Nationwide Validation of the 8th American Joint Committee on Cancer TNM Staging System and Five Proposed Modifications for Resected Pancreatic Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The prognostic value of four proposed modifications to the 8th American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) TNM staging system has yet to be evaluated. This study aimed to validate five proposed modifications. METHODS: Patients who underwent pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma resection (2014-2016), as registered in the prospective Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit, were included. Stratification and prognostication of TNM staging systems were assessed using Kaplan-Meier curves, Cox proportional hazard analyses, and C-indices. A new modification was composed based on overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Overall, 750 patients with a median OS of 18 months (interquartile range 10-32) were included. The 8th edition had an increased discriminative ability compared with the 7th edition {C-index 0.59 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.56-0.61) vs. 0.56 (95% CI 0.54-0.58)}. Although the 8th edition showed a stepwise decrease in OS with increasing stage, no differences could be demonstrated between all substages; stage IIA vs. IB (hazard ratio [HR] 1.30, 95% CI 0.80-2.09; p  = 0.29) and stage IIB vs. IIA (HR 1.17, 95% CI 0.75-1.83; p  = 0.48). The four modifications showed comparable prognostic accuracy (C-index 0.59-0.60); however, OS did not differ between all modified TNM stages (ns). The new modification, migrating T3N1 patients to stage III, showed a C-index of 0.59, but did detect significant survival differences between all TNM stages (p  < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The 8th TNM staging system still lacks prognostic value for some categories of patients, which was not clearly improved by four previously proposed modifications. The modification suggested in this study allows for better prognostication in patients with all stages of disease.

Socioeconomic differences in participation and diagnostic yield within the Dutch national colorectal cancer screening programme with faecal immunochemical testing.

BACKGROUND: CRC mortality rates are higher for individuals with a lower socioeconomic status (SES). Screening could influence health inequalities. We therefore aimed to investigate SES differences in participation and diagnostic yield of FIT screening. METHODS: All invitees in 2014 and 2015 in the Dutch national CRC screening programme were included in the analyses. We used area SES as a measure for SES and divided invitees into quintiles, with Quintile 1 being the highest SES. Logistic regression analysis was used to compare the participation rate, positivity rate, colonoscopy uptake, positive predictive value (PPV) and detection rate across the SES groups. RESULTS: Participation to FIT screening was significantly lower for Quintile 5 (67.0%) compared to the other Quintiles (73.0% to 75.1%; adjusted OR quintile 5 versus quintile 1: 0.73, 95%CI: 0.72-0.74), as well as colonoscopy uptake after a positive FIT (adjusted OR 0.73, 95%CI: 0.69-0.77). The detection rate per FIT participant for advanced neoplasia gradually increased from 3.3% in Quintile 1 to 4.0% in Quintile 5 (adjusted OR 1.20%, 95%CI 1.16-1.24). As a result of lower participation, the yield per invitee was similar for Quintile 5 (2.04%) and Quintile 1 (2.00%), both being lower than Quintiles 2 to 4 (2.20%-2.28%). CONCLUSIONS: Screening has the potential to reduce health inequalities in CRC mortality, because of a higher detection in participants with a lower SES. However, in the Dutch screening programme, this is currently offset by the lower participation in this group.

Microscopic resection margin status in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma - A nationwide analysis.

INTRODUCTION: First, this study aimed to assess the prognostic value of different definitions for resection margin status on disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Second, preoperative predictors of direct margin involvement were identified. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This nationwide observational cohort study included all patients who underwent upfront PDAC resection (2014-2016), as registered in the prospective Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit. Patients were subdivided into three groups: R0 (≥1 mm margin clearance), R1 (<1 mm margin clearance) or R1 (direct margin involvement). Survival was compared using multivariable Cox regression analysis. Logistic regression with baseline variables was performed to identify preoperative predictors of R1 (direct). RESULTS: 595 patients with a median OS of 18 months (IQR 10-32 months) months were analysed. R0 (≥1 mm) was achieved in 277 patients (47%), R1 (<1 mm) in 146 patients (24%) and R1 (direct) in 172 patients (29%). R1 (direct) was associated with a worse OS, as compared with both R0 (≥1 mm) (hazard ratio (HR) 1.35 [95% and confidence interval (CI) 1.08-1.70); P < 0.01) and R1 (<1 mm) (HR 1.29 [95%CI 1.01-1.67]; P < 0.05). No OS difference was found between R0 (≥1 mm) and R1 (<1 mm) (HR 1.05 [95% CI 0.82-1.34]; P = 0.71). Preoperative predictors associated with an increased risk of R1 (direct) included age, male sex, performance score 2-4, and venous or arterial tumour involvement. CONCLUSION: Resection margin clearance of <1 mm, but without direct margin involvement, does not affect survival, as compared with a margin clearance of ≥1 mm. Given that any vascular tumour involvement on preoperative imaging was associated with an increased risk of R1 (direct) resection with upfront surgery, neoadjuvant therapy might be considered in these patients.

Endoscopically removed rectal NETs: a nationwide cohort study.

PURPOSE: Rectal neuroendocrine tumours (NETs) often present as an incidental finding during colonoscopy. Complete endoscopic resection of low-grade NETs up to 10 mm is considered safe. Whether this is also safe for NETs up to 20 mm is unclear. We performed a nationwide study to determine the risk of lymph node and distant metastases in endoscopically removed NETs. METHODS: All endoscopically removed rectal NETs between 1990 and 2010 were identified using the national pathology database (PALGA). Each NET was stratified according to size, grade and resection margin. Follow-up was until February 2016. RESULTS: Between 1990 and 2010, a total of 310 NETs smaller than 20 mm were endoscopically removed. Mean size of NETs was 7.4 mm (SD 3.5). In 49% of NETs (n = 153), no grade (G) could be assessed from the pathology report, 1% was G2 (n = 3), and the remaining NETs were G1. Median follow up was 11.6 years (range 4.9-26.0). During follow-up, 30 patients underwent surgical resection. Lymph node or distant metastasis was seen in 3 patients (1%) which all had a grade 2 NET. Mean time from endoscopic resection to diagnosis of metastases was 6.1 years (95% CI 2.9-9.2). CONCLUSION: No lymph node or distant metastases were seen in endoscopically removed G1 NETs up to 20 mm during the long follow-up of this nationwide study. This adds evidence to the ENET guideline that endoscopic resection of G1 NETs up to 20 mm appears to be safe.

Granular dot-like staining with MLH1 immunohistochemistry is a clone-dependent artefact.

Immunohistochemistry (IHC) for DNA mismatch repair proteins MLH1, PMS2, MSH2, and MSH6 is used for microsatellite instability (MSI) screening in colorectal carcinoma (CRC) and endometrial carcinoma (EC). Loss of PMS2, with retained MLH1 staining occurs in germline mutations of PMS2 gene, and is an indication for genetic testing. We report a pitfall of immunohistochemical interpretation in an EC, initially regarded as MLH1-positive and PMS2-negative. Review of the MLH1-IHC (M1-clone) revealed a granular, dot-like, nuclear staining. On repeating the MLH1-IHC with a different clone (ES05-clone), complete negativity was noted, and on molecular testing, MLH1 promotor methylation was detected. The dot-like pattern was therefore adjudged a clone-dependent artefact. On reviewing the archived MLH1-IHC slides, we observed the same dot-like pattern in two CRCs; in both cases the M1-clone had been used. Awareness of this artefact may prevent reporting errors, and unnecessary referrals for germline mutation testing.

Interobserver, intraobserver, and interlaboratory variability in reporting pT4a colon cancer.

Clinical significance of the pT4 category in colon cancer is increasing with several therapeutic implications. The aim of this study was to evaluate variability in diagnosing pT4a colon cancer. Twelve pathologists classified 66 preselected scanned Hematoxylin/Eosin-stained slides with tumor cells at a distance of 25-1500 µm (n = 22), 0-25 µm (n = 22), or on (n = 22) the peritoneal surface. Inter- and intraobserver variability were calculated using Kappa statistics. For interlaboratory variability, pathology reports of pT3 and pT4a colon cancer were extracted from the Dutch Pathology Registry between 2012 and 2015. The proportion of pT4a (pT4a/(pT3+pT4a)) was compared between 33 laboratories. Potential risk of understaging was assessed by determining the average number of blocks taken from pT3 and pT4a N0-2M0 tumors with metachronous peritoneal metastasis. Interobserver variability among 12 pathologists was 0.50 (95%CI 0.41-0.60; moderate agreement). Intraobserver variability (8 pathologists) was 0.71 (substantial agreement). A total of 7745 reports with pT3 or pT4aN0-2M0 colon cancer from 33 laboratories were included for interlaboratory analysis. Median percentage of pT4a was 15.5% (range 3.2-24.6%). After adjustment for case mix, 8 labs diagnosed pT4a significantly less or more frequently than the median lab. Metachronous peritoneal metastases were histologically verified in 170 of 6629 pT3 and in 129 of 1116 pT4a tumors, with a mean number of blocks of 4.03(SD 1.51) and 4.78 (SD 1.76) taken from the primary tumors, respectively (p < 0.001). A substantial variability in diagnosing pT4a colon cancer exists, both at pathologist and laboratory level. Diagnosis of pT4a stage appears to be challenging and there is a need for standardizing assessment of this pathological entity.