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.

Treatment Variation and Long-Term Outcomes of Low-Grade Appendiceal Neoplasms.

BACKGROUND: Heterogenous nomenclature describing appendiceal neoplasms has added to uncertainty around their appropriate treatment. Although a recent consensus has established the term low-grade appendiceal neoplasm (LAMN), we hypothesize that significant variation remains in the treatment of LAMNs. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed our prospectively maintained appendiceal registry, identifying patients with LAMNs from 2009 to 2019. We assessed variability in treatment, including whether patients underwent colectomy, spread of disease at presentation, and long-term outcomes. RESULTS: Of 136 patients with LAMNs, 88 (35%) presented with localized disease and 48 (35%) with disseminated peritoneal disease. Median follow-up was 2.9 years (IQR 1.9-4.4), and 120 (88%) patients underwent pre-referral surgery. Among 26 pre-referral colectomy patients, 23 (88%) were performed for perceived oncologic need/nodal evaluation; no nodal metastases were identified. In patients with resected LAMNs without radiographic evidence of disseminated disease, 41 (47%) underwent second look diagnostic laparoscopy (DL) to evaluate for occult metastases. No peritoneal metastases were identified. Patients with disseminated disease were treated with cytoreductive surgery/heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS/HIPEC). For patients undergoing CRS/HIPEC, 5-year recurrence-free survival was 94% (95% CI 81-98%). For patients with localized disease, 5-year RFS was 98% (95% CI 85-99%). CONCLUSIONS: Significant variation exists in treatment patterns for LAMNs, particularly prior to referral to a high-volume center. Patients frequently underwent colectomy without apparent oncologic benefit. In the current era of high-quality cross sectional imaging, routine use of DL has low yield and is not recommended. Recurrence in this population is rare, and low-intensity surveillance can be offered. Overall prognosis is excellent, even with peritoneal disease.

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.

MRI Staging in an Evolving Management Paradigm for Rectal Cancer, From the AJR Special Series on Cancer Staging.

The treatment of rectal cancer centers around the distinct but related goals of management of distant metastases and management of local disease. Optimal local management requires attention to the primary tumor and its anatomic relationship to surrounding pelvic structures, with the goal of minimizing local recurrence (LR). High-resolution MRI is ideally suited for this purpose; application of MRI-based criteria in conjunction with optimized surgical and pathologic techniques has successfully reduced LR rates. This success has led to a shift away from using the TNM-based National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines as the sole determinant of whether a patient receives neoadjuvant chemoradiation. The new model uses a hybrid approach for assigning risk categories that combines elements of the TNM staging system with MRI-based anatomic features. These risk categories incorporate tumor proximity to the circumferential resection margin, T category, distance to the anal verge, and presence of extramural venous invasion to classify rectal tumors as low, intermediate, or high risk. This approach has been validated by accumulated data from numerous multiinstitutional studies. This article illustrates key anatomic concepts, depicts common interpretive errors and pitfalls, and discusses ongoing limitations; these insights should guide radiologists in optimal rectal MRI interpretation.

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.