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.

A Prospective Clinical Trial to Evaluate Mesothelin as a Biomarker for the Clinical Management of Patients With Esophageal Adenocarcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the utility of serum soluble mesothelin-related peptide (SMRP) and tumor mesothelin expression in the management of esophageal adenocarcinoma (ADC). BACKGROUND: Clinical management of esophageal ADC is limited by a lack of accurate evaluation of tumor burden, treatment response, and disease recurrence. Our retrospective data showed that tumor mesothelin and its serum correlate, SMRP, are overexpressed and associated with poor outcomes in patients with esophageal ADC. METHODS: Serum SMRP and tumoral mesothelin expression from 101 patients with locally advanced esophageal ADC were analyzed before induction chemoradiation (pretreatment) and at the time of resection (posttreatment), as a biomarker for treatment response, disease recurrence, and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Pre and posttreatment serum SMRP was ≥1 nM in 49% and 53%, and pre and post-treatment tumor mesothelin expression was >25% in 35% and 46% of patients, respectively. Pretreatment serum SMRP was not significantly associated with tumor stage ( P = 0.9), treatment response (radiologic response, P = 0.4; pathologic response, P = 0.7), or recurrence ( P =0.229). Pretreatment tumor mesothelin expression was associated with OS (hazard ratio: 2.08; 95% CI: 1.14-3.79; P = 0.017) but had no statistically significant association with recurrence ( P = 0.9). Three-year OS of patients with pretreatment tumor mesothelin expression of ≤25% was 78% (95% CI: 68%-89%), compared with 49% (95% CI: 35%-70%) among those with >25%. CONCLUSIONS: Pretreatment tumor mesothelin expression is prognostic of OS for patients with locally advanced esophageal ADC, whereas serum SMRP is not a reliable biomarker for monitoring treatment response or recurrence.

Factors associated with detection of hereditary diffuse gastric cancer on endoscopy in individuals with germline CDH1 mutations.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Individuals with germline pathogenic CDH1 variants have a high risk of hereditary diffuse gastric cancer. The sensitivity of EGD in detecting signet ring cell carcinoma (SRCC) in this population is low. We aimed to identify endoscopic findings and biopsy practices associated with detection of SRCC. METHODS: This retrospective cohort included individuals with a germline pathogenic/likely pathogenic CDH1 variant undergoing at least 1 EGD at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center between January 1, 2006, and March 25, 2022. The primary outcome was detection of SRCC on EGD. Findings on gastrectomy were also assessed. The study included periods before and after implementation of the Cambridge protocol for endoscopic surveillance, allowing for assessment of a spectrum of biopsy practices. RESULTS: Ninety-eight CDH1 patients underwent at least 1 EGD at our institution. SRCC was detected in 20 (20%) individuals on EGD overall and in 50 (86%) of the 58 patients undergoing gastrectomy. Most SRCC foci were detected in the gastric cardia/fundus (EGD, 50%; gastrectomy, 62%) and body/transition zone (EGD, 60%; gastrectomy, 62%). Biopsy results of gastric pale mucosal areas were associated with detection of SRCC (P < .01). The total number of biopsy samples taken on EGD was associated with increased detection of SRCC (P = .01), with 43% detected when ≥40 samples were taken. CONCLUSIONS: Targeted biopsy sampling of gastric pale mucosal areas and increasing number of biopsy samples taken on EGD were associated with detection of SRCC. SRCC foci were mostly detected in the proximal stomach, supporting updated endoscopic surveillance guidelines. Further studies are needed to refine endoscopic protocols to improve SRCC detection in this high-risk population.

Early age of onset and broad cancer spectrum persist in MSH6- and PMS2-associated Lynch syndrome.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to characterize MSH6/PMS2-associated mismatch repair-deficient (MMR-D)/microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) tumors, given revised guidelines suggesting more modest phenotypes. METHODS: Patients who consented to Institutional Review Board-approved protocols of tumor/germline sequencing or Lynch syndrome registry at a single institution from February 2005 to January 2021 with germline, heterozygous MSH6/PMS2 pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants were identified. Clinical data were abstracted and correlated with MMR/microsatellite instability status using nonparametric tests. RESULTS: We identified 243 patients (133 sequencing, 110 registry) with germline MSH6/PMS2 pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants; 186 (77%) had >1 cancer. Of 261 pooled tumors, colorectal cancer (CRC) and endometrial cancer (EC) comprised 55% and 43% of cancers in MSH6 and PMS2, respectively; 192 tumors underwent molecular assessments and 122 (64%) were MMR-D/MSI-H (77 in MSH6, 45 in PMS2). MMR-D/MSI-H cancers included CRC (n = 56), EC (n = 35), small bowel cancer (n = 6), ovarian cancer (n = 6), urothelial cancer (n = 5), pancreas/biliary cancer (n = 4), gastric/esophageal cancer (n = 3), nonmelanoma skin tumors (n = 3), prostate cancer (n = 2), breast cancer (n = 1), and central nervous system/brain cancer (n = 1). Among MMR-D/MSI-H CRC and EC, median age of diagnosis was 51.5 (range = 27-80) and 55 (range = 39-74) years, respectively; 9 of 56 (16%) MMR-D/MSI-H CRCs were diagnosed at age <35 years. CONCLUSION: MSH6/PMS2 heterozygotes remain at risk for a broad spectrum of cancers, with 16% of MMR-D/MSI-H CRCs presenting before upper threshold of initiation of colonoscopy per guidelines.

Effectiveness of a surveillance program of upper endoscopy for upper gastrointestinal cancers in Lynch syndrome patients.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Lynch syndrome (LS) is the most common cause of hereditary colorectal cancer and is associated with an increased lifetime risk of gastric and duodenal cancers of 8-16% and 7%, respectively; therefore, we aim to describe an esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) surveillance program for upper gastrointestinal (GI) precursor lesions and cancer in LS patients. METHODS: Patients who either had positive genetic testing or met clinical criteria for LS who had a surveillance EGD at our institution from 1996 to 2017 were identified. Patients were included if they had at least two EGDs or an upper GI cancer detected on the first surveillance EGD. EGD and pathology reports were extracted manually. RESULTS: Our cohort included 247 patients with a mean age of 47.1 years (SD 12.6) at first EGD. Patients had a mean of 3.5 EGDs (range 1-16). Mean duration of follow-up was 5.7 years. Average interval between EGDs was 2.3 years. Surveillance EGD detected precursor lesions in 8 (3.2%) patients, two (0.8%) gastric cancers and two (0.8%) duodenal cancers. Two interval cancers were diagnosed: a duodenal adenocarcinoma was detected 2 years, 8 months after prior EGD and a jejunal adenocarcinoma was detected 1 year, 9 months after prior EGD. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that surveillance EGD is a useful tool to help detect precancerous and cancerous upper GI lesions in LS patients. To our knowledge, this is the first study to examine a program of surveillance EGDs in LS patients. More data are needed to determine the appropriate surveillance interval.

Clinical features of young onset colorectal cancer patients from a large cohort at a single cancer center.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to describe the demographics and clinical features of patients with young onset (YO) CRC. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients with CRC diagnosed between ages 20 and 49 years was evaluated at the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center from 1/2004 to 6/2019. We excluded those with a hereditary CRC syndrome, inflammatory bowel disease, or prior CRC diagnosis. Patient demographics; presenting symptoms; medical, surgical, and smoking history; family history of cancer; tumor characteristics; and pathology were obtained from the electronic medical record. RESULTS: We identified 3856 YO CRC patients (median age CRC diagnosis 43; 52.5% male). A total of 59.1% were overweight or obese (32.2% and 26.9%, respectively). Most (90.1%) had no family history of CRC in a first-degree relative; 56.3% of patients reported being never smokers; 5.2% had diabetes. The most common presenting symptoms were rectal bleeding (47.7%), abdominal pain/bloating (33.1%), and change in bowel habits (24.7%). The majority presented with left-sided cancers (77.3%), at late-stage disease (68.4% at stages 3 or 4). CONCLUSION: Most YO CRC patients presented with rectal bleeding or abdominal pain, left-sided cancers, and later-stage disease and had no family history of CRC in a first-degree relative. Over half were overweight and obese and were more likely to have never smoked. More data are needed to better understand YO CRC risk factors and to help identify high-risk populations who may benefit from earlier screening.

NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Colorectal, Version 1.2021.

Identifying individuals with hereditary syndromes allows for timely cancer surveillance, opportunities for risk reduction, and syndrome-specific management. Establishing criteria for hereditary cancer risk assessment allows for the identification of individuals who are carriers of pathogenic genetic variants. The NCCN Guidelines for Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Colorectal provides recommendations for the assessment and management of patients at risk for or diagnosed with high-risk colorectal cancer syndromes. The NCCN Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Colorectal panel meets annually to evaluate and update their recommendations based on their clinical expertise and new scientific data. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP)/attenuated familial adenomatous polyposis (AFAP) syndrome and considerations for management of duodenal neoplasia.

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Colorectal Cancer Screening, Version 2.2020.

The NCCN Guidelines for Colorectal Cancer (CRC) Screening describe various colorectal screening modalities as well as recommended screening schedules for patients at average or increased risk of developing sporadic CRC. They are intended to aid physicians with clinical decision-making regarding CRC screening for patients without defined genetic syndromes. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on select recent updates to the NCCN Guidelines, including a section on primary and secondary CRC prevention, and provide context for the panel's recommendations regarding the age to initiate screening in average risk individuals and follow-up for low-risk adenomas.

Computed Tomography Colonography vs Colonoscopy for Colorectal Cancer Surveillance After Surgery.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Recommendations for surveillance after curative surgery for colorectal cancer (CRC) include a 1-year post-resection abdominal-pelvic computed tomography (CT) scan and optical colonoscopy (OC). CT colonography (CTC), when used in CRC screening, effectively identifies colorectal polyps ≥10 mm and cancers. We performed a prospective study to determine whether CTC, concurrent with CT, could substitute for OC in CRC surveillance. METHODS: Our study enrolled 231 patients with resected stage 0-III CRC, identified at 5 tertiary care academic centers. Approximately 1 year after surgery, participants underwent outpatient CTC plus CT, followed by same-day OC. CTC results were revealed after endoscopic visualization of sequential colonic segments, which were re-examined for discordant findings. The primary outcome was performance of CTC in the detection of colorectal adenomas and cancers using endoscopy as the reference standard. RESULTS: Of the 231 participants, 116 (50.2%) had polyps of any size or histology identified by OC, and 15.6% had conventional adenomas and/or serrated polyps ≥6 mm. No intra-luminal cancers were detected. CTC detected patients with polyps of ≥6 mm with 44.0% sensitivity (95% CI, 30.2-57.8) and 93.4% specificity (95% CI, 89.7-97.0). CTC detected polyps ≥10 mm with 76.9% sensitivity (95% CI, 54.0-99.8) and 89.0% specificity (95% CI, 84.8-93.1). Similar values were found when only adenomatous polyps were considered. The negative predictive value of CTC for adenomas ≥6 mm was 90.7% (95% CI, 86.7-94.5) and for adenomas ≥10 mm the negative predictive value was 98.6% (95% CI, 97.0-100). CONCLUSIONS: In a CRC surveillance population 1 year following resection, CTC was inferior to OC for detecting patients with polyps ≥6 mm. Clinical Trials.gov Registration Number: NCT02143115.

Colorectal carcinoma with double somatic mismatch repair gene inactivation: clinical and pathological characteristics and response to immune checkpoint blockade.

Double somatic mismatch-repair-gene mutation/alteration is a recently recognized molecular mechanism that underlies microsatellite instability-high in some colorectal carcinomas. It remains to be determined whether and how microsatellite instability-high tumors with this molecular defect differ from their counterparts caused by other mechanisms, specifically, Lynch syndrome-associated and MLH1-promoter hypermethylated. In this study, we evaluated the clinical and pathological characteristics of a series of 15 double somatic mutation/alteration-associated microsatellite instability-high colorectal carcinomas identified from our genetics service and 68 such cases reported in the literature. We observed that these cases presented at an age similar to MLH1-promoter hypermethylated (n = 20) and microsatellite-stable (n = 39) cases but older than Lynch syndrome-associated cases (n = 20, p < 0.05). While these tumors simulated other microsatellite instability-high tumors in their prevalent right-sided location, they appeared to differ in TNM stages at presentation (73% stage III/IV versus 25% stage III/IV in other microsatellite instability-high tumors, p = 0.04). Histologically, 40% of them had a dominant solid growth pattern. Inter-tumoral heterogeneity was a striking feature, spanning the spectrum from medullary type (with a tumor-infiltrating-lymphocyte/high-power-field count as high as 59) to conventional-type with only few tumor-infiltrating-lymphocytes (1/high-power-filed). As a group, these tumors seemed less likely to show robustly high lymphocytic infiltration than other microsatellite instability-high tumors (only 20% had ≥10 tumor-infiltrating-lymphocytes/high-power-filed, whereas this rate in Lynch syndrome-associated and MLH1-promoter hypermethylated tumors was 60% and 75%, respectively). Three double somatic mutation/alteration-associated tumors were treated with a PD1/PD-L1 checkpoint inhibitor. While all three had an elevated tumor-mutation-burden (>47 mut/megabase), only one had tumor-infiltrating-lymphocytes >10/high-power-field, yet all three exhibited measurable response. In summary, microsatellite instability-high colorectal carcinomas caused by double somatic mismatch-repair-gene mutation/alteration may have varied clinical and pathological characteristics, and some may have relatively low tumor-infiltrating-lymphocytes; response to immune checkpoint inhibitors can be achieved in this group even when the lymphocytic infiltration is not abundant.

Cellular localization of PD-L1 expression in mismatch-repair-deficient and proficient colorectal carcinomas.

Blockade of the interaction between PD-1 and its ligands PD-L1 has shown clinical efficacy across several tumor types, especially in mismatch-repair-deficient colorectal carcinoma. The aim of this study was to examine the pattern and cellular localization of PD-L1 expression in the different molecular subtypes of mismatch-repair-deficient colorectal cancers vs. their mismatch-repair-proficient counterparts. PD-L1/SATB2 double-antibody-immunohistochemistry was utilized to distinguish tumor cell from immune cell staining. We observed in our series of 129 colorectal adenocarcinomas that PD-L1 expression occurred primarily in tumor-associated-immune cells and most prominently at the tumor-stroma-interface of the invasive front. The level of invasive front immune cell staining was significantly higher in mismatch-repair-deficient tumors compared to mismatch-repair-proficient tumors (p < 0.001), but no difference was observed among the different subtypes of mismatch-repair-deficient tumors: Lynch syndrome-associated vs. MLH1-methylated vs. unexplained. While selected mismatch-repair-proficient tumors exhibited unusually high tumor-infiltrating-lymphocytes and had high level immune cell PD-L1 expression, a positive correlation between PD-L1 expression and high lymphocyte count was detected only in mismatch-repair-deficient tumors (r = 0.39, p < 0.001) and not in mismatch-repair-proficient tumors. Notably, true tumor cell PD-L1 expression in colorectal carcinoma was rare, present in only 3 of 129 tumors (2.3%): 2 MLH1-methylated and 1 mismatch-repair-proficient with high tumor-infiltrating-lymphocytes; and the staining in the tumor cells in all 3 was diffuse (>=50% of the tumor). These findings may serve to inform further efforts aiming to evaluate PD-L1 immunohistochemistry vis-à-vis molecular sub-classification as predictive biomarkers in the treatment of colorectal carcinoma.

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Colorectal, Version 2.2019.

Identifying individuals with hereditary syndromes allows for improved cancer surveillance, risk reduction, and optimized management. Establishing criteria for assessment allows for the identification of individuals who are carriers of pathogenic genetic variants. The NCCN Guidelines for Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Colorectal provide recommendations for the assessment and management of patients with high-risk colorectal cancer syndromes. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on criteria for the evaluation of Lynch syndrome and considerations for use of multigene testing in the assessment of hereditary colorectal cancer syndromes.

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Colorectal Cancer Screening, Version 1.2018.

The NCCN Guidelines for Colorectal Cancer (CRC) Screening outline various screening modalities as well as recommended screening strategies for individuals at average or increased-risk of developing sporadic CRC. The NCCN panel meets at least annually to review comments from reviewers within their institutions, examine relevant data, and reevaluate and update their recommendations. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize 2018 updates to the NCCN Guidelines, with a primary focus on modalities used to screen individuals at average-risk for CRC.

Clinical Value of CT Colonography Versus Preoperative Colonoscopy in the Surgical Management of Occlusive Colorectal Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: CT colonography (CTC) has been recognized as a complementary approach to evaluating the entire colon after incomplete colonoscopy (IC) in patients with occlusive colorectal cancer (CRC). The objective of this study is to evaluate changes in preoperative surgical planning after CTC is performed for patients with occlusive CRC and IC in an oncologic hospital. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study included 65 consecutive patients with occlusive CRC who underwent CTC after IC at our institution from February 2000 to April 2016. CTC examinations and radiology reports were reviewed by an abdominal radiologist. Clinical information was obtained from a review of the electronic medical record. RESULTS: CTC contributed to a change in the initial surgical plan of the surgeon for 14 of 65 patients (21.5%). In these 14 patients, CTC detected five synchronous proximal colon polyps (35.7%), five synchronous proximal cancers (35.7%), two imprecise CRC locations (14.3%), one case of proximal colon ischemia (7.1%), and one instance of tumor infiltration of the urinary bladder (7.1%). All CTC findings were confirmed at surgery, and all proximal colon polyps were subsequently confirmed to be advanced adenomas. CONCLUSION: The preoperative CTC findings optimized the surgical management plan for 21.5% of patients with occlusive CRC and IC.

Endoscopic Ultrasound as a Pretreatment Clinical Staging Tool for Gastric Cancer: Association with Pathology and Outcome.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is a guideline-recommended diagnostic test to estimate pretreatment clinical stage in gastric cancer. The impact of EUS to discriminate long-term outcomes has not been established. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of our study were to (1) evaluate the association between EUS and pathologic stage; (2) evaluate the ability of EUS to predict disease-specific survival (DSS); and (3) determine how neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) affects these relationships. METHODS: A prospective gastric cancer database at a tertiary care cancer center identified 734 patients who underwent curative intent resection. Patients were separated into EUS low-risk (T1-2, N0) and EUS high-risk (T3-4 Nany, or Tany N+) groups. Agreement statistics and 5-year DSS were estimated stratified by NCT. RESULTS: Between 1987 and 2015, 68% (502/734) of patients were not treated with NCT. Among these patients, percentage agreement between EUS and pathology was moderate (individual T stage: 52%; N stage: 70%; risk group: 73%). EUS accurately estimated pathologic risk group in 73% (365/502) of patients, whereas it overestimated pathologic risk group in 19% (93/502) of patients and underestimated risk in 8% (41/502) of patients. EUS in non-NCT staging was able to discriminate DSS for T stage (hazard ratio [HR] 5.07, p < 0.05), N stage (HR 3.58, p < 0.05), and risk group (HR 6.35, p < 0.05). Among patients treated with NCT, EUS was unable to discriminate DSS for T stage (HR 0.94, p > 0.05), N stage (HR 1.46, p > 0.05) and risk group (HR 0.50, p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Pretreatment clinical staging based on EUS alone could lead to over- or under treatment in 27% of patients and can discriminate DSS in NCT-naive patients. EUS should be used in the context of other validated clinical risk tools.

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Colorectal, Version 3.2017.

The NCCN Guidelines for Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Colorectal provide recommendations for the management of patients with high-risk syndromes associated with an increased risk of colorectal cancer (CRC). The NCCN Panel for Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Colorectal meets at least annually to assess comments from reviewers within their institutions, examine relevant data, and reevaluate and update their recommendations. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on genes newly associated with CRC risk on multigene panels, the associated evidence, and currently recommended management strategies.

Educational and Psychosocial Support Needs in Lynch Syndrome: Implementation and Assessment of an Educational Workshop and Support Group.

Few reports of educational and counseling support resources exist for Lynch syndrome (LS), a disorder requiring multi-organ cancer screening and specialized medical care throughout adult life. Here we describe the development and efficacy of two resources designed to address this need, the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Clinical Genetics Service annual Lynch Syndrome Educational Workshop (LSEW), and a quarterly Lynch Syndrome Patient Advocacy Network (LSPAN) support group. The LSEW and LSPAN were implemented beginning in 2012. Participant survey data evaluating satisfaction, clarity, and unmet needs for each event were retrospectively analyzed and summarized using descriptive statistics. Annual LSEW attendance ranged from 53 to 75 total participants. LSEW year 1 participants indicated a need for a support group, and preferred in-person meetings at a frequency of every 3-6 months. For LSEW year 2-5 participants, >96 % reported satisfaction with the LSEW, and >82 % expressed interest in secure online support. Common themes for improvement included increased time for question and answer sessions and additional introductory genetics education. Responding LSPAN participants (n = 57 total survey responses in 11 meetings) found the meetings helpful (100 %), information clear (91 %), and presence of a genetic counselor useful (67 %). Desired discussion topics included coping with stress and anxiety, development of a support network, family communication about LS, genetic testing decisions, and bereavement. Following genetic counseling, a need exists for ongoing educational and emotional support in LS. Implementation of resources such as the LSEW and LSPAN is feasible and perceived as helpful by participants.

Patterns and prognostic relevance of PD-1 and PD-L1 expression in colorectal carcinoma.

Immune checkpoint blockade targeting the programmed death-1 (PD-1) pathway has shown efficacy in several types of cancers including mismatch-repair-deficient colorectal carcinoma. In some tumor types, programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression detected by immunohistochemistry has shown utility as a predictive marker for response to anti-PD-1 therapies. This utility, however, remains to be determined in colorectal carcinoma. In addition, although tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes have been associated with better prognosis in colorectal carcinoma, the prognostic value of PD-1 expression in these lymphocytes and its interaction with PD-L1 expression still await investigation. To address these questions, we performed a pilot study to evaluate the patterns of PD-L1 and PD-1 immunohistochemical expression on colorectal carcinoma cells and their tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes, respectively. Using tissue microarray, we found that 5% (19/394) of colorectal carcinomas exhibited high tumor PD-L1 expression, and 19% (76/392) had elevated numbers of PD-1-positive tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes. PD-L1 levels correlated with PD-1 levels (P<0.001), and mismatch-repair-deficient tumors had significantly higher rates of high PD-L1 and PD-1 expression when compared with mismatch-repair-proficient tumors (18% vs 2% and 50% vs 13%, respectively; P<0.001 for both). Staining intensity was also stronger for both markers in mismatch-repair-deficient tumors. Furthermore, we observed that among patients with mismatch-repair-deficient colorectal carcinoma, PD-1/PD-L1 expression stratified recurrence-free survival in an inter-dependent manner: an association between high PD-1-positive tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes and improved recurrence-free survival (P=0.041) was maintained only when the tumors had low-level PD-L1 expression (P=0.006); patients whose tumors had both high PD-1-positive tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes and high PD-L1 expression had a significantly worse recurrence-free survival (P<0.001). Thus, our results not only provide a foundation for further assessment of PD-L1 immunohistochemistry as a predictive marker for anti-PD-1 therapy in colorectal carcinoma, they also shed light on the prognostic impact of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in different subsets of mismatch-repair-deficient colorectal carcinomas.

A proposed staging system and stage-specific interventions for familial adenomatous polyposis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: It is not possible to accurately count adenomas in many patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP). Nevertheless, polyp counts are critical in evaluating each patient's response to interventions. However, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration no longer recognizes the decrease in polyp burden as a sufficient chemoprevention trial treatment endpoint requiring a measure of "clinical benefit." To develop endpoints for future industry-sponsored chemopreventive trials, the International Society for Gastrointestinal Hereditary Tumors (InSIGHT) developed an FAP staging and intervention classification scheme for lower-GI tract polyposis. METHODS: Twenty-four colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy videos were reviewed by 26 clinicians familiar with diagnosis and treatment of FAP. The reviewers independently assigned a stage to a case by using the proposed system and chose a stage-specific intervention for each case. Our endpoint was the degree of concordance among reviewers staging and intervention assessments. RESULTS: The staging and intervention ratings of the 26 reviewers were highly concordant (ρ = 0.710; 95% credible interval, 0.651-0.759). Sixty-two percent of reviewers agreed on the FAP stage, and 90% of scores were within ±1 stage of the mode. Sixty percent of reviewers agreed on the intervention, and 86% chose an intervention within ±1 level of the mode. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed FAP colon polyposis staging system and stage-specific intervention are based on a high degree of agreement on the part of experts in the review of individual cases of polyposis. Therefore, reliable and clinically relevant means for measuring trial outcomes can be developed. Outlier cases showing wide scatter in stage assignment call for individualized attention and may be inappropriate for enrollment in clinical trials for this reason.