Programme of self-reactive innate-like T cell-mediated cancer immunity.

Cellular transformation induces phenotypically diverse populations of tumour-infiltrating T cells1-5, and immune checkpoint blockade therapies preferentially target T cells that recognize cancer cell neoantigens6,7. Yet, how other classes of tumour-infiltrating T cells contribute to cancer immunosurveillance remains elusive. Here, in a survey of T cells in mouse and human malignancies, we identified a population of αß T cell receptor (TCR)-positive FCER1G-expressing innate-like T cells with high cytotoxic potential8 (ILTCKs). These cells were broadly reactive to unmutated self-antigens, arose from distinct thymic progenitors following early encounter with cognate antigens, and were continuously replenished by thymic progenitors during tumour progression. Notably, expansion and effector differentiation of intratumoural ILTCKs depended on interleukin-15 (IL-15) expression in cancer cells, and inducible activation of IL-15 signalling in adoptively transferred ILTCK progenitors suppressed tumour growth. Thus, the antigen receptor self-reactivity, unique ontogeny, and distinct cancer cell-sensing mechanism distinguish ILTCKs from conventional cytotoxic T cells, and define a new class of tumour-elicited immune response.

PD-1 Blockade in Mismatch Repair-Deficient, Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiation followed by surgical resection of the rectum is a standard treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer. A subset of rectal cancer is caused by a deficiency in mismatch repair. Because mismatch repair-deficient colorectal cancer is responsive to programmed death 1 (PD-1) blockade in the context of metastatic disease, it was hypothesized that checkpoint blockade could be effective in patients with mismatch repair-deficient, locally advanced rectal cancer. METHODS: We initiated a prospective phase 2 study in which single-agent dostarlimab, an anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibody, was administered every 3 weeks for 6 months in patients with mismatch repair-deficient stage II or III rectal adenocarcinoma. This treatment was to be followed by standard chemoradiotherapy and surgery. Patients who had a clinical complete response after completion of dostarlimab therapy would proceed without chemoradiotherapy and surgery. The primary end points are sustained clinical complete response 12 months after completion of dostarlimab therapy or pathological complete response after completion of dostarlimab therapy with or without chemoradiotherapy and overall response to neoadjuvant dostarlimab therapy with or without chemoradiotherapy. RESULTS: A total of 12 patients have completed treatment with dostarlimab and have undergone at least 6 months of follow-up. All 12 patients (100%; 95% confidence interval, 74 to 100) had a clinical complete response, with no evidence of tumor on magnetic resonance imaging, 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron-emission tomography, endoscopic evaluation, digital rectal examination, or biopsy. At the time of this report, no patients had received chemoradiotherapy or undergone surgery, and no cases of progression or recurrence had been reported during follow-up (range, 6 to 25 months). No adverse events of grade 3 or higher have been reported. CONCLUSIONS: Mismatch repair-deficient, locally advanced rectal cancer was highly sensitive to single-agent PD-1 blockade. Longer follow-up is needed to assess the duration of response. (Funded by the Simon and Eve Colin Foundation and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04165772.).

Association of Lateral Pelvic Lymph Nodes with Disease Recurrence and Organ Preservation in Patients with Distal Rectal Adenocarcinoma Treated with Total Neoadjuvant Therapy.

OBJECTIVE: Assess the significance of enlarged lateral lymph nodes (LLN) for disease recurrence, metastasis, and organ preservation in patients with rectal cancer. BACKGROUND: Optimal treatment of rectal adenocarcinoma involving LLN is subject to debate. METHODS: A post hoc analysis of the OPRA trial, a multicenter study of patients with rectal cancer treated with total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) followed by total mesorectal excision or watch-and-wait management. We analyzed the association of visible LLN (LLN+), LLN≥7 mm (short axis) on baseline MRI, and LLN≥4 mm on restaging MRI with recurrence, metastasis, and rectum preservation. RESULTS: At baseline, 57 out of 324 (18%) patients had LLN+. In 30 (53%) of 57 patients with LLN+ on baseline MRI, the LLN disappeared after TNT. Disease recurrence in LLN was rare (3.5% of patients with LLN+ and 0.4% of patients with LLN-). All patients with recurrence in LLN also had distant metastasis. The rate of organ preservation was significantly lower in patients with LLN≥4 mm on restaging MRI (P=0.013). We found no significant differences in rates of local recurrence or metastasis between patients with LLN+ vs. LLN- and in patients with LLN≥7 vs.<7 mm on baseline MRI. LLN dissection was performed in 3 patients; 2 of them died of distant metastasis. CONCLUSIONS: LLN involvement is not associated with disease recurrence or metastasis, but persistence of LLN≥4 mm after TNT is negatively associated with rectum preservation in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer treated with TNT. Dissection of lateral nodes likely benefits few patients.

Assessing Endoscopic Response in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer Treated with Total Neoadjuvant Therapy: Development and Validation of a Highly Accurate Convolutional Neural Network.

BACKGROUND: Rectal tumors display varying degrees of response to total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT). We evaluated the performance of a convolutional neural network (CNN) in interpreting endoscopic images of either a non-complete response to TNT or local regrowth during watch-and-wait surveillance. METHODS: Endoscopic images from stage II/III rectal cancers treated with TNT from 2012 to 2020 at a single institution were retrospectively reviewed. Images were labelled as Tumor or No Tumor based on endoscopy timing (before, during, or after treatment) and the tumor's endoluminal response. A CNN was trained using ResNet-50 architecture. The area under the curve (AUC) was analyzed during training and for two test sets. The main test set included images of tumors treated with TNT. The other contained images of local regrowth. The model's performance was compared to sixteen surgeons and surgical trainees who evaluated 119 images for evidence of tumor. Fleiss' kappa was calculated by respondent experience level. RESULTS: A total of 2717 images from 288 patients were included; 1407 (51.8%) contained tumor. The AUC was 0.99, 0.98, and 0.92 for training, main test, and local regrowth test sets. The model performed on par with surgeons of all experience levels for the main test set. Interobserver agreement was good ( k = 0.71-0.81). All groups outperformed the model in identifying tumor from images of local regrowth. Interobserver agreement was fair to moderate ( k = 0.24-0.52). CONCLUSIONS: A highly accurate CNN matched the performance of colorectal surgeons in identifying a noncomplete response to TNT. However, the model demonstrated suboptimal accuracy when analyzing images of local regrowth.

Anal Adenocarcinoma Treated in the Era of Total Neoadjuvant Therapy and Nonoperative Management.

BACKGROUND: Anal adenocarcinoma bears a treatment strategy unique to other anal cancers. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe oncologic outcomes of total neoadjuvant therapy followed by watch-and-wait approach for anal adenocarcinoma. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis. SETTINGS: This study was conducted at a comprehensive cancer center. PATIENTS: Patients with anal adenocarcinoma treated between 2004 and 2019 were selected. INTERVENTIONS: Fifty-four patients received neoadjuvant therapy and were divided into 2 groups according to their treatment strategy: total neoadjuvant therapy versus single neoadjuvant modality therapy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Organ preservation, tumor regrowth, local failure, distant metastasis rates, recurrence-free survival, and overall survival. RESULTS: This study included 70 patients with anal adenocarcinoma. Fifty-four patients (77%) received neoadjuvant therapy, of whom 30 (42%) received total neoadjuvant therapy and 24 (34%) received single neoadjuvant modality. Twenty-three (33%) patients achieved complete clinical response and were managed by watch-and-wait approach. The proportion of patients able to continue to watch-and-wait approach was higher after receiving total neoadjuvant therapy (60%) compared with single neoadjuvant modality therapy (20%; p = 0.004). A tumor regrowth rate of 22% was observed in the total neoadjuvant therapy group. The 5-year overall survival rate was 70% (95% CI, 59%-83%), including 61% (95% CI, 42%-88%) for the total neoadjuvant therapy and 65% (95% CI, 48%-88%) for the single neoadjuvant modality groups. Colostomy was avoided in 50% of patients who received total neoadjuvant therapy and 83% of watch-and-wait patients. Five-year recurrence-free survival rates of 55% (95% CI, 39%-79%) and 30% (95% CI, 15%-58%) were observed in the total neoadjuvant therapy and single neoadjuvant modality groups. LIMITATIONS: Retrospective nature. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first report in the literature describing the safety and feasibility of nonoperative management for anal adenocarcinoma. Anal adenocarcinoma treated with total neoadjuvant therapy and nonoperative management achieve regrowth rates comparable to those observed in rectal cancer, with oncologic outcomes similar to those of traditional treatment strategies. See Video Abstract . ADENOCARCINOMA ANAL TRATADO EN LA ERA DE LA TERAPIA NEOADYUVANTE TOTAL Y EL TRATAMIENTO NO QUIRRGICO: ANTECEDENTES:El adenocarcinoma anal conlleva una estrategia de tratamiento único para otros cánceres anales.OBJETIVO:Describir los resultados oncológicos de la terapia neoadyuvante total seguida de observar y esperar en adenocarcinoma anal.DISEÑO:Análisis retrospectivo.AJUSTE:Este estudio se llevó a cabo en un centro oncológico integral.PACIENTES:Se seleccionaron pacientes con adenocarcinoma anal tratados entre 2004-2019.INTERVENCIONES:Cincuenta y cuatro pacientes recibieron terapia neoadyuvante y se dividieron en dos grupos según su estrategia de tratamiento: terapia neoadyuvante total versus terapia de modalidad neoadyuvante única.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Preservación de órganos, recurrencia tumoral, falla local, tasas de metástasis a distancia, libre de recurrencia y supervivencia general.RESULTADOS:El estudio incluyó a 70 pacientes con adenocarcinoma anal. Cincuenta y cuatro pacientes (77%) recibieron terapia neoadyuvante, de los cuales 30 (42%) recibieron terapia neoadyuvante total y 24 (34%) recibieron modalidad neoadyuvante única. Veintitrés (33%) pacientes presentaron una respuesta clínica completa y fueron tratados con vigilancia y espera. La proporción de pacientes capaces de continuar en observar y esperar fue mayor después de recibir terapia neoadyuvante total (60%) en comparación con la terapia de modalidad neoadyuvante única (20%) ( p = 0,004). Se observó una tasa de recurrencia tumoral del 22% en el grupo de terapia neoadyuvante total. La tasa de supervivencia general a 5 años fue del 70% (IC95% 59%-83 %), incluido el 61% (IC95% 42%-88%) para la terapia neoadyuvante total y el 65% (IC95% 48%-88%) para grupos de modalidad neoadyuvante única. Se evitó la colostomía en el 50% de los pacientes que recibieron terapia neoadyuvante total y el 83% de los pacientes en observar y esperar. Se observaron tasas de supervivencia libre de recurrencia a cinco años del 55% (IC95% 39%-79%) y del 30% (IC95% 15%-58%) en los grupos de terapia neoadyuvante total y modalidad neoadyuvante única, respectivamente.LIMITACIONES:Diseño retrospectivo.CONCLUSIONES:Este es el primer informe en la literatura que describe la seguridad y viabilidad del tratamiento no quirúrgico del adenocarcinoma anal. El adenocarcinoma anal tratado con terapia neoadyuvante total y manejo no quirúrgico logra tasas de recurrencia comparables a las observadas en el cáncer de recto, con resultados oncológicos similares a las estrategias de tratamientos tradicionales. (Traducción-Dr. Fidel Ruiz Healy ).

Tumour deposits are independently associated with recurrence in colon cancer.

AIM: Tumour deposits are focal aggregates of cancer cells in pericolic fat and mesentery, distinct from vessels, nerves and lymphatics. Their presence upstages lymph node negative patients but is ignored in lymph node positive patients. We investigated the clinicopathological factors associated with tumour deposits and their impact on recurrence in lymph node positive and negative patients. METHOD: Clinicopathological variables were collected from the medical records of patients with Stage I-III colon cancer who underwent resection in 2017-2019. Pathology was reviewed by a gastrointestinal pathologist. Patients with rectal cancer, metastasis, and concurrent malignancy were excluded. RESULTS: Tumour deposits were noted in 69 (9%) of 770 patients. They were associated with the presence of lymph node metastasis, advanced T category, poorly differentiated tumours, microsatellite stable subtype and lymphovascular and perineural invasion (p < 0.05). The presence of tumour deposits (hazard ratio 2.48, 95% CI 1.49-4.10) and of lymph node metastasis (hazard ratio 3.04, 95% CI 1.72-5.37) were independently associated with decreased time to recurrence. There was a weak correlation (0.27) between the number of tumour deposits and the number of positive lymph nodes. CONCLUSION: Tumour deposits are associated with more advanced disease and high-risk pathological features. The presence of tumour deposits and lymph node metastasis were found to be independent risk factors for decreased time to recurrence. A patient with both lymph node metastasis and tumour deposits is more than twice as likely to have recurrence compared with a patient with only lymph node metastasis. Tumour deposits independently predict recurrence and should not be ignored in lymph node positive patients.

The RECOURSE Study: Long-term Oncologic Outcomes Associated With Robotically Assisted Minimally Invasive Procedures for Endometrial, Cervical, Colorectal, Lung, or Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess long-term outcomes with robotic versus laparoscopic/thoracoscopic and open surgery for colorectal, urologic, endometrial, cervical, and thoracic cancers. BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive surgery provides perioperative benefits and similar oncological outcomes compared with open surgery. Recent robotic surgery data have questioned long-term benefits. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis of cancer outcomes based on surgical approach was conducted based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines using Pubmed, Scopus, and Embase. Hazard ratios for recurrence, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS) were extracted/estimated using a hierarchical decision tree and pooled in RevMan 5.4 using inverse-variance fixed-effect (heterogeneity nonsignificant) or random effect models. RESULTS: Of 31,204 references, 199 were included (7 randomized, 23 database, 15 prospective, 154 retrospective studies)-157,876 robotic, 68,007 laparoscopic/thoracoscopic, and 234,649 open cases. Cervical cancer: OS and DFS were similar between robotic and laparoscopic [1.01 (0.56, 1.80), P =0.98] or open [1.18 (0.99, 1.41), P =0.06] surgery; 2 papers reported less recurrence with open surgery [2.30 (1.32, 4.01), P =0.003]. Endometrial cancer: the only significant result favored robotic over open surgery [OS; 0.77 (0.71, 0.83), P <0.001]. Lobectomy: DFS favored robotic over thoracoscopic surgery [0.74 (0.59, 0.93), P =0.009]; OS favored robotic over open surgery [0.93 (0.87, 1.00), P =0.04]. Prostatectomy: recurrence was less with robotic versus laparoscopic surgery [0.77 (0.68, 0.87), P <0.0001]; OS favored robotic over open surgery [0.78 (0.72, 0.85), P <0.0001]. Low-anterior resection: OS significantly favored robotic over laparoscopic [0.76 (0.63, 0.91), P =0.004] and open surgery [0.83 (0.74, 0.93), P =0.001]. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term outcomes were similar for robotic versus laparoscopic/thoracoscopic and open surgery, with no safety signal or indication requiring further research (PROSPERO Reg#CRD42021240519).

Lymph Node Metastases and Associated Recurrence-Free Survival in Microsatellite Stable and Unstable Colon Cancer.

BACKGROUND: In contrast to microsatellite stable (MSS) colon cancer, predictors of lymph node metastases and their association with recurrence are not well-defined in microsatellite instability (MSI) colon cancer. METHODS: A cohort of nonmetastatic colon cancer patients undergoing surgery between 2015 and 2021 were evaluated for predictors of lymph node metastases (LNMs) and their association with recurrence-free survival (RFS). RESULTS: Of 1466 patients included in the analyses, 361 (25 %) had MSI. Compared with MSS, MSI was associated with earlier stage, fewer LNMs in the patients with N1 or N2 disease, and fewer high-risk features. Compared with the T3-T4 MSS patients, the odds ratios for LNM were 0.52 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.38-0.71) for the T3-T4 MSI patients, 0.27 (95% CI, 0.38-0.71) for the T1-T2 MSS patients, and 0.15 (95 % CI, 0.08-0.26) for the T1-T2 MSI patients. In both groups, LNMs were associated with T category, patient age, and venous, lymphatic, or perineural invasion. In the MSS patients, LNMs were additionally associated with patient sex and histologic grade. Compared with the MSS patients, the MSI patients with N0 and N1 disease had a better 3-year RFS. However, the MSI patients with N2 disease had a lower rate of 3-year RFS than the MSS patients (hazard ratio, 19.75 vs 4.49). CONCLUSIONS: In MSI colon cancer, LNMs are 50 % less prevalent, but the factors associated with LNM are like those in MSS colon cancer. The improved prognosis traditionally associated with early-stage MSI colon cancers dissipates with four or more LNMs. These findings should be taken into consideration by clinicians selecting the most appropriate course of treatment for MSI colon cancer.

MRI Assessment of Extramural Venous Invasion Before and After Total Neoadjuvant Therapy for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer and Its Association with Disease-Free and Overall Survival.

BACKGROUND: Extramural venous invasion (EMVI) on baseline MRI is associated with poor prognosis in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. This study investigated the association of persistent EMVI after total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) (chemoradiotherapy and systemic chemotherapy) with survival. METHODS: Baseline MRI, post-TNT MRI, and surgical pathology data from 175 patients with locally advanced rectal cancer who underwent TNT and total mesorectal excision between 2010 and 2017 were retrospectively analyzed for evidence of EMVI. Two radiologists assessed EMVI status with disagreement adjudicated by a third. Pathologic EMVI status was assessed per departmental standards. Cox regression models evaluated the associations between EMVI and disease-free and overall survival. RESULTS: EMVI regression on both post-TNT MRI and surgical pathology was associated with disease-free survival (hazard ratio, 0.17; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.04-0.64) and overall survival (hazard ratio, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.02-0.68). In an exploratory analysis of 35 patients with EMVI on baseline MRI, only six had EMVI on pathology compared with 18 on post-TNT MRI; these findings were not associated (p = 0.2). Longer disease-free survival was seen with regression on both modalities compared with remaining positive. Regression on pathology alone, independent of MRI EMVI status, was associated with similar improvements in survival. CONCLUSIONS: Baseline EMVI is associated with poor prognosis even after TNT. EMVI regression on surgical pathology is common even with persistent EMVI on post-TNT MRI. EMVI regression on surgical pathology is associated with improved DFS, while the utility of post-TNT MRI EMVI persistence for decision-making and prognosis remains unclear.

Comparison of Robotic, Laparoscopic, and Open Resections of Nonmetastatic Colon Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic resection for colon cancer has not been associated with improvements in oncological outcomes in comparison to open resection. Robotic resections are associated with increased lymph node yield and radicality of mesenteric resection in patients with right-sided tumors. It is unclear whether lymph node yield is higher in robotic resections in other parts of the colon and whether higher lymph node yield is associated with improved survival. OBJECTIVE: To compare survival rates between robotic, laparoscopic, and open resections in a large cohort of patients with nonmetastatic colon cancer. DESIGN: This is a retrospective observational study. SETTING: A single comprehensive cancer center. PATIENTS: Patients who underwent resection of nonmetastatic primary colon cancer between January 2006 and December 2018. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Univariable and multivariable models were used to identify predictors of disease-free and overall survival. Lymph node yield and perioperative outcomes were compared between operative approaches. RESULTS: There were 2398 patients who met the inclusion criteria: 699 (29%) underwent open, 824 (34%) underwent laparoscopic, and 875 (36%) underwent robotic resection. The median follow-up was 3.8 years (45.4 months). Robotic surgery was associated with higher lymph node yield and radicality of mesenteric resection. On multivariable analysis, the surgical approach was not associated with a difference in disease-free or overall survival. Minimally invasive colectomy was associated with fewer complications and shorter length of stay in comparison to open surgery. In a direct comparison between the 2 minimally invasive approaches, robotic colectomy was associated with fewer complications, shorter length of stay, and lower conversion rate than laparoscopy. LIMITATIONS: This was a single-center retrospective study. CONCLUSIONS: Our data indicate that the 3 surgical approaches are similarly effective in treating primary resectable colon cancer and that differences in outcomes are observed primarily in the early postoperative period. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/C115 . COMPARACIN DE RESECCIONES ROBTICAS, LAPAROSCPICAS Y ABIERTAS DE CNCER DE COLON NO METASTSICO: ANTECEDENTES:La resección laparoscópica para el cáncer de colon no se ha asociado con mejoras en los resultados oncológicos en comparación con la resección abierta. Las resecciones robóticas se asocian con un mayor rendimiento de los ganglios linfáticos y la radicalidad de la resección mesentérica en pacientes con tumores del lado derecho. No está claro si la cosecha ganglionar es mayor en las resecciones robóticas en otras partes del colon y si un mayor rendimiento de los ganglios linfáticos se asocia con una mejor supervivencia.OBJETIVO:Comparar las tasas de supervivencia entre resecciones robóticas, laparoscópicas y abiertas en una gran cohorte de pacientes con cáncer de colon no metastásico.DISEÑO:Este es un estudio observacional retrospectivo.ESCENARIO:Este estudio se realizó en un único centro oncológico integral.PACIENTES:Pacientes que se sometieron a resección de cáncer de colon primario no metastásico entre enero de 2006 y diciembre de 2018.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Se utilizaron modelos univariables y multivariables para identificar predictores de supervivencia libre de enfermedad y global. La cosecha ganglionar y los resultados perioperatorios se compararon entre los abordajes quirúrgicos.RESULTADOS:Hubo 2398 pacientes que cumplieron con los criterios de inclusión: 699 (29%) se sometieron a cirugía abierta, 824 (34%) se sometieron a resección laparoscópica y 875 (36%) se sometieron a resección robótica. La mediana de seguimiento fue de 3,8 años (45,4 meses). La cirugía robótica se asoció con una mayor cosecha ganglionar y la radicalidad de la resección mesentérica. En el análisis multivariable, el abordaje quirúrgico no se asoció con una diferencia en la supervivencia general o libre de enfermedad. La colectomía mínimamente invasiva se asoció con menos complicaciones y una estancia más corta en comparación con la cirugía abierta. En una comparación directa entre los dos enfoques mínimamente invasivos, la colectomía robótica se asoció con menos complicaciones, una estancia más corta y una tasa de conversión más baja que la laparoscopia.LIMITACIONES:Este fue un estudio retrospectivo de un solo centro.CONCLUSIONES:Nuestros datos indican que los tres enfoques quirúrgicos son igualmente efectivos en el tratamiento del cáncer de colon resecable primario y que las diferencias en los resultados se observan principalmente en el período posoperatorio temprano. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/C115 . (Traducción-Dr. Felipe Bellolio ).

Adoption of Organ Preservation and Surgeon Variability for Patients with Rectal Cancer Does Not Correlate with Worse Survival.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Watch-and-wait is variably adopted by surgeons and the impact of this on outcomes is unknown. We compared the disease-free survival and organ preservation rates of locally advanced rectal cancer patients treated by expert colorectal surgeons at a comprehensive cancer center. METHODS: This study included retrospective data on patients diagnosed with stage II/III rectal adenocarcinoma from January 2013 to June 2017 who initiated neoadjuvant therapy (either with chemoradiation, chemotherapy, or a combination of both) and were treated by an expert colorectal surgeon. RESULTS: Overall, 444 locally advanced rectal cancer patients managed by five surgeons were included. Tumor distance from the anal verge, type of neoadjuvant therapy, and organ preservation rates varied by treating surgeon. There was no difference in disease-free survival after stratifying by the treating surgeon (p = 0.2). On multivariable analysis, neither the type of neoadjuvant therapy nor the treating surgeon was associated with disease-free survival. CONCLUSIONS: While neoadjuvant therapy type and organ preservation rates varied among surgeons, there were no meaningful differences in disease-free survival. These data suggest that among expert colorectal surgeons, differing thresholds for selecting patients for watch-and-wait do not affect survival.

Technical feasibility of salvage endoscopic submucosal dissection after chemoradiation for locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The standard treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer is chemoradiation (CRT) followed by proctectomy and adjuvant chemotherapy. However, there is an emerging role for nonsurgical management after CRT or total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) consisting of CRT and neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) after CRT or TNT for rectal cancer, termed "salvage ESD," may be a viable nonsurgical option for carefully selected patients. We aimed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of salvage ESD. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of cases of salvage ESD for locally advanced rectal cancer and standard ESD for rectal tumors without prior CRT from July 2018 to August 2020 at our institution was performed. Clinical factors and imaging, procedural, and pathology results were collected and compared. RESULTS: Twelve salvage ESD cases were compared with 27 standard ESD cases. Before CRT, 83.3% of lesions in the salvage ESD group were initially clinically staged as T3. The en-bloc resection rates were 92.7% and 91.7% (P = 1.00) and R0 resection rates 66.7% and 75.0% (P = .55) for the standard and salvage groups, respectively. In the salvage ESD group, no adverse events were observed, and 75.0% of the adenocarcinomas in the salvage ESD group had morphologically changed to hyperplasia or adenoma after CRT, with no identifiable lesions greater than T1 tumor depth. CONCLUSIONS: Salvage ESD for locally advanced rectal cancer is technically feasible with low adverse event rates. There may be a diagnostic role in salvage ESD in assessing pathologic response to CRT and a possible therapeutic role in resection of residual lesions with the potential to avoid surgery.

Predictors of operative difficulty in robotic low anterior resection for rectal cancer.

AIM: This study evaluates the relationship of tumour and anatomical features with operative difficulty in robotic low anterior resection performed by four experienced surgeons in a high-volume colorectal cancer practice. METHODS: Data from 382 patients who underwent robotic low anterior resection by four expert surgeons between January 2016 and June 2019 were included in the analysis. Operating time was used as a measure of operative difficulty. Univariate and multivariate mixed models were used to identify associations between baseline characteristics and operating time, with surgeon as a random effect, thereby controlling for variability in surgeon speed and proficiency. In an exploratory analysis, operative difficulty was defined as conversion to laparotomy, a positive margin or an incomplete mesorectum. RESULTS: Median operating time was 4.28 h (range 1.95-11.33 h) but varied by surgeon from 3.45 h (1.95-6.10 h) to 5.93 h (3.33-11.33 h) (P < 0.001). Predictors of longer operating time in multivariate analysis were male sex, higher body mass index, neoadjuvant radiotherapy, low tumour height, greater sacral height and larger mesorectal area at the S5 vertebral level. Conversion occurred in two cases (0.5%), and incomplete mesorectum and positive margins were found in nine (2.4%) and 19 (5.0%) patients, respectively. Neoadjuvant radiotherapy and larger pelvic outlet were the only characteristics associated with the exploratory measure of difficulty. CONCLUSION: Predicting operative difficulty based on easy to identify, preoperative radiological and clinical variables is feasible in robotic anterior resection.

Anorectal Mucosal Melanoma in the Era of Immune Checkpoint Inhibition: Should We Change Our Surgical Management Paradigm?

BACKGROUND: The advent of immune checkpoint inhibition therapy has dramatically improved survival in patients with skin melanoma. Survival outcomes after resection of anorectal melanoma treated with immune checkpoint inhibition have not been reported. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare survival outcomes following surgical resection of anorectal melanoma between patients who received immune checkpoint inhibition and patients who did not. DESIGN: This study is a retrospective analysis of data from a prospectively maintained database. SETTING: This study was conducted at a comprehensive cancer center. PATIENTS: Patients who underwent surgery for anorectal melanoma between 2006 and 2017 were included. They were stratified according to the use of immune checkpoint inhibition. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes measured were overall and disease-specific survival. RESULTS: Of the 47 patients included in the analysis, 29 (62%) received immune checkpoint inhibition therapy. Twenty-two (76%) of the 29 patients received immune checkpoint inhibition after detection of metastasis or disease progression rather than in the neoadjuvant or adjuvant setting. Overall survival did not differ significantly between patients who received immune checkpoint inhibition therapy and patients who did not (median, 52 and 20 months; 5-year rate, 41% vs 35%; p = 0.25). Disease-specific survival also did not differ significantly. Our analysis did not identify any clinical or pathological features associated with response to immune checkpoint inhibition therapy or with survival. LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by its relatively small sample and retrospective design and by the heterogeneous treatment regimen in the immune checkpoint inhibition group. CONCLUSIONS: Immune checkpoint inhibition therapy by itself does not appear to improve survival in patients who undergo resection or excision of anorectal melanoma. Combinations of immune checkpoint inhibition with other therapeutic modalities warrant further investigation. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B499. MELANOMA DE LA MUCOSA ANORRECTAL EN LA ERA DE LOS INHIBIDORES DEL PUNTO DE CONTROL INMUNOLÓGICO: ¿DEBEMOS DE CAMBIAR NUESTRO PARADIGMA DEL MANEJO QUIRÚRGICO: El advenimiento de la terapia de los inhibidores del punto de control inmunológico, han mejorado dramáticamente la supervivencia en pacientes con melanoma de piel. No se han informado los resultados de supervivencia después de la resección del melanoma anorrectal, tratado con inhibidores del punto de control inmunológico.Comparar los resultados de supervivencia después de la resección quirúrgica de melanoma anorrectal entre pacientes que recibieron y no recibieron inhibidores del punto de control inmunológico.Análisis retrospectivo de una base de datos mantenida prospectivamente.Centro oncológico integral.Pacientes que se sometieron a cirugía por melanoma anorrectal entre 2006 y 2017. Los pacientes fueron estratificados según el uso de inhibidores del punto de control inmunológico.Supervivencia global y específica de la enfermedad.De los 47 pacientes incluidos en el análisis, 29 (62%) recibieron terapia de inhibidores del punto de control inmunológico. Veintidós (76%) de los 29 pacientes recibieron inhibidores del punto de control inmunológico después de la detección de metástasis o progresión de la enfermedad, en vez de administración adyuvante o neoadyuvante. La supervivencia global no varió significativamente entre los pacientes que recibieron o no recibieron terapia de inhibidores del punto de control inmunológico (mediana, 52 y 20 meses, respectivamente; tasa a 5 años, 41% frente a 35%, respectivamente; p = 0,25). La supervivencia específica de la enfermedad tampoco varió significativamente. Nuestro análisis no identificó ninguna característica clínica o patológica, asociada con la respuesta a la terapia de inhibidores del punto de control inmunológico o con la supervivencia.Muestra relativamente pequeña y diseño retrospectivo. Régimen de tratamiento heterogéneo en el grupo de inhibidores del punto de control inmunológico.La terapia por sí sola, de inhibidores del punto de control inmunológico, no parece mejorar la supervivencia en pacientes que se someten a resección o escisión de melanoma anorrectal. Las combinaciones de inhibidores del punto de control inmunológico con otras modalidades terapéuticas, merecen una mayor investigación. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B499. (Traducción-Dr. Fidel Ruiz Healy).

Primary Tumor-Related Complications and Salvage Outcomes in Patients with Metastatic Rectal Cancer and an Untreated Primary Tumor.

BACKGROUND: For rectal cancer with unresectable metastases, current practice favors omitting interventions directed at the primary tumor in asymptomatic patients. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the proportion of patients with primary tumor-related complications, characterize salvage outcomes, and measure survival in patients with metastatic rectal cancer who did not undergo upfront intervention for their primary tumor. DESIGN: This is a retrospective analysis. SETTING: This study was conducted at a comprehensive cancer center. PATIENTS: Patients who presented between January 1, 2008, and December 31, 2015, with synchronous stage IV rectal cancer, an unresected primary tumor, and no prior primary tumor-directed intervention were selected. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcome measured was the rate of primary tumor-related complications in the cohort that did not receive any primary tumor-directed intervention. The Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression analysis were used to determine whether complications are associated with survival. RESULTS: The cohort comprised 358 patients with a median age of 56 years (22-92). Median follow-up was 26 months (range, 1-93 months). Among the 168 patients (46.9%) who eventually underwent elective resection of the primary tumor, the surgery was performed with curative intent in 66 patients (18.4%) and preemptive intent in 102 patients (28.5%). Of the 190 patients who did not undergo an upfront or elective intervention for the primary tumor, 68 (35.8%) experienced complications. Nonsurgical intervention for complications was attempted in 34 patients with an overall success rate of 61.8% (21/34). Surgical intervention was performed in 47 patients (including 13 patients for whom nonsurgical intervention failed): diversion in 26 patients and resection in 21 patients. Of those 47 patients, 42 (89.4%) ended up with a colostomy or ileostomy. LIMITATIONS: This study was conducted at a single center. CONCLUSION: A significant proportion of patients with metastatic rectal cancer and untreated primary tumor experience primary tumor-related complications. These patients should be followed closely, and preemptive intervention (resection, diversion, or radiation) should be considered if the primary tumor progresses despite systemic therapy. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B400. COMPLICACIONES RELACIONADAS CON EL TUMOR PRIMARIO Y RESULTADOS DE RESCATE EN PACIENTES CON CÁNCER DE RECTO METASTÁSICO Y UN TUMOR PRIMARIO NO TRATADO: Para el cáncer de recto con metástasis no resecables, la práctica actual favorece la omisión de las intervenciones dirigidas al tumor primario en pacientes asintomáticos.Determinar la proporción de pacientes con complicaciones relacionadas con el tumor primario, caracterizar los resultados de rescate y medir la supervivencia en pacientes con cáncer rectal metastásico que no se sometieron a una intervención inicial para su tumor primario.Análisis retrospectivo.Centro oncológico integral.Pacientes que se presentaron entre el 1 de enero de 2008 y el 31 de diciembre de 2015 con cáncer de recto en estadio IV sincrónico, un tumor primario no resecado y sin intervención previa dirigida al tumor primario.Tasa de complicaciones relacionadas con el tumor primario en la cohorte que no recibió ninguna intervención dirigida al tumor primario. Se utilizó el método de Kaplan-Meier y el análisis de regresión de Cox para determinar si las complicaciones están asociadas con la supervivencia.La cohorte estuvo compuesta por 358 pacientes con una mediana de edad de 56 años (22-92). La mediana de seguimiento fue de 26 meses (rango, 1 a 93 meses). Entre los 168 pacientes (46,9%) que finalmente se sometieron a resección electiva del tumor primario, la cirugía se realizó con intención curativa en 66 pacientes (18,4%) y con intención preventiva en 102 pacientes (28,5%). De los 190 pacientes que no se sometieron a una intervención inicial o electiva para el tumor primario, 68 (35,8%) experimentaron complicaciones. Se intentó una intervención no quirúrgica para las complicaciones en 34 pacientes con una tasa de éxito global del 61,8% (21 de 34). La intervención quirúrgica se realizó en 47 pacientes (incluidos 13 pacientes en los que falló la intervención no quirúrgica): derivación en 26 pacientes y resección en 21 pacientes. De esos 47 pacientes, 42 (89,4%) terminaron con una colostomía o ileostomía.Único centro.Una proporción significativa de pacientes con cáncer de recto metastásico y primario no tratado experimentan complicaciones relacionadas con el tumor primario. Se debe hacer un seguimiento estrecho de estos pacientes y considerar la posibilidad de una intervención preventiva (resección, derivación o radiación) si el tumor primario progresa a pesar de la terapia sistémica. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B400.

Type of recurrence is associated with disease-free survival after salvage surgery for locally recurrent rectal cancer.

PURPOSE: To compare the characteristics and outcomes of rectal cancer patients with local recurrence at a perianastomotic site (PA), a surgical field (SF) site, or in lateral lymph nodes (LLN). METHODS: A total of 114 consecutive patients who underwent surgery for recurrent, non-metastatic rectal cancer at a single comprehensive cancer center between 1997 and 2012 were grouped on the basis of radiographic assessment of type of recurrence: PA, 76 (67%) patients; SF, 25 (22%) patients; LLN, 13 (11%) patients. Demographic, clinical, and pathological features were compared between the three groups, as were disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Recurrence type was associated with positive circumferential margin in the primary resection (PA, 4 [6%]; SF, 4 [19%]; LLN, 3 [25%]; P = 0.027), prior neoadjuvant therapy for the primary tumor (PA, 57 [75%]; SF, 18 [72%]; LLN, 4 [31%]; P = 0.007), and location of the primary tumor in the upper rectum (PA, 33 [45%]; SF, 5 [23%]; LLN, 1 [8%]; P < 0.001). Patients with PA had longer median DFS (PA, 5.1 years; SF, 1.5 years; LLN, 1.2 years; P = 0.036). There was a non-significant trend toward longer OS and higher rates of R0 resection for PA. CONCLUSION: Type of recurrence after salvage surgery for locally recurrent rectal cancer is associated with longer DFS in patients with PA recurrence.

Comparative analysis of the Memorial Sloan Kettering Bowel Function Instrument and the Low Anterior Resection Syndrome Questionnaire for assessment of bowel dysfunction in rectal cancer patients after low anterior resection.

AIM: Neoadjuvant therapy and total mesorectal excision (TME) for rectal cancer are associated with bowel dysfunction symptoms known as low anterior resection syndrome (LARS). Our study compared the only two validated instruments-the LARS Questionnaire (LARS-Q) and the Memorial Sloan Kettering Bowel Function Instrument (MSK-BFI)-in rectal cancer patients undergoing sphincter-preserving TME. METHODS: One hundred and ninety patients undergoing sphincter-preserving TME for Stage I-III rectal cancer completed the MSK-BFI and LARS-Q simultaneously at a median time of 12 (range 1-43) months after restoration of bowel continuity. Associations between the MSK-BFI total/subscale scores and the LARS-Q score were investigated using Spearman rank correlation (r s ). Discriminant validity for the two questionnaires was assessed, and the questionnaires were compared with the European Quality of Life Instrument. RESULTS: Major LARS was identified in 62% of patients. The median MSK-BFI scores for no LARS, minor LARS and major LARS were 76.5, 70 and 57, respectively. We found a strong association between MSK-BFI and LARS-Q (r s -0.79). The urgency/soilage subscale (r s -0.7) and the frequency subscale (rs -0.68) of MSK-BFI strongly correlated with LARS-Q. Low correlation was observed between the MSK-BFI diet subscale and LARS-Q (r s -0.39). On multivariate analysis, both questionnaires showed worse bowel function in patients with distal tumours. A low to moderate correlation with the European Quality of Life Instrument was observed for both questionnaires. CONCLUSIONS: The MSK-BFI and LARS-Q showed good correlation and similar discriminant validity. As the LARS-Q is easier to complete, it may be considered the preferred tool to screen for bowel dysfunction.

Patient-Reported Bowel Function in Patients With Rectal Cancer Managed by a Watch-and-Wait Strategy After Neoadjuvant Therapy: A Case-Control Study.

BACKGROUND: A watch-and-wait strategy is a nonoperative alternative to sphincter-preserving surgery for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer who achieve a clinical complete response after neoadjuvant therapy. There are limited data about bowel function for patients undergoing this organ-preservation approach. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare bowel function in patients with rectal cancer managed with a watch-and-wait approach with bowel function in patients who underwent sphincter-preserving surgery (total mesorectal excision). DESIGN: This was a retrospective case-control study using patient-reported outcomes. SETTINGS: The study was conducted at a comprehensive cancer center. PATIENTS: Twenty-one patients underwent a watch-and-wait approach and were matched 1:1 with 21 patients from a pool of 190 patients who underwent sphincter-preserving surgery, based on age, sex, and tumor distance from the anal verge. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Bowel function was measured using the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Bowel Function Instrument. RESULTS: Patients in the watch-and-wait arm had better bowel function on the overall scale (median total score, 76 vs 55; p < 0.001) and on all of the subscales, with the greatest difference on the urgency/soilage subscale (median score, 20 vs 12; p < 0.001). LIMITATIONS: The study was limited by its retrospective design, small sample size, and temporal variability between surgery and time of questionnaire completion. CONCLUSIONS: A watch-and-wait strategy correlated with overall better bowel function when compared with sphincter-preserving surgery using a comprehensive validated bowel dysfunction tool. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B218. FUNCIÓN EVACUATORIA INFORMADA POR PACIENTES EN CÁNCER RECTAL MANEJADO CON UNA ESTRATEGIA DE OBSERVAR Y ESPERAR DESPUÉS DE LA TERAPIA NEOADYUVANTE: UN ESTUDIO DE CASOS Y CONTROLES: Observar y esperar es una alternativa no operativa a la cirugía de preservación del esfínter para pacientes con cáncer rectal localmente avanzado que logran una respuesta clínica completa después de la terapia neoadyuvante. Hay datos limitados sobre la función evacuatoria en pacientes sometidos a este abordaje para preservación de órganos.Evaluar la función evacuatoria en pacientes con cáncer rectal manejados con observar y esperar comparado a pacientes sometidos a cirugía de preservación de esfínteres (escisión mesorrectal total).Estudio retrospectivo de casos y controles utilizando resultados reportados por pacientes.Centro especializado oncológico.21 pacientes se sometieron a observar y esperar y se compararon con 21 pacientes de un grupo de 190 pacientes que se sometieron a cirugía de preservación de esfínteres controlando por edad, sexo y la distancia del tumor al borde anal.Función evacuatoria utilizando un instrumento de valoración del Centro de Cáncer Memorial Sloan Kettering.Los pacientes de observar y esperar demostraron mejor función evacuatoria en la escala general (puntuación total media, 76 versus 55; p <0,001) y en todas las subescalas, con la mayor diferencia en la subescala de urgencia / ensuciamiento fecal (puntuación media, 20 versus 12; p <0,001).Diseño retrospectivo, numero de muestra pequeño y variabilidad temporal entre la cirugía y el tiempo de finalización del cuestionario.Observar y esperar se correlacionó con mejor función evacuatoria en general en comparación con la cirugía de preservación del esfínter utilizando una herramienta integral validada para la disfunción evacuatoria. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B218. (Traducción-Dr. Adrián Ortega).

Diagnostic Modalities in Gastrointestinal Bleeding.

A variety of diagnostic modalities is available to assist in the evaluation of patients presenting with acute gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding. This article reviews some older technologies like colonoscopy, nuclear scintigraphy, and conventional angiography and will also review the newest additions to the lower GI bleeding diagnostic toolbox, which are video capsule endoscopy and computed tomography (CT) angiography. The management algorithm used at a given institution depends on the available expertise and resources.