Adjuvant hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in patients with colon cancer at high risk of peritoneal carcinomatosis; the COLOPEC randomized multicentre trial

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 degrees 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

Laparoscopic surgery for T4 colon cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

In colon cancer, T4 stage is still assumed to be a relative contraindication for laparoscopic surgery considering the oncological safety. The aim of this systematic review with meta-analysis was to evaluate short- and long-term oncological outcomes after laparoscopic surgery for T4 colon cancer, and to compare these with open surgery. Using systematic review of literature, studies reporting on radicality of resection, disease-free survival (DFS), and/or overall survival (OS) after laparoscopic surgery for T4 colon cancer were identified, with or without a control group of open surgery. Pooled proportions and risk ratios were calculated using an inverse variance method. Thirteen observational cohort studies published between 2012 and 2017 were included, together consisting of 1217 patients that received laparoscopic surgery and 1357 with an open procedure. The proportion of multivisceral resections was larger in the open group in five studies. Based on 11 studies, the pooled proportion of R0 resection was 0.96 (95% CI: 0.91-0.99) and 0.96 (95% CI: 0.90-0.98) after laparoscopic and open surgery, respectively. Analysing (mainly) T4a subgroups in 6 evaluable studies revealed pooled R0 resection rates of 0.94 in both groups. No significant differences were found between laparoscopic and open surgery for any survival measure: RR 1.07 (95% CI: 0.96-1.20) for 3-year DFS, RR 1.04 (95% CI: 0.95-1.15) for 5-year DFS, RR 1.07 (95% CI: 0.99-1.14) for 3-year OS, and RR 1.05 (95% CI: 0.98-1.12) for 5-year OS. Literature on laparoscopic surgery for T4 colon cancer is restricted to non-randomized comparisons with substantial allocation bias. Laparoscopic surgery for T4a tumours might be safe, whereas for T4b colon cancer requiring multivisceral resection it should be applied with cautio

Outcome After Redo Surgery for Complicated Colorectal and Coloanal Anastomosis: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND: When a colorectal or coloanal anastomosis fails because of persistent leakage or stenosis, or the anastomosis has to be resected for recurrent cancer, constructing a new anastomosis might be an option in selected patients. This is a rare and complex type of redo surgery

The measured distance between tumor cells and the peritoneal surface predicts the risk of peritoneal metastases and offers an objective means to differentiate between pT3 and pT4a colon cancer

Substantial variability exists in what pathologists consider as pT4a in colorectal cancer when tumor cells are within 1 mm of the free peritoneal surface. This study aimed to determine if the measured sub-millimeter distance between tumor cells and the free peritoneal surface would offer an objective means of stratifying patients according to the risk of developing peritoneal metastases. Histological slides of patients included in the COLOPEC trial, with resectable primary c/pT4N0-2M0 colon cancer, were centrally reassessed. Specific tumor morphological variables were collected, including distance from tumor to free peritoneal surface, measured in micrometers (mu m). The primary outcome, 3-year peritoneal metastasis rate, was compared between four groups of patients stratified for relation of tumor cells to the peritoneum: 1) Full peritoneal penetration with tumor cells on the peritoneal surface, 2) 0-99 mu m distance to the peritoneum, 3) 100-999 mu m to the peritoneum, and 4) >= 1000 mu m to the peritoneum, by using Kaplan-Meier analysis. In total, 189 cases were included in the present analysis. Cases with full peritoneal penetration (n = 89), 0-99 mu m distance to the peritoneal surface (n = 34), 100-999 mu m distance (n = 33), and >= 1000 mu m distance (n = 33), showed significantly different 3-year peritoneal metastases rates of 25% vs 29% vs 6% vs 12%, respectively (Log Rank, p = 0.044). N-category did not influence the risk of peritoneal metastases in patients with a tumor distance beyond 100 mu m, while only the N2 category seemed to result in an additive risk in patients with a distance of 0-99 mu m. The findings of this study suggest that the measured shortest distance between tumor cells and the free peritoneal surface is useful as an objective means of stratifying patients according to the risk of developing peritoneal metastases. This simple measurement is practical and may help in providing a precise definition of pT4a. Trial registration: NCT02231086 (Clinicaltrials.gov)

Routine histopathologic examination of the appendix after appendectomy for presumed appendicitis: Is it really necessary? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: Owing to substantial costs and increasing interest in the nonoperative management of appendicitis, the necessity of routine histopathologic examination of appendectomy specimens is being questioned. The aim of this study was to determine whether routine histopathologic examination after appendectomy for suspected appendicitis should still be performed. Methods: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched for studies listing the histopathologic diagnoses after appendectomy for suspected appendicitis. Main outcomes were the incidence of histopathologically proven aberrant findings, the ability of surgeons to recognize unexpected appendiceal pathology intraoperatively, and the percentage of aberrant findings resulting in a change of postoperative management. A meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model. Results: Twenty-five studies with 57,357 patients were included. The pooled percentage of aberrant findings was 2.52% (95% confidence interval 1.81–3.51). Neoplasms were found in 0.71% (95% confidence interval 0.54–0.94). Findings of the intraoperative assessment by the surgeon were reported for 82 of the 2,718 (3.0%) unexpected diagnoses, with great variation between studies. The impact on postoperative management was described for 237 of 2,718 (8.7%) aberrant findings. Of these, 166 (70.0%) resulted in a change of postoperative management. Conclusion: Based on current evidence, it remains unclear how many of the unexpected appendiceal pathologies with clinical consequences can be identified intraoperatively by the surgeon. Until reliable data on the safety and potential cost savings of a selective policy becomes available, we advise sending appendectomy specimens routinely for histopathologic examination

Locally Advanced Colon Cancer:Evaluation of Current Clinical Practice and Treatment Outcomes at the Population Level

Background: The goal of this study was to evaluate current clinical practice and treatment outcomes regarding locally advanced colon cancer (LACC) at the population level. Methods: Data were used from the Dutch Surgical Colorectal Audit from 2009 to 2014. A total of 34,527 patients underwent resection for non-LACC and 6,918 for LACC, which was defined as cT4 and/or pT4 stage. LACC was divided into those with multivisceral resection (LACC-MV; n=3,385) and without (LACC-noMV; n=1,595). Guideline adherence, treatment strategy, and short-term outcomes were evaluated. Results: Guideline adherence was >90% regarding preoperative imaging and 80% regarding preoperative multidisciplinary team (MDT) discussion. In the elective setting, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (chemoRT) was applied in 6.2% of the cT4 cases, and neoadjuvant chemotherapy in 4.0%. RO resection rates were 99%, 91%, and 87% in patients with non-LACC, LACCnoMV, and LACC-MV, respectively (

A mouse model for peritoneal metastases of colorectal origin recapitulates patient heterogeneity

The peritoneum is a common site of dissemination in patients with colorectal cancer. In order to identify high-risk patients and improve therapeutic strategies, a better understanding of the peritoneal dissemination process and the reasons behind the high heterogeneity that is observed between patients is required. We aimed to create a murine model to further elucidate the process of peritoneal dissemination and to provide an experimental platform for further studies. We developed an in vivo model to assess patterns of peritoneal dissemination of 15 colorectal cancer cell lines. Immune deficient mice were intraperitoneally injected with 10,000 human colorectal cancer cells. Ten weeks after injection, or earlier in case of severe discomfort, the mice were sacrificed followed by dissection including assessment of the outgrowth and localization of peritoneal metastases. Furthermore, using a color-based clonal tracing method, the clonal dynamics of peritoneal nodules were observed. The different cell lines showed great variation in the extent of peritoneal outgrowth, ranging from no outgrowth to localized or widespread outgrowth of cells. An association between KRAS pathway activation and the formation of peritoneal metastases was identified. Also, cell line specific tumor location preferences were observed, with similar patterns of outgrowth in anatomically related areas. Furthermore, different patterns regarding clonal dynamics were found, varying from monoclonal or polyclonal outgrowth to extensively dispersed polyclonal lesions. The established murine model recapitulates heterogeneity as observed in human peritoneal metastases, which makes it a suitable platform for future (intervention) studies

Locally Advanced Colorectal Cancer: True Peritoneal Tumor Penetration is Associated with Peritoneal Metastases

Findings show T4 colorectal cancer (CRC) to be a risk factor for the development of peritoneal metastases (PM). Heterogeneity regarding peritoneal involvement of T4 tumors might explain the wide range of reported PM incidences (8-50%). Hyperplastic and mesothelial inflammatory reactions complicate evaluation of the exact primary tumor involvement of the peritoneal layer. This retrospective cohort study aimed to assess the association between either inflammatory peritoneal reaction or peritoneal involvement of the primary tumor and the risk of PM. Since 2010, pathologists at UZ Leuven have systematically categorized peritoneal involvement in peritoneal reaction with tumor less than 1 mm from the peritoneal surface or true peritoneal penetration. All patients undergoing resection of CRC between January 2010 and July 2013 who fulfilled either of these pathologic criteria were included in this study. The study enrolled 159 CRC patients. Peritoneal reaction with tumor less than 1 mm from the peritoneal surface was present in 43 patients and true peritoneal penetration in 116 patients. Overall, 29 patients (18%) had synchronous PM, and 30 patients (23%) had metachronous PM. In the multivariable analysis, true peritoneal penetration, in contrast to peritoneal reaction with tumor less than 1 mm from the peritoneum, was associated with greater risk of PM (odds ratio [OR], 2.518; range, 1.038-6.111; p = 0.041) and lymph node involvement (N1: OR, 1.572; range, 0.651-3.797 vs N2: OR, 4.046; range, 1.549-10.569; p = 0.014). Histologically confirmed true peritoneal penetration by CRC, rather than inflammatory peritoneal reaction constitutes a high risk for PM. With evolving treatment strategies that aim to treat PM in an earlier phase, identification of high-risk patients becomes highly important clinicall

A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis on Omentoplasty for the Management of Abdominoperineal Defects in Patients Treated for Cancer

Objective: The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to examine the effects of omentoplasty on pelviperineal morbidity following abdominoperineal resection (APR) in patients with cancer. Background: Recent studies have questioned the use of omentoplasty for the prevention of perineal wound complications. Methods: A systematic review of published literature since 2000 on the use of omentoplasty during APR for cancer was undertaken. The authors were requested to share their source patient data. Meta-analyses were conducted using a random-effects model. Results: Fourteen studies comprising 1894 patients (n = 839 omentoplasty) were included. The majority had APR for rectal cancer (87%). Omentoplasty was not significantly associated with the risk of presacral abscess formation in the overall population (RR 1.11; 95% CI 0.79-1.56), nor in planned subgroup analysis (n = 758) of APR with primary perineal closure for nonlocally advanced rectal cancer (RR 1.06; 95% CI 0.68-1.64). No overall differences were found for complicated perineal wound healing within 30 days (RR 1.30; 95% CI 0.92-1.82), chronic perineal sinus (RR 1.08; 95% CI 0.53-2.20), and pelviperineal complication necessitating reoperation (RR 1.06; 95% CI 0.80-1.42) as well. An increased risk of developing a perineal hernia was found for patients submitted to omentoplasty (RR 1.85; 95% CI 1.26-2.72). Complications related to the omentoplasty were reported in 4.6% (95% CI 2.5%-8.6%). Conclusions: This meta-analysis revealed no beneficial effect of omentoplasty on presacral abscess formation and perineal wound healing after APR, while it increases the likelihood of developing a perineal hernia. These findings do not support the routine use of omentoplasty in APR for cancer