Rivaroxaban vs placebo for extended antithrombotic prophylaxis after laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer.

The clinical benefit of extended prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism (VTE) after laparoscopic surgery for cancer is unclear. The efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants for this indication are unexplored. PROphylaxis of venous thromboembolism after LAParoscopic Surgery for colorectal cancer Study II (PROLAPS II) was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, investigator-initiated, superiority study aimed at assessing the efficacy and safety of extended prophylaxis with rivaroxaban after laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer. Consecutive patients who had laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer were randomized to receive rivaroxaban (10 mg once daily) or a placebo to be started at 7 ± 2 days after surgery and given for the subsequent 3 weeks. All patients received antithrombotic prophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin from surgery to randomization. The primary study outcome was the composite of symptomatic objectively confirmed VTE, asymptomatic ultrasonography-detected deep vein thrombosis (DVT), or VTE-related death at 28 ± 2 days after surgery. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding. Patient recruitment was prematurely closed due to study drug expiry after the inclusion of 582 of the 646 planned patients. A primary study outcome event occurred in 11 of 282 patients in the placebo group compared with 3 of 287 in the rivaroxaban group (3.9 vs 1.0%; odds ratio, 0.26; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.07-0.94; log-rank P = .032). Major bleeding occurred in none of the patients in the placebo group and 2 patients in the rivaroxaban group (incidence rate 0.7%; 95% CI, 0-1.0). Oral rivaroxaban was more effective than placebo for extended prevention of VTE after laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer without an increase in major bleeding. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT03055026.

Bowel preparation for elective colorectal resection: multi-treatment machine learning analysis on 6241 cases from a prospective Italian cohort.

BACKGROUND: Current evidence concerning bowel preparation before elective colorectal surgery is still controversial. This study aimed to compare the incidence of anastomotic leakage (AL), surgical site infections (SSIs), and overall morbidity (any adverse event, OM) after elective colorectal surgery using four different types of bowel preparation. METHODS: A prospective database gathered among 78 Italian surgical centers in two prospective studies, including 6241 patients who underwent elective colorectal resection with anastomosis for malignant or benign disease, was re-analyzed through a multi-treatment machine-learning model considering no bowel preparation (NBP; No. = 3742; 60.0%) as the reference treatment arm, compared to oral antibiotics alone (oA; No. = 406; 6.5%), mechanical bowel preparation alone (MBP; No. = 1486; 23.8%), or in combination with oAB (MoABP; No. = 607; 9.7%). Twenty covariates related to biometric data, surgical procedures, perioperative management, and hospital/center data potentially affecting outcomes were included and balanced into the model. The primary endpoints were AL, SSIs, and OM. All the results were reported as odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). RESULTS: Compared to NBP, MBP showed significantly higher AL risk (OR 1.82; 95% CI 1.23-2.71; p = .003) and OM risk (OR 1.38; 95% CI 1.10-1.72; p = .005), no significant differences for all the endpoints were recorded in the oA group, whereas MoABP showed a significantly reduced SSI risk (OR 0.45; 95% CI 0.25-0.79; p = .008). CONCLUSIONS: MoABP significantly reduced the SSI risk after elective colorectal surgery, therefore representing a valid alternative to NBP.

Completion total mesorectal excision after neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy and local excision for rectal cancer.

AIM: Local excision (LE) in selected cases after neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy (RCT) for locally advanced rectal cancer in clinically complete or major responders has been recently reported as an alternative to standard radical resection. Completion total mesorectal excision (cTME) is generally performed when high-risk pathological features are found in LE surgical specimens. The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence of residual tumour and lymph node metastases after cTME in patients previously treated by RCT + LE. The secondary aims were to quantify the rate of postoperative morbidity and mortality and to evaluate the long-term oncological outcome of this group of patients. METHODS: All patients treated from 2007 to 2020 by LE for locally advanced rectal cancer with a clinically complete or major response to RCT who had a subsequent cTME for high-risk pathological factors (ypT >1 and/or TRG >2 and/or positive margins) were included in this multicentre retrospective study. Pathological data, postoperative short-term morbidity (classified according to Clavien-Dindo) and mortality and oncological long-term outcome after cTME were recorded in a database. Statistical analysis was performed using Wizard for iOS version 1.9.31. RESULTS: A total of 47 patients were included in the study. The rate of R0 resection was 95.7%, and a sphincter-saving procedure was performed in 37 patients (78.7%), with a protective stoma rate of 78.4%. In 28 cases (59.6%), it was possible to perform a minimally invasive approach. A residual tumour (pT and/or pN) on cTME specimens was found in 21 cases (44.7%). The rate of lymph node metastases was 12.8%. The overall short-term (within 30 days) postoperative morbidity was 34%, but grade >2 postoperative complications occurred in only nine patients (19.1%), with a reoperation rate of 6.4%. No short-term postoperative deaths occurred. At a median follow-up of 57 months (range: 21-174), the long-term stoma-free rate was 70.2%, and the actuarial 5-year overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS) and local control (LC) were 86.7%, 88.9% and 95.7%, respectively. CONCLUSION: When patients exhibit high-risk pathological factors after RCT + LE, cTME should be suggested due to the high risk of residual tumour or lymph node involvement (44.7%). The results after cTME in terms of the rate of R0 resection, sphincter-saving procedure, postoperative morbidity and mortality and long-term oncological outcome seem to be acceptable and do not represent a contraindication to use LE as a first-step treatment in patients with major or complete clinical response after RCT.

Oligo-metastatic neoPlasms from the gastro-intestinal tract: iDentIfiCaTIon of cliNical and molecular drivers: the PREDICTION study.

BACKGROUND: Metastatic disease in tumors originating from the gastrointestinal tract can exhibit varying degrees of tumor burden at presentation. Some patients follow a less aggressive disease course, characterized by a limited number of metastatic sites, referred to as "oligo-metastatic disease" (OMD). The precise biological characteristics that define the oligometastatic behavior remain uncertain. In this study, we present a protocol designed to prospectively identify OMD, with the aim of proposing novel therapeutic approaches and monitoring strategies. METHODS: The PREDICTION study is a monocentric, prospective, observational investigation. Enrolled patients will receive standard treatment, while translational activities will involve analysis of the tumor microenvironment and genomic profiling using immunohistochemistry and next-generation sequencing, respectively. The first primary objective (descriptive) is to determine the prevalence of biological characteristics in OMD derived from gastrointestinal tract neoplasms, including high genetic concordance between primary tumors and metastases, a significant infiltration of T lymphocytes, and the absence of clonal evolution favoring specific driver genes (KRAS and PIK3CA). The second co-primary objective (analytic) is to identify a prognostic score for true OMD, with a primary focus on metastatic colorectal cancer. The score will comprise genetic concordance (> 80%), high T-lymphocyte infiltration, and the absence of clonal evolution favoring driver genes. It is hypothesized that patients with true OMD (score 3+) will have a lower rate of progression/recurrence within one year (20%) compared to those with false OMD (80%). The endpoint of the co-primary objective is the rate of recurrence/progression at one year. Considering a reasonable probability (60%) of the three factors occurring simultaneously in true OMD (score 3+), using a significance level of α = 0.05 and a test power of 90%, the study requires a minimum enrollment of 32 patients. DISCUSSION: Few studies have explored the precise genetic and biological features of OMD thus far. In clinical settings, the diagnosis of OMD is typically made retrospectively, as some patients who undergo intensive treatment for oligometastases develop polymetastatic diseases within a year, while others do not experience disease progression (true OMD). In the coming years, the identification of true OMD will allow us to employ more personalized and comprehensive strategies in cancer treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT05806151.

Protective ileostomy creation after anterior resection of the rectum: Shared decision-making or still subjective?

AIM: The choice of whether to perform protective ileostomy (PI) after anterior resection (AR) is mainly guided by risk factors (RFs) responsible for the development of anastomotic leakage (AL). However, clear guidelines about PI creation are still lacking in the literature and this is often decided according to the surgeon's preferences, experiences or feelings. This qualitative study aims to investigate, by an open-ended question survey, the individual surgeon's decision-making process regarding PI creation after elective AR. METHOD: Fifty four colorectal surgeons took part in an electronic survey to answer the questions and describe what usually led their decision to perform PI. A content analysis was used to code the answers. To classify answers, five dichotomous categories (In favour/Against PI, Listed/Unlisted RFs, Typical/Atypical, Emotions/Non-emotions, Personal experience/No personal experience) have been developed. RESULTS: Overall, 76% of surgeons were in favour of PI creation and 88% considered listed RFs in the question of whether to perform PI. Atypical answers were reported in 10% of cases. Emotions and personal experience influenced surgeons' decision-making process in 22% and 49% of cases, respectively. The most frequently considered RFs were the distance of the anastomosis from the anal verge (96%), neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (88%), a positive intraoperative leak test (65%), blood loss (37%) and immunosuppression therapy (35%). CONCLUSION: The indications to perform PI following rectal cancer surgery lack standardization and evidence-based guidelines are required to inform practice. Until then, expert opinion can be helpful to assist the decision-making process in patients who have undergone AR for adenocarcinoma.

Short- and long-term outcomes in ypT2 rectal cancer patients after neoadjuvant therapy and local excision: a multicentre observational study.

BACKGROUND: Although local excision (LE) after neoadjuvant treatment (NT) has achieved encouraging oncological outcomes in selected patients, radical surgery still remains the rule when unfavorable pathology occurs. However, there is a risk of undertreating patients not eligible for radical surgery. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of patients with pathological incomplete response (ypT2) in a multicentre cohort of patients undergoing LE after NT and to compare them with ypT0-is-1 rectal cancers. METHODS: From 2010 to 2019, all patients who underwent LE after NT for rectal cancer were identified from five institutional retrospective databases. After excluding 12 patients with ypT3 tumors, patients with ypT2 tumors were compared to patients with ypT0-is-1 tumors). The endpoints of the study were early postoperative and long-term oncological outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 177 patients (132 males, 45 females, median age 70 [IQR 16] years) underwent LE following NT. There were 46 ypT2 patients (39 males, 7 females, median age 72 [IQR 18.25] years) and 119 ypT0-is-1 patients (83 males, 36 females, median age 69 [IQR 15] years). Patients with pathological incomplete response (ypT2) were frailer than the ypT0-is-1 patients (mean Charlson Comorbidity Index 6.15 ± 2.43 vs. 5.29 ± 1.99; p = 0.02) and there was a significant difference in the type of NT used for the two groups (long- course radiotherapy: 100 (84%) vs. 23 (63%), p = 0.006; short-course radiotherapy: 19 (16%) vs. 17 (37%), p = 0.006). The postoperative rectal bleeding rate (13% vs. 1.7%; p = 0.008), readmission rate (10.9% vs. 0.8%; p = 0.008) and R1 resection rate (8.7% vs. 0; p = 0.008) was significantly higher in the ypT2 group. Recurrence rates were comparable between groups (5% vs. 13%; p = 0.15). Five-year overall survival was 91.3% and 94.9% in the ypT2 and ypT0-is-1 groups, respectively (p = 0.39), while 5-year cancer specific survival was 93.4% in the ypT2 group and 94.9% in the ypT0-is-1 group (p = 0.70). No difference was found in terms of 5-year local recurrence free-survival (p = 0.18) and 5-year distant recurrence free-survival (p = 0.37). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with ypT2 tumors after NT and LE have a higher risk of late-onset rectal bleeding and positive resection margins than patients with complete or near complete response. However, long-term recurrence rates and survival seem comparable.

Rectal Sparing Approach After Neoadjuvant Therapy in Patients with Rectal Cancer: The Preliminary Results of the ReSARCh Trial.

BACKGROUND: Rectum-preservation for locally advanced rectal cancer has been proposed as an alternative to total mesorectal excision (TME) in patients with major (mCR) or complete clinical response (cCR) after neoadjuvant therapy. The purpose of this study was to report on the short-term outcomes of ReSARCh (Rectal Sparing Approach after preoperative Radio- and/or Chemotherapy) trial, which is a prospective, multicenter, observational trial that investigated the role of transanal local excision (LE) and watch-and-wait (WW) as integrated approaches after neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer. METHODS: Patients with mid-low rectal cancer who achieved mCR or cCR after neoadjuvant therapy and were fit for major surgery were enrolled. Clinical response was evaluated at 8 and 12 weeks after completion of chemoradiotherapy. Treatment approach, incidence, and reasons for subsequent TME were recorded. RESULTS: From 2016 to 2019, 160 patients were enrolled; mCR or cCR at 12 weeks was achieved in 64 and 96 of patients, respectively. Overall, 98 patients were managed with LE and 62 with WW. In the LE group, Clavien-Dindo 3+ complications occurred in three patients. The rate of cCR increased from 8- to 12-week restaging. Thirty-three (94.3%) of 35 patients with cCR had ypT0-1 tumor. At a median 24 months follow-up, a tumor regrowth was found in 15 (24.2%) patients undergoing WW. CONCLUSIONS: LE for patients achieving cCR or mCR is safe. A 12-week interval from chemoradiotherapy completion to LE is correlated with an increased cCR rate. The risk of ypT > is reduced when LE is performed after cCR.

The impact of anastomotic leak on long-term oncological outcomes after low anterior resection for mid-low rectal cancer: extended follow-up of a randomised controlled trial.

PURPOSE: The impact of anastomotic leaks (AL) on oncological outcomes after low anterior resection for mid-low rectal cancer is still debated. The aim of this study was to evaluate overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and local and distant recurrence in patients with AL following low anterior resection. METHODS: This is an extension of a multicentre RCT (NCT01110798). Kaplan-Meier method and the log-rank test were used to estimate and compare the 3-, 5-, and 10-year OS and DFS, and local and distant recurrence in patients with and without AL. Predictors of OS and DFS were evaluated using the Cox regression analysis as secondary aim. RESULTS: Follow-up was available for 311 patients. Of them, 252 (81.0%) underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and 138 (44.3%) adjuvant therapy. AL occurred in 63 (20.3%) patients. At a mean follow-up of 69.5 ± 31.9 months, 23 (7.4%) patients experienced local recurrence and 49 (15.8%) distant recurrence. The 3-, 5-, and 10-year OS and DFS were 89.2%, 85.3%, and 70.2%; and 80.7%, 75.1%, and 63.5% in patients with AL, and 88.9%, 79.8% and 72.3%; and 83.7, 74.2 and 62.8%, respectively in patients without (p = 0.89 and p = 0.84, respectively). At multivariable analysis, AL was not an independent predictor of OS (HR 0.65, 95%CI 0.34-1.28) and DFS (HR 0.70, 95%CI 0.39-1.25), whereas positive circumferential resection margins and pathological stage impaired both. CONCLUSIONS: In the context of modern multimodal rectal cancer treatment, AL does not affect long-term OS, DFS, and local and distant recurrence in patients with mid-low rectal cancer.

Risk factors for anastomotic leakage after anterior resection for rectal cancer (RALAR study): A nationwide retrospective study of the Italian Society of Surgical Oncology Colorectal Cancer Network Collaborative Group.

AIM: Anastomotic leakage after restorative surgery for rectal cancer shows high morbidity and related mortality. Identification of risk factors could change operative planning, with indications for stoma construction. This retrospective multicentre study aims to assess the anastomotic leak rate, identify the independent risk factors and develop a clinical prediction model to calculate the probability of leakage. METHODS: The study used data from 24 Italian referral centres of the Colorectal Cancer Network of the Italian Society of Surgical Oncology. Patients were classified into two groups, AL (anastomotic leak) or NoAL (no anastomotic leak). The effect of patient-, disease-, treatment- and postoperative outcome-related factors on anastomotic leak after univariable and multivariable analysis was measured. RESULTS: A total of 5398 patients were included, 552 in group AL and 4846 in group NoAL. The overall incidence of leaks was 10.2%, with a mean time interval of 6.8 days. The 30-day leak-related mortality was 2.6%. Sex, body mass index, tumour location, type of approach, number of cartridges employed, weight loss, clinical T stage and combined multiorgan resection were identified as independent risk factors. The stoma did not reduce the leak rate but significantly decreased leak severity and reoperation rate. A nomogram with a risk score (RALAR score) was developed to predict anastomotic leak risk at the end of resection. CONCLUSIONS: While a defunctioning stoma did not affect the leak risk, it significantly reduced its severity. Surgeons should recognize independent risk factors for leaks at the end of rectal resection and could calculate a risk score to select high-risk patients eligible for protective stoma construction.

ERAS program adherence-institutionalization, major morbidity and anastomotic leakage after elective colorectal surgery: the iCral2 multicenter prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs influence morbidity rates and length of stay after colorectal surgery (CRS), and may also impact major complications and anastomotic leakage rates. A prospective multicenter observational study to investigate the interactions between ERAS program adherence and early outcomes after elective CRS was carried out. METHODS: Prospective enrolment of patients submitted to elective CRS with anastomosis in 18 months. Adherence to 21 items of ERAS program was measured upon explicit criteria in every case. After univariate analysis, independent predictors of primary endpoints [major morbidity (MM) and anastomotic leakage (AL) rates] were identified through logistic regression analyses including all significant variables, presenting odds ratios (OR). RESULTS: Institutional ERAS protocol was declared by 27 out of 38 (71.0%) participating centers. Median overall adherence to ERAS program items was 71.4%. Among 3830 patients included in the study, MM and AL rates were 4.7% and 4.2%, respectively. MM rates were independently influenced by intra- and/or postoperative blood transfusions (OR 7.79, 95% CI 5.46-11.10; p < 0.0001) and standard anesthesia protocol (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.48-0.96; p = 0.028). AL rates were independently influenced by male gender (OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.06-2.07; p = 0.021), intra- and/or postoperative blood transfusions (OR 4.29, 95% CI 2.93-6.50; p < 0.0001) and non-standard resections (OR 1.49, 95% CI 1.01-2.22; p = 0.049). CONCLUSIONS: This study disclosed wide room for improvement in compliance to several ERAS program items. It failed to detect any significant association between institutionalization and/or adherence rates to ERAS program with primary endpoints. These outcomes were independently influenced by gender, intra- and postoperative blood transfusions, non-standard resections, and standard anesthesia protocol.

Management and 1-year outcomes of anastomotic leakage after elective colorectal surgery.

PURPOSE: To analyze different types of management and one-year outcomes of anastomotic leakage (AL) after elective colorectal resection. METHODS: All patients with anastomotic leakage after elective colorectal surgery with anastomosis (76/1,546; 4.9%), with the exclusion of cases with proximal diverting stoma, were followed-up for at least one year. Primary endpoints were as follows: composite outcome of one-year mortality and/or unplanned intensive care unit (ICU) admission and additional morbidity rates. Secondary endpoints were as follows: length of stay (LOS), one-year persistent stoma rate, and rate of return to intended oncologic therapy (RIOT). RESULTS: One-year mortality rate was 10.5% and unplanned ICU admission rate was 30.3%. Risk factors of the composite outcome included age (aOR = 1.08 per 1-year increase, p = 0.002) and anastomotic breakdown with end stoma at reoperation (aOR = 2.77, p = 0.007). Additional morbidity rate was 52.6%: risk factors included open versus laparoscopic reoperation (aOR = 4.38, p = 0.03) and ICU admission (aOR = 3.63, p = 0.05). Median (IQR) overall LOS was 20 days (14-26), higher in the subgroup of patients reoperated without stoma. At 1 year, a stoma persisted in 32.0% of patients, higher in the open (41.2%) versus laparoscopic (12.5%) reoperation group (p = 0.04). Only 4 out of 18 patients (22.2%) were able to RIOT. CONCLUSION: Mortality and/or unplanned ICU admission rates after AL are influenced by increasing age and by anastomotic breakdown at reoperation; additional morbidity rates are influenced by unplanned ICU admission and by laparoscopic approach to reoperation, the latter also reducing permanent stoma and failure to RIOT rates. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov # NCT03560180.

Transanal reinforcement of low rectal anastomosis versus protective ileostomy after total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Preliminary results of a randomized clinical trial.

AIM: The study aimed to show if transanal reinforcement of the suture line can prevent anastomotic leakage (AL) after rectal cancer surgery, thus avoiding the need for a covering ileostomy. METHODS: This is a prospective, multicentre, parallel-arm randomized controlled equivalence trial. After standard total mesorectal excision, patients with anastomotic line at 1-3 cm from the dentate line were randomized to have transanal suture reinforcement (TAR group) or protective ileostomy (PI group). RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients had PI, 25 had TAR. The two groups were comparable both for baseline characteristics and intra-operative aspects. Clinically evident AL occurred in four (16%) and five (17.24%) patients of the TAR and PI group, respectively, resulting in a difference of -1.20% (90% CI -17.93, 15.45), while subclinical AL at proctography was absent in 15 (65.22%) and 13 (50%) patients of the TAR and PI groups, respectively, resulting in a difference of 15% (90% CI -7.74 to 38.17). CONCLUSION: Preliminary data suggest that transanal reinforcement of the suture line performed in rectal cancer patients with suture line at 1-3 cm from the dentate line carries a similar (even if not equivalent) AL rate to covering ileostomy, suggesting that a covering ileostomy could be avoided in this selected group of patients. This indication needs to be addressed with future larger trials (clinicaltrials.gov ID number NCT02279771).

ICG fluorescence imaging in colorectal surgery: a snapshot from the ICRAL study group.

BACKGROUND: Fluorescence-guided visualization is a recently proposed technology in colorectal surgery. Possible uses include evaluating perfusion, navigating lymph nodes and searching for hepatic metastases and peritoneal spread. Despite the absence of high-level evidence, this technique has gained considerable popularity among colorectal surgeons due to its significant reliability, safety, ease of use and relatively low cost. However, the actual use of this technique in daily clinical practice has not been reported to date. METHODS: This survey was conducted on April 2020 among 44 centers dealing with colorectal diseases and participating in the Italian ColoRectal Anastomotic Leakage (iCral) study group. Surgeons were approximately equally divided based on geographical criteria from multiple Italian regions, with a large proportion based in public (89.1%) and nonacademic (75.7%) centers. They were invited to answer an online survey to snapshot their current behaviors regarding the use of fluorescence-guided visualization in colorectal surgery. Questions regarding technological availability, indications and techniques, personal approaches and feelings were collected in a 23-item questionnaire. RESULTS: Questionnaire replies were received from 37 institutions and partially answered by 8, as this latter group of centers do not implement fluorescence technology (21.6%). Out of the remaining 29 centers (78,4%), fluorescence is utilized in all laparoscopic colorectal resections by 72.4% of surgeons and only for selected cases by the remaining 27.6%, while 62.1% of respondents do not use fluorescence in open surgery (unless the perfusion is macroscopically uncertain with the naked eye, in which case 41.4% of them do). The survey also suggests that there is no agreement on dilution, dosing and timing, as many different practices are adopted based on personal judgment. Only approximately half of the surgeons reported a reduced leak rate with fluorescence perfusion assessment, but 65.5% of them strongly believe that this technique will become a minimum requirement for colorectal surgery in the future. CONCLUSION: The survey confirms that fluorescence is becoming a widely used technique in colorectal surgery. However, both the indications and methods still vary considerably; furthermore, the surgeons' perceptions of the results are insufficient to consider this technology essential. This survey emphasizes the need for further research to reach recommendations based on solid scientific evidence.

Validation of the standardized index of shape tool to analyze DCE-MRI data in the assessment of neo-adjuvant therapy in locally advanced rectal cancer.

PURPOSE: Standardized index of shape (SIS) tool validation to examine dynamic contrast enhanced-magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) in preoperative chemo-radiation therapy (pCRT) assessment of locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) in order to guide the surgeon versus more or less conservative treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 194 patients (January 2008-November 2020), with III-IV locally advanced rectal cancer and subjected to pCRT were included. Three expert radiologists performed DCE-MRI analysis using SIS tool. Degree of absolute agreement among measurements, degree of consistency among measurements, degree of reliability and level of variability were calculated. Patients with a pathological tumour regression grade (TRG) 1 or 2 were classified as major responders (complete responders have TRG 1). RESULTS: Good significant correlation was obtained between SIS measurements (range 0.97-0.99). The degree of absolute agreement ranges from 0.93 to 0.99, the degree of consistency from 0.81 to 0.9 and the reliability from 0.98 to 1.00 (p value < < 0.001). The variability coefficient ranges from 3.5% to 26%. SIS value obtained to discriminate responders by non-responders a sensitivity of 95.9%, a specificity of 84.7% and an accuracy of 91.8% while to detect complete responders, a sensitivity of 99.2%, a specificity of 63.9% and an accuracy of 86.1%. CONCLUSION: SIS tool is suitable to assess pCRT response both to identify major responders and complete responders in order to guide the surgeon versus more or less conservative treatment.

Colonic J-Pouch or Straight Colorectal Reconstruction After Low Anterior Resection For Rectal Cancer: Impact on Quality of Life and Bowel Function: A Multicenter Prospective Randomized Study.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcomes associated with different bowel reconstruction techniques following anterior resection for rectal cancer are still a matter of debate. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess quality of life and bowel function in patients who underwent colonic J-pouch or straight colorectal anastomosis reconstruction after low anterior resection. DESIGN: Bowel function and quality of life were assessed within a multicenter randomized trial. Questionnaires were administered before the surgery (baseline) and at 6, 12, and 24 months after surgery. SETTINGS: Patients were enrolled by 19 centers. The enrollment started in October 2009 and was stopped in February 2016. The study was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov (Identifier: NCT01110798). PATIENTS: Patients who underwent low anterior resection for primary mid-low rectal cancer and who were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either stapled colonic J-pouch or straight colorectal anastomosis were selected. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes measured were quality of life and bowel function. RESULTS: Of the 379 patients who were evaluable, 312 (82.3%) completed the baseline, 259 (68.3%) the 6-month, 242 (63.9%) the 12-month, and 199 (52.5%) the 24-month assessment. Bowel functioning and quality of life did not significantly differ between arms for almost all domains. The total bowel function score, the urgency, and the stool fractionation scores significantly worsened after surgery and remained impaired over time in both arms (p < 0.0032), whereas constipation improved after surgery but recovered to baseline levels from 1 year onward (p < 0.0036). All patients showed a significant and continuous improvement in emotional functioning (p < 0.0013) and future perspective (p < 0.0001) from baseline to the end of the study. LIMITATIONS: Limitations of the study include missing data, which increased over time; the possibility that some treatments have slightly changed since the study was conducted; and investigators not blind to treatment allocation. CONCLUSION: The findings of this study do not support the routine use of colonic J-pouch reconstruction in patients with rectal cancer who undergo a low anterior resection. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B328. BOLSA J COLÓNICA O RECONSTRUCCIÓN COLORRECTAL RECTA DESPUÉS DE RESECCIÓN ANTERIOR BAJA PARA CÁNCER RECTAL: IMPACTO EN LA CALIDAD DE VIDA Y LA FUNCIÓN INTESTINAL: UN ESTUDIO ALEATORIZADO PROSPECTIVO MULTICÉNTRICO: Los resultados informados por el paciente asociados con diferentes técnicas de reconstrucción intestinal después de la resección anterior para el cáncer de recto aún son tema de debate.Evaluar la calidad de vida y la función intestinal en pacientes que se sometieron a una bolsa en J colónica o reconstrucción de anastomosis colorrectal recta después de una resección anterior baja.La función intestinal y la calidad de vida se evaluaron en un ensayo aleatorizado multicéntrico. Los cuestionarios se administraron antes de la cirugía (basal) y a los 6, 12 y 24 meses después de la cirugía.Los pacientes fueron incluidos en 19 centros. La inscripción comenzó en Octubre de 2009 y se detuvo en Febrero de 2016. El estudio se registró en www.clinicaltrials.gov (Identificador: NCT01110798).Pacientes que se sometieron a resección anterior baja por cáncer rectal primario medio-bajo y que fueron aleatorizados en una proporción de 1: 1 para recibir bolsa J colónica con grapas o anastomosis colorrectal recta.calidad de vida y función intestinal.De los 379 pacientes que fueron evaluables, 312 (82.3%) completaron la evaluación inicial, 259 (68.3%) a los 6 meses, 242 (63.9%) a los 12 meses y 199 (52.5%) a los 24 meses. . El funcionamiento intestinal y la calidad de vida no difirieron significativamente entre los dos grupos en casi todos los dominios. La puntuación total de la función intestinal, la urgencia y las puntuaciones de fraccionamiento de las heces empeoraron significativamente después de la cirugía y continuaron con el tiempo extra en ambos grupos (p <0.0032), mientras que el estreñimiento mejoró después de la cirugía pero se recuperó a los niveles basales a partir de 1 año en adelante (p <0.0036). Todos los pacientes mostraron una mejora significativa y continua en el funcionamiento emocional (p <0.0013) y la perspectiva futura (<0.0001) desde el inicio hasta el final del estudio.Datos faltantes, que aumentaron con el tiempo; la posibilidad de que algunos tratamientos hayan cambiado ligeramente desde que se realizó el estudio; investigadores no cegados a la asignación del tratamiento.Los hallazgos de este estudio no respaldan el uso rutinario de la reconstrucción de la bolsa J colónica en pacientes con cáncer rectal que se someten a una resección anterior baja. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B328. (Traducción-Dr. Yesenia Rojas-Khalil).

International validation of the consensus Immunoscore for the classification of colon cancer: a prognostic and accuracy study.

BACKGROUND: The estimation of risk of recurrence for patients with colon carcinoma must be improved. A robust immune score quantification is needed to introduce immune parameters into cancer classification. The aim of the study was to assess the prognostic value of total tumour-infiltrating T-cell counts and cytotoxic tumour-infiltrating T-cells counts with the consensus Immunoscore assay in patients with stage I-III colon cancer. METHODS: An international consortium of 14 centres in 13 countries, led by the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer, assessed the Immunoscore assay in patients with TNM stage I-III colon cancer. Patients were randomly assigned to a training set, an internal validation set, or an external validation set. Paraffin sections of the colon tumour and invasive margin from each patient were processed by immunohistochemistry, and the densities of CD3+ and cytotoxic CD8+ T cells in the tumour and in the invasive margin were quantified by digital pathology. An Immunoscore for each patient was derived from the mean of four density percentiles. The primary endpoint was to evaluate the prognostic value of the Immunoscore for time to recurrence, defined as time from surgery to disease recurrence. Stratified multivariable Cox models were used to assess the associations between Immunoscore and outcomes, adjusting for potential confounders. Harrell's C-statistics was used to assess model performance. FINDINGS: Tissue samples from 3539 patients were processed, and samples from 2681 patients were included in the analyses after quality controls (700 patients in the training set, 636 patients in the internal validation set, and 1345 patients in the external validation set). The Immunoscore assay showed a high level of reproducibility between observers and centres (r=0·97 for colon tumour; r=0·97 for invasive margin; p<0·0001). In the training set, patients with a high Immunoscore had the lowest risk of recurrence at 5 years (14 [8%] patients with a high Immunoscore vs 65 (19%) patients with an intermediate Immunoscore vs 51 (32%) patients with a low Immunoscore; hazard ratio [HR] for high vs low Immunoscore 0·20, 95% CI 0·10-0·38; p<0·0001). The findings were confirmed in the two validation sets (n=1981). In the stratified Cox multivariable analysis, the Immunoscore association with time to recurrence was independent of patient age, sex, T stage, N stage, microsatellite instability, and existing prognostic factors (p<0·0001). Of 1434 patients with stage II cancer, the difference in risk of recurrence at 5 years was significant (HR for high vs low Immunoscore 0·33, 95% CI 0·21-0·52; p<0·0001), including in Cox multivariable analysis (p<0·0001). Immunoscore had the highest relative contribution to the risk of all clinical parameters, including the American Joint Committee on Cancer and Union for International Cancer Control TNM classification system. INTERPRETATION: The Immunoscore provides a reliable estimate of the risk of recurrence in patients with colon cancer. These results support the implementation of the consensus Immunoscore as a new component of a TNM-Immune classification of cancer. FUNDING: French National Institute of Health and Medical Research, the LabEx Immuno-oncology, the Transcan ERAnet Immunoscore European project, Association pour la Recherche contre le Cancer, CARPEM, AP-HP, Institut National du Cancer, Italian Association for Cancer Research, national grants and the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer.

Radiofrequency Ablation and Microwave Ablation in Liver Tumors: An Update.

This article provides an overview of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and microwave ablation (MWA) for treatment of primary liver tumors and hepatic metastasis. Only studies reporting RFA and MWA safety and efficacy on liver were retained. We found 40 clinical studies that satisfied the inclusion criteria. RFA has become an established treatment modality because of its efficacy, reproducibility, low complication rates, and availability. MWA has several advantages over RFA, which may make it more attractive to treat hepatic tumors. According to the literature, the overall survival, local recurrence, complication rates, disease-free survival, and mortality in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treated with RFA vary between 53.2 ± 3.0 months and 66 months, between 59.8% and 63.1%, between 2% and 10.5%, between 22.0 ± 2.6 months and 39 months, and between 0% and 1.2%, respectively. According to the literature, overall survival, local recurrence, complication rates, disease-free survival, and mortality in patients with HCC treated with MWA (compared with RFA) vary between 22 months for focal lesion >3 cm (vs. 21 months) and 50 months for focal lesion ≤3 cm (vs. 27 months), between 5% (vs. 46.6%) and 17.8% (vs. 18.2%), between 2.2% (vs. 0%) and 61.5% (vs. 45.4%), between 14 months (vs. 10.5 months) and 22 months (vs. no data reported), and between 0% (vs. 0%) and 15% (vs. 36%), respectively. According to the literature, the overall survival, local recurrence, complication rates, and mortality in liver metastases patients treated with RFA (vs. MWA) are not statistically different for both the survival times from primary tumor diagnosis and survival times from ablation, between 10% (vs. 6%) and 35.7% (vs. 39.6), between 1.1% (vs. 3.1%) and 24% (vs. 27%), and between 0% (vs. 0%) and 2% (vs. 0.3%). MWA should be considered the technique of choice in selected patients, when the tumor is ≥3 cm in diameter or is close to large vessels, independent of its size. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Although technical features of the radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and microwave ablation (MWA) are similar, the differences arise from the physical phenomenon used to generate heat. RFA has become an established treatment modality because of its efficacy, reproducibility, low complication rates, and availability. MWA has several advantages over RFA, which may make it more attractive than RFA to treat hepatic tumors. The benefits of MWA are an improved convection profile, higher constant intratumoral temperatures, faster ablation times, and the ability to use multiple probes to treat multiple lesions simultaneously. MWA should be considered the technique of choice when the tumor is ≥3 cm in diameter or is close to large vessels, independent of its size.

Cetuximab, irinotecan and fluorouracile in fiRst-line treatment of immunologically-selected advanced colorectal cancer patients: the CIFRA study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Combination of chemotherapies (fluoropirimidines, oxaliplatin and irinotecan) with biologic drugs (bevacizumab, panitumumab, cetuximab) have improved clinical responses and survival of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). However, patients' selection thorough the identification of predictive factors still represent a challange. Cetuximab (Erbitux®), a chimeric monoclonal antibody binding to the Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR), belongs to the Immunoglobulins (Ig) grade 1 subclass able to elicite both in vitro and in vivo the Antibody-Dependent Cell-mediated Cytotoxicity (ADCC). ADCC is the cytotoxic killing of antibody-coated target cells by immunologic effectors. The effector cells express a receptor for the Fc portion of these antibodies (FcγR); genetic polymorphisms of FcγR modify the binding affinity with the Fc of IgG1. Interestingly, the high-affinity FcγRIIIa V/V is associated with increased ADCC in vitro and in vivo. Thus, ADCC could partially account for cetuximab activity. METHODS/DESIGN: CIFRA is a single arm, open-label, phase II study assessing the activity of cetuximab in combination with irinotecan and fluorouracile in FcγRIIIa V/V patients with KRAS, NRAS, BRAF wild type mCRC. The study is designed with a two-stage Simon model based on a hypothetical higher response rate (+ 10%) of FcγRIIIa V/V patients as compared to previous trials (about 60%) assuming ADCC as one of the possible mechanisms of cetuximab action. The test power is 95%, the alpha value of the I-type error is 5%. With these assumptions the sample for passing the first stage is 14 patients with > 6 responses and the final sample is 34 patients with > 18 responses to draw positive conclusions. Secondary objectives include toxicity, responses' duration, progression-free and overall survival. Furthermore, an associated translational study will assess the patients' cetuximab-mediated ADCC and characterize the tumor microenvironment. DISCUSSION: The CIFRA study will determine whether ADCC contributes to cetuximab activity in mCRC patients selected on an innovative immunological screening. Data from the translational study will support results' interpretation as well as provide new insights in host-tumor interactions and cetuximab activity. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The CIFRA trial (version 0.0, June 21, 2018) has been registered into the NIH-US National Library of Medicine, ClinicalTrials.gov database with the identifier number ( NCT03874062 ).

Diagnostic performance of gadoxetic acid-enhanced liver MRI versus multidetector CT in the assessment of colorectal liver metastases compared to hepatic resection.

BACKGROUND: Imaging is an essential tool in the management of patients with Colorectal cancer (CRC) by helping evaluate number and sites of metastases, determine resectability, assess response to treatment, detect drug toxicities and recurrences. Although multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) is the first tool used for staging and patient's surveillance, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the most reliable imaging modality that allows to assess liver metastases. Our purpose is to compare the diagnostic performance of gadoxetic acid-(Gd-EOB) enhanced liver MRI and contrast-enhanced MDCT in the detection of liver metastasis from colorectal cancer (mCRC). METHODS: One hundred and twenty-eight patients with pathologically proven mCRC (512 liver metastases) underwent Gd-EOB MRI and MDCT imaging. An additional 46 patients without mCRC were included as control subjects. Three radiologists independently graded the presence of liver nodules on a five-point confidence scale. Sensitivity and specificity for the detection of metastases were calculated. Weighted к values were used to evaluate inter-reader agreement of the confidence scale regarding the presence of the lesion. RESULTS: MRI detected 489 liver metastases and MDCT 384. In terms of per-lesion sensitivity in the detection of liver metastasis, all three readers had higher diagnostic sensitivity with Gd-EOB MRI than with MDCT (95.5% vs. 72% reader 1; 90% vs. 72% reader 2; 96% vs. 75% reader 3). Each reader showed a statistical significant difference (p < <.001 at Chi square test). MR imaging showed a higher performance than MDCT in per-patient detection sensitivity (100% vs. 74.2% [p < <.001] reader 1, 98% vs. 73% [p < <.001] reader 2, and 100% vs. 78% [p < <.001] reader 3). In the control group, MRI and MDCT showed similar per-patient specificity (100% vs. 98% [p = 0.31] reader 1, 100% vs. 100% [p = 0.92] reader 2, and 100% vs. 96% [p = 0.047] reader 3). Inter-reader agreement of lesion detection between the three radiologists was moderate to excellent (k range, 0.56-0.86) for Gd-EOB MRI and substantial to excellent for MDCT (k range, 0.75-0.8). CONCLUSION: Gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI performs significantly better in the detection of mCRC, than MDCT, particularly in patients treated with chemotherapy, in subcapsular lesions, and in peribiliary metastases.