Validation of a Clinical Calculator Predicting Freedom From Colon Cancer Recurrence After Surgery on the Basis of Molecular and Clinical Variables.

BACKGROUND: The Memorial Sloan Kettering clinical calculator for estimating the likelihood of freedom from colon cancer recurrence on the basis of clinical and molecular variables was developed at a time when testing for microsatellite instability was performed selectively, based on patient age, family history, and histologic features. Microsatellite stability was assumed if no testing was done. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to validate the calculator in a cohort of patients who had all been tested for microsatellite instability. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort analysis. SETTINGS: Comprehensive cancer center. PATIENTS: This study included consecutive patients who underwent curative resection for stage I, II, or III colon cancer between 2017 and 2019. INTERVENTION: Universal testing of mircrosatellite phenotype in all cases. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The calculator's predictive accuracy was assessed using the concordance index and a calibration plot of predicted versus actual freedom from recurrence at 3 years after surgery. For a secondary sensitivity analysis, the presence of a tumor deposit(s) (disease category N1c) was considered equivalent to one positive lymph node (category N1a). RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 32 months among survivors, the concordance index for the 745 patients in the cohort was 0.748 (95% CI, 0.693-0.801), and a plot of predicted versus observed recurrences approached the 45° diagonal, indicating good discrimination and calibration. In the secondary sensitivity analysis for tumor deposits, the concordance index was 0.755 (95% CI, 0.700-0.806). LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by its retrospective, single-institution design. CONCLUSIONS: These results, based on inclusion of actual rather than imputed microsatellite stability status and presence of tumor deposits, confirm the predictive accuracy and reliability of the calculator. See Video Abstract . VALIDACIN DE UNA CALCULADORA CLNICA QUE PREDICE LA AUSENCIA DE RECURRENCIA POSTQUIRURGICA DEL CNCER DE COLON SOBRE LA BASE DE VARIABLES MOLECULARES Y CLNICAS: ANTECEDENTES:La calculadora clínica del Memorial Sloan Kettering para la estimación de la probabilidad de ausencia de recurrencia del cáncer de colon sobre la base de variables clínicas y moleculares, se desarrolló en un momento en que las pruebas para la inestabilidad de microsatélites se realizaban de forma selectiva, basadas en la edad del paciente, los antecedentes familiares y las características histológicas. Se asumía la estabilidad micro satelital si no se realizaba ninguna prueba.OBJETIVO:El objetivo de este estudio fue validar la calculadora en una cohorte de pacientes a los que se les había realizado la prueba de inestabilidad de microsatélites.DISEÑO:Análisis de cohorte retrospectivo.AJUSTE:Centro integral de cáncer.PACIENTES:Pacientes consecutivos con cáncer de colon que fueron sometidos a resección curativa por cáncer de colon en estadios I, II o III entre los años 2017 y 2019.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:La precisión predictiva de la calculadora fue evaluada mediante el índice de concordancia y un gráfico de calibración de la ausencia de recurrencia predecida versus la real a los 3 años tras la cirugía. A los efectos de un análisis secundario de sensibilidad, la presencia de depósito(s) tumoral(es) (categoría de enfermedad N1c) se consideró equivalente a un ganglio linfático positivo (categoría N1a).RESULTADOS:Con una mediana de seguimiento de 32 meses entre los supervivientes, el índice de concordancia para los 745 pacientes de la cohorte fue de 0,748 (intervalo de confianza del 95 %, 0,693 a 0,801), y una gráfica de recurrencias previstas versus observadas se acercó a la diagonal de 45°, indicando una buena discriminación y calibración. En el análisis secundario de sensibilidad para depósitos tumorales, el índice de concordancia fue de 0,755 (intervalo de confianza del 95 %, 0,700 a 0,806).LIMITACIONES:Diseño retrospectivo, institución única.CONCLUSIONES:Estos resultados, basados en la inclusión real del estado de estabilidad de microsatélites en lugar de imputado y la presencia de depósitos tumorales, confirman la precisión predictiva y la confiabilidad de la calculadora. (Traducción-Dr Osvaldo Gauto ).

Anal Adenocarcinoma Treated in the Era of Total Neoadjuvant Therapy and Nonoperative Management.

BACKGROUND: Anal adenocarcinoma bears a treatment strategy unique to other anal cancers. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe oncologic outcomes of total neoadjuvant therapy followed by watch-and-wait approach for anal adenocarcinoma. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis. SETTINGS: This study was conducted at a comprehensive cancer center. PATIENTS: Patients with anal adenocarcinoma treated between 2004 and 2019 were selected. INTERVENTIONS: Fifty-four patients received neoadjuvant therapy and were divided into 2 groups according to their treatment strategy: total neoadjuvant therapy versus single neoadjuvant modality therapy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Organ preservation, tumor regrowth, local failure, distant metastasis rates, recurrence-free survival, and overall survival. RESULTS: This study included 70 patients with anal adenocarcinoma. Fifty-four patients (77%) received neoadjuvant therapy, of whom 30 (42%) received total neoadjuvant therapy and 24 (34%) received single neoadjuvant modality. Twenty-three (33%) patients achieved complete clinical response and were managed by watch-and-wait approach. The proportion of patients able to continue to watch-and-wait approach was higher after receiving total neoadjuvant therapy (60%) compared with single neoadjuvant modality therapy (20%; p = 0.004). A tumor regrowth rate of 22% was observed in the total neoadjuvant therapy group. The 5-year overall survival rate was 70% (95% CI, 59%-83%), including 61% (95% CI, 42%-88%) for the total neoadjuvant therapy and 65% (95% CI, 48%-88%) for the single neoadjuvant modality groups. Colostomy was avoided in 50% of patients who received total neoadjuvant therapy and 83% of watch-and-wait patients. Five-year recurrence-free survival rates of 55% (95% CI, 39%-79%) and 30% (95% CI, 15%-58%) were observed in the total neoadjuvant therapy and single neoadjuvant modality groups. LIMITATIONS: Retrospective nature. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first report in the literature describing the safety and feasibility of nonoperative management for anal adenocarcinoma. Anal adenocarcinoma treated with total neoadjuvant therapy and nonoperative management achieve regrowth rates comparable to those observed in rectal cancer, with oncologic outcomes similar to those of traditional treatment strategies. See Video Abstract . ADENOCARCINOMA ANAL TRATADO EN LA ERA DE LA TERAPIA NEOADYUVANTE TOTAL Y EL TRATAMIENTO NO QUIRRGICO: ANTECEDENTES:El adenocarcinoma anal conlleva una estrategia de tratamiento único para otros cánceres anales.OBJETIVO:Describir los resultados oncológicos de la terapia neoadyuvante total seguida de observar y esperar en adenocarcinoma anal.DISEÑO:Análisis retrospectivo.AJUSTE:Este estudio se llevó a cabo en un centro oncológico integral.PACIENTES:Se seleccionaron pacientes con adenocarcinoma anal tratados entre 2004-2019.INTERVENCIONES:Cincuenta y cuatro pacientes recibieron terapia neoadyuvante y se dividieron en dos grupos según su estrategia de tratamiento: terapia neoadyuvante total versus terapia de modalidad neoadyuvante única.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Preservación de órganos, recurrencia tumoral, falla local, tasas de metástasis a distancia, libre de recurrencia y supervivencia general.RESULTADOS:El estudio incluyó a 70 pacientes con adenocarcinoma anal. Cincuenta y cuatro pacientes (77%) recibieron terapia neoadyuvante, de los cuales 30 (42%) recibieron terapia neoadyuvante total y 24 (34%) recibieron modalidad neoadyuvante única. Veintitrés (33%) pacientes presentaron una respuesta clínica completa y fueron tratados con vigilancia y espera. La proporción de pacientes capaces de continuar en observar y esperar fue mayor después de recibir terapia neoadyuvante total (60%) en comparación con la terapia de modalidad neoadyuvante única (20%) ( p = 0,004). Se observó una tasa de recurrencia tumoral del 22% en el grupo de terapia neoadyuvante total. La tasa de supervivencia general a 5 años fue del 70% (IC95% 59%-83 %), incluido el 61% (IC95% 42%-88%) para la terapia neoadyuvante total y el 65% (IC95% 48%-88%) para grupos de modalidad neoadyuvante única. Se evitó la colostomía en el 50% de los pacientes que recibieron terapia neoadyuvante total y el 83% de los pacientes en observar y esperar. Se observaron tasas de supervivencia libre de recurrencia a cinco años del 55% (IC95% 39%-79%) y del 30% (IC95% 15%-58%) en los grupos de terapia neoadyuvante total y modalidad neoadyuvante única, respectivamente.LIMITACIONES:Diseño retrospectivo.CONCLUSIONES:Este es el primer informe en la literatura que describe la seguridad y viabilidad del tratamiento no quirúrgico del adenocarcinoma anal. El adenocarcinoma anal tratado con terapia neoadyuvante total y manejo no quirúrgico logra tasas de recurrencia comparables a las observadas en el cáncer de recto, con resultados oncológicos similares a las estrategias de tratamientos tradicionales. (Traducción-Dr. Fidel Ruiz Healy ).

Comparison of short-term outcomes and survival between minimally invasive colectomy and open colectomy in patients 80 years of age and older.

We investigated the short- and long-term outcomes of patients 80 years of age and older with colon cancer who underwent robotic colectomy versus laparoscopic colectomy. Data for patients treated at a comprehensive cancer center between January 2006 and November 2018 were collected retrospectively. Outcomes from minimally invasive laparoscopic or robotic colectomy were compared. Survival was analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier method with significance evaluated by the log-rank test. The laparoscopic (n = 104) and the robotic (n = 75) colectomy groups did not differ across baseline characteristics. Patients who underwent a robotic colectomy had a shorter median length of hospital stay (5 versus 6 days; p < 0.001) and underwent fewer conversions to open surgery (3% versus 17%; p = 0.002) compared to the laparoscopic cohort. The groups did not differ in postoperative complication rates, overall survival or disease-free survival. Elderly patients undergoing robotic colectomy for colon cancer have a shorter hospital stay and lower rates of conversion without compromise to oncologic outcomes.

Incomplete cytoreductive surgery for appendiceal and colorectal peritoneal carcinomatosis: Characteristics and outcomes of an overlooked group.

BACKGROUND OND OBJECTIVES: Complete cytoreductive surgery (CRS) may prolong survival for selected patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis from colorectal cancer (CRC). However, there is a paucity of data on outcomes following incomplete procedures. METHODS: Patients with incomplete CRS for well-differentiated (WD) and moderate/poorly-differentiated (M/PD) appendiceal cancer, right and left CRC were identified at a single tertiary center (2008-2021). RESULTS: Of 109 patients, 10% were WD and 51% M/PD appendiceal cancers, and 16% right and 23% left CRC. There were no differences in gender, BMI (mean = 27), ASA score, previous abdominal surgery (72%), and extent of CRS. The PC Index differed between appendiceal and colorectal cancers (mean = 27 vs. 17, p < 0.01). Overall, the perioperative outcomes were similar among the groups, with 15% experiencing complications. Postoperatively, 61% received chemotherapy, and 51% required ≥1 subsequent procedure. The 1 and 3-year survival for the WD, M/PD, right and left CRC subgroups were 100%, 67%, 44%, 51%, and 88%, 17%, 12%, and 23%, respectively (p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Incomplete CRS was associated with significant morbidity and number of subsequent palliative procedures. Prognosis correlated with histologic subtype; WD appendiceal cancer patients having superior outcomes, while those with right sided CRC the worst survival. These data may help guiding expectations in the setting of incomplete procedures.

Comparison of Robotic, Laparoscopic, and Open Resections of Nonmetastatic Colon Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic resection for colon cancer has not been associated with improvements in oncological outcomes in comparison to open resection. Robotic resections are associated with increased lymph node yield and radicality of mesenteric resection in patients with right-sided tumors. It is unclear whether lymph node yield is higher in robotic resections in other parts of the colon and whether higher lymph node yield is associated with improved survival. OBJECTIVE: To compare survival rates between robotic, laparoscopic, and open resections in a large cohort of patients with nonmetastatic colon cancer. DESIGN: This is a retrospective observational study. SETTING: A single comprehensive cancer center. PATIENTS: Patients who underwent resection of nonmetastatic primary colon cancer between January 2006 and December 2018. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Univariable and multivariable models were used to identify predictors of disease-free and overall survival. Lymph node yield and perioperative outcomes were compared between operative approaches. RESULTS: There were 2398 patients who met the inclusion criteria: 699 (29%) underwent open, 824 (34%) underwent laparoscopic, and 875 (36%) underwent robotic resection. The median follow-up was 3.8 years (45.4 months). Robotic surgery was associated with higher lymph node yield and radicality of mesenteric resection. On multivariable analysis, the surgical approach was not associated with a difference in disease-free or overall survival. Minimally invasive colectomy was associated with fewer complications and shorter length of stay in comparison to open surgery. In a direct comparison between the 2 minimally invasive approaches, robotic colectomy was associated with fewer complications, shorter length of stay, and lower conversion rate than laparoscopy. LIMITATIONS: This was a single-center retrospective study. CONCLUSIONS: Our data indicate that the 3 surgical approaches are similarly effective in treating primary resectable colon cancer and that differences in outcomes are observed primarily in the early postoperative period. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/C115 . COMPARACIN DE RESECCIONES ROBTICAS, LAPAROSCPICAS Y ABIERTAS DE CNCER DE COLON NO METASTSICO: ANTECEDENTES:La resección laparoscópica para el cáncer de colon no se ha asociado con mejoras en los resultados oncológicos en comparación con la resección abierta. Las resecciones robóticas se asocian con un mayor rendimiento de los ganglios linfáticos y la radicalidad de la resección mesentérica en pacientes con tumores del lado derecho. No está claro si la cosecha ganglionar es mayor en las resecciones robóticas en otras partes del colon y si un mayor rendimiento de los ganglios linfáticos se asocia con una mejor supervivencia.OBJETIVO:Comparar las tasas de supervivencia entre resecciones robóticas, laparoscópicas y abiertas en una gran cohorte de pacientes con cáncer de colon no metastásico.DISEÑO:Este es un estudio observacional retrospectivo.ESCENARIO:Este estudio se realizó en un único centro oncológico integral.PACIENTES:Pacientes que se sometieron a resección de cáncer de colon primario no metastásico entre enero de 2006 y diciembre de 2018.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Se utilizaron modelos univariables y multivariables para identificar predictores de supervivencia libre de enfermedad y global. La cosecha ganglionar y los resultados perioperatorios se compararon entre los abordajes quirúrgicos.RESULTADOS:Hubo 2398 pacientes que cumplieron con los criterios de inclusión: 699 (29%) se sometieron a cirugía abierta, 824 (34%) se sometieron a resección laparoscópica y 875 (36%) se sometieron a resección robótica. La mediana de seguimiento fue de 3,8 años (45,4 meses). La cirugía robótica se asoció con una mayor cosecha ganglionar y la radicalidad de la resección mesentérica. En el análisis multivariable, el abordaje quirúrgico no se asoció con una diferencia en la supervivencia general o libre de enfermedad. La colectomía mínimamente invasiva se asoció con menos complicaciones y una estancia más corta en comparación con la cirugía abierta. En una comparación directa entre los dos enfoques mínimamente invasivos, la colectomía robótica se asoció con menos complicaciones, una estancia más corta y una tasa de conversión más baja que la laparoscopia.LIMITACIONES:Este fue un estudio retrospectivo de un solo centro.CONCLUSIONES:Nuestros datos indican que los tres enfoques quirúrgicos son igualmente efectivos en el tratamiento del cáncer de colon resecable primario y que las diferencias en los resultados se observan principalmente en el período posoperatorio temprano. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/C115 . (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.

MRI at Restaging After Neoadjuvant Therapy for Rectal Cancer Overestimates Circumferential Resection Margin Proximity as Determined by Comparison With Whole-Mount Pathology.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines recommend restaging with MRI after neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer, but the accuracy of restaging MRI in estimating circumferential margin involvement requires additional clarification. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to measure the accuracy of circumferential resection margin assessment by MRI after neoadjuvant therapy and identify characteristics associated with accuracy. DESIGN: MRI data were retrospectively analyzed for concordance with the findings of whole-mount pathology analysis of the corresponding surgical specimens. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to identify characteristics associated with accuracy. SETTING: This study was conducted at a comprehensive cancer center. PATIENTS: Included in the study were consecutive patients who underwent total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer between January 2018 and March 2020 after receiving neoadjuvant therapy and undergoing restaging with MRI. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome of this study included accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values for categorizing the circumferential resection margin as threatened; mean and paired mean differences were in proximity of the margin. RESULTS: Of the 94 patients included in the analysis, 39 (41%) had a threatened circumferential resection margin according to MRI at restaging, but only 17 (18%) had a threatened margin based on pathology. The accuracy of MRI in identifying a threatened margin was 63.8%, with margin proximity overestimated by 0.4 cm on average. In multivariate logistic regression, anterior location of the margin and tumor proximity to the anal verge were independently associated with reduced MRI accuracy. LIMITATIONS: A limitation was the retrospective design at a single institution. CONCLUSIONS: The knowledge that MRI-based restaging after neoadjuvant therapy overestimates circumferential margin proximity may render some surgical radicality unnecessary and thereby help avoid the associated morbidity. With the recognition that MRI-based assessment of margin proximity may not be reliable for anterior margin and for distal tumors, radiologists may want to use greater caution in interpreting images of tumors with these characteristics and to acknowledge the uncertainty in their reports. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B814. LA IRM EN LA REESTADIFICACIN LUEGO DE TERAPIA NEOADYUVANTE EN EL CNCER DE RECTO SOBRESTIMA LA PROXIMIDAD DEL MARGEN DE RESECCIN CIRCUNFERENCIAL SEGN LO DETERMINADO COMPARATIVAMENTE CON LA PIEZA DE ANATOMOPATOLOGA: ANTECEDENTES:Las pautas actuales recomiendan la re-estadificación por medio de la resonancia magnética luego de terapia neoadyuvante en los casos de cáncer de recto, pero la precisión de la reevaluación con la IRM para estimar el grado de implicación del margen circunferencial requiere aclaraciones adicionales.OBJETIVO:Medir el grado de exactitud en la evaluación del margen de resección circunferencial mediante resonancia magnética después de la terapia neoadyuvante e identificar las características asociadas con la precisión.DISEÑO:Se analizaron retrospectivamente los datos de resonancia magnética para determinar la concordancia entre los hallazgos del análisis de la pieza de anatamopatología y las muestras quirúrgicas correspondientes. Se realizó el análisis de regresión logística univariada y multivariada para identificar las características asociadas con la exactitud.AJUSTE:Centro oncológico integral.PACIENTES:Todos aquellos que se sometieron consecutivamente a una excisión total del mesorrecto por cáncer rectal entre Enero 2018 y Febrero 2020 luego de recibir terapia neoadyuvante y someterse a una re-estadificación por imágenes de resonancia magnética (IRM).PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:La exactitud, la sensibilidad y especificidad; los valores predictivos positivos y negativos para categorizar el margen de resección circunferencial como amenazado; la diferencia media y las medias pareadas de proximidad a los margenes.RESULTADOS:De los 94 pacientes incluidos en el análisis, 39 (41%) tenían un margen de resección circunferencial amenazado según la resonancia magnética en la re-estadificación, pero solo 17 (18%) tenían un margen amenazado basado en la patología. La precisión de la resonancia magnética para identificar un margen amenazado fue del 63,8%, con la proximidad del margen sobreestimada en 0,4 cm en promedio. En la regresión logística multivariada, la ubicación anterior de los bordes de resección y la proximidad del tumor al margen anal se asociaron de forma independiente con la reducción en la precisión de la resonancia magnética.LIMITACIONES:Diseño retrospectivo en una institución única.CONCLUSIONES:El saber que la re-estadificación basada en la IRM, luego de terapia neoadyuvante sobreestima la proximidad de la lesión a los márgenes circunferenciales, hace innecesaria cierta radicalidad quirúrgica complementaria, lo que ayuda a evitar morbilidad asociada. Reconociendo que la evaluación de proximidad de los márgenes de resección basada en la resonancia magnética, no puede ser confiable en casos de márgenes anteriores y en casos de tumores distales. Los radiólogos recomiendan tener más precaución en la interpretación de imágenes de tumores con estas características y reconocen cierto desasosiego en sus informes. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B814.

Development and Assessment of a Clinical Calculator for Estimating the Likelihood of Recurrence and Survival Among Patients With Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer Treated With Chemotherapy, Radiotherapy, and Surgery.

Importance: Predicting outcomes in patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer is challenging because of tumor downstaging. Validated clinical calculators that can estimate recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) among patients with rectal cancer who have received multimodal therapy are needed. Objective: To develop and validate clinical calculators providing estimates of rectal cancer recurrence and survival that are better for individualized decision-making than the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging system or the neoadjuvant rectal (NAR) score. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prognostic study developed risk models, graphically represented as nomograms, for patients with incomplete pathological response using Cox proportional hazards and multivariable regression analyses with restricted cubic splines. Because patients with complete pathological response to neoadjuvant therapy had uniformly favorable outcomes, their predictions were obtained separately. The study included 1400 patients with stage II or III rectal cancer who received treatment with chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and surgery at 2 comprehensive cancer centers (Memorial Sloan Kettering [MSK] Cancer Center and Siteman Cancer Center [SCC]) between January 1, 1998, and December 31, 2017. Patients from the MSK cohort received chemoradiation, surgery, and adjuvant chemotherapy from January 1, 1998, to December 31, 2014; these patients were randomly assigned to either a model training group or an internal validation group. Models were externally validated using data from the SCC cohort, who received either chemoradiation, surgery, and adjuvant chemotherapy (chemoradiotherapy group) or short-course radiotherapy, consolidation chemotherapy, and surgery (total neoadjuvant therapy with short-course radiotherapy group) from January 1, 2009, to December 31, 2017. Data were analyzed from March 1, 2020, to January 10, 2021. Exposures: Chemotherapy, radiotherapy, chemoradiotherapy, and surgery. Main Outcomes and Measures: Recurrence-free survival and OS were the outcome measures, and the discriminatory performance of the clinical calculators was measured with concordance index and calibration plots. The ability of the clinical calculators to predict RFS and OS was compared with that of the AJCC staging system and the NAR score. The models for RFS and OS among patients with incomplete pathological response included postoperative pathological tumor category, number of positive lymph nodes, tumor distance from anal verge, and large- and small-vessel venous and perineural invasion; age was included in the risk model for OS. The final clinical calculators provided RFS and OS estimates derived from Kaplan-Meier curves for patients with complete pathological response and from risk models for patients with incomplete pathological response. Results: Among 1400 total patients with locally advanced rectal cancer, the median age was 57.8 years (range, 18.0-91.9 years), and 863 patients (61.6%) were male, with tumors at a median distance of 6.7 cm (range, 0-15.0 cm) from the anal verge. The MSK cohort comprised 1069 patients; of those, 710 were assigned to the model training group and 359 were assigned to the internal validation group. The SCC cohort comprised 331 patients; of those, 200 were assigned to the chemoradiotherapy group and 131 were assigned to the total neoadjuvant therapy with short-course radiotherapy group. The concordance indices in the MSK validation data set were 0.70 (95% CI, 0.65-0.76) for RFS and 0.73 (95% CI, 0.65-0.80) for OS. In the external SCC data set, the concordance indices in the chemoradiotherapy group were 0.71 (95% CI, 0.62-0.81) for RFS and 0.72 (95% CI, 0.59-0.85) for OS; the concordance indices in the total neoadjuvant therapy with short-course radiotherapy group were 0.62 (95% CI, 0.49-0.75) for RFS and 0.67 (95% CI, 0.46-0.84) for OS. Calibration plots confirmed good agreement between predicted and observed events. These results compared favorably with predictions based on the AJCC staging system (concordance indices for MSK validation: RFS = 0.69 [95% CI, 0.64-0.74]; OS = 0.67 [95% CI, 0.58-0.75]) and the NAR score (concordance indices for MSK validation: RFS = 0.56 [95% CI, 0.50-0.63]; OS = 0.56 [95% CI, 0.46-0.66]). Furthermore, the clinical calculators provided more individualized outcome estimates compared with the categorical schemas (eg, estimated RFS for patients with AJCC stage IIIB disease ranged from 7% to 68%). Conclusions and Relevance: In this prognostic study, clinical calculators were developed and validated; these calculators provided more individualized estimates of the likelihood of RFS and OS than the AJCC staging system or the NAR score among patients with rectal cancer who received multimodal treatment. The calculators were easy to use and applicable to both short- and long-course radiotherapy regimens, and they may be used to inform surveillance strategies and facilitate future clinical trials and statistical power calculations.

Evaluating the Validity of the Clavien-Dindo Classification in Colectomy Studies: A 90-Day Cost of Care Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The Clavien-Dindo classification is widely used to report postoperative morbidity but may underestimate the severity of colectomy complications. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess how well the Clavien-Dindo classification represents the severity of all grades of complications after colectomy using cost of care modeling. DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study. SETTINGS: The study was conducted at a comprehensive cancer center. PATIENTS: Consecutive patients (N = 1807) undergoing elective colon or rectal resections without a stoma performed at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center between 2009 and 2014 who were followed up for ≥90 days, were not transferred to other hospitals, and did not receive intraperitoneal chemotherapy were included in the study. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Complication severity was measured by the highest-grade complication per patient and attributable outpatient and inpatient costs. Associations were evaluated between patient complication grade and cost during 3 time periods: the 90 days after surgery, index admission, and postdischarge (<90 d). RESULTS: Of the 1807 patients (median age = 62 y), 779 (43%) had a complication; 80% of these patients had only grade 1 or 2 complications. Increasing patient complication grade correlated with 90-day cost, driven by inpatient cost differences (p < 0.001). For grade 1 and 2 patients, most costs were incurred after discharge and were the same between these grade categories. Among patients with a single complication (52%), there was no difference in index hospitalization, postdischarge, or total 90-day costs between grade 1 and 2 categories. LIMITATIONS: The study was limited by its retrospective design and generalizability. CONCLUSIONS: The Clavien-Dindo classification correlates well with 90-day costs, driven largely by inpatient resource use. Clavien-Dindo does not discriminate well among patients with low-grade complications in terms of their substantial postdischarge costs. These patients represent 80% of patients with a complication after colectomy. Examining the long-term burden associated with complications can help refine the Clavien-Dindo classification for use in colectomy studies. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B521. EVALUACIN DE LA VALIDEZ DE LA CLASIFICACIN DE CLAVIENDINDO EN ESTUDIOS DE COLECTOMA ANLISIS DEL COSTO DE LA ATENCIN EN DAS: ANTECEDENTES:La clasificación de Clavien-Dindo es utilizada ampliamante para conocer la morbilidad posoperatoria, pero puede subestimar la gravedad de las complicaciones de la colectomía.OBJETIVO:Evaluar que tan bien representa la clasificación de Clavien-Dindo la gravedad de todos los grados de complicaciones después de la colectomía utilizando un modelo de costo de la atención.DISEÑO:Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo.ENTORNO CLÍNICO:Centro oncológico integral.PACIENTES:Pacientes consecutivos (n = 1807) sometidos a resecciones electivas de colon o recto sin estoma realizadas en el Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center entre 2009 y 2014 que fueron seguidos durante ≥ 90 días, no fueron transferidos a otros hospitales y no recibieron quimioterapia intraperitoneal.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE VALORACION:Gravedad de la complicación medida por la complicación de mayor grado por paciente y los costos atribuibles para pacientes ambulatorios y hospitalizados. Se evaluó la asociación entre el grado de complicación del paciente y el costo durante 3 períodos de tiempo: posterior a la cirugía (hasta 90 días), a su ingreso y posterior al egreso (hasta 90 días).RESULTADOS:De los 1807 pacientes (mediana de edad de 62 años), 779 (43%) tuvieron una complicación; El 80% de estos pacientes tuvieron solo complicaciones de grado 1 o 2. El aumento del grado de complicación del paciente se correlacionó con el costo a 90 días, impulsado por las diferencias en el costo de los pacientes hospitalizados (p <0,001). Para los pacientes de grado 1 y 2, la mayoría de los costos se incurrieron después del alta y fueron los mismos entre ambas categorías. Entre los pacientes con una sola complicación (52%), no hubo diferencia en el índice de hospitalización, posterior al alta o en el costo total de 90 días entre las categorías de grado 1 y 2.LIMITACIONES:Diseño retrospectivo, generalizabilidad.CONCLUSIONES:La clasificación de Clavien-Dindo se correlaciona bien con los costos a 90 días, impulsados en gran parte por la utilización de recursos de pacientes hospitalizados. Clavien-Dindo no discrimina entre los pacientes con complicaciones de bajo grado en términos de sus costos sustanciales posterior al alta. Estos pacientes representan el 80% de los pacientes aquellos con una complicación tras la colectomía. Examinar la carga a largo plazo asociada a las complicaciones puede ayudar a mejorar la clasificación de Clavien-Dindo para su uso en estudios de colectomía. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B521.

Organ Preservation in Patients with Rectal Cancer Treated with Total Neoadjuvant Therapy.

BACKGROUND: Retrospective studies suggest that watch-and-wait is a safe alternative to total mesorectal excision in selected patients with a clinical complete response after chemoradiotherapy. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the proportion of patients with rectal cancer who may benefit from watch-and-wait. DESIGN: This study is a retrospective analysis of data from prospectively maintained databases. SETTING: This study was conducted at a comprehensive cancer center. PATIENTS: Consecutive patients with stage II or III rectal adenocarcinoma who were treated with total neoadjuvant therapy using induction chemotherapy between 2012 and 2019 under the care of the same surgeon were included. INTERVENTION: Induction-type total neoadjuvant therapy consisted of 8 cycles of leucovorin-fluorouracil-oxaliplatin or 5 cycles of capecitabine-oxaliplatin before chemoradiotherapy. Patients with a clinical complete response were offered watch-and-wait, and patients with residual tumor were offered total mesorectal excision. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Tumor response was assessed with a digital rectal examination, endoscopy, and MRI. Patient characteristics and recurrence-free survival were compared between the watch-and-wait group and the total mesorectal excision group. RESULTS: A total of 88 patients were included in the analysis. One (1%) died during neoadjuvant therapy. Fifty-five patients (62.5%) had an incomplete clinical response and underwent surgery, 10 (18%) of the 55 developed distant metastasis, and 3 (5%) developed local recurrence. The remaining 32 patients (36.3%) had a clinical complete response and underwent watch-and-wait. On average, patients in the watch-and-wait group were older and had smaller, more distal tumors compared with patients in the surgery group. The median radiation dose, number of chemotherapy cycles, rate of adverse events, and length of follow-up did not differ substantively between the total mesorectal excision group and the watch-and-wait group. In the watch-and-wait group, 2 (6%) patients developed tumor regrowth, and one of them had distant metastasis. Recurrence-free survival was significantly higher in the watch-and-wait group. LIMITATIONS: Generalizability, sample size, and follow-up duration were limitations of this study. CONCLUSIONS: Approximately one-third of patients with stage II or III rectal cancer can benefit from a watch-and-wait approach with the aim of preserving the rectum if treated with induction-type total neoadjuvant therapy and followed by an experienced multidisciplinary team. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B688. CONSERVACIN DE RGANOS EN PACIENTES CON CNCER DE RECTO TRATADOS CON TERAPIA NEOADYUVANTE TOTAL: ANTECEDENTES:Estudios retrospectivos sugieren que observar y esperar es una alternativa segura a la escisión mesorrectal total en pacientes seleccionados con una respuesta clínica completa después de la quimiorradioterapia.OBJETIVO:Determinar la proporción de pacientes con cáncer de recto que pueden beneficiarse de observar y esperar.DISEÑO:Análisis retrospectivo de datos de bases de datos mantenidas de forma prospectiva.ESCENARIO:Centro Oncológico Integral.PACIENTES:Pacientes consecutivos con adenocarcinoma de recto en estadio II o III tratados con TNT utilizando quimioterapia de inducción entre 2012 y 2019 bajo el cuidado del mismo cirujano.INTERVENCIÓN:La terapia neoadyuvante total de tipo inducción consistió en ocho ciclos de leucovorín-fluorouracilo-oxaliplatino o cinco ciclos de capecitabina-oxaliplatino antes de la quimiorradioterapia. A los pacientes con una respuesta clínica completa se les ofreció observar y esperar, y a los pacientes con tumor residual se les ofreció la escisión mesorrectal total.PRINCIPALES RESULTADOS Y MEDIDAS:La respuesta del tumor se evaluó con un tacto rectal, endoscopia y resonancia magnética. Se compararon las características de los pacientes y la supervivencia libre de recurrencia entre el grupo de observación y espera y el grupo de escisión mesorrectal total.RESULTADOS:Se incluyó en el análisis a un total de 88 pacientes. Uno (1%) murió durante la terapia neoadyuvante. Cincuenta y cinco pacientes (62.5%) tuvieron una respuesta clínica incompleta y se sometieron a cirugía; 10 (18%) de los 55 desarrollaron metástasis a distancia y 3 (5%) desarrollaron recidiva local. Los 32 pacientes restantes (36.3%) tuvieron una cCR (respuesta clínica completa) y se sometieron a observar y esperar. En promedio, los pacientes del grupo de observación y espera eran mayores y tenían tumores más pequeños y distales en comparación con el grupo de cirugía. La dosis mediana de radiación, el número de ciclos de quimioterapia, la tasa de eventos adversos y la duración del seguimiento no difirieron sustancialmente entre el grupo de escisión mesorrectal total y el grupo de observación y espera. En el grupo de observación y espera, 2 (6%) pacientes desarrollaron recrecimiento del tumor y uno de ellos tuvo metástasis a distancia. La supervivencia libre de recurrencia fue significativamente mayor en el grupo de observación y espera.LIMITACIONES:Generalizabilidad, tamaño de la muestra, duración del seguimiento.CONCLUSIONES:Aproximadamente un tercio de los pacientes con cáncer de recto en estadio II o III pueden beneficiarse de un abordaje de observación y espera con el objetivo de preservar el recto si se tratan con terapia neoadyuvante total de tipo inducción y son seguidos por un equipo multidisciplinario experimentado. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B688.

Type of recurrence is associated with disease-free survival after salvage surgery for locally recurrent rectal cancer.

PURPOSE: To compare the characteristics and outcomes of rectal cancer patients with local recurrence at a perianastomotic site (PA), a surgical field (SF) site, or in lateral lymph nodes (LLN). METHODS: A total of 114 consecutive patients who underwent surgery for recurrent, non-metastatic rectal cancer at a single comprehensive cancer center between 1997 and 2012 were grouped on the basis of radiographic assessment of type of recurrence: PA, 76 (67%) patients; SF, 25 (22%) patients; LLN, 13 (11%) patients. Demographic, clinical, and pathological features were compared between the three groups, as were disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Recurrence type was associated with positive circumferential margin in the primary resection (PA, 4 [6%]; SF, 4 [19%]; LLN, 3 [25%]; P = 0.027), prior neoadjuvant therapy for the primary tumor (PA, 57 [75%]; SF, 18 [72%]; LLN, 4 [31%]; P = 0.007), and location of the primary tumor in the upper rectum (PA, 33 [45%]; SF, 5 [23%]; LLN, 1 [8%]; P < 0.001). Patients with PA had longer median DFS (PA, 5.1 years; SF, 1.5 years; LLN, 1.2 years; P = 0.036). There was a non-significant trend toward longer OS and higher rates of R0 resection for PA. CONCLUSION: Type of recurrence after salvage surgery for locally recurrent rectal cancer is associated with longer DFS in patients with PA recurrence.

Anorectal Mucosal Melanoma in the Era of Immune Checkpoint Inhibition: Should We Change Our Surgical Management Paradigm?

BACKGROUND: The advent of immune checkpoint inhibition therapy has dramatically improved survival in patients with skin melanoma. Survival outcomes after resection of anorectal melanoma treated with immune checkpoint inhibition have not been reported. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare survival outcomes following surgical resection of anorectal melanoma between patients who received immune checkpoint inhibition and patients who did not. DESIGN: This study is a retrospective analysis of data from a prospectively maintained database. SETTING: This study was conducted at a comprehensive cancer center. PATIENTS: Patients who underwent surgery for anorectal melanoma between 2006 and 2017 were included. They were stratified according to the use of immune checkpoint inhibition. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes measured were overall and disease-specific survival. RESULTS: Of the 47 patients included in the analysis, 29 (62%) received immune checkpoint inhibition therapy. Twenty-two (76%) of the 29 patients received immune checkpoint inhibition after detection of metastasis or disease progression rather than in the neoadjuvant or adjuvant setting. Overall survival did not differ significantly between patients who received immune checkpoint inhibition therapy and patients who did not (median, 52 and 20 months; 5-year rate, 41% vs 35%; p = 0.25). Disease-specific survival also did not differ significantly. Our analysis did not identify any clinical or pathological features associated with response to immune checkpoint inhibition therapy or with survival. LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by its relatively small sample and retrospective design and by the heterogeneous treatment regimen in the immune checkpoint inhibition group. CONCLUSIONS: Immune checkpoint inhibition therapy by itself does not appear to improve survival in patients who undergo resection or excision of anorectal melanoma. Combinations of immune checkpoint inhibition with other therapeutic modalities warrant further investigation. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B499. MELANOMA DE LA MUCOSA ANORRECTAL EN LA ERA DE LOS INHIBIDORES DEL PUNTO DE CONTROL INMUNOLÓGICO: ¿DEBEMOS DE CAMBIAR NUESTRO PARADIGMA DEL MANEJO QUIRÚRGICO: El advenimiento de la terapia de los inhibidores del punto de control inmunológico, han mejorado dramáticamente la supervivencia en pacientes con melanoma de piel. No se han informado los resultados de supervivencia después de la resección del melanoma anorrectal, tratado con inhibidores del punto de control inmunológico.Comparar los resultados de supervivencia después de la resección quirúrgica de melanoma anorrectal entre pacientes que recibieron y no recibieron inhibidores del punto de control inmunológico.Análisis retrospectivo de una base de datos mantenida prospectivamente.Centro oncológico integral.Pacientes que se sometieron a cirugía por melanoma anorrectal entre 2006 y 2017. Los pacientes fueron estratificados según el uso de inhibidores del punto de control inmunológico.Supervivencia global y específica de la enfermedad.De los 47 pacientes incluidos en el análisis, 29 (62%) recibieron terapia de inhibidores del punto de control inmunológico. Veintidós (76%) de los 29 pacientes recibieron inhibidores del punto de control inmunológico después de la detección de metástasis o progresión de la enfermedad, en vez de administración adyuvante o neoadyuvante. La supervivencia global no varió significativamente entre los pacientes que recibieron o no recibieron terapia de inhibidores del punto de control inmunológico (mediana, 52 y 20 meses, respectivamente; tasa a 5 años, 41% frente a 35%, respectivamente; p = 0,25). La supervivencia específica de la enfermedad tampoco varió significativamente. Nuestro análisis no identificó ninguna característica clínica o patológica, asociada con la respuesta a la terapia de inhibidores del punto de control inmunológico o con la supervivencia.Muestra relativamente pequeña y diseño retrospectivo. Régimen de tratamiento heterogéneo en el grupo de inhibidores del punto de control inmunológico.La terapia por sí sola, de inhibidores del punto de control inmunológico, no parece mejorar la supervivencia en pacientes que se someten a resección o escisión de melanoma anorrectal. Las combinaciones de inhibidores del punto de control inmunológico con otras modalidades terapéuticas, merecen una mayor investigación. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B499. (Traducción-Dr. Fidel Ruiz Healy).

Primary Tumor Location and Outcomes After Cytoreductive Surgery and Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy for Peritoneal Metastases of Colorectal Origin.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to evaluate outcomes in patients with peritoneal metastasis of colorectal cancer (pmCRC) who underwent cytoreductive surgery and intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS/IPC) in relation to the location of the primary tumor. Regional therapy, including cytoreductive surgery and intraperitoneal chemotherapy, has been associated with improved survival in patients with pmCRC. Location of the primary tumor has been shown to be prognostic in patients with metastasis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective review was performed for all patients who underwent complete cytoreduction and intraperitoneal chemotherapy from 2010 to 2017, examining patient and tumor characteristics, overall and recurrence-free survival, recurrence patterns, and tumor mutational profiles. RESULTS: Ninety-three patients were included in the study: 49 (53%) with a right-sided and 44 (47%) with a left-sided primary tumor. Patients with a right-sided tumor had significantly shorter recurrence-free survival (median, 6.3 months; 95% CI, 4.7-8.1 months vs 12.3 months; 95% CI, 3.6-21.7 months; P = 0.02) and overall survival (median, 36.6 months; 95% CI, 26.4-46.9 months vs 83.3 months; 95% CI 44.2-122.4 months; P = 0.03). BRAF and KRAS mutations were more frequent in right-sided tumors, and APC and TP53 mutations were more frequent in left-sided tumors, which were more chromosomally instable. BRAF mutations were associated with early recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: Tumor sidedness is a predictor of oncological outcomes after CRS/IPC. Tumor sidedness and molecular characteristics should be considered when counseling patients regarding expected outcomes and when selecting or stratifying pmCRC patients for clinical trials of regional therapy.

Primary Tumor-Related Complications and Salvage Outcomes in Patients with Metastatic Rectal Cancer and an Untreated Primary Tumor.

BACKGROUND: For rectal cancer with unresectable metastases, current practice favors omitting interventions directed at the primary tumor in asymptomatic patients. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the proportion of patients with primary tumor-related complications, characterize salvage outcomes, and measure survival in patients with metastatic rectal cancer who did not undergo upfront intervention for their primary tumor. DESIGN: This is a retrospective analysis. SETTING: This study was conducted at a comprehensive cancer center. PATIENTS: Patients who presented between January 1, 2008, and December 31, 2015, with synchronous stage IV rectal cancer, an unresected primary tumor, and no prior primary tumor-directed intervention were selected. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcome measured was the rate of primary tumor-related complications in the cohort that did not receive any primary tumor-directed intervention. The Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression analysis were used to determine whether complications are associated with survival. RESULTS: The cohort comprised 358 patients with a median age of 56 years (22-92). Median follow-up was 26 months (range, 1-93 months). Among the 168 patients (46.9%) who eventually underwent elective resection of the primary tumor, the surgery was performed with curative intent in 66 patients (18.4%) and preemptive intent in 102 patients (28.5%). Of the 190 patients who did not undergo an upfront or elective intervention for the primary tumor, 68 (35.8%) experienced complications. Nonsurgical intervention for complications was attempted in 34 patients with an overall success rate of 61.8% (21/34). Surgical intervention was performed in 47 patients (including 13 patients for whom nonsurgical intervention failed): diversion in 26 patients and resection in 21 patients. Of those 47 patients, 42 (89.4%) ended up with a colostomy or ileostomy. LIMITATIONS: This study was conducted at a single center. CONCLUSION: A significant proportion of patients with metastatic rectal cancer and untreated primary tumor experience primary tumor-related complications. These patients should be followed closely, and preemptive intervention (resection, diversion, or radiation) should be considered if the primary tumor progresses despite systemic therapy. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B400. COMPLICACIONES RELACIONADAS CON EL TUMOR PRIMARIO Y RESULTADOS DE RESCATE EN PACIENTES CON CÁNCER DE RECTO METASTÁSICO Y UN TUMOR PRIMARIO NO TRATADO: Para el cáncer de recto con metástasis no resecables, la práctica actual favorece la omisión de las intervenciones dirigidas al tumor primario en pacientes asintomáticos.Determinar la proporción de pacientes con complicaciones relacionadas con el tumor primario, caracterizar los resultados de rescate y medir la supervivencia en pacientes con cáncer rectal metastásico que no se sometieron a una intervención inicial para su tumor primario.Análisis retrospectivo.Centro oncológico integral.Pacientes que se presentaron entre el 1 de enero de 2008 y el 31 de diciembre de 2015 con cáncer de recto en estadio IV sincrónico, un tumor primario no resecado y sin intervención previa dirigida al tumor primario.Tasa de complicaciones relacionadas con el tumor primario en la cohorte que no recibió ninguna intervención dirigida al tumor primario. Se utilizó el método de Kaplan-Meier y el análisis de regresión de Cox para determinar si las complicaciones están asociadas con la supervivencia.La cohorte estuvo compuesta por 358 pacientes con una mediana de edad de 56 años (22-92). La mediana de seguimiento fue de 26 meses (rango, 1 a 93 meses). Entre los 168 pacientes (46,9%) que finalmente se sometieron a resección electiva del tumor primario, la cirugía se realizó con intención curativa en 66 pacientes (18,4%) y con intención preventiva en 102 pacientes (28,5%). De los 190 pacientes que no se sometieron a una intervención inicial o electiva para el tumor primario, 68 (35,8%) experimentaron complicaciones. Se intentó una intervención no quirúrgica para las complicaciones en 34 pacientes con una tasa de éxito global del 61,8% (21 de 34). La intervención quirúrgica se realizó en 47 pacientes (incluidos 13 pacientes en los que falló la intervención no quirúrgica): derivación en 26 pacientes y resección en 21 pacientes. De esos 47 pacientes, 42 (89,4%) terminaron con una colostomía o ileostomía.Único centro.Una proporción significativa de pacientes con cáncer de recto metastásico y primario no tratado experimentan complicaciones relacionadas con el tumor primario. Se debe hacer un seguimiento estrecho de estos pacientes y considerar la posibilidad de una intervención preventiva (resección, derivación o radiación) si el tumor primario progresa a pesar de la terapia sistémica. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B400.

Patient-Reported Bowel Function in Patients With Rectal Cancer Managed by a Watch-and-Wait Strategy After Neoadjuvant Therapy: A Case-Control Study.

BACKGROUND: A watch-and-wait strategy is a nonoperative alternative to sphincter-preserving surgery for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer who achieve a clinical complete response after neoadjuvant therapy. There are limited data about bowel function for patients undergoing this organ-preservation approach. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare bowel function in patients with rectal cancer managed with a watch-and-wait approach with bowel function in patients who underwent sphincter-preserving surgery (total mesorectal excision). DESIGN: This was a retrospective case-control study using patient-reported outcomes. SETTINGS: The study was conducted at a comprehensive cancer center. PATIENTS: Twenty-one patients underwent a watch-and-wait approach and were matched 1:1 with 21 patients from a pool of 190 patients who underwent sphincter-preserving surgery, based on age, sex, and tumor distance from the anal verge. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Bowel function was measured using the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Bowel Function Instrument. RESULTS: Patients in the watch-and-wait arm had better bowel function on the overall scale (median total score, 76 vs 55; p < 0.001) and on all of the subscales, with the greatest difference on the urgency/soilage subscale (median score, 20 vs 12; p < 0.001). LIMITATIONS: The study was limited by its retrospective design, small sample size, and temporal variability between surgery and time of questionnaire completion. CONCLUSIONS: A watch-and-wait strategy correlated with overall better bowel function when compared with sphincter-preserving surgery using a comprehensive validated bowel dysfunction tool. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B218. FUNCIÓN EVACUATORIA INFORMADA POR PACIENTES EN CÁNCER RECTAL MANEJADO CON UNA ESTRATEGIA DE OBSERVAR Y ESPERAR DESPUÉS DE LA TERAPIA NEOADYUVANTE: UN ESTUDIO DE CASOS Y CONTROLES: Observar y esperar es una alternativa no operativa a la cirugía de preservación del esfínter para pacientes con cáncer rectal localmente avanzado que logran una respuesta clínica completa después de la terapia neoadyuvante. Hay datos limitados sobre la función evacuatoria en pacientes sometidos a este abordaje para preservación de órganos.Evaluar la función evacuatoria en pacientes con cáncer rectal manejados con observar y esperar comparado a pacientes sometidos a cirugía de preservación de esfínteres (escisión mesorrectal total).Estudio retrospectivo de casos y controles utilizando resultados reportados por pacientes.Centro especializado oncológico.21 pacientes se sometieron a observar y esperar y se compararon con 21 pacientes de un grupo de 190 pacientes que se sometieron a cirugía de preservación de esfínteres controlando por edad, sexo y la distancia del tumor al borde anal.Función evacuatoria utilizando un instrumento de valoración del Centro de Cáncer Memorial Sloan Kettering.Los pacientes de observar y esperar demostraron mejor función evacuatoria en la escala general (puntuación total media, 76 versus 55; p <0,001) y en todas las subescalas, con la mayor diferencia en la subescala de urgencia / ensuciamiento fecal (puntuación media, 20 versus 12; p <0,001).Diseño retrospectivo, numero de muestra pequeño y variabilidad temporal entre la cirugía y el tiempo de finalización del cuestionario.Observar y esperar se correlacionó con mejor función evacuatoria en general en comparación con la cirugía de preservación del esfínter utilizando una herramienta integral validada para la disfunción evacuatoria. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B218. (Traducción-Dr. Adrián Ortega).

Induction Chemotherapy Reduces Patient-reported Toxicities During Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation with Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy for Rectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Initial treatment with either neoadjuvant chemoradiation (CRT) or induction FOLFOX (5-Fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin) chemotherapy followed by CRT is considered standard treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer. We compared patient-reported outcomes (PRO) during CRT in patients who had received induction chemotherapy versus those who did not. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We reviewed records of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer who were treated with CRT between September 2009 and October 2014, and who had completed ≥ 4 PRO assessments during treatment. Clinician- and patient-reported toxicities were collected each week during treatment. We fit binomial generalized linear models to maximum toxicity scores across all patients' visits. RESULTS: Of 123 patients with ≥ 4 PRO assessments, 87 (71%) patients reported a clinically meaningful PRO score of 3 or higher for diarrhea, and 91 (74%) patients reported a PRO score of ≥ 3 for urgency, during 1 or more weeks of treatment, corresponding to 'very frequent' or worse. Of 116 patients who had also completed ≥ 4 clinician-reported assessments for descriptive analysis, clinically significant diarrhea (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events grade ≥ 2) was reported in 9% of patients, and grade 2 proctitis and cystitis were reported in 20% and 4%, respectively. Eighty-four (68%) patients had undergone induction chemotherapy prior to CRT. Patients who received induction chemotherapy had 68% lower odds of experiencing significant urgency (odds ratio [OR], 0.32; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.11-0.95; P = .04), 76% lower odds of bleeding (OR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.1-0.62; P < .01), and 75% lower odds of tenesmus (OR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.11-0.6; P < .01) versus those treated with upfront CRT. CONCLUSION: Based on PROs, a high proportion of patients experienced clinically significant symptoms during pelvic CRT, with diarrhea and urgency being most commonly reported. This appears to be under-reported on clinician-reported assessments. Delivery of induction chemotherapy was associated with lower odds of experiencing urgency, bleeding, and tenesmus on PROs during subsequent CRT, with no significant impact on diarrhea and rectal pain.

Assessment of a Watch-and-Wait Strategy for Rectal Cancer in Patients With a Complete Response After Neoadjuvant Therapy.

IMPORTANCE: The watch-and-wait (WW) strategy aims to spare patients with rectal cancer unnecessary resection. OBJECTIVE: To analyze the outcomes of WW among patients with rectal cancer who had a clinical complete response to neoadjuvant therapy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This retrospective case series analysis conducted at a comprehensive cancer center in New York included patients who received a diagnosis of rectal adenocarcinoma between January 1, 2006, and January 31, 2015. The median follow-up was 43 months. Data analyses were conducted from June 1, 2016, to October 1, 2018. EXPOSURES: Patients had a clinical complete response after completing neoadjuvant therapy and agreed to a WW strategy of active surveillance and possible salvage surgery (n = 113), or patients underwent total mesorectal excision and were found to have a pathologic complete response (pCR) at resection (n = 136). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Kaplan-Meier estimates were used for analyses of local regrowth and 5-year rates of overall survival, disease-free survival, and disease-specific survival. RESULTS: Compared with the 136 patients in the pCR group, the 113 patients in the WW group were older (median [range], 67.2 [32.1-90.9] vs 57.3 [25.0-87.9] years, P < .001) with cancers closer to the anal verge (median [range] height from anal verge, 5.5 [0.0-15.0] vs 7.0 [0.0-13.0] cm). All 22 local regrowths in the WW group were detected on routine surveillance and treated by salvage surgery (20 total mesorectal excisions plus 2 transanal excisions). Pelvic control after salvage surgery was maintained in 20 of 22 patients (91%). No pelvic recurrences occurred in the pCR group. Rectal preservation was achieved in 93 of 113 patients (82%) in the WW group (91 patients with no local regrowths plus 2 patients with local regrowths salvaged with transanal excision). At 5 years, overall survival was 73% (95% CI, 60%-89%) in the WW group and 94% (95% CI, 90%-99%) in the pCR group; disease-free survival was 75% (95% CI, 62%-90%) in the WW group and 92% (95% CI, 87%-98%) in the pCR group; and disease-specific survival was 90% (95% CI, 81%-99%) in the WW group and 98% (95% CI, 95%-100%) in the pCR group. A higher rate of distant metastasis was observed among patients in the WW group who had local regrowth vs those who did not have local regrowth (36% vs 1%, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: A WW strategy for select rectal cancer patients who had a clinical complete response after neoadjuvant therapy resulted in excellent rectal preservation and pelvic tumor control; however, in the WW group, worse survival was noted along with a higher incidence of distant progression in patients with local regrowth vs those without local regrowth.