Adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with clinically node-negative but pathologically node-positive rectal cancer in the Netherlands: A retrospective analysis

INTRODUCTION: Accurate clinical staging of rectal cancer is hampered by suboptimal sensitivity of MRI in the detection of regional lymph node metastases. Consequently, some patients may be understaged and have been withheld neoadjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy in retrospect. Although Dutch guidelines do not advocate adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT) in rectal cancer, some of these clinically understaged patients receive ACT according to local policy. We aim to assess the benefit of ACT in these patients. METHODS: Population-based data from patients with clinically node-negative (cN0) but pathologically node-positive (pN+) rectal cancer that underwent total mesorectal excision (TME) without neoadjuvant treatment between 2008 and 2018 were obtained from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Missing data were handled by multiple imputation. Stabilised inverse probability treatment weighting (sIPTW) was used to balance clinical characteristics. Overall survival (OS) was compared in ACT and non-ACT patients. RESULTS: Of 34,724 patients, 13,861 had cN0 disease of whom 3016 were pN+ (21.8%). 1466 (48.6%) of these patients underwent upfront TME and were included. Median follow-up was 84 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 76-97) versus 79 months (95% CI 77-81) in patients that did (n = 290, 19.8%) and did not (n = 1176, 80.2%) receive ACT, respectively. After sIPTW adjustment, ACT was associated with improved OS (hazard ratio 0.70; 95% CI 0.49-0.99; p = 0.04). The estimated 5-year OS rate was 74.2% versus 65.3%, respectively. CONCLUSION: In this population-based cohort of patients with cN0 but pN+ rectal cancer who underwent upfront TME, ACT was associated with a significant OS benefit. These data support to discuss ACT in this population

Prognostic value of total tumor volume in patients with colorectal liver metastases:A secondary analysis of the randomized CAIRO5 trial with external cohort validation

Background:This study aimed to assess the prognostic value of total tumor volume (TTV) for early recurrence (within 6 months) and overall survival (OS) in patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM), treated with induction systemic therapy followed by complete local treatment.Methods: Patients with initially unresectable CRLM from the multicenter randomized phase 3 CAIRO5 trial (NCT02162563) who received induction systemic therapy followed by local treatment were included. Baseline TTV and change in TTV as response to systemic therapy were calculated using the CT scan before and the first after systemic treatment, and were assessed for their added prognostic value. The findings were validated in an external cohort of patients treated at a tertiary center. Results:In total, 215 CAIRO5 patients were included. Baseline TTV and absolute change in TTV were significantly associated with early recurrence (P = 0.005 and P = 0.040, respectively) and OS in multivariable analyses (P = 0.024 and P = 0.006, respectively), whereas RECIST1.1 was not prognostic for early recurrence (P = 0.88) and OS (P = 0.35). In the validation cohort (n = 85), baseline TTV and absolute change in TTV remained prognostic for early recurrence (P = 0.041 and P = 0.021, respectively) and OS in multivariable analyses (P &lt; 0.0001 and P = 0.012, respectively), and showed added prognostic value over conventional clinicopathological variables (increase C-statistic, 0.06; 95 % CI, 0.02 to 0.14; P = 0.008). Conclusion: Total tumor volume is strongly prognostic for early recurrence and OS in patients who underwent complete local treatment of initially unresectable CRLM, both in the CAIRO5 trial and the validation cohort. In contrast, RECIST1.1 did not show prognostic value for neither early recurrence nor OS.</p

Intersurgeon Variability in Local Treatment Planning for Patients with Initially Unresectable Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastases: Analysis of the Liver Expert Panel of the Dutch Colorectal Cancer Group

Background: Consensus on resectability criteria for colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRLM) is lacking, resulting in differences in therapeutic strategies. This study evaluated variability of resectability assessments and local treatment plans for patients with initially unresectable CRLM by the liver expert panel from the randomised phase III CAIRO5 study. Methods: The liver panel, comprising surgeons and radiologists, evaluated resectability by predefined criteria at baseline and 2-monthly thereafter. If surgeons judged CRLM as resectable, detailed local treatment plans were provided. The panel chair determined the conclusion of resectability status and local treatment advice, and forwarded it to local surgeons. Results: A total of 1149 panel evaluations of 496 patients were included. Intersurgeon disagreement was observed in 50% of evaluations and was lower at baseline than follow-up (36% vs. 60%, p < 0.001). Among surgeons in general, votes for resectable CRLM at baseline and follow-up ranged between 0–12% and 27–62%, and for permanently unresectable CRLM between 3–40% and 6–47%, respectively. Surgeons proposed different local treatment plans in 77% of patients. The most pronounced intersurgeon differences concerned the advice to proceed with hemihepatectomy versus parenchymal-preserving approaches. Eighty-four percent of patients judged by the panel as having resectable CRLM indeed received local treatment. Local surgeons followed the technical plan proposed by the panel in 40% of patients. Conclusion: Considerable variability exists among expert liver surgeons in assessing resectability and local treatment planning of initially unresectable CRLM. This stresses the value of panel-based decisions, and the need for consensus guidelines on resectability criteria and technical approach to prevent unwarranted variability in clinical practice

Prognostic value of total tumor volume in patients with colorectal liver metastases: A secondary analysis of the randomized CAIRO5 trial with external cohort validation

Background: This study aimed to assess the prognostic value of total tumor volume (TTV) for early recurrence (within 6 months) and overall survival (OS) in patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM), treated with induction systemic therapy followed by complete local treatment. Methods: Patients with initially unresectable CRLM from the multicenter randomized phase 3 CAIRO5 trial (NCT02162563) who received induction systemic therapy followed by local treatment were included. Baseline TTV and change in TTV as response to systemic therapy were calculated using the CT scan before and the first after systemic treatment, and were assessed for their added prognostic value. The findings were validated in an external cohort of patients treated at a tertiary center. Results: In total, 215 CAIRO5 patients were included. Baseline TTV and absolute change in TTV were significantly associated with early recurrence (P = 0.005 and P = 0.040, respectively) and OS in multivariable analyses (P = 0.024 and P = 0.006, respectively), whereas RECIST1.1 was not prognostic for early recurrence (P = 0.88) and OS (P = 0.35). In the validation cohort (n = 85), baseline TTV and absolute change in TTV remained prognostic for early recurrence (P = 0.041 and P = 0.021, respectively) and OS in multivariable analyses (P < 0.0001 and P = 0.012, respectively), and showed added prognostic value over conventional clinicopathological variables (increase C-statistic, 0.06; 95 % CI, 0.02 to 0.14; P = 0.008). Conclusion: Total tumor volume is strongly prognostic for early recurrence and OS in patients who underwent complete local treatment of initially unresectable CRLM, both in the CAIRO5 trial and the validation cohort. In contrast, RECIST1.1 did not show prognostic value for neither early recurrence nor OS

Preperitoneal or Subcutaneous Wound Catheters as Alternative for Epidural Analgesia in Abdominal Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether the location of wound catheters (ie, preperitoneal vs. subcutaneous) impacts outcomes, when compared with alternatives such as epidural analgesia. BACKGROUND: Continuous wound infiltration is an alternative for epidural analgesia in abdominal surgery but studies have shown conflicting results. This difference could be explained by different efficacy of preperitoneal versus subcutaneous placement of the infiltrative catheters. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines until April 3, 2017. Primary endpoints were pain scores in rest and when moving at 24 hours postoperatively. Secondary endpoints included postoperative pain scores at 12 and 48 hours, functional recovery, pain treatment-related complications, and patient satisfaction. RESULTS: After screening 2283 studies, 29 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with 2059 patients were included. Methodological quality of these RCTs ranged from moderate to high. In the one direct comparison (60 patients), preperitoneal catheters led to better pain control than subcutaneous catheters. Superiority of preperitoneal compared with subcutaneous placement was confirmed indirectly in placebo-controlled RCTs. Preperitoneal wound catheters provided comparable pain control compared with active controls, such as epidural analgesia. Recovery parameters, opioid consumption, incidence of hypotension, and patient satisfaction seemed to be in favor of preperitoneal wound catheters compared with active alternatives, as well as placebo. CONCLUSION: Continuous wound infiltration with preperitoneal wound catheters is an effective pain modality in abdominal surgery. Pain control is as effective as epidural analgesia, but could be favored based upon recovery parameters and patient satisfaction

Trends in Use and Perceptions About Triplet Chemotherapy Plus Bevacizumab for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

Contains fulltext : 237324.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access

External validation of the MSKCC nomogram to estimate five-year overall survival after surgery for stage I–III colon cancer in a Dutch population

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

Toxicity and efficacy of chronomodulated chemotherapy: a systematic review

Timing chemotherapy on the basis of the body's intrinsic circadian clock—ie, chronomodulated chemotherapy—might improve efficacy and reduce treatment toxicity. This systematic review summarises the available clinical evidence on the effects of chronomodulated chemotherapy from randomised, controlled trials in adult patients with cancer, published between the date of database inception and June 1, 2021. This study complies with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and was registered on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42020177878). The protocol was published on Oct 21, 2020, before study initiation. The primary outcome measures comprised toxicity incidence, overall survival, progression-free survival, and objective response rate. Of 1455 identified abstracts, 18 studies including 2547 patients were selected. Studies were heterogeneous in study design, treatment, and population. 14 (77%) of 18 studies reported differences among groups in toxicity. 11 (61%) studies reported that chronomodulated chemotherapy resulted in a significant decrease in toxicity while maintaining anti-cancer activity. Two (11%) studies showed that chronomodulated chemotherapy reduced some toxic effects but increased others, and one (6%) study reported worse toxicity outcomes than standard chemotherapy. Three (17%) studies reported improved efficacy (survival measures, objective response rate, or time to treatment failure) of chronomodulated chemotherapy, and no studies reported a decrease in efficacy. In conclusion, most studies provide evidence of the reduction of toxicity resulting from chronomodulated chemotherapy, while efficacy is maintained. More and larger, carefully designed, randomised, controlled trials are needed to provide recommendations for clinical practice

Trends in Use and Perceptions about Triplet Chemotherapy plus Bevacizumab for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

Importance: Triplet chemotherapy with fluorouracil, folinic acid, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan plus bevacizumab (FOLFOXIRI-B) is an effective first-line treatment option for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). However, the degree of implementation of FOLFOXIRI-B in daily practice is unknown. Objectives: To evaluate the current adoption rate of FOLFOXIRI-B in patients with mCRC and investigate the perspectives of medical oncologists toward this treatment option. Design, Setting, and Participants: This 1-week, multicenter, cross-sectional study in the Netherlands used a flash mob design, which facilitates ultrafast data generation (flash) through the engagement of numerous researchers (mob). During the study week (March 1-5, 2021), patient data were retrieved from electronic health records of 47 hospitals on patients with mCRC who were referred to a medical oncologist between November 1, 2020, and January 31, 2021. Interviews were simultaneously conducted with 101 medical oncologists from 52 hospitals who regularly treat patients with mCRC. Exposure: First-line systemic treatment as determined by the treating physician. Main Outcomes and Measures: The FOLFOXIRI-B prescription rate was the main outcome. Current practice was compared with prescription rates in 2015 to 2018. Eligibility for treatment with FOLFOXIRI-B was estimated. An exploratory outcome was medical oncologists' reported perspectives on FOLFOXIRI-B. Results: A total of 5948 patients in the Netherlands (median age [interquartile range], 66 [57-73] years; 3503 [59%] male; and 3712 [62%] with left-sided or rectal tumor) were treated with first-line systemic therapy for synchronous mCRC. A total of 282 patients with mCRC underwent systemic therapy during the study period (2021). Of these 282 patients, 199 (71%) were treated with intensive first-line therapy other than FOLFOXIRI-B, of whom 184 (65%) were treated with oxaliplatin doublets with or without bevacizumab; 14 (5%) with irinotecan doublets with or without bevacizumab, panitumumab, or cetuximab; and 1 (0.4%) with irinotecan with bevacizumab. Fifty-four patients (19%) were treated with fluoropyrimidine monotherapy with or without bevacizumab, 1 patient (0.4%) with panitumumab monotherapy, and 3 (1%) with immune checkpoint inhibitors. In total, 25 patients (9%; 95% CI, 6%-12%) were treated with first-line FOLFOXIRI-B compared with 142 (2%; 95% CI, 2%-3%) in 2015 to 2018. During the study period, 21 of 157 eligible patients (13.4%) in the Netherlands were treated with FOLFOXIRI-B. A total of 87 medical oncologists (86%) reported discussing FOLFOXIRI-B as a treatment option with eligible patients. A total of 47 of 85 (55%) generally communicated a preference for a chemotherapy doublet to patients. These oncologists reported a significantly lower awareness of guidelines and trial results. Toxic effects were the most reported reason to prefer an alternative regimen. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this study suggest that FOLFOXIRI-B prescription rates have marginally increased in the last 5 years. Considering that most medical oncologists discuss this treatment option, the prescription rate found in this study was below expectations. Awareness of guidelines and trial data seems to contribute to the discussion of available treatment options by medical oncologists, and the findings of th