Radiation-induced gastrointestinal (GI) syndrome as a function of age.

Previous studies show increased sensitivity of older mice (28-29 months) compared with young adult mice (3 months, possessing a mature immune system) to radiation-induced GI lethality. Age-dependent lethality was associated with higher levels of apoptotic stem cells in small intestinal crypts that correlated with sphingomyelinase activity, a source of pro-apoptotic ceramide. The objective of this study is to determine whether the cycling crypt base columnar cells (CBCs) in aging animals are specifically more sensitive to radiation effects than the CBCs in young adult mice, and to identify factors that contribute to increased radiosensitivity. Mortality induced by subtotal body radiation was assessed at different doses (13 Gy, 14 Gy, and 15 Gy) in young adult mice versus older mice. Each dose was evaluated for the occurrence of lethal GI syndrome. A higher death rate due to radiation-induced GI syndrome was observed in older mice as compared with young adult mice: 30 vs. 0% at 13 Gy, 90 vs. 40% at 14 Gy, and 100 vs. 60% at 15 Gy. Radiation-induced damage to crypts was determined by measuring crypt regeneration (H&E staining, Ki67 expression), CBC biomarkers (lgr5 and ascl2), premature senescence (SA-ß-gal activity), and apoptosis of CBCs. At all three doses, crypt microcolony survival assays showed that the older mice had fewer regenerating crypts at 3.5 days post-radiation treatment. Furthermore, in the older animals, baseline CBCs numbers per circumference were significantly decreased, correlating with an elevated apoptotic index. Analysis of tissue damage showed an increased number of senescent CBCs per crypt circumference in older mice relative to younger mice, where the latter was not significantly affected by radiation treatment. It is concluded that enhanced sensitivity to radiation-induced GI syndrome and higher mortality in older mice can be attributed to a decreased capacity to regenerate crypts, presumably due to increased apoptosis and senescence of CBCs.

Technical feasibility of salvage endoscopic submucosal dissection after chemoradiation for locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The standard treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer is chemoradiation (CRT) followed by proctectomy and adjuvant chemotherapy. However, there is an emerging role for nonsurgical management after CRT or total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) consisting of CRT and neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) after CRT or TNT for rectal cancer, termed "salvage ESD," may be a viable nonsurgical option for carefully selected patients. We aimed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of salvage ESD. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of cases of salvage ESD for locally advanced rectal cancer and standard ESD for rectal tumors without prior CRT from July 2018 to August 2020 at our institution was performed. Clinical factors and imaging, procedural, and pathology results were collected and compared. RESULTS: Twelve salvage ESD cases were compared with 27 standard ESD cases. Before CRT, 83.3% of lesions in the salvage ESD group were initially clinically staged as T3. The en-bloc resection rates were 92.7% and 91.7% (P = 1.00) and R0 resection rates 66.7% and 75.0% (P = .55) for the standard and salvage groups, respectively. In the salvage ESD group, no adverse events were observed, and 75.0% of the adenocarcinomas in the salvage ESD group had morphologically changed to hyperplasia or adenoma after CRT, with no identifiable lesions greater than T1 tumor depth. CONCLUSIONS: Salvage ESD for locally advanced rectal cancer is technically feasible with low adverse event rates. There may be a diagnostic role in salvage ESD in assessing pathologic response to CRT and a possible therapeutic role in resection of residual lesions with the potential to avoid surgery.

A Comprehensive Comparison of Early-Onset and Average-Onset Colorectal Cancers.

BACKGROUND: The causative factors for the recent increase in early-onset colorectal cancer (EO-CRC) incidence are unknown. We sought to determine if early-onset disease is clinically or genomically distinct from average-onset colorectal cancer (AO-CRC). METHODS: Clinical, histopathologic, and genomic characteristics of EO-CRC patients (2014-2019), divided into age 35 years and younger and 36-49 years at diagnosis, were compared with AO-CRC (50 years and older). Patients with mismatch repair deficient tumors, CRC-related hereditary syndromes, and inflammatory bowel disease were excluded from all but the germline analysis. All statistical tests were 2-sided. RESULTS: In total, 759 patients with EO-CRC (35 years, n = 151; 36-49 years, n = 608) and AO-CRC (n = 687) were included. Left-sided tumors (35 years and younger = 80.8%; 36-49 years = 83.7%; AO = 63.9%; P < .001 for both comparisons), rectal bleeding (35 years and younger = 41.1%; 36-49 years = 41.0%; AO = 25.9%; P = .001 and P < .001, respectively), and abdominal pain (35 years and younger = 37.1%; 36-49 years = 34.0%; AO = 26.8%; P = .01 and P = .005, respectively) were more common in EO-CRC. Among microsatellite stable tumors, we found no differences in histopathologic tumor characteristics. Initially, differences in TP53 and Receptor Tyrosine Kinase signaling pathway (RTK-RAS)alterations were noted by age. However, on multivariate analysis including somatic gene analysis and tumor sidedness, no statistically significant differences at the gene or pathway level were demonstrated. Among advanced microsatellite stable CRCs, chemotherapy response and survival were equivalent by age cohorts. Pathogenic germline variants were identified in 23.3% of patients 35 years and younger vs 14.1% of AO-CRC (P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: EO-CRCs are more commonly left-sided and present with rectal bleeding and abdominal pain but are otherwise clinically and genomically indistinguishable from AO-CRCs. Aggressive treatment regimens based solely on the age at CRC diagnosis are not warranted.

Response to neoadjuvant therapy in patients with early age-of-onset rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of rectal cancer in patients ≤ 50 years of age is increasing. The response to neoadjuvant treatment in patients ≤ 50 years of age is not known. Factors affecting the response to neoadjuvant therapy in this age group have not been evaluated. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate the rate and identify factors that affect pathologic response to neoadjuvant therapy in patients with early age-of-onset rectal cancer. DESIGN: This study is a retrospective review. SETTING: The investigation was conducted at a tertiary-care cancer referral center. PATIENTS: Included were 193 consecutive patients ≤ 50 years of age with rectal cancer who underwent neoadjuvant therapy followed by surgical resection. INTERVENTIONS: No interventions were performed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measured was the pathologic response to neoadjuvant treatment. RESULTS: The median age was 44 years, and 34% of the patients were female. The median distance from the anal verge was 7 cm. The median percentage of lumen occupied by tumor was 50%. The median CEA level was 3.5 ng/mL. The median treatment response was 80%. The mean number of lymph nodes examined was 15 per patient. Twenty-two percent of patients had a complete or near-complete (≥ 95%) response to neoadjuvant treatment. Seventy-seven percent of evaluable patients experienced tumor or lymph node downstaging on pathologic examination. The presence of adverse histologic features, percentage of lumen occupied by tumor, and CEA level differed between those with <95% response and those with ≥ 95% response to neoadjuvant therapy, although CEA level was not significant when stage IV patients were excluded. LIMITATIONS: This is a retrospective review with heterogeneity in workup, treatment regimens, and interval to surgery. Long-term oncologic outcomes are not available. CONCLUSIONS: The rate of response to neoadjuvant treatment appears similar in patients with early age-of-onset rectal cancer to non-age-based cohorts in the literature. Adverse histologic features and bulky circumferential tumors may be suggestive of a decreased response to neoadjuvant therapy.

Reassessing the need for primary tumor surgery in unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer: overview and perspective.

In the absence of symptoms, primary tumor resection in patients who present with unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer is of uncertain benefit. Prophylactic surgery has been traditionally considered in this setting in order to prevent subsequent complications of perforation, obstruction, or bleeding later during the treatment course, which may require urgent surgery associated with higher mortality. However, recent data have called into question the efficacy of this upfront surgical strategy. We provide a brief overview of how current combinations of systemic chemotherapy including fluorouracil, oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and targeted biologic agents have allowed improved local (in addition to distant) tumor control, significantly decreasing the incidence of late primary-related complications requiring surgery from roughly 20% in the era of single-agent fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy to almost 7% in the era of modern triple-drug chemotherapy. In addition, we attempt to highlight those factors most associated with subsequent primary tumor-related complications in an effort to identify the subset of patients with synchronous metastatic colorectal cancer who might benefit from a surgery-first approach. Finally, we discuss modern nonsurgical options available for palliation of the primary colorectal tumor and review the outcome of patients for which emergent surgery is eventually required to address primary-related symptoms.

Outcome of primary tumor in patients with synchronous stage IV colorectal cancer receiving combination chemotherapy without surgery as initial treatment.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to describe the frequency of interventions necessary to palliate the intact primary tumor in patients who present with synchronous, stage IV colorectal cancer (CRC) and who receive up-front modern combination chemotherapy without prophylactic surgery. PATIENTS AND METHODS: By using a prospective institutional database, we identified 233 consecutive patients from 2000 through 2006 with synchronous metastatic CRC and an unresected primary tumor who received oxaliplatin- or irinotecan-based, triple-drug chemotherapy (infusional fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin; bolus fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan; or fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan) with or without bevacizumab as their initial treatment. The incidence of subsequent use of surgery, radiotherapy, and/or endoluminal stenting to manage primary tumor complications was recorded. RESULTS: Of 233 patients, 217 (93%) never required surgical palliation of their primary tumor. Sixteen patients (7%) required emergent surgery for primary tumor obstruction or perforation, 10 patients (4%) required nonoperative intervention (ie, stent or radiotherapy), and 213 (89%) never required any direct symptomatic management for their intact primary tumor. Of those 213 patients, 47 patients (20%) ultimately underwent elective colon resection at the time of metastasectomy, and eight patients (3%) underwent this resection during laparotomy for hepatic artery infusion pump placement. Use of bevacizumab, location of the primary tumor in the rectum, and metastatic disease burden were not associated with increased intervention rate. CONCLUSION: Most patients with synchronous, stage IV CRC who receive up-front modern combination chemotherapy never require palliative surgery for their intact primary tumor. These data support the use of chemotherapy, without routine prophylactic resection, as the appropriate standard practice for patients with neither obstructed nor hemorrhaging primary colorectal tumors in the setting of metastatic disease.

Squamous-cell carcinoma of the rectum: a rare but curable tumor.

PURPOSE: This study was designed to evaluate one institution's experience with treatment outcomes for rectal squamous-cell carcinoma. METHODS: Using our prospective Colorectal Database, we identified patients diagnosed with rectal squamous-cell carcinoma at our institution between 1983 and 2005. Pathology was rereviewed, tumor immunophenotype was compared to control cases of anal squamous-cell carcinoma and rectal adenocarcinoma, treatment modalities and outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: Twelve patients were identified (10 females median age, 58 years). Median distal extent of tumors was 7 (range, 5-8) cm from the anal verge. Treatment included chemotherapy only (n = 1), chemoradiation only (n = 2), induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation and surgery (n = 2), chemoradiation followed by surgery (n = 5), and surgery followed by chemoradiation (n = 2). The chemotherapy regimen was 5-fluorouracil-based. Radiotherapy total dose was 50.4 Gy (1.8 Gy/day, daily x 5) external iliac and inguinal nodes were not included in the radiation field. Complete clinical responders to chemoradiation (n = 2) received no further treatment. All seven partial responders underwent surgery; six had complete pathologic response; nodal status in two of six was unknown because they had local excision. Immunophenotypical analysis showed similar keratin expression profile between rectal squamous-cell carcinoma (n = 5) and rectal adenocarcinoma (n = 5), which is different from anal squamous-cell carcinoma (n = 10). All patients were alive without evidence of disease at follow-up (median follow-up, 2.6 (range, 0.5-16) years). CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that most patients treated with upfront chemoradiation therapy followed by surgery did well. Sphincter-preserving surgery is usually feasible. Clinical judgment of tumor response after chemoradiation is not completely reliable. Immunohistochemistry suggests a common cellular origin for rectal squamous-cell carcinoma and rectal adenocarcinoma, which is different from anal squamous-cell carcinoma.

Assessing the predictive value of clinical complete response to neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer: an analysis of 488 patients.

BACKGROUND: Patients with transmural or node-positive rectal cancer benefit from the addition of chemoradiation to surgical resection. Administration of the chemoradiation (combined modality therapy) preoperatively has gained popularity in recent years. Some patients undergo apparent complete tumor regression after preoperative combined modality therapy, and controversy exists about the proper management of these patients. Some investigators have proposed that such patients should simply be observed and not undergo resection. STUDY DESIGN: The purpose of this study was to determine the significance of clinical complete response to preoperative combined modality therapy. Specifically, we have attempted to determine the frequency with which a clinical complete response (based on the absence of detectable tumor on preoperative digital rectal examination and proctoscopy) correlates with a pathologic complete response (based on the absence of cancer cells in the resected specimen). A retrospective review of the clinical and pathologic characteristics of 488 patients from the Memorial Sloan-Kettering prospective colorectal database who received preoperative chemoradiation followed by resection for primary rectal cancer was performed. The indications for preoperative therapy included clinical or ultrasound T3 or T4 tumors or node-positive disease. RESULTS: The clinical complete response rate to preoperative therapy was 19%. All patients underwent resection subsequent to preoperative therapy regardless of response. The pathologic complete response rate among all patients was 10%. The pathologic complete response rate among clinical complete responders was 25%. Clinical complete response was a significant predictive factor for pathologic complete response, but the majority (75%) of clinical complete responders had persistent foci of tumor that were not detectable on preoperative examination or proctoscopy. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical complete response to preoperative therapy as determined by preoperative digital rectal examination and proctoscopy or EUA is not an accurate predictor of pathologic complete response. A significant percentage of clinical complete responders have persistent deep tumors or nodal involvement. We do not recommend making treatment decisions based solely on the absence of clinically palpable or visible tumor after chemoradiation. Our data suggest that all acceptable-risk patients with a diagnosis of primary rectal cancer should undergo resection, regardless of their response to preoperative therapy.