Does intestinal anastomosis in resection of colon cancer have a significant impact onto early postoperative outcome and long-term survival?

Objectives: To investigate the influence of anastomosis on the early postoperative and long-term oncological outcomes of patients with primary colon carcinoma (CA). Methods: All consecutive patients with the histologically diagnosed primary colon CA (design, prospective multicenter observational study) were registered with regard to patient-, diagnostic-, tumor (Tu) finding-, and treatment-related aspects using a computer-based registry with 60 items to characterize early postoperative and long-term oncological outcome. Results: Basic data: From 2010 to 2016, data from a total of 14,466 patients were documented (mean age, 72.8 [range, 22-96] years; sex ratio, m:f=7,696:6,770). - 717/14,466 patients (4.96 %) were included in a matched-pair analysis. The majority of these patients underwent elective surgery (n=12,620 patients; 87.2 %) regardless of whether a bowel anastomosis or an ostomy was created. In emergency surgery, a bowel anastomosis was possible in a large proportion (n=1,332 patients [72.1 %]). In contrast, in 514 patients (27.9 %) who underwent emergency surgery, an ostomy was created. Interestingly, ostomy had to be created even less frequently in patients who had undergone planned surgery (n=366 [2.5 %]). - Early postoperative outcome: Cases of postoperative mortality were mainly due to general complications. Especially among the patients treated in an emergency situation without intestinal anastomosis, a high proportion died of their pre-existing condition (17.0 %). Patients who underwent ostomy creation or emergency surgery had a worse risk profile (incl. arterial hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and secondary cardiac or renal diseases) which led to the decision to operate without anastomosis. Furthermore, data show no matter which technique had been used, patients that had undergone surgical intervention without anastomosis were more likely to develop complications. - Long-term oncosurgical outcome: The most important factors influencing long-term survival were age, resection status, and tumor stage (according to TNM and UICC). The more advanced the tumor growth, the lower the long-term survival. Patients categorized with the same tumor stage, age, and risk factors had a better chance of survival, if they underwent elective surgical intervention and with intestinal anastomosis. Interestingly, the multivariable analysis showed that older patients and such with distant metastasis benefit from a discontinuity resection. Conclusions: The association of intraoperative and postoperative complications with increased postoperative mortality, as well as preexisting risk factors and perioperative complications is in line with findings of current studies. Furthermore, current studies also agree that older patients and such with reduced general condition benefit from discontinuity resection.

Prehabilitation in elective surgical interventions - what must the general and abdominal surgeon know.

Objectives: For years, many efforts have been invested to prepare patients, in particular, those with reduced physical and psychic status, much better to provide and finally achieve better outocme if there is time available to provide several beneficial measures. Methods: Therefore, the objective was to illustrate the concept and various single elements of a complex prehabilitation concept based on (i) selective references from the medical literature and (ii) own clinical experiences from clinical practice in general and abdominal surgery. Results: Prehabiliation can be considered the solution of the efforts to improve preoperative status for patients in a disadvantageous status for almost all types of surgery and all other operative and/or interventional procedures. It is the targeted process to improve individual functionality and organ function before a planned (elective) surgical intervention; P. comprises basically nutritional, physical and psychological measures; P. focusses especially onto the elderly, frail and malnourished patients before a planned surgical intervention; the overall aim is to significantly improve final outcome characterized by shorter length of stay, lower complication rate and mortality as well as cost efficiency; P. is especially important in cancer surgery, in which the beneficial effects can be particularly implemented; P. programs and/or "Standard Operating Protocols" (SOP) may help to establish and materialize its single aspects and enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS). There is still further potential to reliably establish and to utilize the options of prehabilitation measures as listed above. Conclusions: Prehabiliation is an indispensable aspect in today's preparation for elective surgery, which needs to become obligatory part of the preparation measures to planned surgical interventions, which can further contribute to a better final outcome and ERAS as well as, in addtion, needs to be further developed and accomplished.

Multivisceral resection of advanced colon and rectal cancer: a prospective multicenter observational study with propensity score analysis of the morbidity, mortality, and survival.

Objectives: In the surgical treatment of colorectal carcinoma (CRC), 1 in 10 patients has a peritumorous adhesion or tumor infiltration in the adjacent tissue or organs. Accordingly, multivisceral resection (MVR) must be performed in these patients. This prospective multicenter observational study aimed to analyze the possible differences between non-multivisceral resection (nMVR) and MVR in terms of early postoperative and long-term oncological treatment outcomes. We also aimed to determine the factors influencing overall survival. Methods: The data of 25,321 patients from 364 hospitals who had undergone surgery for CRC (the Union for International Cancer Control stages I-III) during a defined period were evaluated. MVR was defined as (partial) resection of the tumor-bearing organ along with resection of the adherent and adjacent organs or tissues. In addition to the patients' personal, diagnosis (tumor findings), and therapy data, demographic data were also recorded and the early postoperative outcome was determined. Furthermore, the long-term survival of each patient was investigated, and a "matched-pair" analysis was performed. Results: From 2008 to 2015, the MVR rates were 9.9 % (n=1,551) for colon cancer (colon CA) and 10.6 % (n=1,027) for rectal cancer (rectal CA). CRC was more common in men (colon CA: 53.4 %; rectal CA: 62.0 %) than in women; all MVR groups had high proportions of women (53.6 % vs. 55.2 %; pairs of values in previously mentioned order). Resection of another organ frequently occurred (75.6 % vs. 63.7 %). The MVR group had a high prevalence of intraoperative (5.8 %; 12.1 %) and postoperative surgical complications (30.8 % vs. 36.4 %; each p<0.001). Wound infections (colon CA: 7.1 %) and anastomotic insufficiencies (rectal CA: 8.3 %) frequently occurred after MVR. The morbidity rates of the MVR groups were also determined (43.7 % vs. 47.2 %). The hospital mortality rates were 4.9 % in the colon CA-related MVR group and 3.8 % in the rectal CA-related MVR group and were significantly increased compared with those of the nMVR group (both p<0.001). Results of the matched-pair analysis showed that the morbidity rates in both MVR groups (colon CA: 42.9 % vs. 34.3 %; rectal CA: 46.3 % vs. 37.2 %; each p<0.001) were significantly increased. The hospital lethality rate tended to increase in the colon CA-related MVR group (4.8 % vs. 3.7 %; p=0.084), while it significantly increased in the rectal CA-related MVR group (3.4 % vs. 3.0 %; p=0.005). Moreover, the 5-year (yr) overall survival rates were 53.9 % (nMVR: 69.5 %; p<0.001) in the colon CA group and 56.8 % (nMVR: 69.4 %; p<0.001) in the rectal CA group. Comparison of individual T stages (MVR vs. nMVR) showed no significant differences in the survival outcomes (p<0.05); however, according to the matched-pair analysis, a significant difference was observed in the survival outcomes of those with pT4 colon CA (40.6 % vs. 50.2 %; p=0.017). By contrast, the local recurrence rates after MVR were not significantly different (7.0 % vs. 5.8 %; both p>0.05). The risk factors common to both tumor types were advanced age (>79 yr), pT stage, sex, and morbidity (each hazard ratio: >1; p<0.05). Conclusions: MVR allows curation by R0 resection with adequate long-term survival. For colon or rectal CA, MVR tended to be associated with reduced 5-year overall survival rates (significant only for pT4 colon CA based on the MPA results), as well as, with a significant increase in morbidity rates in both tumor entities. In the overall data, MVR was associated with significant increases in hospital lethality rates, as indicated by the matched-pair analysis (significant only for rectal CA).

International study on the prevalence of malnutrition in centralized care for colorectal cancer patients.

Objectives: Patients with different diseases may show signs of malnutrition both before and during the hospital stay. The presence of malnutrition may impact the recovery and length of stay and consequently the costs. Early identification of malnutrition is thus a critical factor. The objective of this multicenter study is to determine the prevalence of malnutrition in colorectal cancer centers. Another objective is to investigate possible consequences, such as complications or length of stay. In addition, the study aims to demonstrate the relevance of nutrition management in colorectal cancer centers. At the same time, relevant requirements clearly demanded by the Certification Commission for Certified Colorectal Cancer Centers are met through implementation of the study. Methods: Between 2019 and 2021, patients in colorectal cancer centers were examined in the preoperative phase. In addition to questions about patients' state of health and nutrition, the validated screening forms-Subjective Global Assessment (SGA) and Nutritional Risk Screening Tool 2002 (NRS 2002)-were used to assess malnutrition. The data were processed by univariate analysis. Results: In total, data records of 3,102 patients were evaluated. The mean age of the participants was 68.5 ± 11.9 years, and their average body mass index (BMI) was 26.8 ± 5.3 kg/m2. The SGA questionnaire indicated that 23 % of the participants suffered from malnutrition and 38 % were at risk of malnutrition (NRS≥3). Malnutrition was found more frequently in patients with colorectal carcinomas than in patients with rectal carcinomas (53.1 vs. 32.1 %). The length of stay in hospital and the rate of complications were significantly higher when malnutrition was identified. Conclusions: Approximately one in three to four patients with a colorectal carcinoma has an increased risk of malnutrition. The two screening methods calculated a different prevalence (23 and 38 %). Any malnutrition that is present demonstrably has a significant impact both on the rate of complications and the length of stay and may therefore have a decisive influence on the costs. The results of this multicenter study underscore the need for systematic screening for malnutrition and at the same time should increase clinics awareness of the importance of establishing a nutrition management policy.

Impact of a digital surgical workflow including Digital Device Briefing Tool on morbidity and mortality in a patient population undergoing primary stapled colorectal anastomosis for benign or malignant colorectal disease: protocol for a multicentre prospective cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: With growing emphasis on surgical safety, it appears fundamental to assess the safety of colorectal resection involving primary stapled anastomosis. Surgical stapling devices can considerably foster patient safety in colorectal surgery, but their misuse or malfunction encompass a unique risk of postoperative complications. The Digital Device Briefing Tool (DDBT) is a digital cognitive aid developed to enhance safe use of the Ethicon circular stapling device during colorectal resection. The purpose of this study is to evaluate how a digital operative workflow, including DDBT, compared with routine surgical care, affects morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing left-sided colorectal resection with primary stapled colorectal anastomosis for colorectal cancer or benign disease. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A multicentre, prospective cohort study will be conducted at five certified academic colorectal centres in Germany. It compares a non-digital with a Johnson & Johnson digital solution (Surgical Process Institute Deutschland (SPI))-guided operative workflow in patients undergoing left hemicolectomy, sigmoidectomy, anterior rectal resection and Hartmann reversal procedure. The sample size is set at 528 cases in total, divided into 3 groups (a non-digital and two SPI-guided workflow cohorts, with and without DDBT) in a ratio of 1:1:1, with 176 patients each. The primary endpoint is a composite outcome comprising the overall rate of surgical complications, including death, during hospitalisation and within the first 30 days after colorectal resection. Secondary endpoints include operating time, length of hospital stay and 30-day hospital readmission rate. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study will be performed in line with the Declaration of Helsinki. The ethics committee of the Charité-University Medicine Berlin, Germany, approved the study (No: 22-0277-EA2/060/22). Study Investigators will obtain written informed consent from each patient before a patient may participate in this study. The study results will be submitted to an international peer-reviewed journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: DRKS00029682.

Different Prevalence of Alarm, Dyspeptic and Reflux Symptoms in Patients with Cardia and Non-cardia Gastric Cancer.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Symptoms of patients with gastric cancer (GC) are often unspecific and differences in symptoms between patients with cardia and non-cardia GC have been poorly investigated. We aimed to characterize symptoms of patients with cardia and non-cardia GC. METHODS: Patients with cardia (Siewert type II and III) and non-cardia GC were recruited in the German multicenter cohort of the Gastric Cancer Research (staR) study between 2013 and 2017. Alarm, dyspeptic and reflux symptoms at the time of presentation were documented using a self-administered questionnaire. RESULTS: A completed self-administered questionnaire was available for 568/759 recruited patients (132 cardia GC, 436 non-cardia GC, male 61%, mean age 64 years). Dyspeptic symptoms were more common in patients with non-cardia GC (69.0 vs. 54.5%, p=0.0024). Cardia GC patients reported more frequently alarm symptoms (69.7 vs. 44.7%, p<0.0001), and were more likely to have Union for International Cancer Control (UICC) stage III-IV (54.1vs. 38.9%, p=0.0034). Especially, dysphagia and weight loss were more common in patients with cardia GC (49.2 vs. 6.4 %, p<0.0001 and 37.1 vs. 25.7%, p=0.02, respectively). No differences between the two groups were observed with respect to reflux symptoms. Patients with alarm symptoms were more likely to have UICC stage III-IV at presentation (69.4 vs. 42.9%, p<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: In clinical practice the symptom pattern at presentation may serve as a hint for tumor localization. Despite the fact that they are common in the general population, dyspeptic symptoms offer a chance for earlier GC detection. Thus, in patients with dyspeptic symptoms who fail empiric approaches, endoscopy should not be delayed.

Radiochemotherapy with or without cetuximab for unresectable esophageal cancer: final results of a randomized phase 2 trial (LEOPARD-2).

PURPOSE: To investigate the efficacy and toxicity of cetuximab when added to radiochemotherapy for unresectable esophageal cancer. METHODS: This randomized phase 2 trial (clinicaltrials.gov, identifier NCT01787006) compared radiochemotherapy plus cetuximab (arm A) to radiochemotherapy (arm B) for unresectable esophageal cancer. Primary objective was 2­year overall survival (OS). Arm A was considered insufficiently active if 2­year OS was ≤40% (null hypothesis = H0), and promising if the lower limit of the 95% confidence interval was >45%. If that lower limit was >40%, H0 was rejected. Secondary objectives included progression-free survival (PFS), locoregional control (LC), metastases-free survival (MFS), response, and toxicity. The study was terminated early after 74 patients; 68 patients were evaluable. RESULTS: Two-year OS was 71% in arm A (95% CI: 55-87%) vs. 53% in arm B (95% CI: 36-71%); H0 was rejected. Median OS was 49.1 vs. 24.1 months (p = 0.147). Hazard ratio (HR) for death was 0.60 (95% CI: 0.30-1.21). At 2 years, PFS was 56% vs. 44%, LC 84% vs. 72%, and MFS 74% vs. 54%. HRs were 0.51 (0.25-1.04) for progression, 0.43 (0.13-1.40) for locoregional failure, and 0.43 (0.17-1.05) for distant metastasis. Overall response was 81% vs. 69% (p = 0.262). Twenty-six and 27 patients, respectively, experienced at least one toxicity grade ≥3 (p = 0.573). A significant difference was found for grade ≥3 allergic reactions (12.5% vs. 0%, p = 0.044). CONCLUSION: Given the limitations of this trial, radiochemotherapy plus cetuximab was feasible. There was a trend towards improved PFS and MFS. Larger studies are required to better define the role of cetuximab for unresectable esophageal cancer.

Gastric cancer in autoimmune gastritis: A case-control study from the German centers of the staR project on gastric cancer research.

OBJECTIVES: Patients with autoimmune gastritis (AIG) are reported to have an increased risk of developing gastric cancer (GC). In this study, we assess the characteristics and outcomes of GC patients with AIG in a multicenter case-control study. METHODS: Between April 2013 and May 2017, patients with GC, including cancers of the esophagogastric junction (EGJ) Siewert type II and III, were recruited. Patients with histological characteristics of AIG were identified and matched in a 1:2 fashion for age and gender to GC patients with no AIG. Presenting symptoms were documented using a self-administered questionnaire. RESULTS: Histological assessment of gastric mucosa was available for 572/759 GC patients. Overall, 28 (4.9%) of GC patients had AIG (67 ± 9 years, female-to-male ratio 1.3:1). In patients with AIG, GC was more likely to be localized in the proximal (i.e. EGJ, fundus, corpus) stomach (odds ratio (OR) 2.7, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.0-7.1). In GC patients with AIG, pernicious anemia was the leading clinical sign (OR 22.0, 95% CI 2.6-187.2), and the most common indication for esophagogastroduodenoscopy (OR 29.0, 95% CI 7.2-116.4). GC patients with AIG were more likely to present without distant metastases (OR 6.2, 95% CI 1.3-28.8) and to be treated with curative intention (OR 3.0, 95% CI 1.0-9.0). The five-year survival rates with 95% CI in GC patients with and with no AIG were 84.7% (83.8-85.6) and 53.5% (50.9-56.1), respectively (OR 0.25, 95% CI 0.08-0.75, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Pernicious anemia leads to earlier diagnosis of GC in AIG patients and contributes significantly to a better clinical outcome.

Adjuvant treatment for resected rectal cancer: impact of standard and intensified postoperative chemotherapy on disease-free survival in patients undergoing preoperative chemoradiation-a propensity score-matched analysis of an observational database.

AIMS: Adjuvant chemotherapy for resected rectal cancer is widely used. However, studies on adjuvant treatment following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) and total mesorectal excision (TME) have yielded conflicting results. Recent studies have focused on adding oxaliplatin to both preoperative and postoperative therapy, making it difficult to assess the impact of adjuvant oxaliplatin alone. This study was aimed at determining the impact of (i) any adjuvant treatment and (ii) oxaliplatin-containing adjuvant treatment on disease-free survival in CRT-pretreated, R0-resected rectal cancer patients. METHOD: Patients undergoing R0 TME following 5-fluorouracil (5FU)-only-based CRT between January 1, 2008, and December 31, 2010, were selected from a nationwide registry. After propensity score matching (PSM), comparison of disease-free survival (DFS) using Kaplan-Meier analysis and log-rank test was performed in (i) patients receiving no vs. any adjuvant treatment and (ii) patients treated with adjuvant 5FU/capecitabine without vs. with oxaliplatin. RESULTS: Out of 1497 patients, 520 matched pairs were generated for analysis of no vs. any adjuvant treatment. Mean DFS was significantly prolonged with adjuvant treatment (81.8 ± 2.06 vs. 70.1 ± 3.02 months, p < 0.001). One hundred forty-eight matched pairs were available for analysis of adjuvant therapy with or without oxaliplatin, showing no improvement in DFS in patients receiving oxaliplatin (76.9 ± 4.12 vs. 79.3 ± 4.44 months, p = 0.254). Local recurrence rate was not significantly different between groups in either analysis. CONCLUSION: In this cohort of rectal cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant CRT and TME surgery under routine conditions, adjuvant chemotherapy significantly improved DFS. No benefit was observed for the addition of oxaliplatin to adjuvant chemotherapy in this setting.

A phase II study of catumaxomab administered intra- and postoperatively as part of a multimodal approach in primarily resectable gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative relapse rate after gastrectomy and perioperative chemotherapy remain high in patients with advanced gastric cancer due to the spread of disseminated tumour cells in the peritoneal cavity. Perioperative administration of catumaxomab could potentially eliminate residual tumour cells after intended curative resection of the primary tumour. METHODS: This open-label, phase II study investigated the safety and efficacy of catumaxomab following neoadjuvant chemotherapy and subsequent surgery in patients with resectable (T2-4, N+, M0) gastric adenocarcinoma. Patients received catumaxomab intra- (single 10 µg dose) and postoperatively (10, 20, 50 and 150 µg on days 7, 10, 13 and 16, respectively). The primary endpoint was the postoperative complication rate (maximum rate defined as <62 %) within 30 days after surgery in patients who received at least the first catumaxomab dose. RESULTS: Of 64 patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy, 58 underwent surgery and 54 received at least the first catumaxomab dose. Postoperative complications were reported in 18 of 54 evaluable patients (complication rate 33 %; 95 % confidence interval: 21-48 %); thus, the primary endpoint was met. The most frequent complications were pulmonary infection (17 %) and anastomosis insufficiency requiring surgery (11 %). The most common catumaxomab-related adverse events were pyrexia (67 %), leucocytosis (19 %), abdominal pain (17 %) and chills (17 %). The 4-year disease-free and overall survival rates were 38 and 50 %. CONCLUSION: Intra- and postoperative administration of catumaxomab as part of a multimodal treatment approach was feasible and tolerable in patients with advanced gastric cancer and should be further investigated in a randomised trial.

NeoFLOT: Multicenter phase II study of perioperative chemotherapy in resectable adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction or gastric adenocarcinoma-Very good response predominantly in patients with intestinal type tumors.

Perioperative treatment is a standard of care in locally advanced gastroesophageal cancer (GEC) (gastric adenocarcinoma and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma). While preoperative treatment can be applied to the majority of patients, postoperative chemotherapy can be given only to a fraction. The NeoFLOT-study therefore investigates the application of prolonged neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT). Patients with T3, T4, and/or node-positive adenocarcinoma (GEC) were eligible for this multicenter phase II trial. NACT consisted of 6 cycles of oxaliplatin 85 mg/m(2) , leucovorin 200 mg/m(2) , 5-fluorouracil 2600 mg/m(2) and docetaxel 50 mg/m(2) (FLOT) applied q 2 wks. Application of adjuvant chemotherapy was explicitly not part of the protocol. R0-resection rate was evaluated as a primary endpoint. Of 59 enrolled patients, 50 patients underwent surgery and were assessable for the primary endpoint. R0-resection rate was 86.0% (43/50). Pathologic complete response (pCR) was 20.0% (10/50) and a further 20% (10/50) of patients achieved near complete histological remission (<10% residual tumor). Among these very good responders, 85% (17/20) had intestinal type tumors, 10% (2/20) had diffuse and 5% (1/20) had mixed type tumors. After 3 cycles of NACT, 6.9% (4/58) of patients developed progressive disease. Median disease-free survival was 32.9 months. The 1-year survival-rate was 79.3%. Grade 3-4 toxicities included neutropenia 29.3%, febrile neutropenia 1.7%, diarrhea 12.1% and mucositis 6.9%. This study indicates that intensified NACT with 6 cycles of FLOT is highly effective and tolerable in resectable GEC. Very good response (pCR and <10% residual tumor) was predominantly observed in patients with intestinal type tumors.

Adjuvant chemotherapy with gemcitabine and long-term outcomes among patients with resected pancreatic cancer: the CONKO-001 randomized trial.

IMPORTANCE: The prognosis for patients with pancreatic cancer is poor, even after resection with curative intent. Gemcitabine-based chemotherapy is standard treatment for advanced pancreatic cancer, but its effect on survival in the adjuvant setting has not been demonstrated. OBJECTIVE: To analyze whether previously reported improvement in disease-free survival with adjuvant gemcitabine therapy translates into improved overall survival. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: CONKO-001 (Charité Onkologie 001), a multicenter, open-label, phase 3 randomized trial to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of gemcitabine in patients with pancreatic cancer after complete tumor resection. Patients with macroscopically completely removed pancreatic cancer entered the study between July 1998 and December 2004 in 88 hospitals in Germany and Austria. Follow-up ended in September 2012. INTERVENTIONS: After stratification for tumor stage, nodal status, and resection status, patients were randomly assigned to either adjuvant gemcitabine treatment (1g/m2 d 1, 8, 15, q 4 weeks) for 6 months or to observation alone. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary end point was disease-free survival. Secondary end points included treatment safety and overall survival, with overall survival defined as the time from date of randomization to death. Patients lost to follow-up were censored on the date of their last follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 368 patients were randomized, and 354 were eligible for intention-to-treat-analysis. By September 2012, 308 patients (87.0% [95% CI, 83.1%-90.1%]) had relapsed and 316 patients (89.3% [95% CI, 85.6%-92.1%]) had died. The median follow-up time was 136 months. The median disease-free survival was 13.4 (95% CI, 11.6-15.3) months in the treatment group compared with 6.7 (95% CI, 6.0-7.5) months in the observation group (hazard ratio, 0.55 [95% CI, 0.44-0.69]; P < .001). Patients randomized to adjuvant gemcitabine treatment had prolonged overall survival compared with those randomized to observation alone (hazard ratio, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.61-0.95]; P = .01), with 5-year overall survival of 20.7% (95% CI, 14.7%-26.6%) vs 10.4% (95% CI, 5.9%-15.0%), respectively, and 10-year overall survival of 12.2% (95% CI, 7.3%-17.2%) vs 7.7% (95% CI, 3.6%-11.8%). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among patients with macroscopic complete removal of pancreatic cancer, the use of adjuvant gemcitabine for 6 months compared with observation alone resulted in increased overall survival as well as disease-free survival. These findings provide strong support for the use of gemcitabine in this setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN34802808.

Acute cholecystitis: early versus delayed cholecystectomy, a multicenter randomized trial (ACDC study, NCT00447304).

OBJECTIVE: Acute cholecystitis is a common disease, and laparoscopic surgery is the standard of care. BACKGROUND: Optimal timing of surgery for acute cholecystitis remains controversial: either early surgery shortly after hospital admission or delayed elective surgery after a conservative treatment with antibiotics. METHODS: The ACDC ("Acute Cholecystitis-early laparoscopic surgery versus antibiotic therapy and Delayed elective Cholecystectomy") study is a randomized, prospective, open-label, parallel group trial. Patients were randomly assigned to receive immediate surgery within 24 hours of hospital admission (group ILC) or initial antibiotic treatment, followed by delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy at days 7 to 45 (group DLC). For infection, all patients were treated with moxifloxacin for at least 48 hours. Primary endpoint was occurrence of predefined relevant morbidity within 75 days. Secondary endpoints were as follows: (1) 75-day morbidity using a scoring system; (2) conversion rate; (3) change of antibiotic therapy; (4) mortality; (5) costs; and (6) length of hospital stay. RESULTS: Morbidity rate was significantly lower in group ILC (304 patients) than in group DLC (314 patients): 11.8% versus 34.4%. Conversion rate to open surgery and mortality did not differ significantly between groups. Mean length of hospital stay (5.4 days vs 10.0 days; P < 0.001) and total hospital costs (€2919 vs €4262; P < 0.001) were significantly lower in group ILC. CONCLUSIONS: In this large, randomized trial, laparoscopic cholecystectomy within 24 hours of hospital admission was shown to be superior to the conservative approach concerning morbidity and costs. Therefore, we believe that immediate laparoscopic cholecystectomy should become therapy of choice for acute cholecystitis in operable patients. (NCT00447304).

Population-based patterns of care in the first-line treatment of patients with advanced esophagogastric adenocarcinoma in Germany.

BACKGROUND: Randomized studies proved the efficacy of new drugs for the systemic treatment of advanced gastric cancer in the past 5 years. However, little is known about the use of firstline chemotherapy in clinical practice in patients with advanced or metastatic adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG) and the stomach. We investigated temporal trends in therapy and factors influencing treatment decisions for these patients during a 4-year period. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 1058 patients (median age 67 years) with advanced AEG or gastric cancers undergoing treatment decisions were documented with the Therapiemonitor® in 2006-2009. Therapiemonitor collects population-based data regarding treatment decisions and strategies. Time trends of drug use and intensity in the first-line treatment were analyzed in the entire patient group and according to age (cut-off 65 years) and Karnofsky performance status (KPS; cut-off 80%). RESULTS: Over time, the use of oxaliplatin and docetaxel as well as capecitabine increased while cisplatin and irinotecan use slightly declined. The use of chemotherapy triplets rose from 10.1% in 2006 to 47.0% in 2009. Treatment patterns significantly varied by age and KPS: Older patients were significantly less likely to receive chemotherapy triplets, cisplatin and docetaxel but tended to more often receive oxaliplatin. Likewise, triplets, cisplatin and docetaxel were less frequently used in patients with KPS < 80%, while capecitabine and irinotecan were significantly more often used in this patient group. CONCLUSIONS: A clear tendency towards the use of more intensive chemotherapy regimens in patients with AEG and gastric cancer was observed over time. Older or less fit patients were treated preferably with monotherapy or chemotherapy doublets during 2006-2009. Oxaliplatin and docetaxel use has substantially risen.

[Adjuvant therapy in colon cancer]. / Adjuvante therapie des kolonkarzinoms.

The goal of improving adjuvant treatment can be reached in two ways: firstly, by developing more effective drugs and protocols and, secondly, by selecting suitable patients on the basis of clinical and molecular factors. In UICC (Union internationale contre le cancer) stage II, microsatellite instability (MSI) is a strong prognostic factor. Whether it can also be used as a predictive marker is currently a matter of controversy because the available data are contradictory. The question whether or not the MSI status should be checked before treatment decisions are made in stage II patients can therefore not be clearly answered at present. For adjuvant treatment in stage III, with capecitabine/oxaliplatin (XELOX) there is now a new protocol available that is based on the orally administered prodrug capecitabine. With regard to the question of how much older patients in this stage may also benefit from a combination chemotherapy, new--and contradictory--data have emerged recently: firstly, preliminary results of two new studies have given rise to safety concerns and, secondly, an analysis by the 'ACCENT Collaborative Group' indicated lower efficacy of the 'newer' adjuvant protocols in older people. These findings, however, have now been called into question as a result of a new subgroup analysis from the XELOXA study. The expert group therefore recommended that the decision whether to treat patients older than 70 years with an (oral) fluoropyrimidine alone or in combination with oxaliplatin should be based on clinical parameters such as biological age and comorbidities.

[Specific treatment situations in metastatic colorectal cancer]. / Spezielle Therapiesituationen beim metastasierten kolorektalen Karzinom.

As far as the management of primary resectable liver metastases is concerned, three approaches are currently competing with each other: surgery alone, surgery with pre- and postoperative chemotherapy, and surgery with postoperative chemotherapy alone. The core of the argument for pre- and postoperative chemotherapy in these patients is the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) 40983 study, which concluded that, in comparison with surgery alone, perioperative chemotherapy improved the 3-year progression-free survival (PFS) by 7 months. In contrast to this, there are two smaller studies--at a somewhat lower strength of evidence-- indicating that adjuvant chemotherapy extends PFS by 9.1 months compared with surgery alone. In Germany, the adjuvant approach continues to be favored in many places; this can also be seen in the formulation of the S3 guideline. In patients with unresectable liver metastases--with the associated difficulty of classification due to the lack of clear and definitive criteria--preoperative systemic therapy to induce 'conversion' is indicated, in order to allow secondary resection. In KRAS wild-type tumors, high response rates (in terms of a reduction in size of the metastases, such as according to RECIST (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors)) and a high conversion rate are achieved using a cetuximab/chemotherapy combination. Triple chemotherapy combinations with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), oxaliplatin and irinotecan also produce high response rates. Bevacizumab/chemotherapy combinations have led to a high number of complete and partial pathohistological remissions in phase II studies; these seem to correlate with long survival times. In the absence of long-term survival data, it therefore seems to remain unclear as to what is the best parameter to use in order to assess the success of preoperative treatment. Lung metastases, too, or local peritoneal carcinomatosis can nowadays be operated on in selected patients with a good prospect of long-term remission or even cure. The surgery should, however, generally only be carried out in experienced centers, especially in the case of peritoneal carcinomatosis. For synchronous metastasization, the appropriate management depends on the size and extent of liver metastases and of the primary tumor. Small, peripherally lying and safely resectable liver metastases can be removed before or at the same time as the primary tumor, especially if a hemicolectomy is being carried out. If the metastases are unresectable and there is no bleeding or stenosis, the primary tumor can also be left in situ and systemic chemotherapy can be carried out first. However, it should be borne in mind that, according to current data, palliative resection of the primary tumor combined with systemic therapy leads to longer overall survival than does chemotherapy alone. Whether resection or chemotherapy should be done first therefore depends on the patient's clinical situation.

[HER2 testing and targeted therapy in advanced gastric cancer]. / HER2-Diagnostik und zielgerichtete Therapie beim fortgeschrittenen Magenkarzinom.

A large phase III study on the use of the HER2 antibody trastuzumab in locally advanced or metastatic gastric cancer has now been completed. Patients whose tumors were either scored on immunohistochemistry (IHC) as 3+ (independently of the result of fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH)) or as IHC2+ and FISH+ were found, in a planned subgroup analysis, to have a median overall survival time of 16.0 months--versus 11.8 months when trastuzumab was not given. In light of these data, trastuzumab was therefore approved by the European Medicines Agency (EMEA) for metastasizing patients with this HER2 test result. It should be noted that the IHC scoring system for gastric cancer was modified compared to that for breast cancer. If the same criteria as are used for breast cancer were used for gastric cancer, this would lead to a large number of false negatives; around half of the patients who would benefit from trastuzumab would not be identified. Workshops for pathologists and round robin tests are being carried out to introduce the new scoring system.