Concordance of MRI With Pathology for Primary Staging of Rectal Cancer in Routine Clinical Practice: A Single Institution Experience.

PURPOSE: MRI is the preferred imaging modality for primary staging of rectal cancer, used to guide treatment. Patients identified with clinical stage I disease receive upfront surgical resection; those with clinical stage II or greater undergo upfront neoadjuvant therapy. Although clinical under-/over-staging may have consequences for patients and presents opportunities for organ preservation, the correlation between clinical and pathologic staging in routine clinical practice within a single institute has not been fully established. METHODS: This retrospective, Institutional Review Board-approved study, conducted at a National Cancer Institute-Designated Comprehensive Cancer Center with a multi-disciplinary rectal cancer disease center, included patients undergoing rectal MRI for primary staging January 1, 2018-August 30, 2020. Data collection included patient demographics, initial clinical stage via MRI report, pathologic diagnosis, pathologic stage, and treatment. The primary outcome was concordance of overall clinical and pathologic staging. Secondary outcomes included reasons for mismatched staging. RESULTS: A total 105 rectal adenocarcinoma patients (64 males, mean age 57 ± 12.7 years) had staging MRI followed by surgical resection. A total of 28 patients (27%) had mismatched under-/over- staging. Ten patients (10%) were understaged with mismatched T stage group (clinical stage I, pathologic stage II), five (5%) were understaged with mismatched N stage group (clinical stage I, pathologic stage III), and 13 (12%) were overstaged (clinical stage II-III, pathologic stage 0-I). Treatment matched concordance between clinical and pathologic stages was 86%. CONCLUSION: MRI for primary rectal cancer staging has high concordance with pathology. Future studies to assess strategies for reducing clinically relevant understaging would be beneficial.

Management of Peritoneal Disease in Colorectal Cancer.

Colorectal cancer with peritoneal involvement is traditionally recognized as having a poor prognosis, with treatment initially limited to palliative systemic chemotherapy alone. The introduction of cytoreductive surgery (CRS) in combination with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy drastically altered the course of this disease entity and has demonstrated improvements in survival outcomes. Recent evidence has shown benefit of CRS but did not show benefit of HIPEC. Under the guidance of a multidisciplinary team and for appropriately selected patients, CRS is a key component of treatment that can positively alter the course of disease outcomes for patients with peritoneal involvement.

Survival Outcomes for Malignant Peritoneal Mesothelioma at Academic Versus Community Hospitals.

BACKGROUND: Malignant peritoneal mesothelioma is a rare disease with poor outcomes. Cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy is the cornerstone of therapy. We aim to compare outcomes of malignant peritoneal mesothelioma treated at academic versus community hospitals. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study using the National Cancer Database to identify patients with malignant peritoneal mesothelioma from 2004 to 2016. Patients were divided according to treating facility type: academic or community. Outcomes were assessed using log-rank tests, Cox proportional-hazard modeling, and Kaplan-Meier survival statistics. RESULTS: In total, 2682 patients with malignant peritoneal mesothelioma were identified. A total of 1272 (47.4%) were treated at an academic facility and 1410 (52.6%) were treated at a community facility. Five hundred forty-six (42.9%) of patients at academic facilities underwent debulking or radical surgery compared to 286 (20.2%) at community facilities. Three hundred sixty-six (28.8%) of patients at academic facilities received chemotherapy on the same day as surgery compared to 147 (10.4%) of patients at community facilities. Unadjusted 5-year survival was 29.7% (95% CI 26.7-32.7) for academic centers compared to 18.3% (95% CI 16.0-20.7) for community centers. In multivariable analysis, community facility was an independent predictor of increased risk of death (HR: 1.19, 95% CI 1.08-1.32, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate better survival outcomes for malignant peritoneal mesothelioma treated at academic compared to community facilities. Patients at academic centers underwent surgery and received chemotherapy on the same day as surgery more frequently than those at community centers, suggesting that malignant peritoneal mesothelioma patients may be better served at experienced academic centers.

Cytoreductive Surgery and HIPEC in an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Program: A Feasibility Study.

BACKGROUND: Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) have historically been associated with high morbidity given the physiologic insult of an extensive operation. Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) pathways have been successful in improving postoperative outcomes for many procedures but have not been well studied in these cases. We examined the feasibility and effect of ERAS pathway implementation for patients undergoing CRS/HIPEC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis who underwent CRS/HIPEC between October 2015 to September 2018 were identified. Patient characteristics, disease pathology, and perioperative outcome data were obtained. Primary outcomes were hospital length of stay (LOS), 30-d readmissions, renal dysfunction, and complications. RESULTS: Of the 31 patients who were included, 11 (35.5%) patients underwent CRS/HIPEC prior to the implementation of the ERAS pathway, and 20 (64.5%) patients underwent CRS/HIPEC according to the ERAS guidelines. There were no significant differences in the baseline clinical or pathologic characteristics between groups. There was a significant decrease in LOS with ERAS pathway management from 9 d to 6 d (P = 0.002). No patients from either cohort experienced acute kidney injury. There was no significant difference in 30-d readmission rates or complications. CONCLUSIONS: In this feasibility study, ERAS pathway utilization significantly decreased postoperative LOS for patients undergoing CRS/HIPEC, without evidence of increased complications or readmissions. ERAS programs should be considered for integration into future CRS/HIPEC protocols.