Serum Tumor Markers and Outcomes in Patients With Appendiceal Adenocarcinoma.

Importance: Serum tumor markers carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9), and cancer antigen 125 (CA125) have been useful in the management of gastrointestinal and gynecological cancers; however, there is limited information regarding their utility in patients with appendiceal adenocarcinoma. Objective: To assess the association of serum tumor markers (CEA, CA19-9, and CA125) with clinical outcomes and pathologic and molecular features in patients with appendiceal adenocarcinoma. Design, Setting, and Participants: This is a retrospective cohort study at a single tertiary care comprehensive cancer center. The median (IQR) follow-up time was 52 (21-101) months. Software was used to query the MD Anderson internal patient database to identify patients with a diagnosis of appendiceal adenocarcinoma and at least 1 tumor marker measured at MD Anderson between March 2016 and May 2023. Data were analyzed from January to December 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: Association of serum tumor markers with survival in patients with appendiceal adenocarcinoma. Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were also performed to assess associations between clinical factors (serum tumor marker levels, demographics, and patient and disease characteristics) and patient outcomes (overall survival). Results: A total of 1338 patients with appendiceal adenocarcinoma were included, with a median (range) age at diagnosis of 56.5 (22.3-89.6) years. The majority of the patients had metastatic disease (1080 patients [80.7%]). CEA was elevated in 742 of the patients tested (56%), while CA19-9 and CA125 were elevated in 381 patients (34%) and 312 patients (27%), respectively. Individually, elevation of CEA, CA19-9, or CA125 were associated with worse 5-year survival; elevated vs normal was 81% vs 95% for CEA (hazard ratio [HR], 4.0; 95% CI, 2.9-5.6), 84% vs 92% for CA19-9 (HR, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.4-3.4), and 69% vs 93% for CA125 (HR, 4.6; 95% CI, 2.7-7.8) (P < .001 for all). Quantitative evaluation of tumor markers was associated with outcomes. Patients with highly elevated (top 10th percentile) CEA, CA19-9, or CA125 had markedly worse survival, with 5-year survival rates of 59% for CEA (HR, 9.8; 95% CI, 5.3-18.0), 64% for CA19-9 (HR, 6.0; 95% CI, 3.0-11.7), and 57% for CA125 (HR, 7.6; 95% CI, 3.5-16.5) (P < .001 for all). Although metastatic tumors had higher levels of all tumor markers, when restricting survival analysis to 1080 patients with metastatic disease, elevated CEA, CA19-9, or CA125 were all still associated worse survival (HR for CEA, 3.4; 95% CI, 2.5-4.8; P < .001; HR for CA19-9, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.2-2.7; P = .002; and HR for CA125, 3.9; 95% CI, 2.4-6.4; P < .001). Interestingly, tumor grade was not associated with CEA or CA19-9 level, while CA-125 was slightly higher in high-grade tumors relative to low-grade tumors (mean value, 18.3 vs 15.0; difference, 3.3; 95% CI, 0.9-3.7; P < .001). Multivariable analysis identified an incremental increase in the risk of death with an increase in the number of elevated tumor markers, with an 11-fold increased risk of death in patients with all 3 tumor markers elevated relative to those with none elevated. Somatic mutations in KRAS and GNAS were associated with significantly higher levels of CEA and CA19-9. Conclusions and Relevance: In this retrospective study of serum tumor markers in patients with appendiceal adenocarcinoma, CEA, CA19-9, and CA125 were associated with overall survival in appendiceal adenocarcinoma. Given their value, all 3 biomarkers should be included in the initial workup of patients with a diagnosis of appendiceal adenocarcinoma.

Repeat Cytoreduction and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy for Recurrent Mucinous Appendiceal Adenocarcinoma: A Viable Treatment Strategy with Demonstrable Benefit.

INTRODUCTION: Many patients with mucinous appendiceal adenocarcinoma experience peritoneal recurrence despite complete cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). Prior work has demonstrated that repeat CRS/HIPEC can prolong survival in select patients. We sought to validate these findings using outcomes from a high-volume center. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with mucinous appendiceal adenocarcinoma who underwent CRS/HIPEC at MD Anderson Cancer Center between 2004 and 2021 were stratified by whether they underwent CRS/HIPEC for recurrent disease or as part of initial treatment. Only patients who underwent complete CRS/HIPEC were included. Initial and recurrent groups were compared. RESULTS: Of 437 CRS/HIPECs performed for mucinous appendiceal adenocarcinoma, 50 (11.4%) were for recurrent disease. Patients who underwent CRS/HIPEC for recurrent disease were more often treated with an oxaliplatin or cisplatin perfusion (35%/44% recurrent vs. 4%/1% initial, p < 0.001), had a longer operative time (median 629 min recurrent vs. 511 min initial, p = 0.002), and had a lower median length of stay (10 days repeat vs. 13 days initial, p < 0.001). Thirty-day complication and 90-day mortality rates did not differ between groups. Both cohorts enjoyed comparable recurrence free survival (p = 0.82). Compared with patients with recurrence treated with systemic chemotherapy alone, this select cohort of patients undergoing repeat CRS/HIPEC enjoyed better overall survival (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In appropriately selected patients with recurrent appendiceal mucinous adenocarcinoma, CRS/HIPEC can provide survival benefit equivalent to primary CRS/HIPEC and that may be superior to that conferred by systemic therapy alone in select patients. These patients should receive care at a high-volume center in the context of a multidisciplinary team.

The Clinical Significance of CEA, CA19-9, and CA125 in Management of Appendiceal Adenocarcinoma.

Importance: Serum tumor markers CEA, CA19-9, & CA125 have been useful in the management of gastrointestinal and gynecological cancers, however there is limited information regarding their utility in patients with appendiceal adenocarcinoma. Objective: Assessing the association of serum tumor markers (CEA, CA19-9, and CA125) with clinical outcomes, pathologic, and molecular features in patients with appendiceal adenocarcinoma. Design: This is a retrospective study with results reported in 2023. The median follow-up time was 43 months. Setting: Single tertiary care comprehensive cancer center. Participants: Under an approved Institutional Review Board protocol, the Palantir Foundry software system was used to query the MD Anderson internal patient database to identify patients with a diagnosis of appendiceal adenocarcinoma and at least one tumor marker measured at MD Anderson between 2016 and 2023. Results: A total of 1,338 patients with appendiceal adenocarcinoma were included, with a median age of 56.5 years. The majority of the patients had metastatic disease (80.7%). CEA was elevated in more than half of the patients tested (56%), while CA19-9 and CA125 were elevated in 34% and 27%, respectively. Individually, elevation of CEA, CA19-9, or CA125 were associated with worse 5-year survival; 82% vs 95%, 84% vs 92%, and 69% vs 93% elevated vs normal for CEA, CA19-9, and CA125 respectively (all p<0.0001). Quantitative evaluation of tumor markers increased prognostic ability. Patients with highly elevated (top 10th percentile) CEA, CA19-9 or CA125 had markedly worse survival with 5-year survival rates of 59%, 64%, and 57%, respectively (HR vs. normal : 9.8, 6.0, 7.6, all p<0.0001). Although metastatic tumors had higher levels of all tumor markers, when restricting survival analysis to 1080 patients with metastatic disease elevated CEA, CA19-9 or CA125 were all still associated worse survival (HR vs. normal : 3.4, 1.8, 3.9, p<0.0001 for CEA and CA125, p=0.0019 for CA19-9). Interestingly tumor grade was not associated with CEA or CA19-9 level, while CA-125 was slightly higher in high relative to low-grade tumors (18.3 vs. 15.0, p=0.0009). Multivariable analysis identified an incremental increase in the risk of death with an increase in the number of elevated tumor markers, with a 11-fold increased risk of death in patients with all three tumor markers elevated relative to those with none elevated. Mutation in KRAS and GNAS were associated with significantly higher levels of CEA and CA19-9. Conclusions: These findings demonstrate the utility of measuring CEA, CA19-9, and CA125 in the management of appendiceal adenocarcinoma. Given their prognostic value, all three biomarkers should be included in the initial workup of patients diagnosed with appendiceal adenocarcinoma.

Efficacy of Systemic Chemotherapy in Patients With Low-grade Mucinous Appendiceal Adenocarcinoma: A Randomized Crossover Trial.

Importance: Appendiceal adenocarcinoma is a rare tumor, and given the inherent difficulties in performing prospective trials in such a rare disease, there are currently minimal high-quality data to guide treatment decisions, highlighting the need for more preclinical and clinical investigation for this disease. Objective: To prospectively evaluate the effectiveness of fluoropyrimidine-based systemic chemotherapy in patients with inoperable low-grade mucinous appendiceal adenocarcinoma. Design, Setting, and Participants: This open-label randomized crossover trial recruited patients at a single tertiary care comprehensive cancer center from September 2013 to January 2021. The data collection cutoff was May 2022. Enrollment of up to 30 patients was planned. Eligible patients had histological evidence of a metastatic low-grade mucinous appendiceal adenocarcinoma, with radiographic imaging demonstrating the presence of mucinous peritoneal carcinomatosis and were not considered candidates for complete cytoreductive surgery. Key exclusion criteria were concurrent or recent investigational therapy, evidence of bowel obstruction, and use of total parenteral nutrition. Data were analyzed from November 2021 to May 2022. Interventions: Patients were randomized to either 6 months observation followed by 6 months of chemotherapy, or initial chemotherapy followed by observation. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was the percentage difference in tumor growth in treatment and observation groups. Key secondary end points included patient-reported outcomes in the chemotherapy and observation periods, objective response rate, rate of bowel complications, and differences in overall survival (OS). Results: A total of 24 patients were enrolled, with median (range) age of 63 (38 to 82) years, and equal proportion of men and women (eg, 12 men [50%]); all patients had ECOG performance status of 0 or 1. A total of 11 patients were randomized to receive chemotherapy first, and 13 patients were randomized to receive observation first. Most patients (15 patients [63%]) were treated with either fluorouracil or capecitabine as single agent; 3 patients (13%) received doublet chemotherapy (leucovorin calcium [folinic acid], fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin or folinic acid, fluorouracil, and irinotecan hydrochloride), and bevacizumab was added to cytotoxic chemotherapy for 5 patients (21%). Fifteen patients were available to evaluate the primary end point of difference in tumor growth during treatment and observation periods. Tumor growth while receiving chemotherapy increased 8.4% (95% CI, 1.5% to 15.3%) from baseline but was not significantly different than tumor growth during observation (4.0%; 95% CI, -0.1% to 8.0%; P = .26). Of 18 patients who received any chemotherapy, none had an objective response (14 patients [77.8%] had stable disease; 4 patients [22.2%] had progressive disease). Median (range) OS was 53.2 (8.1 to 95.5) months, and there was no significant difference in OS between the observation-first group (76.0 [8.6 to 95.5] months) and the treatment-first group (53.2 [8.1 to 64.1] months; hazard ratio, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.16-2.55; P = .48). Patient-reported quality-of-life metrics identified that during treatment, patients experienced significantly worse fatigue (mean [SD] score, 18.5 [18.6] vs 28.9 [21.3]; P = .02), peripheral neuropathy (mean [SD] score, 6.67 [12.28] vs 38.89 [34.88]; P = .01), and financial difficulty (mean [SD] score, 8.9 [15.2] vs 28.9 [33.0]; P = .001) compared with during observation. Conclusions and Relevance: In this prospective randomized crossover trial of systemic chemotherapy in patients with low-grade mucinous appendiceal adenocarcinoma, patients did not derive clinical benefit from fluorouracil-based chemotherapy, given there were no objective responses, no difference in OS when treatment was delayed 6 months, and no difference in the rate of tumor growth while receiving chemotherapy. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01946854.

Rivaroxaban thromboprophylaxis in ambulatory patients with pancreatic cancer: Results from a pre-specified subgroup analysis of the randomized CASSINI study.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic cancer patients are at risk for venous thromboembolism (VTE); the value of thromboprophylaxis has not been definitively established. METHODS: This trial randomized cancer patients initiating a new regimen and at high risk for VTE (Khorana score ≥2) to rivaroxaban 10 mg or placebo up to day 180. This analysis examined the subset of pancreatic cancer patients. The primary efficacy endpoint was the composite of symptomatic deep-vein thrombosis (DVT), asymptomatic proximal DVT, any pulmonary embolism, and VTE-related death. The primary safety endpoint was International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis-defined major bleeding. RESULTS: In total, 49/1080 (4.5%) patients enrolled had baseline VTE on screening, with higher rates (24/362 [6.6%]) in pancreatic cancer and they were not randomized. Of 841 randomized patients, 273 (32.5%) had pancreatic cancer; 155/273 (57% in each arm) completed the double-blind period. The primary endpoint occurred in 13/135 (9.6%) patients in the rivaroxaban group and in 18/138 (13.0%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.70; 95% CI, 0.34-1.43; P = .328) in up-to-day-180 period and 5/135 (3.7%) patients receiving rivaroxaban and 14/138 (10.1%) receiving placebo in the intervention period (HR = 0.35; 95% CI, 0.13-0.97; P = .034). Major bleeding was similar (2 [1.5%] receiving rivaroxaban and 3 [2.3%] receiving placebo). Correlative biomarker studies demonstrated significant decline in D-dimer (weeks 8 and 16) in patients randomized to rivaroxaban compared to placebo (P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: In ambulatory pancreatic cancer patients, rivaroxaban did not result in significantly lower incidence of VTE or VTE-related death in the 180-day period. During the intervention period, however, rivaroxaban substantially reduced VTE without increasing major bleeding, suggesting benefit of rivaroxaban prophylaxis in this setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT02555878.

Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy for Moderately and Poorly Differentiated Appendiceal Adenocarcinoma: Survival Outcomes and Patient Selection.

BACKGROUND: Moderately and poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma of the appendix represents an aggressive histological variant with a high risk of recurrence and death. METHODS: Overall, 178 patients with moderately and poorly differentiated appendiceal adenocarcinoma were identified from a prospective database. Clinical, pathologic, and treatment factors were analyzed for outcomes. RESULTS: Diagnostic laparoscopy (DL) identified radiographic occult peritoneal metastasis in 25 (42%) patients. These patients had a significantly lower peritoneal carcinomatosis index (PCI) and improved overall survival (OS) compared with those with radiographic disease. Twenty-seven (41%) patients were excluded from cytoreductive surgery (CRS) because of findings on DL, while 116 (65%) patients underwent CRS and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), with a median disease-free survival (DFS) of 23 months. Mucinous histology (hazard ratio [HR] 0.52, p = 0.04) and PCI (HR 1.054, p = 0.02) were independent predictors of DFS. The median OS following CRS and HIPEC was 48 months. Mucinous histology (HR 0.352, p = 0.018), signet ring cells (HR 3.34, p = 0.02), positive peritoneal cytology (HR 0.081, p = 0.04), and PCI (HR 1.076, p = 0.004) were independently associated with OS. Eight-five (73.3%) patients received neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and 40 (47.1%) patients achieved a radiographic response; 36 (42.3%) had stable disease, while 9 (10.6%) had progressive disease. Stable or responsive disease was associated with improved median OS of 44 months, compared with 21 months for those with progressive disease (p = 0.011). CONCLUSIONS: In selected patients, long-term survival can be obtained. Mucinous histology, absence of signet ring cells, negative peritoneal cytology, PCI ≤ 20, and response/stable disease after neoadjuvant chemotherapy are important selection criteria for CRS and HIPEC.

Is hepatectomy justified for patients with RAS mutant colorectal liver metastases? An analysis of 524 patients undergoing curative liver resection.

BACKGROUND: RAS mutations are associated with limited overall survival after resection of colorectal liver metastases. Our aim was to determine criteria for considering hepatectomy for patients with RAS mutant colorectal liver metastases. METHODS: Of 1,163 patients who underwent liver resection for colorectal liver metastases during 2005-2014, all patients operated on with curative intent who had known RAS mutation status were included. Factors associated with overall survival were determined using multivariate analysis. RESULTS: A total of 524 patients met the inclusion criteria; 212 (40%) had mutated RAS. Mutations were located on codon 12 in 128 patients (60%) and codon 13 in 29 (14%). At median follow-up of 38 months, median overall survival was 72.6 months for wild-type RAS and 50.9 months for mutated RAS (P < .001). Median overall survival for patients with codon 12 and 13 mutations was 51.9 and 50.9 months, respectively (P = .839), significantly worse than for patients with wild-type RAS (P = .005, and P = .038 for codon 12 and 13, respectively). For patients with RAS mutation, factors associated independently with worse overall survival were node-positive primary tumor, tumor >3 cm, and >7 cycles of preoperative chemotherapy. Major and 2-stage hepatectomy were not associated independently with overall survival. Median overall survival was 57, 41, and 21.5 months for patients with 1, 2, and 3 risk factors, respectively. There were no 4-year survivors in the highest-risk group. CONCLUSION: Patients with multiple risk factors had poor overall survival after curative resection of RAS mutant colorectal liver metastases. For such patients, hepatectomy may be ill advised, and alternative therapies or further systemic therapy should be considered.

Retrospective analysis of systemic chemotherapy and total parenteral nutrition for the treatment of malignant small bowel obstruction.

Malignant small bowel obstruction (MSBO) that does not resolve with conservative measures frequently leaves few treatment options other than palliative care. This single-institution retrospective study assesses the outcomes of a more aggressive approach-concurrent systemic chemotherapy and total parenteral nutrition (TPN)-in the treatment of MSBO. The MD Anderson pharmacy database was queried to identify patients who received concurrent systemic chemotherapy and TPN between 2005 and 2013. Only patients with MSBO secondary to peritoneal carcinomatosis requiring TPN for ≥8 days were included. Survival and multivariate analyses were performed using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazard models. The study included 82 patients. MSBO resolution was observed in 10 patients. Radiographic assessments showed a response to chemotherapy in 19 patients; 6 of these patients experienced MSBO resolution. Patients spent an average of 38% of their remaining lives hospitalized, and 28% of patients required admission to the intensive care unit. In multivariate modeling, radiographic response to chemotherapy correlated with MSBO resolution (odds ratio [OR] 6.81; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.68-27.85, P = 0.007). Median overall survival (OS) was 3.1 months, and the 1-year OS rate was 12.6%. Radiographic response to chemotherapy (HR 0.30; 95% CI, 0.16-0.56, P < 0.001), and initiation of new chemotherapy during TPN (HR 0.55; 95% CI, 0.33-0.94, P = 0.026) independently predicted for longer OS. Concurrent treatment with systemic chemotherapy and TPN for persistent MSBO results in low efficacy and a high morbidity and mortality, and thus should not represent a standard approach.

Adjuvant chemotherapy with FOLFOX for primary colorectal cancer is associated with increased somatic gene mutations and inferior survival in patients undergoing hepatectomy for metachronous liver metastases.

OBJECTIVE: We hypothesized that metachronous colorectal liver metastases (CLM) have different biology after failure of oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) compared to 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) or no chemotherapy for adjuvant treatment of colorectal cancer (CRC). BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether patients treated with liver resection for metachronous CLM after adjuvant FOLFOX for CRC have worse outcomes than those who received 5-FU or no chemotherapy. METHODS: We identified 341 patients who underwent hepatectomy for metachronous CLM (disease-free interval ≥12 months, 1993-2010). Mass-spectroscopy genotyping for somatic gene mutations in CLM was performed in a subset of 129 patients. RESULTS: Adjuvant treatment for primary CRC was FOLFOX in 77 patients, 5-FU in 169 patients, and no chemotherapy in 95 patients. Node-positive primary was comparable between FOLFOX and 5-FU but lower in the no-chemotherapy group (P < 0.0001). Median metastasis size was smaller in the FOLFOX group (2.5 cm) than in the 5-FU (3.0 cm) or no-chemotherapy (3.5 cm) groups, (P = 0.008) although prehepatectomy chemotherapy utilization, metastases number, and carcinoembryonic antigen levels were similar. Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) rates after hepatectomy were worse in patients treated with adjuvant FOLFOX [DFS at 3 years: 14% vs 38% (5-FU) vs 45% (no-chemo), OS at 3 years: 58% vs 70% (5-FU) vs 84% (no-chemo)]. On multivariate analysis, adjuvant FOLFOX was associated with worse DFS (P < 0.0001) and OS (P < 0.0001). Mutation analysis revealed ≥1 mutations in 57% of patients (27/47) after FOLFOX, 29% (12/41) after 5-FU, and 32% (13/41) after no chemotherapy (P = 0.011). CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant FOLFOX for primary CRC is associated with a high rate of somatic mutations in liver metastases and inferior outcomes after hepatectomy for metachronous CLM.

Fatal diffuse alveolar damage associated with oxaliplatin administration.

Oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy regimens are currently a standard of care for the treatment of colorectal cancer in both the adjuvant and metastatic disease settings. Significant improvements in survival have resulted from the use of oxaliplatin-based combinations. This article describes the use of oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy in a patient with stage III colon cancer who developed fatal diffuse alveolar damage during his adjuvant therapy. Other cases of pulmonary toxicity associated with oxaliplatin use are presented and the proposed pathophysiology of this rare occurrence is discussed.

Modern systemic chemotherapy in surgically unresectable neoplasms of appendiceal origin: a single-institution experience.

BACKGROUND: Appendiceal neoplasms include tumors ranging from benign-appearing cells with widespread mucin deposits to aggressive poorly differentiated signet ring cell adenocarcinomas. Traditionally, these tumors are treated with cytoreductive surgery followed by hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy. For some patients, cytoreductive surgery is not an option, and minimal published data exist in the management and outcome of these patients. A retrospective analysis was conducted to determine the benefit of modern systemic chemotherapy in patients with disseminated appendiceal neoplasm who were not considered optimal candidates for cytoreductive surgery. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted using The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center tumor registry between January 2000 and July 2005. Response was determined by radiographic response and/or overall clinical benefit. RESULTS: Of 186 patients diagnosed with appendiceal neoplasm, 54 (29%) patients considered to be suboptimal surgical candidates received > or =2 cycles of systemic chemotherapy. Thirty (55.6%) patients had a disease control rate noted as a complete response, partial response, or stable disease. After a median follow-up of 24 months, the median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival were determined to be 7.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 4-11) and 56 months (95% CI, 36-not applicable), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Systemic chemotherapy has a role in appendiceal neoplasm patients who are suboptimal candidates for cytoreductive surgery. The intermediate PFS indicates the challenges that exist for appendiceal neoplasm patients in this setting. Prospective randomized trials including systemic chemotherapy are needed to provide further insight into this malignancy, for which no standard exists.