Sorafenib Versus Observation Following Radical Metastasectomy for Clear-cell Renal Cell Carcinoma: Results from the Phase 2 Randomized Open-label RESORT Study.

BACKGROUND: In selected metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients, radical metastasectomy followed by observation is a potential strategy. It is still to be defined whether systemic therapy should be administered following metastasectomy. OBJECTIVE: To assess the potential benefit of postoperative treatment with sorafenib compared with observation alone after radical metastasectomy in mRCC patients. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The RESORT trial was a multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase 2 study conducted between November 2012 and November 2017 in Italy. Patients with clear-cell mRCC pretreated with nephrectomy and undergoing radical metastasectomy (three or fewer lesions) were eligible for the study. Patients were randomized (1:1) within 12 wk from metastasectomy to sorafenib (standard dose 400 mg twice daily) or observation for a maximum of 52 wk. Stratification factors were interval from nephrectomy, site, and number of lesions. Overall, 76 patients were screened and 69 were randomized: 33 were assigned to sorafenib and 36 to observation. The primary endpoint was recurrence-free survival (RFS). Secondary endpoints were overall survival and the safety profile. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: RFS curves were estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method, and the log-rank test was used to statistically compare the curves. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: At a median follow-up of 38 mo, median RFS was 37 mo (95% confidence interval [CI] 20-not available [NA]) in the observation arm versus 21 mo (95% CI 11-NA) in the sorafenib arm (log-rank test p = 0.404), with 12-, 24-, and 36-mo RFS probability of 74% versus 63%, 59% versus 49%, and 50% versus 41%, respectively, in the observation versus the sorafenib arm. Any-grade adverse event (AE) rates were 84% in the sorafenib arm and 31% in the observation arm; grade ≥3 AE rates were 22% and 3% in the sorafenib and the observation arm, respectively, with a rate of treatment discontinuation for AEs of 19% in the sorafenib arm. CONCLUSIONS: This prospective study showed that systemic treatment with sorafenib did not increase RFS as compared with observation in mRCC patients following radical metastasectomy. PATIENT SUMMARY: This article reports the clinical outcome of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with sorafenib or managed with an observation-alone strategy after the radical surgery of metastases. We found that sorafenib did not improve the patient outcome in terms of relapse-free survival in this selected population.

Impact of Perioperative Chemotherapy on Prognosis of Patients with Esophageal Carcinoma Undergoing Pulmonary Metastasectomy.

PURPOSE: To evaluate prognosis of patients with esophageal carcinoma undergoing pulmonary metastasectomy, and help determine appropriate therapeutic strategies. METHODS: We retrospectively studied 16 patients (15 men and one woman; median age 66.5 years) with esophageal carcinoma, who underwent curative resection of pulmonary metastases. Clinical characteristics and surgical outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: In all, 11 patients underwent wedge resection, three segmentectomy, and two lobectomies. The average operating time and blood loss were 147 min and 103 mL, respectively. There were no perioperative deaths or severe complications. Five-year overall survival rate was 40.2% and 2-year disease-free survival rate was 35.2%. All recurrences occurred within 2 years. Univariate and multivariate analyses revealed that absence of adjuvant chemotherapy after therapy for esophageal carcinoma was a significant predictor of poor prognosis and recurrence, respectively (p <0.05). The prognosis of seven patients who underwent esophagectomy with adjuvant chemotherapy was better than that of the other nine patients (p = 0.0166). CONCLUSION: Pulmonary metastasectomy in patients with esophageal carcinoma was only one choice of multimodal treatment, and perioperative chemotherapy was important for long-term survival after pulmonary metastasectomy. Pulmonary metastasectomy was effective in patients undergoing esophagectomy with adjuvant chemotherapy.

Contrast-enhanced intra-operative ultrasound as a clinical decision making tool during surgery for colorectal liver metastases: The ULIIS study.

BACKGROUND: Detecting more colorectal liver metastases (CRLMs) during surgery may help optimise strategy and improve outcomes. Our objective was to determine clinical utility (CU) of contrast-enhanced intra-operative ultrasound (CE-IOUS) using sulphur hexafluoride microbubbles during CRLM surgery. METHOD: A prospective phase II trial performed at two comprehensive cancer research centres. Patients operated for CRLMs were eligible and assessable if intra-operative ultrasound (IOUS) and CE-IOUS had been performed and pathological results were available and/or 3-month imaging. CU was defined as the justified change in planned surgical strategy or procedure using CE-IOUS. RESULTS: Out of the 68 patients enrolled, 54 were eligible and assessable. 43 patients underwent pre-operative chemotherapy. The median number of CRLMs was 2 (range, 1-11). Pre-operative staging was performed using MRI. IOUS allowed identification of 45 new CRLMs in 13 (24.7%) patients. Compared to IOUS, CE-IOUS allowed identification of 10 additional CRLMs in 9 (16.7%) patients. Surgery was altered and justified in 4 patients only, leading to a CU rate of 7.70% (95 CI, [3.2, 18.6]). No missing CRLMs were identified by CE-IOUS. CONCLUSIONS: Although the primary endpoint was not met for one protocol violation, secondary endpoints indicate that CE-IOUS has an intermediate added-value for surgeons treating CRLMs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01880554 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/).

Surveillance for Gastric Cancer.

This article discusses the current National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines and other available Western and Eastern guidelines for the surveillance of gastric cancer following surgical resection. It reviews the literature assessing the utility of intensive surveillance strategies for gastric cancer, which fails to show an improvement in survival. The unique issues relating to follow-up of early gastric cancer and after endoscopic resection of early gastric cancer are discussed. This article also reviews the available modalities for follow-up. In addition, it briefly discusses the advancements in treatment of recurrent and metastatic disease and the implications for gastric cancer survival and surveillance strategies.

Missing metastases as a model to challenge current therapeutic algorithms in colorectal liver metastases.

In oncosurgical approach to colorectal liver metastases, surgery remains considered as the only potentially curative option, while chemotherapy alone represents a strictly palliative treatment. However, missing metastases, defined as metastases disappearing after chemotherapy, represent a unique model to evaluate the curative potential of chemotherapy and to challenge current therapeutic algorithms. We reviewed recent series on missing colorectal liver metastases to evaluate incidence of this phenomenon, predictive factors and rates of cure defined by complete pathologic response in resected missing metastases and sustained clinical response when they were left unresected. According to the progresses in the efficacy of chemotherapeutic regimen, the incidence of missing liver metastases regularly increases these last years. Main predictive factors are small tumor size, low marker level, duration of chemotherapy, and use of intra-arterial chemotherapy. Initial series showed low rates of complete pathologic response in resected missing metastases and high recurrence rates when unresected. However, recent reports describe complete pathologic responses and sustained clinical responses reaching 50%, suggesting that chemotherapy could be curative in some cases. Accordingly, in case of missing colorectal liver metastases, the classical recommendation to resect initial tumor sites might have become partially obsolete. Furthermore, the curative effect of chemotherapy in selected cases could lead to a change of paradigm in patients with unresectable liver-only metastases, using intensive first-line chemotherapy to intentionally induce missing metastases, followed by adjuvant surgery on remnant chemoresistant tumors and close surveillance of initial sites that have been left unresected.

[Cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for peritoneal carcinomatosis of colorectal and appendiceal origin].

BACKGROUND: We report our initial experience combining cytoreductive surgery (CRS) plus intraperitoneal chemotherapy with hyperthermia (HIPEC) in a selected group of patients presenting with disseminated peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) of colorectaL or appendiceaL origin at a single tertiary referral institution. METHODS: The study included patients who underwent CRS with HIPEC at the Sheba Medical Center between April 2009 and December 2011. The HIPEC technique was administered with the open Coliseum technique reaching a steady state of mitomycin-C delivery at 410 C for perfusion duration of 90 minutes. RESULTS: AnaLysis included 45 patients (18 males) incorporating 42 cases of primary colorectal cancer (CRC) or appendiceal cancer and 3 cases of pseudomyxoma peritonei. Thirty-seven patients (82%) underwent CC-0 resections with a median overall hospital stay of 8 days (range 5-43). There was one perioperative death at 90 days. The perioperative complication rate was 31.1%. The median follow-up was 12 months (range 2-36) during which 13 patients died. Among the CRC and appendiceal cancer group the median overall survival was 20.2 months and the median progression free survival was 16.4 months (Kaplan-Meier analysis). During follow-up, 23 patients experienced disease progression. CONCLUSION: The selective use of cytoreductive surgery plus hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis from colorectal or appendiceal origin is safe with acceptable morbidity and low mortality.

Preoperative chemotherapy prior to pulmonary metastasectomy in surgically resected primary colorectal carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The benefit of preoperative chemotherapy prior to pulmonary metastasectomy for patients with colorectal carcinoma (CRC) is unknown. Here, we identify outcomes of preoperative chemotherapy in patients with resected primary CRC who then underwent pulmonary metastasectomy. METHODS: We queried a prospective database to identify treatment characteristics. Multivariate analyses identified predictors of overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: 229 patients underwent lung metastasectomy, of whom 115 proceeded to surgery without chemotherapy while 114 received preoperative regimen based on oxaliplatin (32%), irinotecan (46%), capecitabine (16%), or other (6%). Median PFS in preoperative chemotherapy vs. surgery alone arms were comparable (p=0.004). Patients on oxaliplatin-based therapy had an improved OS vs. an irinotecan, capecitabine, or alternate regimen (p=.019). On multivariate analysis, the irinotecan subset had a worse OS (HR 1.846; 95% CI 1.070, 3.185) vs. surgery alone arm (p=0.028). The OS of an oxaliplatin-based regimen vs. no chemotherapy was inconclusive (HR 0.57; 95% CI 0.237 to 1.389, p=0.218). Multivariate analysis demonstrated a worse PFS and OS for the male gender and an incomplete resection (R2). CONCLUSION: Prospective trials on specific preoperative regimens and criteria for patient selection may identify a role for preoperative chemotherapy prior to a curative pulmonary metastasectomy.