to enrolment, and no previous CRS-HIPEC. Eligible patients are randomised (1:1) to perioperative systemic therapy and CRS-HIPEC (experimental arm) or upfront CRS-HIPEC alone (control arm) by using central randomisation software with minimisation stratified by a peritoneal cancer index of 0–10 or 11–20, metachronous or synchronous PM, previous systemic therapy for colorectal cancer, and HIPEC with oxaliplatin or mitomycin C. At the treating physician’s discretion, perioperative systemic therapy consists of either four 3-weekly neoadjuvant and adjuvant cycles of capecitabine with oxaliplatin (CAPOX), six 2-weekly neoadjuvant and adjuvant cycles of 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin with oxaliplatin (FOLFOX), or six 2-weekly neoadjuvant cycles of 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin with irinotecan (FOLFIRI) followed by four 3-weekly (capecitabine) or six 2-weekly (5-fluorouracil/leucovorin) adjuvant cycles of fluoropyrimidine monotherapy. Bevacizumab is added to the first three (CAPOX) or four (FOLFOX/FOLFIRI) neoadjuvant cycles. The first 80 patients are enrolled in a phase II study to explore the feasibility of accrual and the feasibility, safety, and tolerance of perioperative systemic therapy. If predefined criteria of feasibility and safety are met, the study continues as a phase III study with 3-year overall survival as primary endpoint. A total of 358 patients is needed to detect the hypothesised 15% increase in 3-year overall survival (control arm 50%; experimental arm 65%). Secondary endpoints are surgical characteristics, major postoperative morbidity, progression-free survival, disease-free survival, health-related quality of life, costs, major systemic therapy related toxicity, and objective radiological and histopathological response rates. Discussion This is the first randomised study that prospectively compares oncological outcomes of perioperative systemic therapy and CRS-HIPEC with upfront CRS-HIPEC alone for isolated resectable colorectal PM. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov/NCT02758951, NTR/NTR6301, ISRCTN/ISRCTN15977568, EudraCT/2016–001865-99.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Koen P Rovers
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, PO Box 1350, 5602 ZA, Eindhoven, Netherlands
| | - Checca Bakkers
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, PO Box 1350, 5602 ZA, Eindhoven, Netherlands
| | - Geert A A M Simkens
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, PO Box 1350, 5602 ZA, Eindhoven, Netherlands
| | - Jacobus W A Burger
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, PO Box 1350, 5602 ZA, Eindhoven, Netherlands
| | - Simon W Nienhuijs
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, PO Box 1350, 5602 ZA, Eindhoven, Netherlands
| | - Geert-Jan M Creemers
- Department of Medical Oncology, Catharina Hospital, PO Box 1350, 5602, Eindhoven, ZA, Netherlands
| | - Anna M J Thijs
- Department of Medical Oncology, Catharina Hospital, PO Box 1350, 5602, Eindhoven, ZA, Netherlands
| | | | - Eva V E Madsen
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Erasmus Medical Centre, PO Box 2040, 3000, Rotterdam, CA, Netherlands
| | - Ninos Ayez
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Erasmus Medical Centre, PO Box 2040, 3000, Rotterdam, CA, Netherlands
| | - Nadine L de Boer
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Erasmus Medical Centre, PO Box 2040, 3000, Rotterdam, CA, Netherlands
| | - Esther van Meerten
- Department of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, PO Box 2040, 3000, Rotterdam, CA, Netherlands
| | - Jurriaan B Tuynman
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, Location VUMC, PO Box 7057, 1007, Amsterdam, MB, Netherlands
| | - Miranda Kusters
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, Location VUMC, PO Box 7057, 1007, Amsterdam, MB, Netherlands
| | - Nina R Sluiter
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, Location VUMC, PO Box 7057, 1007, Amsterdam, MB, Netherlands
| | - Henk M W Verheul
- Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, Location VUMC, PO Box 7057, 1007, Amsterdam, MB, Netherlands
| | - Hans J van der Vliet
- Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, Location VUMC, PO Box 7057, 1007, Amsterdam, MB, Netherlands
| | - Marinus J Wiezer
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, PO Box 2500, 3430, Nieuwegein, EM, Netherlands
| | - Djamila Boerma
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, PO Box 2500, 3430, Nieuwegein, EM, Netherlands
| | - Emma C E Wassenaar
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, PO Box 2500, 3430, Nieuwegein, EM, Netherlands
| | - Maartje Los
- Department of Medical Oncology, St. Antonius Hospital, PO Box 2500, 3430, Nieuwegein, EM, Netherlands
| | - Cornelis B Hunting
- Department of Medical Oncology, St. Antonius Hospital, PO Box 2500, 3430, Nieuwegein, EM, Netherlands
| | - Arend G J Aalbers
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, PO Box 90203, 1006, Amsterdam, BE, Netherlands
| | - Niels F M Kok
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, PO Box 90203, 1006, Amsterdam, BE, Netherlands
| | - Koert F D Kuhlmann
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, PO Box 90203, 1006, Amsterdam, BE, Netherlands
| | - Henk Boot
- Department of Gastrointestinal Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, PO Box 90203, 1006, Amsterdam, BE, Netherlands
| | - Myriam Chalabi
- Department of Gastrointestinal Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, PO Box 90203, 1006, Amsterdam, BE, Netherlands
| | - Schelto Kruijff
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, PO Box 30001, 9700 RB, Groningen, RB, Netherlands
| | - Lukas B Been
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, PO Box 30001, 9700 RB, Groningen, RB, Netherlands
| | - Robert J van Ginkel
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, PO Box 30001, 9700 RB, Groningen, RB, Netherlands
| | - Derk Jan A de Groot
- Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Centre Groningen, PO Box 30001, 9700, Groningen, RB, Netherlands
| | - Rudolf S N Fehrmann
- Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Centre Groningen, PO Box 30001, 9700, Groningen, RB, Netherlands
| | - Johannes H W de Wilt
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Centre, PO Box 9101, 6500, Nijmegen, HB, Netherlands
| | - Andreas J A Bremers
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Centre, PO Box 9101, 6500, Nijmegen, HB, Netherlands
| | - Philip R de Reuver
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Centre, PO Box 9101, 6500, Nijmegen, HB, Netherlands
| | - Sandra A Radema
- Department of Medical Oncology, Radboud University Medical Centre, PO Box 9101, 6500, Nijmegen, HB, Netherlands
| | - Karin H Herbschleb
- Department of Medical Oncology, Radboud University Medical Centre, PO Box 9101, 6500, Nijmegen, HB, Netherlands
| | | | - Arjen J Witkamp
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Utrecht, PO Box 85500, 3508, Utrecht, GA, Netherlands
| | - Miriam Koopman
- Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, PO Box 85500, 3508, Utrecht, GA, Netherlands
| | - Nadia Haj Mohammad
- Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, PO Box 85500, 3508, Utrecht, GA, Netherlands
| | - Eino B van Duyn
- Department of Surgery, Medisch Spectrum Twente, PO Box 50000, 7500, Enschede, KA, Netherlands
| | - Walter J B Mastboom
- Department of Surgery, Medisch Spectrum Twente, PO Box 50000, 7500, Enschede, KA, Netherlands
| | - Leonie J M Mekenkamp
- Department of Medical Oncology, Medisch Spectrum Twente, PO Box 50000, 7500, Enschede, KA, Netherlands
| | - Joost Nederend
- Department of Radiology, Catharina Hospital, PO Box 1350, 5602, Eindhoven, ZA, Netherlands
| | - Max J Lahaye
- Department of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, PO Box 90203, 1006, Amsterdam, BE, Netherlands
| | - Petur Snaebjornsson
- Department of Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, PO Box 90203, 1006, Amsterdam, BE, Netherlands
| | - Cornelis Verhoef
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Erasmus Medical Centre, PO Box 2040, 3000, Rotterdam, CA, Netherlands
| | - Hanneke W M van Laarhoven
- Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, Location AMC, PO Box 22660, 1100, Amsterdam, DD, Netherlands
| | - Aeilko H Zwinderman
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Biostatistics & Bioinformatics, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, Location AMC, PO Box 22660, 1100, Amsterdam, DD, Netherlands
| | - Jeanette M Bouma
- Clinical Trial Department, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (IKNL), PO Box 19079, 3501, Utrecht, DB, Netherlands
| | - Onno Kranenburg
- UMC Utrecht Cancer Centre, University Medical Centre Utrecht, PO Box 85500, 3508, Utrecht, GA, Netherlands
| | - Iris van 't Erve
- Department of Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, PO Box 90203, 1006, Amsterdam, BE, Netherlands
| | - Remond J A Fijneman
- Department of Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, PO Box 90203, 1006, Amsterdam, BE, Netherlands
| | - Marcel G W Dijkgraaf
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Biostatistics & Bioinformatics, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, Location AMC, PO Box 22660, 1100, Amsterdam, DD, Netherlands
| | - Patrick H J Hemmer
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, PO Box 30001, 9700 RB, Groningen, RB, Netherlands
| | - Cornelis J A Punt
- Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, Location AMC, PO Box 22660, 1100, Amsterdam, DD, Netherlands
| | - Pieter J Tanis
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, Location AMC, PO Box 22660, 1100, Amsterdam, DD, Netherlands
| | - Ignace H J T de Hingh
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, PO Box 1350, 5602 ZA, Eindhoven, Netherlands.
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
18
|
Bastiaenen VP, Klaver CEL, Kok NFM, de Wilt JHW, de Hingh IHJT, Aalbers AGJ, Boerma D, Bremers AJA, Burger JWA, van Duyn EB, Evers P, van Grevenstein WMU, Hemmer PHJ, Madsen EVE, Snaebjornsson P, Tuynman JB, Wiezer MJ, Dijkgraaf MGW, van der Bilt JDW, Tanis PJ. Second and third look laparoscopy in pT4 colon cancer patients for early detection of peritoneal metastases; the COLOPEC 2 randomized multicentre trial. BMC Cancer 2019; 19:254. [PMID: 30898098 PMCID: PMC6429794 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-019-5408-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/17/2019] [Accepted: 02/25/2019] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Approximately 20–30% of patients with pT4 colon cancer develop metachronous peritoneal metastases (PM). Due to restricted accuracy of imaging modalities and absence of early symptoms, PM are often detected at a stage in which only a quarter of patients are eligible for curative intent treatment. Preliminary findings of the COLOPEC trial (NCT02231086) revealed that PM were already detected during surgical re-exploration within two months after primary resection in 9% of patients with pT4 colon cancer. Therefore, second look diagnostic laparoscopy (DLS) to detect PM at a subclinical stage may be considered an essential component of early follow-up in these patients, although this needs confirmation in a larger patient cohort. Furthermore, a third look DLS after a negative second look DLS might be beneficial for detection of PM occurring at a later stage. Methods The aim of this study is to determine the yield of second look DLS and added value of third look DLS after negative second look DLS in detecting occult PM in pT4N0-2 M0 colon cancer patients after completion of primary treatment. Patients will undergo an abdominal CT at 6 months postoperative, followed by a second look DLS within 1 month if no PM or other metastases not amenable for local treatment are detected. Patients without PM will subsequently be randomized between routine follow-up including 18 months abdominal CT, or an experimental arm with a third look DLS provided that PM or incurable metastases are absent at the 18 months abdominal CT. Primary endpoint is the proportion of PM detected after a negative second look DLS and will be determined at 20 months postoperative. Discussion Second look DLS is supposed to result in 10% occult PM, and third look DLS after negative second look DLS is expected to detect an additional 10% of PM compared to routine follow-up alone in patients with pT4 colon cancer. Detection of PM at an early stage will likely increase the proportion of patients eligible for curative intent treatment and subsequently improve survival, given the uniformly reported direct association between the extent of peritoneal disease and survival. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03413254, January 2018. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12885-019-5408-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vivian P Bastiaenen
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, PO Box 22660, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| | - Charlotte E L Klaver
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, PO Box 22660, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Niels F M Kok
- Department of Surgery, the Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Johannes H W de Wilt
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | | | - Arend G J Aalbers
- Department of Surgery, the Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Djamila Boerma
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - Andre J A Bremers
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | | | - Eino B van Duyn
- Department of Surgery, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - Pauline Evers
- Dutch Federation of Cancer Patient Organizations (NFK), Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | | | - Patrick H J Hemmer
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Eva V E Madsen
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Petur Snaebjornsson
- Department of Pathology, the Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Jurriaan B Tuynman
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Marinus J Wiezer
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - Marcel G W Dijkgraaf
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Jarmila D W van der Bilt
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, PO Box 22660, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.,Department of Surgery, Flevo hospital, Almere, the Netherlands
| | - Pieter J Tanis
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, PO Box 22660, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
de Neree Tot Babberich MPM, Vermeer NCA, Wouters MWJM, van Grevenstein WMU, Peeters KCMJ, Dekker E, Tanis PJ. Postoperative Outcomes of Screen-Detected vs Non-Screen-Detected Colorectal Cancer in the Netherlands. JAMA Surg 2018; 153:e183567. [PMID: 30285063 DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2018.3567] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Abstract
Importance The nationwide fecal immunochemical test-based screening program has influenced surgical care for patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) in the Netherlands, although these implications have not been studied in much detail so far. Objective To compare surgical outcomes of patients diagnosed as having CRC through the fecal immunochemical test-based screening program (screen detected) and patients with non-screen-detected CRC. Design, Setting, and Participants This was a population-based comparative cohort study using the Dutch ColoRectal Audit and analyzed all Dutch hospitals performing CRC resections. Patients who underwent elective resection for CRC between January 2011 to December 2016 were included. Interventions Colorectal cancer surgery. Main Outcomes and Measures Postoperative nonsurgical complications, postoperative surgical complications, postoperative 30-day or in-hospital mortality, and complicated course (postoperative complication resulting in a hospital stay >14 days and/or a reintervention and/or mortality). A risk-stratified comparison was made for different postoperative outcomes based on screening status (screen detected vs not screen detected), cancer stage (I-IV), and for cancer stage I to III also on age (aged ≤70 years and >70 years) and American Society of Anesthesiologists score (I-II and III-IV). To determine any residual case-mix-corrected differences in outcomes between patients with screen-detected and non-screen-detected cancer, univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed. Results In total, 36 242 patients with colon cancer and 17 416 patients with rectal cancer were included for analysis. Compared with patients with non-screen-detected CRC, screen-detected patients were younger (mean [SD] age, 68 [5] vs 70 [11] years), more often men (3777 [60%] vs 13 506 [57%]), and had lower American Society of Anesthesiologists score (American Society of Anesthesiologists score III+: 838 [13%] vs 5529 [23%]). Patients with stage I to III colon cancer who were screen detected had a significantly lower mortality and complicated course rate compared with non-screen-detected patients. For patients with rectal cancer, only a significant difference was found in mortality rate in patients with a cancer stage IV disease, which was higher in the screen-detected group. Compared with non-screen-detected colon cancer, an independent association was found for screen-detected colon cancer on nonsurgical complications (adjusted odds ratio, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.73-0.91), surgical complications (adjusted odds ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.72-0.89), and complicated course (adjusted odds ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.71-0.90). Screen-detected rectal cancer had significantly higher odds on mortality. Conclusions and Relevance Postoperative outcomes were significantly better for patients with colon cancer referred through the fecal immunochemical test-based screening program compared with non-screen-detected patients. These differences were not found in patients with rectal cancer. The outcomes of patients with screen-detected colon cancer were still better after an extensive case-mix correction, implying additional underlying factors favoring patients referred for surgery through the screening program.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael P M de Neree Tot Babberich
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.,Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.,Scientific Bureau of the Dutch Institute of Clinical Auditing, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Nina C A Vermeer
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Michel W J M Wouters
- Scientific Bureau of the Dutch Institute of Clinical Auditing, Leiden, the Netherlands.,Department of Surgical Oncology, the Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Koen C M J Peeters
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Evelien Dekker
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Pieter J Tanis
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | |
Collapse
|
20
|
Couwenberg AM, Burbach JPM, van Grevenstein WMU, Smits AB, Consten ECJ, Schiphorst AHW, Wijffels NAT, Heikens JT, Intven MPW, Verkooijen HM. Effect of Neoadjuvant Therapy and Rectal Surgery on Health-related Quality of Life in Patients With Rectal Cancer During the First 2 Years After Diagnosis. Clin Colorectal Cancer 2018; 17:e499-e512. [PMID: 29678514 DOI: 10.1016/j.clcc.2018.03.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 49] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/18/2017] [Revised: 03/12/2018] [Accepted: 03/14/2018] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Rectal cancer surgery with neoadjuvant therapy is associated with substantial morbidity. The present study describes the course of quality of life (QOL) in rectal cancer patients in the first 2 years after the start of treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS We performed a prospective study within a colorectal cancer cohort including rectal cancer patients who were referred for neoadjuvant chemoradiation or short-course radiotherapy and underwent rectal surgery. QOL was assessed using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer core questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) and colorectal cancer questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-CR29) before treatment and after 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. The outcomes were compared with the QOL scores from the Dutch general population and stratified by low anterior resection and abdominoperineal resection. Postoperative bowel dysfunction after low anterior resection was measured using the low anterior resection syndrome score. RESULTS Of the 324 patients, 272 (84%) responded to at least 2 questionnaires and were included in the present study. Compared with pretreatment levels, the strongest decline was observed in physical, role, and social functioning at 3 and 6 months after the start of treatment. Global health and cognitive functioning declined to a lesser extend, and emotional functioning gradually improved over the time. Within 24 months, the QOL scores had recovered toward the pretreatment levels in most patients. Compared with the general population, physical, role, social, and cognitive functioning and symptoms of fatigue and insomnia remained significantly worse in patients on longer-term. After low anterior resection, major bowel dysfunction was reported by 44% to 60% of the patients. Increasing urinary incontinence and severe complaints of impotence were observed in patients who had undergone abdominoperineal resection. CONCLUSION Rectal cancer treatment is associated with a significant decline in QOL during the first 6 months after the diagnosis. Within 2 years, most patients return toward pretreatment functioning but could still experience poorer functioning and treatment-related symptoms compared with the general population. These findings support shared decision-making and emphasize the need for postoperative supportive care and novel treatment approaches.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alice M Couwenberg
- Department of Radiation-Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
| | - Johannes P M Burbach
- Department of Radiation-Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | | | - Anke B Smits
- Department of Surgery, St Antonius Ziekenhuis, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Esther C J Consten
- Department of Surgery, Meander Medical Center, Amersfoort, The Netherlands
| | | | - Niels A T Wijffels
- Department of Surgery, Zuwe Hofpoort Ziekenhuis, Woerden, The Netherlands
| | - Joost T Heikens
- Department of Surgery, Ziekenhuis Rivierenland, Tiel, The Netherlands
| | - Martijn P W Intven
- Department of Radiation-Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Helena M Verkooijen
- Imaging Division, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands; University of Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
van Brunschot S, van Grinsven J, van Santvoort HC, Bakker OJ, Besselink MG, Boermeester MA, Bollen TL, Bosscha K, Bouwense SA, Bruno MJ, Cappendijk VC, Consten EC, Dejong CH, van Eijck CH, Erkelens WG, van Goor H, van Grevenstein WMU, Haveman JW, Hofker SH, Jansen JM, Laméris JS, van Lienden KP, Meijssen MA, Mulder CJ, Nieuwenhuijs VB, Poley JW, Quispel R, de Ridder RJ, Römkens TE, Scheepers JJ, Schepers NJ, Schwartz MP, Seerden T, Spanier BWM, Straathof JWA, Strijker M, Timmer R, Venneman NG, Vleggaar FP, Voermans RP, Witteman BJ, Gooszen HG, Dijkgraaf MG, Fockens P. Endoscopic or surgical step-up approach for infected necrotising pancreatitis: a multicentre randomised trial. Lancet 2018; 391:51-58. [PMID: 29108721 DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(17)32404-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 395] [Impact Index Per Article: 65.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/30/2017] [Revised: 06/19/2017] [Accepted: 08/02/2017] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Infected necrotising pancreatitis is a potentially lethal disease and an indication for invasive intervention. The surgical step-up approach is the standard treatment. A promising alternative is the endoscopic step-up approach. We compared both approaches to see whether the endoscopic step-up approach was superior to the surgical step-up approach in terms of clinical and economic outcomes. METHODS In this multicentre, randomised, superiority trial, we recruited adult patients with infected necrotising pancreatitis and an indication for invasive intervention from 19 hospitals in the Netherlands. Patients were randomly assigned to either the endoscopic or the surgical step-up approach. The endoscopic approach consisted of endoscopic ultrasound-guided transluminal drainage followed, if necessary, by endoscopic necrosectomy. The surgical approach consisted of percutaneous catheter drainage followed, if necessary, by video-assisted retroperitoneal debridement. The primary endpoint was a composite of major complications or death during 6-month follow-up. Analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN09186711. FINDINGS Between Sept 20, 2011, and Jan 29, 2015, we screened 418 patients with pancreatic or extrapancreatic necrosis, of which 98 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to the endoscopic step-up approach (n=51) or the surgical step-up approach (n=47). The primary endpoint occurred in 22 (43%) of 51 patients in the endoscopy group and in 21 (45%) of 47 patients in the surgery group (risk ratio [RR] 0·97, 95% CI 0·62-1·51; p=0·88). Mortality did not differ between groups (nine [18%] patients in the endoscopy group vs six [13%] patients in the surgery group; RR 1·38, 95% CI 0·53-3·59, p=0·50), nor did any of the major complications included in the primary endpoint. INTERPRETATION In patients with infected necrotising pancreatitis, the endoscopic step-up approach was not superior to the surgical step-up approach in reducing major complications or death. The rate of pancreatic fistulas and length of hospital stay were lower in the endoscopy group. The outcome of this trial will probably result in a shift to the endoscopic step-up approach as treatment preference. FUNDING The Dutch Digestive Disease Foundation, Fonds NutsOhra, and the Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sandra van Brunschot
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
| | - Janneke van Grinsven
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands; Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Hjalmar C van Santvoort
- Department of Surgery, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, Netherlands; Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | - Olaf J Bakker
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Marja A Boermeester
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Thomas L Bollen
- Department of Radiology, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, Netherlands
| | - Koop Bosscha
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, 's-Hertogenbosch, Netherlands
| | - Stefan A Bouwense
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, Netherlands
| | - Marco J Bruno
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Erasmus MC, University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | | | - Esther C Consten
- Department of Surgery, Meander Medical Centre, Amersfoort, Netherlands
| | - Cornelis H Dejong
- Department of Surgery and NUTRIM School for Nutrition and Translational Research in Metabolism, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, Netherlands
| | - Casper H van Eijck
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC, University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | | | - Harry van Goor
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, Netherlands
| | | | - Jan-Willem Haveman
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands
| | - Sijbrand H Hofker
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands
| | - Jeroen M Jansen
- Department of Gastroenterology, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Johan S Laméris
- Department of Radiology, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Krijn P van Lienden
- Department of Radiology, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | | | - Chris J Mulder
- Department of Gastroenterology, VU Medical Centre, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | | | - Jan-Werner Poley
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Erasmus MC, University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Rutger Quispel
- Department of Gastroenterology, Reinier de Graaf Group, Delft, Netherlands
| | - Rogier J de Ridder
- Department of Gastroenterology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, Netherlands
| | - Tessa E Römkens
- Department of Gastroenterology, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, 's-Hertogenbosch, Netherlands
| | | | - Nicolien J Schepers
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Erasmus MC, University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Matthijs P Schwartz
- Department of Gastroenterology, Meander Medical Centre, Amersfoort, Netherlands
| | - Tom Seerden
- Department of Gastroenterology, Amphia Hospital, Breda, Netherlands
| | | | | | - Marin Strijker
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Robin Timmer
- Department of Gastroenterology, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, Netherlands
| | - Niels G Venneman
- Department of Gastroenterology, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, Netherlands
| | - Frank P Vleggaar
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | - Rogier P Voermans
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Ben J Witteman
- Department of Gastroenterology, Hospital Gelderse Vallei, Ede, Netherlands
| | - Hein G Gooszen
- Department of OR/Evidence Based Surgery, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, Netherlands
| | - Marcel G Dijkgraaf
- Clinical Research Unit, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Paul Fockens
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Ubink I, Elias SG, Moelans CB, Laclé MM, van Grevenstein WMU, van Diest PJ, Borel Rinkes IHM, Kranenburg O. A Novel Diagnostic Tool for Selecting Patients With Mesenchymal-Type Colon Cancer Reveals Intratumor Subtype Heterogeneity. J Natl Cancer Inst 2017; 109:3064533. [DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djw303] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/04/2016] [Accepted: 11/16/2016] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
|
23
|
van der Linden YTK, Brenkman HJF, van der Horst S, van Grevenstein WMU, van Hillegersberg R, Ruurda JP. Robotic Single-Port Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Is Safe but Faces Technical Challenges. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 2016; 26:857-861. [PMID: 27258800 DOI: 10.1089/lap.2016.0183] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/17/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND For cholecystectomy, multiport laparoscopy is the recommended surgical approach. Single-port laparoscopy (SPL) was introduced to reduce postoperative pain and provide better cosmetic results, but has technical disadvantages. Robotic SPL (RSPL) was developed to overcome these disadvantages. In this prospective study, we aim to describe intraoperative results and postoperative outcomes of RSPL cholecystectomies and evaluate technical aspects of the technique. METHODS A prospective database of all patients who underwent a RSPL cholecystectomy between January 2012 and December 2014 was analyzed. Intraoperative results and postoperative complications were evaluated. RESULTS A total of 27 patients underwent RSPL cholecystectomy. Median age was 59 (20-78) years and median body mass index was 25 (19-35) kg/m2. The majority of patients had American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) II classification (67%) and 89% underwent surgery for cholecystolithiasis or cholecystitis. The median operating time was 81 (41-115) minutes. Conversion to a multiport procedure occurred in 2; one due to insufficient length of the robotic instruments. In the second and third patients, conversion to an open procedure was necessary due to inadequate exposure caused by liver cirrhosis and purulent ascites, respectively. In seven procedures, spill occurred due to rupture of the gallbladder. Postoperative complications occurred in 4 patients, including 1 bleeding (no reintervention), 1 peritonitis, and 2 wound infections. After a median follow-up of 33 (10-44) months, 5 (19%) trocar-site hernias were seen. CONCLUSION RSPL cholecystectomy is feasible, however, encountered by technical challenges due to inadequate length of the nonwristed robotic instruments. A high incidence of gallbladder rupture and trocar-site hernias may limit its application.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Hylke J F Brenkman
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht , Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Sylvia van der Horst
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht , Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | | | | | - Jelle P Ruurda
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht , Utrecht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Klaver CEL, Musters GD, Bemelman WA, Punt CJA, Verwaal VJ, Dijkgraaf MGW, Aalbers AGJ, van der Bilt JDW, Boerma D, Bremers AJA, Burger JWA, Buskens CJ, Evers P, van Ginkel RJ, van Grevenstein WMU, Hemmer PHJ, de Hingh IHJT, Lammers LA, van Leeuwen BL, Meijerink WJHJ, Nienhuijs SW, Pon J, Radema SA, van Ramshorst B, Snaebjornsson P, Tuynman JB, Te Velde EA, Wiezer MJ, de Wilt JHW, Tanis PJ. Adjuvant hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in patients with colon cancer at high risk of peritoneal carcinomatosis; the COLOPEC randomized multicentre trial. BMC Cancer 2015; 15:428. [PMID: 26003804 PMCID: PMC4492087 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-015-1430-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 96] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/07/2015] [Accepted: 05/13/2015] [Indexed: 12/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Background The peritoneum is the second most common site of recurrence in colorectal cancer. Early detection of peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) by imaging is difficult. Patients eventually presenting with clinically apparent PC have a poor prognosis. Median survival is only about five months if untreated and the benefit of palliative systemic chemotherapy is limited. Only a quarter of patients are eligible for curative treatment, consisting of cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CR/HIPEC). However, the effectiveness depends highly on the extent of disease and the treatment is associated with a considerable complication rate. These clinical problems underline the need for effective adjuvant therapy in high-risk patients to minimize the risk of outgrowth of peritoneal micro metastases. Adjuvant hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) seems to be suitable for this purpose. Without the need for cytoreductive surgery, adjuvant HIPEC can be performed with a low complication rate and short hospital stay. Methods/Design The aim of this study is to determine the effectiveness of adjuvant HIPEC in preventing the development of PC in patients with colon cancer at high risk of peritoneal recurrence. This study will be performed in the nine Dutch HIPEC centres, starting in April 2015. Eligible for inclusion are patients who underwent curative resection for T4 or intra-abdominally perforated cM0 stage colon cancer. After resection of the primary tumour, 176 patients will be randomized to adjuvant HIPEC followed by routine adjuvant systemic chemotherapy in the experimental arm, or to systemic chemotherapy only in the control arm. Adjuvant HIPEC will be performed simultaneously or shortly after the primary resection. Oxaliplatin will be used as chemotherapeutic agent, for 30 min at 42-43 °C. Just before HIPEC, 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin will be administered intravenously. Primary endpoint is peritoneal disease-free survival at 18 months. Diagnostic laparoscopy will be performed routinely after 18 months postoperatively in both arms of the study in patients without evidence of disease based on routine follow-up using CT imaging and CEA. Discussion Adjuvant HIPEC is assumed to reduce the expected 25 % absolute risk of PC in patients with T4 or perforated colon cancer to a risk of 10 %. This reduction is likely to translate into a prolonged overall survival. Trial registration number NCT02231086 (Clinicaltrials.gov)
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Charlotte E L Klaver
- Department of surgery, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Post box 22660, 1105AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Gijsbert D Musters
- Department of surgery, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Post box 22660, 1105AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Willem A Bemelman
- Department of surgery, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Post box 22660, 1105AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Cornelis J A Punt
- Department of oncology, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Post box 22660, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Victor J Verwaal
- Department of Surgery, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek hospital/the Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Marcel G W Dijkgraaf
- Clinical Research Unit, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Post box 22660, 1105AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Arend G J Aalbers
- Department of Surgery, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek hospital/the Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Jarmila D W van der Bilt
- Department of surgery, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Post box 22660, 1105AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Djamila Boerma
- Department of surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Post box 2500, 3430 EM, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands.
| | - Andre J A Bremers
- Department of surgery, Radboud University Medical Centre, Geert Grooteplein-Zuid 22, 6525 GA, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
| | - Jacobus W A Burger
- Department of surgery, Erasmus Medical Centre/Daniel den Hoed, Post box 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Christianne J Buskens
- Department of surgery, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Post box 22660, 1105AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Pauline Evers
- Dutch Cancer Patient Organization 'Leven met Kanker', Utrecht, the Netherlands.
| | - Robert J van Ginkel
- Department of surgery, University Medical Centre, Hanzeplein 1, 9700 RB, Groningen, The Netherlands.
| | | | - Patrick H J Hemmer
- Department of surgery, University Medical Centre, Hanzeplein 1, 9700 RB, Groningen, The Netherlands.
| | - Ignace H J T de Hingh
- Department of surgery, Catharina Ziekenhuis, Post box 1350, 5602 ZA, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
| | - Laureen A Lammers
- Department of pharmacy, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Post box 22660, 1105AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Barbara L van Leeuwen
- Department of surgery, University Medical Centre, Hanzeplein 1, 9700 RB, Groningen, The Netherlands.
| | - Wilhelmus J H J Meijerink
- Departement of surgery, Vrije University Medical Center, Post box 7057, 1007 MB, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Simon W Nienhuijs
- Department of surgery, Catharina Ziekenhuis, Post box 1350, 5602 ZA, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
| | - Jolien Pon
- Society of patients with cancer of the gastrointestinal tract (SPKS), Darmkanker Nederland, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
| | - Sandra A Radema
- Department of oncology, Radboud University Medical Centre, Geert Grooteplein-Zuid 22, 6525 GA, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
| | - Bert van Ramshorst
- Department of surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Post box 2500, 3430 EM, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands.
| | - Petur Snaebjornsson
- Department of pathology, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek hospital/the Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Jurriaan B Tuynman
- Departement of surgery, Vrije University Medical Center, Post box 7057, 1007 MB, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Elisabeth A Te Velde
- Departement of surgery, Vrije University Medical Center, Post box 7057, 1007 MB, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Marinus J Wiezer
- Department of surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Post box 2500, 3430 EM, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands.
| | - Johannes H W de Wilt
- Department of surgery, Radboud University Medical Centre, Geert Grooteplein-Zuid 22, 6525 GA, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
| | - Pieter J Tanis
- Department of surgery, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Post box 22660, 1105AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Burbach JPM, Verkooijen HM, Intven M, Kleijnen JPJE, Bosman ME, Raaymakers BW, van Grevenstein WMU, Koopman M, Seravalli E, van Asselen B, Reerink O. RandomizEd controlled trial for pre-operAtive dose-escaLation BOOST in locally advanced rectal cancer (RECTAL BOOST study): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials 2015; 16:58. [PMID: 25888548 PMCID: PMC4344756 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-015-0586-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 47] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/29/2014] [Accepted: 01/30/2015] [Indexed: 01/28/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) consists of chemoradiation therapy (CRT) and surgery. Approximately 15% of patients show a pathological complete response (pCR). Increased pCR-rates can be achieved through dose escalation, thereby increasing the number patients eligible for organ-preservation to improve quality of life (QoL). A randomized comparison of 65 versus 50Gy with external-beam radiation alone has not yet been performed. This trial investigates pCR rate, clinical response, toxicity, QoL and (disease-free) survival in LARC patients treated with 65Gy (boost + chemoradiation) compared with 50Gy standard chemoradiation (sCRT). Methods/design This study follows the ‘cohort multiple randomized controlled trial’ (cmRCT) design: rectal cancer patients are included in a prospective cohort that registers clinical baseline, follow-up, survival and QoL data. At enrollment, patients are asked consent to offer them experimental interventions in the future. Eligible patients—histologically confirmed LARC (T3NxM0 <1 mm from mesorectal fascia, T4NxM0 or TxN2M0) located ≤10 cm from the anorectal transition who provided consent for experimental intervention offers—form a subcohort (n = 120). From this subcohort, a random sample is offered the boost prior to sCRT (n = 60), which they may accept or refuse. Informed consent is signed only after acceptance of the boost. Non-selected patients in the subcohort (n = 60) undergo sCRT alone and are not notified that they participate in the control arm until the trial is completed. sCRT consists of 50Gy (25 × 2Gy) with concomitant capecitabine. The boost (without chemotherapy) is given prior to sCRT and consists of 15 Gy (5 × 3Gy) delivered to the gross tumor volume (GTV). The primary endpoint is pCR (TRG 1). Secondary endpoints include acute grade 3–4 toxicity, good pathologic response (TRG 1-2), clinical response, surgical complications, QoL and (disease-free) survival. Data is analyzed by intention to treat. Discussion The boost is delivered prior to sCRT so that GTV adjustment for tumor shrinkage during sCRT is not necessary. Small margins also aim to limit irradiation of healthy tissue. The cmRCT design provides opportunity to overcome common shortcomings of classic RCTs, such as slow recruitment, disappointment-bias in control arm patients and poor generalizability. Trial registration The Netherlands Trials Register NL46051.041.13. Registered 22 August 2013. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01951521. Registered 18 September 2013.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J P Maarten Burbach
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584, CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
| | - Helena M Verkooijen
- Trial Bureau Imaging Division, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584, CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
| | - Martijn Intven
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584, CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
| | - Jean-Paul J E Kleijnen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584, CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
| | - Mirjam E Bosman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584, CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
| | - Bas W Raaymakers
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584, CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
| | | | - Miriam Koopman
- Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584, CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
| | - Enrica Seravalli
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584, CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
| | - Bram van Asselen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584, CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
| | - Onne Reerink
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584, CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
van Grevenstein WMU, Aalbers AGJ, Ten Raa S, Sluiter W, Hofland LJ, Jeekel H, van Eijck CHJ. Surgery-Derived Reactive Oxygen Species Produced by Polymorphonuclear Leukocytes Promote Tumor Recurrence: Studies in an In Vitro Model. J Surg Res 2007; 140:115-20. [PMID: 17196986 DOI: 10.1016/j.jss.2006.10.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/30/2006] [Revised: 10/06/2006] [Accepted: 10/06/2006] [Indexed: 01/22/2023]
Abstract
Tissue injury induces the acute phase response, aimed at minimizing damage and starting the healing process. Polymorphonuclear leukocytes (PMNs) respond to the presence of specific chemoattractants and begin to appear in large numbers. The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of reactive oxygen species (ROS) produced by PMNs on the interaction between colon carcinoma cells and mesothelial cells. An experimental human in vitro model was designed using Caco-2 colon carcinoma cells and primary cultures of mesothelial cells. Tumor cell adhesion to a mesothelial monolayer was assessed after preincubation of the mesothelium with stimulated PMNs and unstimulated PMNs. Mesothelial cells were also incubated with xanthine/xanthine oxidase (X/XO) complex producing ROS after which adhesion of Caco-2 cells was investigated and the expression of adhesion molecules (ICAM-1, VCAM-1, and CD44) by means of enzyme immunoassay. In the control situation the average adhesion of Caco-2 cells to the mesothelial monolayers was 23%. Mesothelial monolayers incubated with unstimulated PMNs showed a 25% increase of tumor cell adhesion (P < 0.05). The adhesion of tumor to the monolayers incubated with the N-formyl-methionyl-leucyl-phenylalanine-stimulated PMNs increased with 40% (P < 0.01). Incubation of the mesothelium with X/XO resulted in an enhancement of adhesion of Caco-2 cells of 70% and an up-regulation of expression of ICAM-1, VCAM-1, and CD44. This study reveals an increase of tumor cell adhesion to the mesothelium induced by incubating the mesothelial monolayers with PMNs. PMNs are producing a number of products, like proteolytic enzymes, cytokines, and ROS. These factors up-regulate the expression of adhesion molecules and in that way stimulate the adhesion of tumor to the mesothelium.
Collapse
|
27
|
van Grevenstein WMU, Hofland LJ, Jeekel J, van Eijck CHJ. The expression of adhesion molecules and the influence of inflammatory cytokines on the adhesion of human pancreatic carcinoma cells to mesothelial monolayers. Pancreas 2006; 32:396-402. [PMID: 16670622 DOI: 10.1097/01.mpa.0000220865.80034.2a] [Citation(s) in RCA: 32] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Pancreatic cancer has a tremendously deplorable prognosis. Peritoneal dissemination frequently occurs after surgical resection of the tumor. Specific adhesion molecules may be of great importance in local tumor recurrence. These adhesion molecules may be influenced by inflammatory cytokines produced during surgery. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of inflammatory cytokines, interleukin-1beta (IL-1beta), interleukin-6 (IL-6), and tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha), on the interaction between pancreatic tumor cells and mesothelial cells. METHODS An experimental in vitro model was designed using Panc-1, MiaPaCa-2, and BxPC-3 pancreatic carcinoma cell lines. Primary cultures of mesothelial cells were incubated with the inflammatory cytokines, and after the incubation, the adherence of the different pancreatic cell lines was measured. By means of immunocytochemical staining and enzyme immunoassay, the expression of adhesion molecules (ICAM-1, VCAM-1, and CD44) and counterparts (LFA-1 and VLA-4) was investigated. RESULTS Preincubation of the mesothelial monolayer with IL-1beta or TNF-alpha resulted in enhanced tumor cell adhesion of the MiaPaCa-2 and BxPC-3 cells. The amount of stimulation for the MiaPaCa-2 cells was more than 100% versus the control situation and for BxPC-3 cells between 20% to 35%. IL-6 did not affect the tumor cell adhesion of the MiaPaCa-2 and BxPC-3 cells. The adherence of Panc-1 was not enhanced after preincubation of the mesothelial monolayers with the inflammatory cytokines. Mesothelial cells show a significant enhancement of expression of ICAM-1, VCAM-1, and CD44 after stimulation with IL-1beta and TNF-alpha. CONCLUSIONS The presented results prove that IL-1beta and TNF-alpha are significant stimulating factors in pancreatic tumor cell adhesion in vitro and may therefore account for tumor recurrence to the peritoneum in vivo. The immunocytochemical staining results demonstrate that ICAM-1 and CD44 important adhesion molecules and interference with their function may decrease the incidence of peritoneal tumor recurrence after curative resection of pancreatic cancer.
Collapse
|
28
|
ten Kate M, Hofland LJ, van Grevenstein WMU, van Koetsveld PV, Jeekel J, van Eijck CHJ. Influence of proinflammatory cytokines on the adhesion of human colon carcinoma cells to lung microvascular endothelium. Int J Cancer 2004; 112:943-50. [PMID: 15386356 DOI: 10.1002/ijc.20506] [Citation(s) in RCA: 54] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/11/2022]
Abstract
In this experimental study, the influence of surgery-induced proinflammatory cytokines on tumor recurrence in the lung was investigated. A reproducible human in vitro assay was developed to study the adhesion of HT29 colon carcinoma cells to monolayers of microvascular endothelial cells of the lung (HMVECs-L) or human umbilical venous endothelial cells (HUVECs). Preincubation of HMVECs-L with maximally active concentrations of IL-1beta and TNF-alpha, but not with IL-6, resulted in at least 250% adhesion compared to control adhesion (p <or= 0.01). The effect of IL-1beta and TNF-alpha was concentration- and time-dependent. Comparable results were found for HUVECs. Tumor cell adhesion was not increased after preincubation of HT29 with TNF-alpha. Enzyme immunoassays of cytokine-preincubated HUVECs and HMVECs-L showed concentration- and time-dependent upregulation of E-selectin, ICAM-1 and VCAM-1 expression. In addition, LFA-1 and VLA-4 were only expressed on HMVECs-L, creating more binding possibilities for HMVECs-L compared to HUVECs. Inhibition assays with anti-E-selectin monoclonal antibody significantly decreased tumor cell adhesion to HUVECs; however, it did not affect tumor cell adhesion to HMVECs-L. Furthermore, anti-ICAM-1 and anti-VCAM-1 antibodies did not affect adhesion. Our results prove IL-1beta and TNF-alpha promote tumor cell adhesion to HMVECs-L in vitro and may therefore account for enhanced tumor recurrence in the lung seen after major surgical trauma. The adhesion of HT29 to HUVEC is inhibitable by E-selectin antibodies, whereas the adhesion to HMVEC-L is not inhibitable by these antibodies. Probably not one but a complex of adhesion molecules is responsible for enhanced adhesion to HMVECs-L.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Miranda ten Kate
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|