The Real-Life Impact of Primary Tumor Resection of Synchronous Metastatic Colorectal Cancer-From a Clinical Oncologic Point of View.

AIM: The complex medical care of synchronous metastatic colorectal (smCRC) patients requires prudent multidisciplinary planning and treatments due to various challenges caused by the primary tumor and its metastases. The role of primary tumor resection (PTR) is currently uncertain; strong arguments exist for and against it. We aimed to define its effect and find its best place in our therapeutic methodology. METHOD: We performed retrospective data analysis to investigate the clinical course of 449 smCRC patients, considering treatment modalities and the location of the primary tumor and comparing the clinical results of the patients with or without PTR between 1 January 2013 and 31 December 2018 at the Institute of Oncotherapy of the University of Pécs. RESULTS: A total of 63.5% of the 449 smCRC patients had PTR. Comparing their data to those whose primary tumor remained intact (IPT), we observed significant differences in median progression-free survival with first-line chemotherapy (mPFS1) (301 vs. 259 days; p < 0.0001; 1 y PFS 39.2% vs. 26.6%; OR 0.56 (95% CI 0.36-0.87)) and median overall survival (mOS) (760 vs. 495 days; p < 0.0001; 2 y OS 52.4 vs. 26.9%; OR 0.33 (95% CI 0.33-0.53)), respectively. However, in the PTR group, the average ECOG performance status was significantly better (0.98 vs. 1.1; p = 0.0456), and the use of molecularly targeted agents (MTA) (45.3 vs. 28.7%; p = 0.0005) and rate of metastasis ablation (MA) (21.8 vs. 1.2%; p < 0.0001) were also higher, which might explain the difference partially. Excluding the patients receiving MTA and MA from the comparison, the effect of PTR remained evident, as the mOS differences in the reduced PTR subgroup compared to the reduced IPT subgroup were still strongly significant (675 vs. 459 days; p = 0.0009; 2 y OS 45.9 vs. 24.1%; OR 0.37 (95% CI 0.18-0.79). Further subgroup analysis revealed that the site of the primary tumor also had a major impact on the outcome considering only the IPT patients; shorter mOS was observed in the extrapelvic IPT subgroup in contrast with the intrapelvic IPT group (422 vs. 584 days; p = 0.0026; 2 y OS 18.2 vs. 35.9%; OR 0.39 (95% CI 0.18-0.89)). Finally, as a remarkable finding, it should be emphasized that there were no differences in OS between the smCRC PTR subgroup and metachronous mCRC patients (mOS 760 vs. 710 days, p = 0.7504, 2 y OS OR 0.85 (95% CI 0.58-1.26)). CONCLUSIONS: The role of PTR in smCRC is still not professionally justified. Our survey found that most patients had benefited from PTR. Nevertheless, further prospective trials are needed to clarify the optimal treatment sequence of smCRC patients and understand this cancer disease's inherent biology.

Real-Life Effectivity of Dose Intensity Reduction of First-Line mFOLFIRI-Based Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancers: Sometimes Less Is More.

Aim: The key purposes of the treatment of metastatic malignancies are to extend survival and maintain the quality of life. Recently it has been emphasized in the scientific literature that the maintenance of maximal dose intensity is not always beneficial. Method: We examined the effectiveness of first-line mFOLFIRI-based treatments used in mCRC indication in 515 patients, treated between 1 January 2013 and 31 December 2018 at the Department of Oncotherapy of the University of Pécs, on a basis of real-world retrospective data analysis. We studied the effect of decreased dose intensity treatment modifications on patient survival. Results: 45% of all patients achieved the optimal relative dose intensity (RDI) of 85%, and the median progression-free and overall survival (mPFS, mOS) were 199 and 578 days, compared to 322 and 743 days, (mPFS p < 0.0002, 1 y (year) PFS OR (odds ratio) 0.39 (95% CI: 0.26−0.56) and mOS p = 0.0781, 2 yrs OS OR 0.58 (95% CI: 0.39−0.85), respectively) in the group of patients not achieving the RDI of 85%. Conclusions: Decreased dose intensity did not reduce the effectiveness of treatment; in fact, there was a significant improvement in most of the analyzed parameters. The option of reduced dose intensity, which shows the same or even better results with less toxicity, should definitely be considered in the future palliative treatment of mCRC patients.

The Real-Life Impact of mFOLFIRI-Based Chemotherapies on Elderly Patients-Should We Let It or Leave It?

AIM: The oncologic treatment of elderly patients is going on with a lack of evidence due to their underrepresentation in clinical trials. Many data suggest that certain groups of elderly patients, like their younger counterparts, may benefit from the systemic treatment of their metastatic colorectal tumors (mCRC). METHOD: We performed retrospective data analysis to investigate the clinical course of care and clinical outcomes of 515 patients who received first-line mFOLFIRI-based chemotherapy for mCRC between 1 January 2013 and 31 December 2018 at the Institute of Oncotherapy of the University of Pécs, focusing on a comparison of patients over and under 70 years of age, defined as the cut-off value. RESULTS: 28.7% of the 515 patients were 70 years old and older (median age 73.5 years). Compared to the data of the elderly patients, the younger group (median age 61.1 years) had a performance status that was significantly better (average ECOG 1.07 vs. 0.83, p < 0.0001), and significantly more patients received molecularly targeted agents (MTA) (21.6% vs. 51.8%, p < 0.0001); nevertheless, mPFS (241 vs. 285 days, p = 0.3960) and mOS (610 vs. 698 days, p = 0.6305) results did not differ significantly. Considering the 1y PFS OR and the 2ys OS OR values (0.94 [95%CI 0.63-1.41] and 0.72 [95%CI 0.47-1.09], respectively), only a non-significant trend was observed in OS favouring the younger population. Additional analysis of our data proved that the survival in patients over 70 years was positively affected by the addition of MTAs to the doublet chemotherapies, and the reasonable modifications/reductions in dose intensity and the addition of local interventions had similar positive effects as observed in the younger patients' group. CONCLUSIONS: Age stratification of mCRC patients is not professionally justified. Patients over 70 years of age with good performance status and controlled co-morbidities benefit from systemic therapy, its modifications and local treatment to the same extent as younger patients. With the increasing incidence of age-related cancers due to the rising average lifespan, prospective randomised clinical trials are needed to determine the real value of systemic therapy in the elderly and the rational, objective methods of patient selection.

[Successfully resected retroperitoneal haemangiopericytoma with critical haemorrhage, 11 years after lung and liver manifestation]. / Eletveszélyes vérzést okozó retroperitoneális haemangiopericytoma sikerrel operált esete 11 évvel a tüdo és máj manifesztáció után.

The authors present the case history of a haemangiopericytoma patient surviving more than 11 years. First they did a lung resection parallel with transdiaphragmatic liver resection, then, 11 years later, because a massive recurrence developed in the retroperitoneum which threatened with critical haemorrhage, tumor reduction, marsupialization of the connective tissue capsule and open treatment postoperative were performed. The patient survived for the operation for 6 months. They describe the histopathological transformation of the tumour.