Impact of comprehensive geriatric assessment on treatment strategies and complications in older adults with colorectal cancer considering surgery.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA) in customizing care for elderly cancer patients, specifically focusing on colorectal cancer. The research compared treatment strategies and outcomes in older adults considered for surgery before and after the initiation of a Geriatric Oncology Service (GOS). METHODS: Conducting a comparative study, two cohorts of consecutive colorectal cancer patients aged 75 or older were examined: the control group (n = 156) and the GOS group (n = 158). Upon the treating surgeon's GOS consultation request, a geriatrician and an oncologist performed CGA, guiding treatment decisions and perioperative interventions. Postoperative complications were compared using propensity score matching (PSM). RESULTS: In the GOS group, 91% (n = 116) underwent CGA consultations, influencing decisions to forego surgery in 12 patients. After PSM for surgical cases (controls n = 146, GOS n = 146), each group comprised 128 patients. Perioperative physical therapy and pharmacist referrals were more frequent in the GOS group. The GOS group exhibited a significantly lower incidence of postoperative complications (22%) compared to the control group (33%) (p = 0.0496). CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing colorectal surgery post-GOS implementation experienced a notable reduction in postoperative complications, highlighting the positive impact of personalized geriatric assessment on surgical outcomes in the elderly.

Japanese Classification of Esophageal Cancer, 12th Edition: Part II.

This is the second half of English edition of Japanese Classification of Esophageal Cancer, 12th Edition that was published by the Japan Esophageal Society in 2022.

Japanese Classification of Esophageal Cancer, 12th Edition: Part I.

This is the first half of English edition of Japanese Classification of Esophageal Cancer, 12th Edition that was published by the Japan Esophageal Society in 2022.

Esophagectomy for esophageal cancer in patients with a history of total pharyngolaryngectomy: a Japanese nationwide retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Second primary esophageal cancer often develops in patients with head and neck cancer, and esophagectomy in patients with a history of total pharyngolaryngectomy (TPL) is challenging. However, the clinical outcomes of these patients have yet to be examined in a multicenter setting. METHODS: We evaluated the surgical outcomes of a nationwide cohort of 62 patients who underwent esophagectomy for esophageal cancer with a history of TPL. RESULTS: Ivor-Lewis and McKeown esophagectomies were performed in 32 (51.6%) and 30 (48.4%) patients, respectively. Postoperatively, 23 patients (37.1%) developed severe complications, and 7 patients (11.3%) required reoperation within 30 days. Pneumonia and anastomotic leakage occurred in 13 (21.0%) and 16 (25.8%) patients, respectively. Anastomotic leakage occurred more frequently in the McKeown group than in the Ivor-Lewis group (46.7% vs. 6.2%, P < 0.001). The adjusted odds ratio for anastomotic leakage in the McKeown group was 9.64 (95% confidence intervals (CI), 2.11-70.82, P = 0.008). Meanwhile, the 5-year overall survival rates were comparable between the groups (41.8% for Ivor-Lewis and 42.7% for McKeown), and the adjusted hazard ratio of overall survival was 1.44 (95% CI, 0.64-3.29; P = 0.381; Ivor-Lewis as the reference). CONCLUSIONS: In our cohort, anastomotic leakage occurred more frequently after McKeown than Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy, and almost half of patients in the McKeown group experienced leakage. Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy is preferred for decreasing anastomotic leakage when oncologically and technically feasible.

Healthcare professionals roles in pancreatic cancer care: patient and family views and preferences.

OBJECTIVES: This study explored the information needs and requirements of patients with pancreatic cancer (PPCs) and their families through patients' and families' views and preferences (PVPs) collected by healthcare professionals (HCPs) and to identify differences in PVPs by profession. METHODS: We conducted an anonymous web-based survey of HCPs in cancer care hospitals in Japan, posing specific questions from patients or families regarding pancreatic cancer within the past year. We qualitatively analysed the data and classified them into several categories according to their content. We also compared the percentage of PVPs in each category in the medical profession. RESULTS: We collected 893 PVPs from 353 HCPs and classified them into 15 topics within 5 categories: (1) treatment and care, (2) characteristics of the disease, (3) daily life, (4) feelings of patients or families and (5) communication with HCPs/peer support information. Physicians, nurses and pharmacists received mainly PVPs in categories 1 and 2. Characteristically, cancer counsellors received PVPs in all categories, with higher frequencies for categories 3-5. CONCLUSIONS: PPCs and families have diverse PVPs, and appear to select different HCPs for consultation based on their specific concerns. Each HCP should recognise that their individual experience may be insufficient in understanding the full spectrum of PVPs; however, cancer counsellors tend to have a broader awareness of them. To support PPCs and families, HCPs should appropriately collaborate with each other, considering that HCPs like cancer counsellors who do not provide direct treatment still play an important role in providing holistic support.

A Multicenter Analysis of Short-term and Long-term Outcomes Following Laparoscopic Multivisceral Resection for Advanced Colorectal Cancer.

Background/Aim: Recent research has demonstrated that laparoscopic multivisceral resection (MVR) for advanced colorectal cancer is safe, practicable, and yields satisfactory oncological results, which is in line with the growing usage of laparoscopic surgery. The effectiveness of laparoscopic MVR is still debatable, though. The goal of this study was to compare the short- and long-term results of patients with advanced colorectal cancer treated with open MVR with laparoscopic procedures. Patients and Methods: Data on 3,571 consecutive patients hospitalized at the Kyushu University National Kyushu Cancer Center for colorectal cancer surgery between 2004 and 2020 were gathered retrospectively. In the end, 84 individuals with advanced colorectal cancer who had a colectomy with MVR were examined. We evaluated invasiveness in terms of complications, blood loss, and operating time. Recurrence-free survival rates and overall 5-year survival were among the oncological outcomes. Results: Of the 84 patients examined, 29 underwent laparoscopic treatment, and 55 underwent open treatment. The laparoscopic surgery group experienced shorter hospital stays (15 vs. 18 days, p<0.05) and much less blood loss (median volume: 167 vs. 1,058 g, p<0.005) than the open surgery group. Following the exclusion of patients with stage IV colorectal cancer from the study (groups undergoing laparoscopic surgery, n=25; open surgery, n=38), the groups displayed comparable pathologic results and no discernible variations in either the 5-year overall survival (p=0.87) or recurrence-free survival (p=0.86). Conclusion: In certain individuals with advanced colorectal cancer, a laparoscopic method of manipulation with MVR may be less invasive than an open method without compromising the prognosis.