RESUMEN
The American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging system for all cancer sites, including gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs), is meant to be dynamic, requiring periodic updates to optimize AJCC staging definitions. This entails the collaboration of experts charged with evaluating new evidence that supports changes to each staging system. GEP-NETs are the second most prevalent neoplasm of gastrointestinal origin after colorectal cancer. Since publication of the AJCC eighth edition, the World Health Organization has updated the classification and separates grade 3 GEP-NETs from poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinoma. In addition, because of major advancements in diagnostic and therapeutic technologies for GEP-NETs, AJCC version 9 advocates against the use of serum chromogranin A for the diagnosis and monitoring of GEP-NETs. Furthermore, AJCC version 9 recognizes the increasing role of endoscopy and endoscopic resection in the diagnosis and management of NETs, particularly in the stomach, duodenum, and colorectum. Finally, T1NXM0 has been added to stage I in these disease sites as well as in the appendix.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Intestinales , Estadificación de Neoplasias , Tumores Neuroendocrinos , Neoplasias Pancreáticas , Neoplasias Gástricas , Humanos , Tumores Neuroendocrinos/patología , Tumores Neuroendocrinos/diagnóstico , Tumores Neuroendocrinos/terapia , Estadificación de Neoplasias/métodos , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/patología , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Gástricas/patología , Neoplasias Gástricas/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Intestinales/patología , Neoplasias Intestinales/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Intestinales/terapia , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is a major cause of cancer-related death, with a 5-year relative overall survival of up to 20%. The liver is the most common site of distant metastasis in colorectal cancer (CRC), with about 50% of CRC patients metastasizing to their liver over the course of their disease. Complete liver resection is the primary modality of treatment for resectable colorectal cancer liver metastasis (CRLM), with an overall 5-year survival rate of up to 58%. However, only 15% to 20% of patients with CRLM are deemed suitable for resection at presentation. For unresectable diseases, the median survival of patients remains low even with the best chemotherapy. In recent decades, the management of CRLM has continued to evolve with the expansion of resection criteria, novel targeted systemic therapies, and improved locoregional therapies. However, due to the heterogeneity of the CRC patient population, the optimal evaluation of treatment options for CRLM remains complex. Therefore, effective management requires a multidisciplinary team to help define resectability and devise a personalized treatment approach, from the initial diagnosis to the final treatment.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Colorrectales , Hepatectomía , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Humanos , Neoplasias Colorrectales/patología , Neoplasias Colorrectales/terapia , Neoplasias Hepáticas/secundario , Neoplasias Hepáticas/terapia , Tasa de SupervivenciaRESUMEN
Objective: Hepatobiliary tumors have evolving management guidelines. Patient educational needs and interest in community engagement are unknown. This study serves as a needs assessment. Methods: A prospective, needs assessment, survey study of hepatobiliary patients was performed (2016-2019). Surveys (n = 169) were distributed covering three domains of interest: informational needs, interest in outreach, and engagement preferences. Results: Seventy patients completed the survey (response rate = 41.4%). Most patients had completed surgical treatment (84.3%). Cancer treatment was ranked as their primary topic of interest (n = 39, 55.7bold%), followed by symptom management, nutrition, and survivorship. Most patients did not participate in screening (n = 57, 81.4%), though were interested in learning more about these programs. Thirty-nine patients (55.7%) stated they would want to receive more education. Only 17 (24.3%) were interested in attending in-person events. Patients preferred online methods for education (n = 49, 70%). While patients were aware of their case presentation at tumor board, only 38 (54.3%) felt well-informed about recommendations. Conclusion: Multidisciplinary care is complex and difficult for patients to navigate. Most patients have interest in educational resources and prefer online modalities. Patients understand multidisciplinary tumor boards, but communication could be improved. Innovation: These data inform a new, innovative, approach to outreach efforts in this population.