Characteristics of Mismatch Repair-Deficient Colon Cancer in Relation to Mismatch Repair Protein Loss, Hypermethylation Silencing, and Constitutional and Biallelic Somatic Mismatch Repair Gene Pathogenic Variants.

BACKGROUND: Mismatch repair-deficient colon cancer is heterogeneous. Differentiating inherited constitutional variants from somatic genetic alterations and gene silencing is important for surveillance and genetic counseling. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the extent to which the underlying mechanism of loss of mismatch repair influences molecular and clinicopathologic features of microsatellite instability-high colon cancer. DESIGN: This is a retrospective analysis. SETTINGS: This study was conducted at a comprehensive cancer center. PATIENTS: Patients with microsatellite instability-high colon cancer of stage I, II, or III were included. INTERVENTION: Patients underwent a curative surgical resection. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcome measures were hypermethylation of the MLH1 promoter, biallelic inactivation, constitutional pathogenic variants, and loss of specific mismatch repair proteins. RESULTS: Of the 157 identified tumors with complete genetic analysis, 66% had hypermethylation of the MLH1 promoter, 18% had constitutional pathogenic variants, (Lynch syndrome), 11% had biallelic somatic mismatch repair gene pathogenic variants, and 6% had unexplained high microsatellite instability. The distribution of mismatch repair loss was as follows: MLH1 and PMS2 co-loss, 79% of the tumors; MSH2 and MSH6 co-loss, 10%; MSH6 alone, 3%; PMS2 alone, 2%; other combinations, 2%; no loss, 2%. Tumor mutational burden was lowest in MLH1- and PMS2-deficient tumors. MSH6-deficient tumors had the lowest levels of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes, lowest MSI scores, and fewest frameshift deletions. Patients with MLH1 promoter hypermethylation were significantly more likely to be older and female and to have right-sided colon lesions than patients with biallelic inactivation. Mutation was the most prevalent second hit in tumors with biallelic inactivation and tumors of patients with Lynch syndrome. LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by potential selection or referral bias, missing data for some patients, and relatively small sizes of some subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical characteristics of mismatch repair-deficient colon cancer vary with the etiology of microsatellite instability, and its molecular characteristics vary with the affected mismatch repair protein. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B984 . CARACTERSTICAS DEL CNCER DE COLON CON DEFICIENCIA EN LA REPARACIN DE ERRORES DE EMPAREJAMIENTO EN RELACIN CON LA PRDIDA DE PROTENAS MMR, SILENCIAMIENTO DE LA HIPERMETILACIN Y LAS VARIANTES PATGENAS SOMTICAS DE GENES MMR CONSTITUCIONAL Y BIALLICO: ANTECEDENTES:El cáncer de colon deficiente en la reparación de errores de emparejamiento es heterogéneo. La diferenciación de las variantes constitucionales heredadas de las alteraciones genéticas somáticas y el silenciamiento de genes es importante para la vigilancia y el asesoramiento genético.OBJETIVO:Determinar hasta qué punto el mecanismo subyacente de pérdida de reparación de desajustes influye en las características moleculares y clinicopatológicas del cáncer de colon con alta inestabilidad de microsatélites.DISEÑO:Análisis retrospectivo.ESCENARIO:Centro integral de cáncer.PACIENTES:Pacientes con cáncer de colon con inestabilidad de microsatélites alta en estadio I, II, o III.INTERVENCIÓN:Resección quirúrgica con intención curativa.PRINCIPALES RESULTADOS Y MEDIDAS:Hipermetilación del promotor MLH1, inactivación bialélica, variante patógena constitucional y pérdida de proteínas específicas reparadoras de desajustes.RESULTADOS:De los 157 tumores identificados con un análisis genético completo, el 66 % tenía hipermetilación del promotor MLH1, el 18 % tenía una variante patogénica constitucional (síndrome de Lynch), el 11 % tenía variantes patogénicas somáticas bialélicas de algún gen MMR y el 6 % tenía una alta inestabilidad de microsatélites sin explicación. La distribución de la pérdida según la proteína de reparación del desajuste fue la siguiente: pérdida conjunta de MLH1 y PMS2, 79 % de los tumores; co-pérdida de MSH2 y MSH6, 10%; MSH6 solo, 3%; PMS2 solo, 2%; otras combinaciones, 2%; sin pérdida, 2%. La carga mutacional del tumor fue más baja en los tumores deficientes en MLH1 y PMS2. Los tumores con deficiencia de MSH6 tenían los niveles más bajos de linfocitos infiltrantes de tumores, las puntuaciones más bajas del sensor de IMS y la menor cantidad de deleciones por cambio de marco. Los pacientes con hipermetilación del promotor MLH1 tenían significativamente más probabilidades de ser mayores y mujeres y de tener lesiones en el colon derecho que los pacientes con inactivación bialélica. La mutación fue el segundo golpe más frecuente en tumores con inactivación bialélica y tumores de pacientes con síndrome de Lynch.LIMITACIONES:Sesgo potencial de selección o referencia, datos faltantes para algunos pacientes y tamaños relativamente pequeños de algunos subgrupos.CONCLUSIONES:Las características clínicas del cáncer de colon deficiente en reparación de desajustes varían con la etiología de la inestabilidad de microsatélites, y sus características moleculares varían con la proteína de reparación de desajustes afectada. Vea Resumen de video en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B984 . (Traducción-Dr. Felipe Bellolio ).

Deep Learning-Based Model for Identifying Tumors in Endoscopic Images From Patients With Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer Treated With Total Neoadjuvant Therapy.

BACKGROUND: A barrier to the widespread adoption of watch-and-wait management for locally advanced rectal cancer is the inaccuracy and variability of identifying tumor response endoscopically in patients who have completed total neoadjuvant therapy (chemoradiotherapy and systemic chemotherapy). OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to develop a novel method of identifying the presence or absence of a tumor in endoscopic images using deep convolutional neural network-based automatic classification and to assess the accuracy of the method. DESIGN: In this prospective pilot study, endoscopic images obtained before, during, and after total neoadjuvant therapy were grouped on the basis of tumor presence. A convolutional neural network was modified for probabilistic classification of tumor versus no tumor and trained with an endoscopic image set. After training, a testing endoscopic imaging set was applied to the network. SETTINGS: The study was conducted at a comprehensive cancer center. PATIENTS: Images were analyzed from 109 patients who were diagnosed with locally advanced rectal cancer between December 2012 and July 2017 and who underwent total neoadjuvant therapy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcomes were accuracy of identifying tumor presence or absence in endoscopic images measured as area under the receiver operating characteristic for the training and testing image sets. RESULTS: A total of 1392 images were included; 1099 images (468 of no tumor and 631 of tumor) were for training and 293 images (151 of no tumor and 142 of tumor) for testing. The area under the receiver operating characteristic for training and testing was 0.83. LIMITATIONS: The study had a limited number of images in each set and was conducted at a single institution. CONCLUSIONS: The convolutional neural network method is moderately accurate in distinguishing tumor from no tumor. Further research should focus on validating the convolutional neural network on a large image set. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B959 . MODELO BASADO EN APRENDIZAJE PROFUNDO PARA IDENTIFICAR TUMORES EN IMGENES ENDOSCPICAS DE PACIENTES CON CNCER DE RECTO LOCALMENTE AVANZADO TRATADOS CON TERAPIA NEOADYUVANTE TOTAL: ANTECEDENTES:Una barrera para la aceptación generalizada del tratamiento de Observar y Esperar para el cáncer de recto localmente avanzado, es la imprecisión y la variabilidad en la identificación de la respuesta tumoral endoscópica, en pacientes que completaron la terapia neoadyuvante total (quimiorradioterapia y quimioterapia sistémica).OBJETIVO:Desarrollar un método novedoso para identificar la presencia o ausencia de un tumor en imágenes endoscópicas utilizando una clasificación automática basada en redes neuronales convolucionales profundas y evaluar la precisión del método.DISEÑO:Las imágenes endoscópicas obtenidas antes, durante y después de la terapia neoadyuvante total se agruparon en base de la presencia del tumor. Se modificó una red neuronal convolucional para la clasificación probabilística de tumor versus no tumor y se entrenó con un conjunto de imágenes endoscópicas. Después del entrenamiento, se aplicó a la red un conjunto de imágenes endoscópicas de prueba.ENTORNO CLINICO:El estudio se realizó en un centro oncológico integral.PACIENTES:Analizamos imágenes de 109 pacientes que fueron diagnosticados de cáncer de recto localmente avanzado entre diciembre de 2012 y julio de 2017 y que se sometieron a terapia neoadyuvante total.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE VALORACION:La precisión en la identificación de la presencia o ausencia de tumores en imágenes endoscópicas medidas como el área bajo la curva de funcionamiento del receptor para los conjuntos de imágenes de entrenamiento y prueba.RESULTADOS:Se incluyeron mil trescientas noventa y dos imágenes: 1099 (468 sin tumor y 631 con tumor) para entrenamiento y 293 (151 sin tumor y 142 con tumor) para prueba. El área bajo la curva operativa del receptor para entrenamiento y prueba fue de 0,83.LIMITACIONES:El estudio tuvo un número limitado de imágenes en cada conjunto y se realizó en una sola institución.CONCLUSIÓN:El método de la red neuronal convolucional es moderadamente preciso para distinguir el tumor de ningún tumor. La investigación adicional debería centrarse en validar la red neuronal convolucional en un conjunto de imágenes mayor. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B959 . (Traducción -Dr. Fidel Ruiz Healy ).

A Dynamic Clinical Calculator for Estimating Conditional Recurrence-Free Survival After Total Neoadjuvant Therapy for Rectal Cancer and Either Surgery or Watch-and-Wait Management.

Importance: The risk of recurrence in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer has historically been determined after surgery, relying on pathologic variables. A growing number of patients are being treated without surgery, and their risk of recurrence needs to be calculated differently. Objective: To develop a dynamic calculator for estimating the probability of recurrence-free survival (RFS) in patients with rectal cancer who undergo total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) (induction systemic chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy) and either surgery or watch-and-wait management. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study included patients who presented with stage II or III rectal cancer between June 1, 2009, and March 1, 2015, at a comprehensive cancer center. Conditional modeling was incorporated into a previously validated clinical calculator to allow the probability of RFS to be updated based on whether the patient remained in watch-and-wait management or underwent delayed surgery. Data were analyzed from November 2021 to March 2022. Exposure: TNT followed by immediate surgery or watch-and-wait management with the possibility of delayed surgery. Main Outcomes and Measures: RFS, concordance index, calibration curves. Results: Of the 302 patients in the cohort, 204 (68%) underwent surgery within 3 months from TNT completion (median [range] age, 51 [22-82] years; 78 [38%] women), 54 (18%) underwent surgery more than 3 months from TNT completion (ie, delayed surgery; median [range] age, 62 [31-87] years; 30 [56%] female), and 44 (14%) remained in watch-and-wait management as of April 21, 2021 (median [range] age, 58 [32-89] years; 16 [36%] women). Among patients who initially opted for watch-and-wait management, migration to surgery due to regrowth or patient choice occurred mostly within the first year following completion of TNT, and RFS did not differ significantly whether surgery was performed 3.0 to 5.9 months (73%; 95% CI, 52%-92%) vs 6.0 to 11.9 months (71%; 95% CI, 51%-99%) vs more than 12.0 months (70%; 95% CI, 49%-100%) from TNT completion (P = .70). RFS for patients in the watch-and-wait cohort at 12 months from completion of TNT more closely resembled patients who had undergone surgery and had a pathologic complete response than the watch-and-wait cohort at 3 months from completion of TNT. Accordingly, model performance improved over time, and the concordance index increased from 0.62 (95% CI, 0.53-0.71) at 3 months after TNT to 0.66 (95% CI, 0-0.75) at 12 months. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of patients with rectal cancer, the clinical calculator reliably estimated the likelihood of RFS for patients who underwent surgery immediately after TNT, patients who underwent delayed surgery after entering watch-and-wait management, and patients who remained in watch-and-wait management. Delayed surgery following attempted watch-and-wait did not appear to compromise oncologic outcomes. The risk calculator provided conditional survival estimates at any time during surveillance and could help physicians counsel patients with rectal cancer about the consequences of alternative treatment pathways and thereby support informed decisions that incorporate patients' preferences.

Survival After Induction Chemotherapy and Chemoradiation Versus Chemoradiation and Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) improves tumor response in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) patients compared to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy alone. The effect of TNT on patient survival has not been fully investigated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective case series of patients with LARC at a comprehensive cancer center. Three hundred and eleven patients received chemoradiotherapy (chemoRT) as the sole neoadjuvant treatment and planned adjuvant chemotherapy, and 313 received TNT (induction fluorouracil and oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy followed by chemoradiotherapy in the neoadjuvant setting). These patients then underwent total mesorectal excision or were entered in a watch-and-wait protocol. The proportion of patients with complete response (CR) after neoadjuvant therapy (defined as pathological CR or clinical CR sustained for 2 years) was compared by the χ2 test. Disease-free survival (DFS), local recurrence-free survival, distant metastasis-free survival, and overall survival were assessed by Kaplan-Meier analysis and log-rank test. Cox regression models were used to further evaluate DFS. RESULTS: The rate of CR was 20% for chemoRT and 27% for TNT (P=.05). DFS, local recurrence-free survival, metastasis-free survival, and overall survival were no different. Disease-free survival was not associated with the type of neoadjuvant treatment (hazard ratio [HR] 1.3; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.93-1.80; P = .12). CONCLUSIONS: Although TNT does not prolong survival than neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus intended postoperative chemotherapy, the higher response rate associated with TNT may create opportunities to preserve the rectum in more patients with LARC.

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.