Early-onset Colorectal Cancer Patients Do Not Require Shorter Intervals for Post-surgical Surveillance Colonoscopy.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Early-onset colorectal cancer (EO-CRC), diagnosed before age 50, is rising in incidence worldwide. Although post-surgical colonoscopy surveillance strategies exist, appropriate intervals in EO-CRC remain elusive, as long-term surveillance outcomes remain scant. We sought to compare findings of surveillance colonoscopies of EO-CRC with patients with average onset colorectal cancer (AO-CRC) to help define surveillance outcomes in these groups. METHODS: Single-institution retrospective chart review identified EO-CRC and AO-CRC patients with colonoscopy and no evidence of disease. Surveillance intervals and time to development of advanced neoplasia (CRC and advanced polyps [adenoma/sessile serrated]) were examined. For each group, 3 serial surveillance colonoscopies were evaluated. Statistical analyses were performed utilizing log-ranked Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards. RESULTS: A total of 1259 patients with CRC were identified, with 612 and 647 patients in the EO-CRC and AO-CRC groups, respectively. Compared with patients with AO-CRC, patients with EO-CRC had a 29% decreased risk of developing advanced neoplasia from time of initial surgery to first surveillance colonoscopy (hazard ratio, 0.71; 95% confidence interval, 0.52-1.0). Average follow-up time from surgical resection to first surveillance colonoscopy was 12.6 months for both cohorts. Overall surveillance findings differed between cohorts (P = .003), and patients with EO-CRC were found to have less advanced neoplasia compared with their counterparts with AO-CRC (12.4% vs 16.0%, respectively). Subsequent colonoscopies found that, while patients with EO-CRC returned for follow-up surveillance colonoscopy earlier than patients with AO-CRC, the EO-CRC cohort did not have more advanced neoplasia nor non-advanced adenomas. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with EO-CRC do not have an increased risk of advanced neoplasia compared with patients with AO-CRC and therefore do not require more frequent colonoscopy surveillance than current guidelines recommend.

Morbidity and mortality in patients with stage IV pancreatic adenocarcinoma and acute cholangitis: Outcomes and risk prognostication.

BACKGROUND: Acute cholangitis (AC) is a common complication of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Herein, we evaluated outcomes after the first AC episode and predictors of mortality and AC recurrence in patients with stage IV PDAC. METHODS: We conducted a single-center, retrospective observational study using institutional databases. Clinical data and outcomes for patients with stage IV PDAC and at least one documented episode of AC, were assessed. Overall survival (OS) was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and Cox regression model was employed to identify predictors of AC recurrence and mortality. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-four patients with stage IV PDAC and AC identified between January 01, 2014 and October 31, 2020 were included. Median OS after first episode of AC was 4.1 months (95 % CI, 4.0-5.5), and 30-day, 6, and 12-month survival was 86.2 % (95 % CI, 80.3-92.5), 37 % (95 % CI, 29.3-46.6 %) and 18.9 % (95 % CI, 13.1-27.3 %), respectively. Primary tumor in pancreatic body/tail (HR 2.29, 95 % CI: 1.26 to 4.18, p = 0.011), concomitant metastases to liver and other sites (HR 1.96, 95 % CI: 1.16 to 3.31, p = 0.003) and grade 3 AC (HR 2.26, 95 % CI: 1.45 to 3.52, p < 0.001), predicted worse outcomes. Intensive care unit admission, sepsis, systemic therapy, treatment regimen, and time to intervention did not predict survival or risk of recurrence of AC. CONCLUSIONS: AC confers significant morbidity and mortality in advanced PDAC. Worse outcomes are associated with higher grade AC, primary tumor location in pancreatic body/tail, and metastases to liver and other sites.

Treatment of esophageal adenocarcinoma in patients with a history of bariatric surgery.

BACKGROUND: The relationship among obesity, bariatric surgery, and esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) is complex, given that some bariatric procedures are thought to be associated with increased incidence of reflux and Barrett's esophagus. Previous bariatric surgery may complicate the use of the stomach as a conduit for esophagectomy. In this study, we presented our experience with patients who developed EAC after bariatric surgery and described the challenges encountered and the techniques used. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of our institutional database to identify all patients at our institution who were treated for EAC after previously undergoing bariatric surgery. RESULTS: In total, 19 patients underwent resection with curative intent for EAC after bariatric surgery, including 10 patients who underwent sleeve gastrectomy. The median age at diagnosis of EAC was 63 years; patients who underwent sleeve gastrectomy were younger (median age, 56 years). The median time from bariatric surgery to EAC was 7 years. Most patients had a body mass index (BMI) score of >30 kg/m2 at the time of diagnosis of EAC; approximately 40% had class III obesity (BMI score > 40 kg/m2). Six patients (32%) had known Barrett's esophagus before undergoing a reflux-increasing bariatric procedure. Sleeve gastrectomy patients underwent esophagectomy with gastric conduit, colonic interposition, or esophagojejunostomy. Only 1 patient had an anastomotic leak (after esophagojejunostomy). CONCLUSION: Endoscopy should be required both before (for treatment selection) and after all bariatric surgical procedures. Resection of EAC after bariatric surgery requires a highly individualized approach but is safe and feasible.