Prognostic impact and survival outcomes of colon perforation in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a multicenter retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Colon perforation caused by colorectal cancer (CRC) is a fatal condition requiring emergency intervention. For patients with metastatic lesions, surgeons face difficult decisions regarding whether to resect the primary and metastatic lesions. Moreover, there is currently no established treatment strategy for these patients. This study aimed to investigate the clinical practice and long-term outcomes of patients with metastatic CRC diagnosed with the onset of colon perforation. METHODS: We performed a population-based multicenter cohort study. Consecutive patients diagnosed with stage IV CRC between 2008 and 2015 at all designated cancer hospitals in Fukushima Prefecture, Japan, were enrolled in this study. We evaluated the impact of colon perforation on the survival outcomes of patients with metastatic CRC. The main outcome was the adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) of perforation for overall survival (OS). Survival time and HRs were estimated using Kaplan‒Meier and Cox proportional regression analyses. RESULTS: A total of 1258 patients were enrolled (perforation: n = 46; non-perforation: n = 1212). All but one of the patients with perforation underwent primary resection or colostomy and 25 cases were able to receive chemotherapy. The median OS for the perforation and non-perforation groups was 19.0 and 20.0 months, respectively (p = 0.96). Moreover, perforation was not an independent prognostic factor (aHR: 0.99; 95% confidence interval: 0.61-1.28). CONCLUSIONS: In metastatic CRC, perforation is not necessarily a poor prognostic factor. Patients with perforation who undergo primary tumor resection or colostomy and prompt initiation of systemic chemotherapy might be expected to have a survival time similar to that of patients with non-perforated colon.

Clinical Features and Survival of Young Adults with Stage IV Gastric Cancer: a Japanese Population-Based Study.

PURPOSE: With the aging of society, the mean age of patients with gastric cancer (GC) in Japan has increased. However, there are few documented outcomes for young patients with stage IV GC. We investigated the clinical characteristics and prognosis of such patients aged < 40 years using a dataset from an integrated population-based cohort study. METHODS: We conducted this multicenter population-based cohort study to determine whether earlier onset of GC was a poor prognostic factor. We enrolled patients with metastatic GC aged < 40 years (young group) and those aged between 60 and 75 years (middle-aged group). Patients were histologically diagnosed as having gastric adenocarcinoma. We evaluated the overall survival (OS) of both groups and the hazard ratio (HR) for OS based on age. The adjusted HR with 95% confidence interval (CI) was evaluated using the Cox proportional hazards model after adjusting for confounding factors, including sex, histology, number of metastatic lesions, surgical resection, and chemotherapy. RESULTS: This study enrolled 555 patients. The patients were classified into the young (n = 20) and the middle-aged group (n = 535). The median OS durations were 5.7 and 8.8 months in the young and middle-aged groups, respectively (p = 0.029). The adjusted HR (95% CI) of the young group was 1.88 (1.17-3.04, p = 0.009). CONCLUSION: Age was an independent prognostic factor in patients with stage IV GC. Further studies investigating the genomic characteristics of GC and exploring more effective chemotherapeutic agents are required.

Prognostic Role of Carcinoembryonic Antigen and Carbohydrate Antigen 19-9 in Stage IV Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND/AIM: We investigated the association of the levels of serum carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9) with prognosis in patients with stage IV colorectal cancer at diagnosis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this multicenter retrospective cohort study, patients with serum CEA and CA19-9 measured at diagnosis of stage IV colorectal cancer were included. The cutoff values were 5 ng/ml for CEA and 37 U/ml for CA19-9. Patients were categorized into four groups: those with normal levels for both CEA and CA19-9; those with only an elevated CEA level; those with only an elevated CA19-9 level; and those with elevated levels of both. RESULTS: A total of 825 patients were included. Among them, 132 (16.0%) had normal levels for both markers, 258 (31.3%) had an elevated CEA level only, 33 (4.0%) had an elevated CA19-9 level only, and 402 (48.7%) had elevated levels of both CEA and CA19-9. Compared with patients with normal levels for both CEA and CA19-9, the multivariate hazard ratio for overall survival was 1.24 (95% confidence interval=0.95-1.62, p=0.12) for those with elevated CEA only, 2.04 (95% confidence interval=1.31-3.17, p=0.002) for those with elevated CA19-9 only, and 1.82 (95% confidence interval=1.41-2.32, p<0.001) in those with elevation of both CEA and CA19-9. CONCLUSION: Elevation of CEA alone was not prognostic. Elevation of only CA19-9 at diagnosis was associated with a worse prognosis in patients with stage IV colorectal cancer. The combined measurement of CEA and CA19-9 can be helpful as a predictive tool for the prognosis of stage IV colorectal cancer.

Impact of histological subtype on prognosis in stage IV colorectal cancer: A population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: There are a few established prognostic factors for stage IV colorectal cancer. Thus, this study aimed to evaluate the impact of histological subtypes on prognosis and metastatic patterns in patients with stage IV colorectal cancer. METHODS: This was a population-based, multicenter, cohort study. We included consecutive patients diagnosed with stage IV colorectal cancer between 2008 and 2015 at all designated cancer hospitals in Fukushima prefecture, Japan. Patients were classified into two groups according to histological subtypes as follows: poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma (Por), mucinous adenocarcinoma (Muc), or signet-ring cell carcinoma (Sig) and well (Wel) or moderately differentiated adenocarcinoma (Mod). We evaluated the relationship between these histological groups and survival time. After adjusting for other clinical factors, we calculated the hazard ratio for Por/Muc/Sig. RESULTS: A total of 1,151 patients were enrolled, and 1,031 and 120 had Wel/Mod and Por/Muc/Sig, respectively. The median overall survival was 19.2 and 11.9 months for Wel/Mod and Por/Muc/Sig, respectively (p < 0.001). The adjusted hazard ratio for Por/Muc/Sig with regard to survival time was 1.42 (95% confidence interval: 1.13-1.77). Por/Muc/Sig had a lower incidence of liver and lung metastases and a higher incidence of peritoneal dissemination and metastasis to rare organs, such as the bone and brain. CONCLUSIONS: The Por/Muc/Sig histological subtype was an independent prognostic factor for poor prognosis among patients with stage IV colorectal cancer. The histological subtype may be useful for predicting the prognosis of patients with stage IV colorectal cancer and designing the treatment strategy.

Clinical impact of gastrectomy for gastric cancer patients with positive lavage cytology without gross peritoneal dissemination.

BACKGROUND: The prognosis of gastric cancer patients with positive lavage cytology without gross peritoneal dissemination (P0CY1) is poor. The survival benefit of gastrectomy for these patients has not been established. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this population-based cohort study, we investigated the impact of radical gastrectomy with lymph node dissection for P0CY1 patients. Patients who were diagnosed with Stage IV gastric cancer from 2008 to 2015 in all nine cancer-designated hospitals in a tertiary medical area were listed. Patients who were diagnosed with histologically proven adenocarcinoma in both the primary lesion and lavage cytology during the operation or a diagnostic laparoscopic examination were enrolled. Patients with a gross peritoneal lesion or other metastatic lesions were excluded. The primary outcome was the adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) of gastrectomy for overall survival. We also evaluated the survival time in patients who underwent gastrectomy or chemotherapy in comparison to patients managed without primary surgery or with best supportive care. RESULTS: One hundred patients were enrolled. The aHR (95% confidence interval) of gastrectomy was 0.677 (0.411-1.114, p = 0.125). The median survival time in patients who received gastrectomy (n = 74) was 21.7, while that in patients managed without primary surgery (n = 30) was 20.5 months (p = 0.155). The median survival time in patients who received chemotherapy (n = 76) was 23.0 months, while that in patients managed without chemotherapy was 8.6 months (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Gastrectomy was not effective for improving the survival time in patients with P0CY1 gastric cancer. Surgeons should prioritize the performance of chemotherapy over surgery as the initial treatment.

Clinical Impact of Primary Tumor Site in Stage IV Colorectal Cancer: A Statewide Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND/AIM: We investigated the clinical impact of the primary tumor site in stage IV colorectal cancer (CRC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this statewide multicenter retrospective cohort, patients with stage IV CRC from nine hospital-based cancer registries across the Fukushima Prefecture (2008-2015) were categorized based on three primary tumor sites: right colon cancer (RCC), left colon cancer (LCC), and rectal cancer. Overall survival was assessed using Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: A total of 1,211 patients were included. The most common clinical symptom was obstruction in LCC and bleeding in rectal cancer. Liver metastases were multiple and larger in LCC, while lung metastases were multiple in rectal cancer. Compared to LCC, the adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for overall survival was 1.19 [95% confidence interval (CI)=1.01-1.39, p=0.032] in RCC and 1.03 (95% CI=0.86-1.23, p=0.77) in rectal cancer. CONCLUSION: RCC was independently associated with a worse prognosis in stage IV CRC.

A grading system for predicting the prognosis of gastric cancer with liver metastasis.

OBJECTIVE: The prognosis of patients with liver metastases from gastric cancer is determined using tumor size and number of metastases; this is similar to the factors used for the prediction of liver metastases from colorectal cancer. The relationship between the degree of liver metastasis from gastric cancer and prognosis with reference to the classification of liver metastasis from colorectal cancer was investigated. METHODS: This was a multi-institutional historical cohort study. Among patients with stage IV gastric cancer, who visited the cancer hospitals in Fukushima Prefecture, Japan, between 2008 and 2015, those with simultaneous liver metastasis were included. Abdominal pretreatment computed tomography images were reviewed and classified into H1 (four or less liver metastases with a maximum diameter of ≤5 cm); H2 (other than H1 and H3) or H3 (five or more liver metastases with a maximum diameter of ≥5 cm). The hazard ratio for overall survival according to the H grade (H1, H2 and H3) was calculated using the Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: A total of 412 patients were analyzed. Patients with H1, H2 and H3 grades were 118, 162 and 141, respectively, and their median survival time was 10.2, 5.7 and 3.1 months, respectively (log-rank P < 0.001). The adjusted hazard ratio for overall survival was H1: H2: H3 = reference: 1.39 (95% confidence interval: 1.04-1.85): 1.69 (95% confidence interval: 1.27-2.27). CONCLUSIONS: The grading system proposed in this study was a simple and easy-to-use prognosis prediction index for patients with liver metastasis from gastric cancer.

Benefit of intensive chemotherapy for elderly patients aged 80 years or older with metastatic colorectal cancer: a state-wide multicenter cohort study.

BACKGROUND: It remains unclear whether intensive chemotherapy for Stage IV colorectal cancer (CRC) patients aged 80 years or older is beneficial prognostically. This study aimed to investigate the overall survival of Stage IV CRC patients aged ≥ 80 years receiving intensive chemotherapy. METHODS: The study design was a population-based, multicenter, historical cohort study. The extracted participants' data were consecutive patients diagnosed as Stage IV CRC between January 2008 and May 2015 in nine hospitals in Japan. Patients were classified into two groups according to age: aged group (≥ 80 years) and younger group (< 80 years old). Intensive chemotherapy was defined as at least two courses of doublet chemotherapy with oxaliplatin-or irinotecan-based regimens. The primary outcome was the adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of age ≥ 80 years in patients who undergoing intensive chemotherapy. RESULTS: During the study period, 1259 patients were treated for Stage IV CRC in the participating hospitals. In total, 231 patients (18.3%) were in the aged group, and 1028 (81.7%) were in the younger group, and 788 (62.6%) underwent intensive chemotherapy. The median overall survival for the aged and younger group patients was 21.0 months (interquartile range (IQR), 10.6-34.1 months) and 24.3 months (IQR 12.6-39.3 months), respectively. The adjusted HR of age ≥ 80 years was 1.29 (confidence intervals 0.84-2.00). CONCLUSION: Stage IV CRC patients aged 80 years or older receiving intensive chemotherapy had a similar prognosis to those aged < 80 years. Avoiding intensive chemotherapy for mCRC patients simply because they are ≥ 80 years old is not recommended.

An ascites grading system for predicting the prognosis of gastric cancer with peritoneum dissemination.

AIM: Gastric cancer with peritoneum dissemination is intractable with surgical resection. The evaluation of the degree of dissemination using computed tomography (CT) is difficult. We focused on the amount of ascites based on CT findings and established a scaling system to predict these patients' prognoses. METHODS: We extracted individual data from a population-based cohort. Patients diagnosed with histologically proven gastric adenocarcinoma with peritoneum dissemination were enrolled. Two raters evaluated the CT images and determined the grade of ascites in each patient: grade 0 indicated no ascites in all slices; grade 1 indicated ascites detected only in the upper or lower abdominal cavity; grade 2 indicated ascites detected in both the upper and lower abdominal cavities; and grade 3 indicated ascites extending continuously from the pelvic cavity to the upper abdominal cavity. We evaluated the relationship between the ascites grade and survival time. After adjusting for other clinical factors, we calculated hazard ratios of each ascites grade. RESULTS: A total of 718 patients were enrolled. The number of patients with grades 0, 1, 2, and 3 were 303, 223, 94, and 98, respectively. The median overall survival times were 16.0, 8.7, 5.4, and 3.0 months for ascites on CT grades 0, 1, 2, and 3, respectively (P < .001). The adjusted hazard ratios for the survival time were 1.74 (1.33-2.26, P < .001), 3.20 (2.25-4.57, P < .001), and 4.76 (3.16-7.17, P < .001) for grades 1, 2, and 3, respectively. CONCLUSION: We established a new grading system of pretreatment ascites to better predict the prognosis of gastric cancer.

[Clinical comparison of endoscopic naso-gallbladder drainage versus percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage for acute cholecystitis].

Early cholecystectomy has become the standard treatment for acute cholecystitis. However, gallbladder drainage is often performed before surgery. In the present study, we compared the clinical outcomes between patients who underwent endoscopic naso-gallbladder drainage (ENGBD) and those who underwent percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage (PTGBD). PTGBD was superior to ENGBD in terms of success rate and procedure time. However, there was no significant difference in the rate of complications, improvement effect on inflammation, the length of hospitalization, the duration from drainage to operation, and operation time. Although PTGBD has become the first choice for cases requiring gallbladder drainage, ENGBD should be considered the most appropriate therapy in cases with a contraindication for PTGBD due to antithrombotic treatment, those associated with choledocholithiasis, and those suspected of gallbladder cancer. The importance of ENGBD is expected to increase in the future.

Adenocarcinoma of the minor duodenal papilla: report of a case.

An 81-year-old male was found to have a duodenal tumor by screening upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. The tumor was located in the minor duodenal papilla. Pathological examination of the biopsy specimen revealed adenocarcinoma, and endoscopic ultrasound showed an elevated hypoechoic mass in the minor duodenal papilla. The preoperative diagnosis was therefore considered to be either adenocarcinoma of the minor duodenal papilla or duodenal cancer. We performed a subtotal stomach-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy. Histopathological examination of the resected specimen showed the tumor cells to be primarily located in the submucosa of the minor duodenal papilla, with slight invasion into the pancreatic parenchyma through the accessory pancreatic duct. We therefore diagnosed a primary adenocarcima of the minor duodenal papilla. Adenocarcinoma of the minor duodenal papilla is considered to be a rare disease, but it may be underestimated because of the difficulty in distinguishing advanced adenocarcinoma of the minor duodenal papilla from primary duodenal cancer and cancer of the pancreatic head.