Oncologic outcomes of screen-detected and non-screen-detected T1 colorectal cancers

Background:The incidence of T1 colorectal cancer (CRC) has increased with the implementation of CRC screening programs. It is unknown whether the outcomes and risk models for T1 CRC based on non-screen-detected patients can be extrapolated to screen-detected T1 CRC. This study aimed to compare the stage distribution and oncologic outcomes of T1 CRC patients within and outside the screening program. Methods: Data from T1 CRC patients diagnosed between 2014 and 2017 were collected from 12 hospitals in the Netherlands. The presence of lymph node metastasis (LNM) at diagnosis was compared between screen-detected and non-screen-detected patients using multivariable logistic regression. Cox proportional hazard regression was used to analyze differences in the time to recurrence (TTR), metastasis-free survival (MFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival. Additionally, the performance of conventional risk factors for LNM was evaluated across the groups. Results: 1803 patients were included (1114 [62%] screendetected), with median follow-up of 51 months (interquartile range 30). The proportion of LNM did not significantly differ between screen- and non-screen-detected patients (12.6% vs. 8.9%; odds ratio 1.41; 95%CI 0.89-2.23); a prediction model for LNM performed equally in both groups. The 3- and 5-year TTR, MFS, and CSS were similar for patients within and outside the screening program. However, overall survival was significantly longer in screen-detected T1 CRC patients (adjusted hazard ratio 0.51; 95%CI 0.38- 0.68). Conclusions: Screen-detected and non-screen-detected T1 CRCs have similar stage distributions and oncologic outcomes and can therefore be treated equally. However, screen-detected T1 CRC patients exhibit a lower rate of non-CRC-related mortality, resulting in longer overall survival.</p

Standardised training for endoscopic mucosal resection of large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps to reduce recurrence (*STAR-LNPCP study):a multicentre cluster randomised trial

OBJECTIVE: Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is the preferred treatment for non-invasive large (=20?mm) non-pedunculated colorectal polyps (LNPCPs) but is associated with an early recurrence rate of up to 30%. We evaluated whether standardised EMR training could reduce recurrence rates in Dutch community hospitals. DESIGN: In this multicentre cluster randomised trial, 59 endoscopists from 30 hospitals were randomly assigned to the intervention group (e-learning and 2-day training including hands-on session) or control group. From April 2019 to August 2021, all consecutive EMR-treated LNPCPs were included. Primary endpoint was recurrence rate after 6 months. RESULTS: A total of 1412 LNPCPs were included; 699 in the intervention group and 713 in the control group (median size 30 mm vs 30 mm, 45% vs 52% size, morphology, site and access (SMSA) score IV, 64% vs 64% proximal location). Recurrence rates were lower in the intervention group compared with controls (13% vs 25%, OR 0.43; 95% CI 0.23 to 0.78; p=0.005) with similar complication rates (8% vs 9%, OR 0.93; 95% CI 0.64 to 1.36; p=0.720). Recurrences were more often unifocal in the intervention group (92% vs 76%; p=0.006). In sensitivity analysis, the benefit of the intervention on recurrence rate was only observed in the 20-40?mm LNPCPs (5% vs 20% in 20-29?mm, p=0.001; 10% vs 21% in 30-39?mm, p=0.013) but less evident in =40?mm LNPCPs (24% vs 31%; p=0.151). In a post hoc analysis, the training effect was maintained in the study group, while in the control group the recurrence rate remained high. CONCLUSION: A compact standardised EMR training for LNPCPs significantly reduced recurrences in community hospitals. This strongly argues for a national dedicated training programme for endoscopists performing EMR of =20?mm LNPCPs. Interestingly, in sensitivity analysis, this benefit was limited for LNPCPs =40?mm. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NTR7477

Oncologic outcomes of screen-detected and non-screen-detected T1 colorectal cancers

Background The incidence of T1 colorectal cancer (CRC) has increased with the implementation of CRC screening programs. It is unknown whether the outcomes and risk models for T1 CRC based on non-screen-detected patients can be extrapolated to screen-detected T1 CRC. This study aimed to compare the stage distribution and oncologic outcomes of T1 CRC patients within and outside the screening program. Methods Data from T1 CRC patients diagnosed between 2014 and 2017 were collected from 12 hospitals in the Netherlands. The presence of lymph node metastasis (LNM) at diagnosis was compared between screen-detected and non-screen-detected patients using multivariable logistic regression. Cox proportional hazard regression was used to analyze differences in the time to recurrence (TTR), metastasis-free survival (MFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival. Additionally, the performance of conventional risk factors for LNM was evaluated across the groups. Results 1803 patients were included (1114 [62%] screendetected), with median follow-up of 51 months (interquartile range 30). The proportion of LNM did not significantly differ between screen- and non-screen-detected patients (12.6% vs. 8.9%; odds ratio 1.41; 95%CI 0.89-2.23); a prediction model for LNM performed equally in both groups. The 3- and 5-year TTR, MFS, and CSS were similar for patients within and outside the screening program. However, overall survival was significantly longer in screen-detected T1 CRC patients (adjusted hazard ratio 0.51; 95%CI 0.38- 0.68). Conclusions Screen-detected and non-screen-detected T1 CRCs have similar stage distributions and oncologic outcomes and can therefore be treated equally. However, screen-detected T1 CRC patients exhibit a lower rate of non-CRC-related mortality, resulting in longer overall survival

Full-Thickness Scar Resection after R1/Rx Excised T1 Colorectal Cancers as an Alternative to Completion Surgery

INTRODUCTION:Local full-thickness resections of the scar (FTRS) after local excision of a T1 colorectal cancer (CRC) with uncertain resection margins is proposed as an alternative strategy to completion surgery (CS), provided that no local intramural residual cancer (LIRC) is found. However, a comparison on long-term oncological outcome between both strategies is missing.METHODS:A large cohort of patients with consecutive T1 CRC between 2000 and 2017 was used. Patients were selected if they underwent a macroscopically complete local excision of a T1 CRC but positive or unassessable (R1/Rx) resection margins at histology and without lymphovascular invasion or poor differentiation. Patients treated with CS or FTRS were compared on the presence of CRC recurrence, a 5-year overall survival, disease-free survival, and metastasis-free survival.RESULTS:Of 3,697 patients with a T1 CRC, 434 met the inclusion criteria (mean age 66 years, 61% men). Three hundred thirty-four patients underwent CS, and 100 patients underwent FTRS. The median follow-up period was 64 months. CRC recurrence was seen in 7 patients who underwent CS (2.2%, 95% CI 0.9%-4.6%) and in 8 patients who underwent FTRS (9.0%, 95% CI 3.9%-17.7%). Disease-free survival was lower in FTRS strategy (96.8% vs 89.9%, P = 0.019), but 5 of the 8 FTRS recurrences could be treated with salvage surgery. The metastasis-free survival (CS 96.8% vs FTRS 92.1%, P = 0.10) and overall survival (CS 95.6% vs FTRS 94.4%, P = 0.55) did not differ significantly between both strategies.DISCUSSION:FTRS after local excision of a T1 CRC with R1/Rx resection margins as a sole risk factor, followed by surveillance and salvage surgery in case of CRC recurrence, could be a valid alternative strategy to CS

Indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase (IDO)-1 and IDO-2 activity and severe course of COVID-19

COVID-19 is a pandemic with high morbidity and mortality. In an autopsy cohort of COVID-19 patients, we found extensive accumulation of the tryptophan degradation products 3-hydroxy-anthranilic acid and quinolinic acid in the lungs, heart, and brain. This was not related to the expression of the tryptophan-catabolizing indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase (IDO)-1, but rather to that of its isoform IDO-2, which otherwise is expressed rarely. Bioavailability of tryptophan is an absolute requirement for proper cell functioning and synthesis of hormones, whereas its degradation products can cause cell death. Markers of apoptosis and severe cellular stress were associated with IDO-2 expression in large areas of lung and heart tissue, whereas affected areas in brain were more restricted. Analyses of tissue, cerebrospinal fluid, and sequential plasma samples indicate early initiation of the kynurenine/aryl-hydrocarbon receptor/IDO-2 axis as a positive feedback loop, potentially leading to severe COVID-19 pathology

Standardised training for endoscopic mucosal resection of large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps to reduce recurrence (*STAR-LNPCP study): a multicentre cluster randomised trial

Objective Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is the preferred treatment for non-invasive large (≥20 mm) non-pedunculated colorectal polyps (LNPCPs) but is associated with an early recurrence rate of up to 30%. We evaluated whether standardised EMR training could reduce recurrence rates in Dutch community hospitals. Design In this multicentre cluster randomised trial, 59 endoscopists from 30 hospitals were randomly assigned to the intervention group (e-learning and 2-day training including hands-on session) or control group. From April 2019 to August 2021, all consecutive EMR-treated LNPCPs were included. Primary endpoint was recurrence rate after 6 months. Results A total of 1412 LNPCPs were included; 699 in the intervention group and 713 in the control group (median size 30 mm vs 30 mm, 45% vs 52% size, morphology, site and access (SMSA) score IV, 64% vs 64% proximal location). Recurrence rates were lower in the intervention group compared with controls (13% vs 25%, OR 0.43; 95% CI 0.23 to 0.78; p=0.005) with similar complication rates (8% vs 9%, OR 0.93; 95% CI 0.64 to 1.36; p=0.720). Recurrences were more often unifocal in the intervention group (92% vs 76%; p=0.006). In sensitivity analysis, the benefit of the intervention on recurrence rate was only observed in the 20-40 mm LNPCPs (5% vs 20% in 20-29 mm, p=0.001; 10% vs 21% in 30-39 mm, p=0.013) but less evident in ≥40 mm LNPCPs (24% vs 31%; p=0.151). In a post hoc analysis, the training effect was maintained in the study group, while in the control group the recurrence rate remained high. Conclusion A compact standardised EMR training for LNPCPs significantly reduced recurrences in community hospitals. This strongly argues for a national dedicated training programme for endoscopists performing EMR of ≥20 mm LNPCPs. Interestingly, in sensitivity analysis, this benefit was limited for LNPCPs ≥40 mm. Trial registration number NTR7477

Association between dexamethasone treatment and the host response in COVID-19 patients admitted to the general ward

AbstractDexamethasone improves clinical outcomes in COVID-19 patients requiring supplementary oxygen. We investigated possible mechanisms of action by comparing sixteen plasma host response biomarkers in general ward patients before and after implementation of dexamethasone as standard of care. 48 patients without and 126 patients with dexamethasone treatment were sampled within 48 h of admission. Endothelial cell and coagulation activation biomarkers were comparable. Dexamethasone treatment was associated with lower plasma interleukin (IL)-6 and IL-1 receptor antagonist levels, whilst other inflammation parameters were not affected. These data argue against modification of vascular-procoagulant responses as an early mechanism of action of dexamethasone in COVID-19.</jats:p

Anti-C5a antibody vilobelimab treatment and the effect on biomarkers of inflammation and coagulation in patients with severe COVID-19: a substudy of the phase 2 PANAMO trial

We recently reported in the phase 3 PANAMO trial that selectively blocking complement 5a (C5a) with vilobelimab led to improved survival in critically ill COVID-19 patients. C5a is an important contributor to the innate immune system and can also activate the coagulation system. High C5a levels have been reported in severely ill COVID-19 patients and correlate with disease severity and mortality. Previously, we assessed the potential benefit and safety of vilobelimab in severe COVID-19 patients. In the current substudy of the phase 2 PANAMO trial, we aim to explore the effects of vilobelimab on various biomarkers of inflammation and coagulation. Between March 31 and April 24, 2020, 17 patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia were enrolled in an exploratory, open-label, randomised phase 2 trial. Blood markers of complement, endothelial activation, epithelial barrier disruption, inflammation, neutrophil activation, neutrophil extracellular trap (NET) formation and coagulopathy were measured using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) or utilizing the Luminex platform. During the first 15 days after inclusion, change in biomarker concentrations between the two groups were modelled with linear mixed-effects models with spatial splines and compared. Eight patients were randomized to vilobelimab treatment plus best supportive care (BSC) and nine patients were randomized to BSC only. A significant decrease over time was seen in the vilobelimab plus BSC group for C5a compared to the BSC only group (p < 0.001). ADAMTS13 levels decreased over time in the BSC only group compared to the vilobelimab plus BSC group (p < 0.01) and interleukin-8 (IL-8) levels were statistically more suppressed in the vilobelimab plus BSC group compared to the BSC group (p = 0.03). Our preliminary results show that C5a inhibition decreases the inflammatory response and hypercoagulability, which likely explains the beneficial effect of vilobelimab in severe COVID-19 patients. Validation of these results in a larger sample size is warranted

Neurofilament light increases over time in severe COVID-19 and is associated with delirium

Neurological monitoring in sedated Intensive Care Unit patients is constrained by the lack of reliable blood-based biomarkers. Neurofilament light is a cross-disease biomarker for neuronal damage with potential clinical applicability for monitoring Intensive Care Unit patients. We studied the trajectory of neurofilament light over a month in Intensive Care Unit patients diagnosed with severe COVID-19 and explored its relation to clinical outcomes and pathophysiological predictors. Data were collected over a month in 31 Intensive Care Unit patients (166 plasma samples) diagnosed with severe COVID-19 at Amsterdam University Medical Centre, and in the first week after emergency department admission in 297 patients with COVID-19 (635 plasma samples) admitted to Massachusetts General hospital. We observed that Neurofilament light increased in a non-linear fashion in the first month of Intensive Care Unit admission and increases faster in the first week of Intensive Care Unit admission when compared with mild-moderate COVID-19 cases. We observed that baseline Neurofilament light did not predict mortality when corrected for age and renal function. Peak neurofilament light levels were associated with a longer duration of delirium after extubation in Intensive Care Unit patients. Disease severity, as measured by the sequential organ failure score, was associated to higher neurofilament light values, and tumour necrosis factor alpha levels at baseline were associated with higher levels of neurofilament light at baseline and a faster increase during admission. These data illustrate the dynamics of Neurofilament light in a critical care setting and show associations to delirium, disease severity and markers for inflammation. Our study contributes to determine the clinical utility and interpretation of neurofilament light levels in Intensive Care Unit patients