Influence of Molecular Status on Recurrence Site in Patients Treated for a Stage III Colon Cancer: a Post Hoc Analysis of the PETACC-8 Trial

BACKGROUND

Recurrence patterns in stage III colon cancer (CC) patients according to molecular markers remain unclear. The objective of the study was to assess recurrence patterns according to microsatellite instability (MSI), RAS and BRAF^V600E status in stage III CC patients.

METHODS

All stage III CC patients from the PETACC-8 randomized trial tested for MSI, RAS and BRAF^V600E status were included. The site and characteristics of recurrence were analyzed according to molecular status. Survival after recurrence (SAR) was analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 1650 patients were included. Recurrence occurred in 434 patients (26.3%). Microsatellite stable (MSS) patients had a significantly higher recurrence rate (27.2% vs. 18.7%, P = 0.02) with a trend to more pulmonary recurrence (28.8% vs. 12.9%, P = 0.06) when compared to MSI patients. MSI patients experienced more regional lymph nodes compared to MSS (12.9% vs. 4%, P = 0.046). In the MSS population, the recurrence rate was significantly higher in RAS (32.2%) or BRAF (32.3%) patients when compared to double wild-type patients (19.9%) (p < 0.001); no preferential site of recurrence was observed according to RAS and BRAF^V600E mutations. Finally, decreased SAR was observed in the case of peritoneal recurrence or more than two recurrence sites.

CONCLUSIONS

Microsatellite, RAS and BRAF^V600E status influences recurrence rates in stage III CC patients. However, only microsatellite status seems to be associated with specific recurrence patterns. More than two recurrence sites and recurrence in the peritoneum were associated with poorer SAR.

Modified H-pouch as an alternative to the J-pouch for anorectal reconstruction

AIM

A modification is described of the J-pouch to facilitate ileoanal anastomosis in the presence of an anal or anovaginal fistula.

METHOD

The bowel is divided at the level of the apex of the J-pouch, the distal limb is advanced to project beyond the proximal limb by 3-5 cm. The pouch is constructed by a side-to-side anastomosis to form the H-pouch with a distal ileal segment, which is passed through the anal canal to form an ileoanal anastomosis.

RESULTS

The modification allows the treatment of anal and rectal disorders not resolvable by a usual J-pouch construction, as in cases where a rectal resection is needed for concomitant fistulation or destruction of the anal mucosa. The functional results are similar to those of the J-pouch, with no added postoperative morbidity. This technique helps to avoid permanent stoma in selected cases.

CONCLUSION

The modified pouch is relatively simple to perform and can help the surgeon to address complex anorectal disorders.

Enhanced recovery after elective colorectal resection outside a strict fast-track protocol. A single centre experience

INTRODUCTION

Optimising the management of hospitalised patients is a major concern. In colorectal surgery, the concept of enhanced recovery has been popularised by means of "fast-track" protocols, aiming at patient's discharge on the second postoperative day. Nevertheless, a strict fast-track protocol has several limitations. It is very demanding for the patient and therefore applicable only to a limited number of patients.

AIM

In order to optimise, in every aspect, the postoperative recovery of each patient undergoing an elective colorectal resection inside our institution, we set up a "soft" enhanced recovery programme.

MATERIAL-METHODS

A retrospective analysis was conducted in 92 patients evaluating the respective impact of protocol application throughout the duration of the hospital stay.

RESULTS

When all the required measures of our protocol were correctly implemented, the median discharge day was postoperative day 3 (range 3-5 days). On the contrary, when deviations occurred, they resulted in longer hospital stay (p < 0.001). Patients operated by laparoscopy were discharged earlier than patients operated by laparotomy (p < 0.001). The use of nasogastric tube and postoperative drainage prolonged significantly the length of stay (p = 0.001 and p < 0.001 respectively). When the urinary catheter was not removed or oral feeding not resumed on postoperative day 1, the patients were discharged later (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

There are substantial possibilities of optimising the recovery process after an elective colorectal resection, outside a strict fast-track protocol.

[Multidisciplinary management of hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhotic patients]

The treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in cirrhotic patients is challenging: the incidence is increasing, the cirrhosis dramatically limits the tolerance to treatment possibilities, there are many therapeutic modalities but resources are limited, namely in the context of organ shortage for transplantation. Liver transplantation (LT) is the optimal treatment as it combines the largest tumor resection possible and the correction of the underlying liver disease. Due to organ shortage however, LT is reserved for early-stages HCC. Surgical resection and radiofrequency destruction represent potentially curative options in highly selected patients. Arterial embolizations, chemo- or radio-embolizations, allow local tumor control but are not curative. These techniques could be performed before surgical resection or LT, to downstage the tumor and/or to control tumor progression while waiting for a graft. Finally, sorafenib is the only systemic treatment which has shown a survival benefit in advanced HCC. The benefit of combination of sorafenib and surgical treatments remains undetermined. The challenge in the management of HCC in cirrhotic patients is to integrate both individual (age, comorbidities, cirrhosis stage, tumor stage, specific contraindications to LT, etc.) and collective variables (expected waiting time before LT) to determine the best therapeutic option for each patient. In this process, multidisciplinarity is a key for success.

Induction of tolerance in solid organ transplantation: the rationale to develop clinical protocols in liver transplantation

Minimization or withdrawal of immunosuppressive treatments after organ transplantation represents a major objective for improving quality of life and long-term survival of grafted patients. Such a goal may be reached under some clinical conditions, particularly in liver transplantation, making these patients good candidates for tolerance trials. In this context in liver transplantation, the central questions are (1) how to promote the natural propensity of the liver graft to be accepted, (2) which type of immunosuppressive drug should be used for induction and maintenance, and (3) which biomarkers could be used to discriminate tolerant patients from those requiring long-term immunosuppression. Induction therapies using aggressive T-cell-depleting agents may favor graft acceptance. However, persistent and/or rapidly reemerging cell lines, such as memory-type cells or CD8(+) T cells, could represent a significant barrier for induction of tolerance. The type of maintenance drugs also remains questionable. Calcineurin inhibitors may be eventually deleterious in the context of tolerance protocols, through inhibitory effects on regulatory T cells, that are not observed with rapamycin. In conclusion, significant efforts must be made to achieve reliable strategies for immunosuppression minimization or withdrawal after organ transplantation into the clinics.

Cholecystectomy in cirrhotic patients: pitfalls and reasonable recommendations

Cholecystectomy in cirrhotic patients remains a high risk procedure. The recent literature was reviewed in the objective to elaborate (evidence-based) recommendations for therapeutic decision. In patients with Child Pugh A or B cirrhosis, the laparoscopic approach should be preferred as it is associated with reduced morbidity and mortality as compared with open surgery (level B). In patients with decompensated Child Pugh C cirrhosis, the scarcity of literature data renders much more hazardous the definition of robust recommendations. In these patients, two options have to be considered beyond early laparoscopic cholecystectomy: first, a delayed surgery, in order to improve the preoperative patient's general condition and namely the coagulation, and second, a percutaneous drainage in very severe cases (level C).

Liver transplantation for acute liver failure in adults

Acute liver failure is a challenging clinical condition, associated with high morbidity and mortality. In well-selected patients, LT (LT) is the only therapeutic which has been demonstrated to improve patient survival. Clichy and King's College criteria are the two mains scoring systems used to select the patients for liver transplantation. Both models achieve high specificity but remain associated with limited negative predictive value. Several other predictive factors have been evaluated, but none of them have been strongly validated so far. Globally, whole LT appears as the procedure of choice for patients within Clichy and/or King's College criteria. Due to the severity of the disease and its multisystemic consequences, the results of LT for fulminant liver failure remain inferior to those obtained in elective indications. Accord-ing to local conditions, namely expected waiting time before urgent transplantation and surgical expertise, living donor transplantation and auxiliary transplantations appear as valuable alternatives. These techniques have the respective potential advantages to limit the waiting period before transplantation and to avoid the need for lifelong immunosuppression when native liver recovers, but overall results remain inferior to those obtained with whole LT.

Comparison of immunohistochemical and biochemical measurement of steroid receptors in breast cancer: are both still necessary?

In our institute, the oestrogen and progesterone receptors of breast cancer samples are analyzed by biochemistry and immunohistochemistry. The purpose of this study is to evaluate and compare both techniques and establish whether one of them should be used in preference to the other. The probability of getting a positive or negative result with each technique was the same regardless of the method used as reference. The biochemical method uses a larger volume of tissue to determine the receptor status than immunohistochemistry. In some cases, this means a loss of valuable information. If we only use one technique, there is the potential to misclassify +/- 11% of patients. According to these results and in the knowledge that the major interest of steroid receptors' status remains in the domain of therapeutic decisions, we advise using immunohistochemistry first and biochemistry if there is a negative result. This would spare tumour tissue for new research studies.