Expression levels of circulating miRNAs as biomarkers during multimodal treatment of rectal cancer - TiMiSNAR-mirna: a substudy of the TiMiSNAR Trial (NCT03962088)

Background: Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery is the mainstay treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer, leading to significant decrease in tumor size (downsizing) and a shift towards earlier disease stage (downstaging). Extensive histopathological work-up of the tumor specimen after surgery including tumor regression grading and lymph node status helped to visualize individual tumor sensitivity to chemoradiotherapy, retrospectively. As the response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy is heterogeneous, however, valid biomarkers are needed to monitor tumor response. A relevant number of studies aimed to identify molecular markers retrieved from tumor tissue while the relevance of blood-based biomarkers is less stringent assessed. MicroRNAs are currently under investigation to serve as blood-based biomarkers. To date, no screening approach to identify relevant miRNAs as biomarkers in blood of patients with rectal cancer was undertaken. The aim of the study is to investigate the role of circulating miRNAs as biomarkers in those patients included in the TiMiSNAR Trial (NCT03465982). This is a biomolecular substudy of TiMiSNAR Trial (NCT03962088). Methods: All included patients in the TiMiSNAR Trial are supposed to undergo blood collection at the time of diagnosis, after neoadjuvant treatment, after 1 month from surgery, and after adjuvant chemotherapy whenever indicated. Discussion: TiMiSNAR-MIRNA will evaluate the association of variation between preneoadjuvant and postneoadjuvant expression levels of miRNA with pathological complete response. Moreover, the study will evaluate the role of liquid biopsies in the monitoring of treatment, correlate changes in expression levels of miRNA following complete surgical resection with disease-free survival, and evaluate the relation between changes in miRNA during surveillance and tumor relapse. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03962088 . Registered on 23 May 2019

Standard (8 weeks) vs long (12 weeks) timing to minimally-invasive surgery after NeoAdjuvant Chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer: A multicenter randomized controlled parallel group trial (TiMiSNAR)

Background: The optimal timing of surgery in relation to chemoradiation is still controversial. Retrospective analysis has demonstrated in the recent decades that the regression of adenocarcinoma can be slow and not complete until after several months. More recently, increasing pathologic Complete Response rates have been demonstrated to be correlated with longer time interval. The purpose of the trial is to demonstrate if delayed timing of surgery after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy actually affects pathologic Complete Response and reflects on disease-free survival and overall survival rather than standard timing. Methods: The trial is a multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled, unblinded, parallel-group trial comparing standard and delayed surgery after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for the curative treatment of rectal cancer. Three-hundred and forty patients will be randomized on an equal basis to either robotic-assisted/standard laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery after 8 weeks or robotic-assisted/standard laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery after 12 weeks. Discussion: To date, it is well-know that pathologic Complete Response is associated with excellent prognosis and an overall survival of 90%. In the Lyon trial the rate of pCR or near pathologic Complete Response increased from 10.3 to 26% and in retrospective studies the increase rate was about 23-30%. These results may be explained on the relationship between radiation therapy and tumor regression: DNA damage occurs during irradiation, but cellular lysis occurs within the next weeks. Study results, whether confirmed that performing surgery after 12 weeks from neoadjuvant treatment is advantageous from a technical and oncological point of view, may change the current pathway of the treatment in those patient suffering from rectal cancer. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT3465982

Standard (8 weeks) vs long (12 weeks) timing to minimally-invasive surgery after NeoAdjuvant Chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer: a multicenter randomized controlled parallel group trial (TiMiSNAR)

BACKGROUND: The optimal timing of surgery in relation to chemoradiation is still controversial. Retrospective analysis has demonstrated in the recent decades that the regression of adenocarcinoma can be slow and not complete until after several months. More recently, increasing pathologic Complete Response rates have been demonstrated to be correlated with longer time interval. The purpose of the trial is to demonstrate if delayed timing of surgery after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy actually affects pathologic Complete Response and reflects on disease-free survival and overall survival rather than standard timing. METHODS: The trial is a multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled, unblinded, parallel-group trial comparing standard and delayed surgery after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for the curative treatment of rectal cancer. Three-hundred and forty patients will be randomized on an equal basis to either robotic-assisted/standard laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery after 8\u2009weeks or robotic-assisted/standard laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery after 12\u2009weeks. DISCUSSION: To date, it is well-know that pathologic Complete Response is associated with excellent prognosis and an overall survival of 90%. In the Lyon trial the rate of pCR or near pathologic Complete Response increased from 10.3 to 26% and in retrospective studies the increase rate was about 23-30%. These results may be explained on the relationship between radiation therapy and tumor regression: DNA damage occurs during irradiation, but cellular lysis occurs within the next weeks. Study results, whether confirmed that performing surgery after 12\u2009weeks from neoadjuvant treatment is advantageous from a technical and oncological point of view, may change the current pathway of the treatment in those patient suffering from rectal cancer

Effects of hospital facilities on patient outcomes after cancer surgery: an international, prospective, observational study

Background Early death after cancer surgery is higher in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) compared with in high-income countries, yet the impact of facility characteristics on early postoperative outcomes is unknown. The aim of this study was to examine the association between hospital infrastructure, resource availability, and processes on early outcomes after cancer surgery worldwide.Methods A multimethods analysis was performed as part of the GlobalSurg 3 study-a multicentre, international, prospective cohort study of patients who had surgery for breast, colorectal, or gastric cancer. The primary outcomes were 30-day mortality and 30-day major complication rates. Potentially beneficial hospital facilities were identified by variable selection to select those associated with 30-day mortality. Adjusted outcomes were determined using generalised estimating equations to account for patient characteristics and country-income group, with population stratification by hospital.Findings Between April 1, 2018, and April 23, 2019, facility-level data were collected for 9685 patients across 238 hospitals in 66 countries (91 hospitals in 20 high-income countries; 57 hospitals in 19 upper-middle-income countries; and 90 hospitals in 27 low-income to lower-middle-income countries). The availability of five hospital facilities was inversely associated with mortality: ultrasound, CT scanner, critical care unit, opioid analgesia, and oncologist. After adjustment for case-mix and country income group, hospitals with three or fewer of these facilities (62 hospitals, 1294 patients) had higher mortality compared with those with four or five (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 3.85 [95% CI 2.58-5.75]; p<0.0001), with excess mortality predominantly explained by a limited capacity to rescue following the development of major complications (63.0% vs 82.7%; OR 0.35 [0.23-0.53]; p<0.0001). Across LMICs, improvements in hospital facilities would prevent one to three deaths for every 100 patients undergoing surgery for cancer.Interpretation Hospitals with higher levels of infrastructure and resources have better outcomes after cancer surgery, independent of country income. Without urgent strengthening of hospital infrastructure and resources, the reductions in cancer-associated mortality associated with improved access will not be realised

Evaluation of appendicitis risk prediction models in adults with suspected appendicitis

Background Appendicitis is the most common general surgical emergency worldwide, but its diagnosis remains challenging. The aim of this study was to determine whether existing risk prediction models can reliably identify patients presenting to hospital in the UK with acute right iliac fossa (RIF) pain who are at low risk of appendicitis. Methods A systematic search was completed to identify all existing appendicitis risk prediction models. Models were validated using UK data from an international prospective cohort study that captured consecutive patients aged 16–45 years presenting to hospital with acute RIF in March to June 2017. The main outcome was best achievable model specificity (proportion of patients who did not have appendicitis correctly classified as low risk) whilst maintaining a failure rate below 5 per cent (proportion of patients identified as low risk who actually had appendicitis). Results Some 5345 patients across 154 UK hospitals were identified, of which two‐thirds (3613 of 5345, 67·6 per cent) were women. Women were more than twice as likely to undergo surgery with removal of a histologically normal appendix (272 of 964, 28·2 per cent) than men (120 of 993, 12·1 per cent) (relative risk 2·33, 95 per cent c.i. 1·92 to 2·84; P < 0·001). Of 15 validated risk prediction models, the Adult Appendicitis Score performed best (cut‐off score 8 or less, specificity 63·1 per cent, failure rate 3·7 per cent). The Appendicitis Inflammatory Response Score performed best for men (cut‐off score 2 or less, specificity 24·7 per cent, failure rate 2·4 per cent). Conclusion Women in the UK had a disproportionate risk of admission without surgical intervention and had high rates of normal appendicectomy. Risk prediction models to support shared decision‐making by identifying adults in the UK at low risk of appendicitis were identified

Appendectomy versus conservative treatment with antibiotics for patients with uncomplicated acute appendicitis: a propensity score–matched analysis of patient-centered outcomes (the ACTUAA prospective multicenter trial)

Purpose: The aim of this prospective multicenter study was to compare antibiotic therapy and appendectomy as treatment for patients with uncomplicated appendicitis confirmed by ultrasound and/or computed tomography. Methods: The study was conducted from January 2017 to January 2018. Data regarding all patients discharged from the participating centers with a diagnosis of uncomplicated appendicitis were collected prospectively. Results: Of the 318 patients enrolled in the study, 27.4% underwent antibiotic-first therapy, and 72.6% underwent appendectomy. The matched group was composed of 87 patients in both study arms. Of the 87 patients available of 1-year follow-up in the antibiotic-first group, 64 (73.6%) did not require appendectomy. The complication-free treatment success in the antibiotic-first group was 64.4%. A statistically significant higher complication-free treatment success was found in the appendectomy group: 81.8% in the pre-matching sample and 83.9% in the post-matching sample. Patients in the antibiotic-first group reported lower VAS scores compared to those treated with an appendectomy, both at discharge (2.0 ± 1.7 vs 3.6 ± 2.3) and at 30-day follow-up (0.3 ± 0.6 vs 2.1 ± 1.7). The mean of the days of absence from work was higher in the appendectomy group (β 0.63; 95% CI 0.08–1.18). Conclusion: Although laparoscopic appendectomy remains the gold standard of treatment for uncomplicated appendicitis, conservative treatment with antibiotics is a safe option in most cases. Approximately 65% of patients treated with antibiotics are symptom-free at 1&nbsp;year, without increased risk of adverse events should symptoms recur, and better outcomes in terms of less pain and shorter period of absence from work compared to patients undergoing an appendectomy. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier (NCT number): NCT03080103

Expression levels of circulating miRNAs as biomarkers during multimodal treatment of rectal cancer - TiMiSNAR-mirna: A substudy of the TiMiSNAR Trial (NCT03962088)

Background: Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery is the mainstay treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer, leading to significant decrease in tumor size (downsizing) and a shift towards earlier disease stage (downstaging). Extensive histopathological work-up of the tumor specimen after surgery including tumor regression grading and lymph node status helped to visualize individual tumor sensitivity to chemoradiotherapy, retrospectively. As the response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy is heterogeneous, however, valid biomarkers are needed to monitor tumor response. A relevant number of studies aimed to identify molecular markers retrieved from tumor tissue while the relevance of blood-based biomarkers is less stringent assessed. MicroRNAs are currently under investigation to serve as blood-based biomarkers. To date, no screening approach to identify relevant miRNAs as biomarkers in blood of patients with rectal cancer was undertaken. The aim of the study is to investigate the role of circulating miRNAs as biomarkers in those patients included in the TiMiSNAR Trial (NCT 03465982). This is a biomolecular substudy of TiMiSNAR Trial (NCT03962088). Methods: All included patients in the TiMiSNAR Trial are supposed to undergo blood collection at the time of diagnosis, after neoadjuvant treatment, after 1 month from surgery, and after adjuvant chemotherapy whenever indicated. Discussion: TiMiSNAR-MIRNA will evaluate the association of variation between preneoadjuvant and postneoadjuvant expression levels of miRNA with pathological complete response. Moreover, the study will evaluate the role of liquid biopsies in the monitoring of treatment, correlate changes in expression levels of miRNA following complete surgical resection with disease-free survival, and evaluate the relation between changes in miRNA during surveillance and tumor relapse. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03962088. Registered on 23 May 2019

Laparoscopic appendectomy vs antibiotic therapy for acute appendicitis: a propensity score-matched analysis from a multicenter cohort study

Acute appendicitis (AA) is among the most common causes of acute lower abdominal pain leading patients to the emergency department. Significant debate remains on whether AA should be operated or not. A propensity score-matched analysis was performed in seven Italian Hospitals, with the aim to assess safety and feasibility both nonoperative management with antibiotics (AT) and surgical therapy with appendectomy (ST) for patients with AA. Data regarding all patients discharged from the participating centers with a diagnosis of appendicitis from January 1st, 2014 to December 31st, 2014 were collected retrospectively. Follow-up data were collected from January 1st, 2015 to December 31st, 2016. The complication-free treatment success of AT (53.7%) was significantly inferior to that of ST (86.4%) (P&nbsp;&lt;&nbsp;0.0001). Patients initially treated with antibiotics reported an index admission AT failure rate of 20.9% and a recurrence rate at 1-year follow-up of 20.3%. No statistically significant difference was found when comparing AT and ST groups for the outcome of interest post-operative complications (13.5 vs 13.6%, P&nbsp;=&nbsp;0.834). Patients treated with AT were discharged home earlier than patients in the ST group (3.38&nbsp;±&nbsp;1.89 vs 4.84&nbsp;±&nbsp;2.69&nbsp;days, P&nbsp;&lt;&nbsp;0.0001). Due to the low rates of complications occurred in the ST group and the high efficacy of the surgical therapy, laparoscopic appendectomy still represents the most effective treatment for patients with AA. AT is associated with shorter hospital stay and faster return to normal activity, and may prevent from appendectomies around 80% of patients who leave the hospital with clinical recovery