Para-aortic Lymph Node Dissection for Colorectal Cancer: Predicting Pathologic Lymph Node Positivity and Optimizing Outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: In colorectal cancer, the presence of para-aortic lymph nodes (PALN) indicates extraregional disease. Appropriately selecting patients for whom PALN dissection will provide oncologic benefit remains challenging. This study identified factors to predict survival among patients undergoing PALN dissection for colorectal cancer. METHODS: An institutional database was queried for patients who underwent curative-intent resection of clinically positive PALN for colorectal cancer between 2007 and 2020. Preoperative radiologic images were reviewed, and patients who did and did not have positive PALN on final pathology were compared. Survival analysis was performed to evaluate the impact of pathologically positive PALN on recurrence-free (RFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Of 74 patients who underwent PALN dissection, 51 had PALN metastasis at the time of primary tumor diagnosis, whereas 23 had metachronous PALN disease. Preoperative chemotherapy ± radiotherapy was given in 60 cases (81.1%), and 28 (37.8%) had pathologically positive PALN. Independent factors associated with positive PALN pathology included metachronous PALN disease and pretreatment and posttreatment radiographically abnormal PALN. On multivariable analysis, pathologically positive PALN was significantly associated with decreased RFS (hazard ratio 3.90) and OS (HR 4.49). Among patients with pathologically positive PALN, well/moderately differentiated histology was associated with better OS, and metachronous disease trended toward an association with better OS. CONCLUSIONS: Pathologically positive PALN are associated with poorer RFS and OS after PALN dissection for colorectal cancer. Clinicopathologic factors may predict pathologic PALN positivity. Curative-intent surgery may provide benefit, especially in patients with well-to-moderately differentiated primary tumors and possibly metachronous PALN disease.

NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Rectal Cancer, Version 3.2024.

The determination of an optimal treatment plan for an individual patient with rectal cancer is a complex process. In addition to decisions relating to the intent of rectal cancer surgery (ie, curative or palliative), consideration must also be given to the likely functional results of treatment, including the probability of maintaining or restoring normal bowel function/anal continence and preserving genitourinary functions. Particularly for patients with distal rectal cancer, finding a balance between curative-intent therapy while having minimal impact on quality of life can be challenging. Furthermore, the risk of pelvic recurrence is higher in patients with rectal cancer compared with those with colon cancer, and locally recurrent rectal cancer is associated with a poor prognosis. Careful patient selection and the use of sequenced multimodality therapy following a multidisciplinary approach is recommended. These NCCN Guidelines Insights detail recent updates to the NCCN Guidelines for Rectal Cancer, including the addition of endoscopic submucosal dissection as an option for early-stage rectal cancer, updates to the total neoadjuvant therapy approach based on the results of recent clinical trials, and the addition of a "watch-and-wait" nonoperative management approach for clinical complete responders to neoadjuvant therapy.

Colon Cancer, Version 3.2024, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the fourth most frequently diagnosed cancer and the second leading cause of cancer death in the United States. Management of disseminated metastatic CRC involves various active drugs, either in combination or as single agents. The choice of therapy is based on consideration of the goals of therapy, the type and timing of prior therapy, the mutational profile of the tumor, and the differing toxicity profiles of the constituent drugs. This manuscript summarizes the data supporting the systemic therapy options recommended for metastatic CRC in the NCCN Guidelines for Colon Cancer.

Anal Carcinoma, Version 2.2023, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

This discussion summarizes the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines for managing squamous cell anal carcinoma, which represents the most common histologic form of the disease. A multidisciplinary approach including physicians from gastroenterology, medical oncology, surgical oncology, radiation oncology, and radiology is necessary. Primary treatment of perianal cancer and anal canal cancer are similar and include chemoradiation in most cases. Follow-up clinical evaluations are recommended for all patients with anal carcinoma because additional curative-intent treatment is possible. Biopsy-proven evidence of locally recurrent or persistent disease after primary treatment may require surgical treatment. Systemic therapy is generally recommended for extrapelvic metastatic disease. Recent updates to the NCCN Guidelines for Anal Carcinoma include staging classification updates based on the 9th edition of the AJCC Staging System and updates to the systemic therapy recommendations based on new data that better define optimal treatment of patients with metastatic anal carcinoma.

Germline Cancer Risk Profiles of Patients With Young-Onset Colorectal Cancer: Findings From a Prospective Universal Germline Testing and Telegenetics Program.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer is being increasingly diagnosed in people younger than 50 years. An inheritable cancer predisposition has been reported in 22% of the young-onset cases. Assessment of germline risk is critical for personalized cancer care. OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to implement universal germline cancer risk assessment and testing and to define the germline cancer risk profiles of patients presenting with young-onset disease. DESIGN: This is a prospective cohort study. SETTINGS: This study was conducted at a tertiary-referral academic medical center. PATIENTS: This study included newly diagnosed patients presenting to surgical clinics between September 2019 and February 2021 who were treated on a standardized care pathway including the universal germline risk assessment. INTERVENTIONS: Patients received educational material on young-onset disease, genetic testing, and insurance coverage followed by genetic counseling (either remotely by telegenetics or in person). Consenting patients were assessed on a 47-gene common hereditary cancer panel. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was a proportion of patients with identifiable germline cancer predisposition. RESULTS: Among 500 patients with colorectal cancer, 185 (37%) were 50 years of age or younger (median: 44). A family history was absent for the majority of patients (123; 67%), and in 15 patients, tumors (8.1%) were deficient in DNA mismatch repair. Germline testing was completed in 130 patients (70%); the remainder were pending (7%), deceased (1%), or declined (22%). Pathogenic germline mutations were identified in 25 of 130 (19%) patients: 12 in mismatch repair genes and 13 in other genes. A variant of uncertain significance was found in 23 (18%) patients. Importantly, a pathogenic germline mutation was identified in 12% of the patients without a family history (versus 32% with; p = 0.015) and in 13% of those with proficient mismatch repair colorectal cancers (versus 71% if deficient; p < 0.001). LIMITATIONS: The study is limited by its implementation at a single tertiary academic institution. CONCLUSIONS: One in 5 patients with young-onset disease harbored germline cancer predisposition. This detection rate, coupled with a high level of interest and acceptance from patients and feasibility of implementation, supports universal germline cancer risk assessment in this patient population. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B925 . PERFILES DE RIESGO DE CNCER DE LNEA GERMINAL DE PACIENTES CON CNCER COLORRECTAL DE INICIO JOVEN HALLAZGOS DE UN PROGRAMA UNIVERSAL PROSPECTIVO DE PRUEBAS DE LNEA GERMINAL Y TELEGENTICA: ANTECEDENTES:El cáncer colorrectal se diagnostica cada vez más en personas menores de 50 años. Se ha informado una predisposición hereditaria al cáncer en el 22 % de los casos de aparición temprana. La evaluación del riesgo de la línea germinal es fundamental para la atención personalizada del cáncer.OBJETIVO:Implementar la evaluación y las pruebas universales de riesgo de cáncer de línea germinal, y definir los perfiles de riesgo de cáncer de línea germinal de los pacientes que presentan una enfermedad de aparición temprana.DISEÑO:Un estudio de cohorte prospectivo.AJUSTE:Un centro médico académico de referencia terciaria.PACIENTES:Los pacientes recién diagnosticados que se presentaron en clínicas quirúrgicas entre Septiembre de 2019 y Febrero de 2021 fueron tratados en una vía de atención estandarizada que incluye una evaluación de riesgo de línea germinal universal.INTERVENCIÓN:Los pacientes recibieron material educativo sobre enfermedades de aparición temprana, pruebas genéticas y cobertura de seguro, seguido de asesoramiento genético (ya sea a distancia por telegenética o en persona). Los pacientes que dieron su consentimiento fueron evaluados en un panel de cánceres hereditarios comunes de 47 genes.MEDIDA DE RESULTADO PRINCIPAL:Proporción de pacientes con predisposición identificable al cáncer de línea germinal.RESULTADOS:Entre 500 pacientes con cáncer colorrectal, 185 (37%) tenían 50 años o menos (mediana: 44). No había antecedentes familiares en la mayoría (123, 67%) y 15 tumores (8,1%) eran deficientes en la reparación del desajuste de ácido desoxirribonucleico. La prueba de línea germinal se completó en 130 pacientes (70%); el resto estaban pendientes (7%), fallecidos (1%) o declinados (22%). Se identificaron mutaciones patogénicas de la línea germinal en 25 (de 130, 19%) pacientes: 12 en genes de reparación de errores de emparejamiento y 13 en otros genes. Se encontró una variante de significado incierto en 23 (18%) pacientes. Es importante señalar que se identificó una mutación germinal patogénica en el 12% de los pacientes sin antecedentes familiares (frente al 32% con; p = 0,015) y en el 13% de aquellos con cánceres colorrectales competentes en la reparación de errores de emparejamiento (frente al 71% si eran deficientes; p < 0,001).LIMITACIÓN:Implementado en una sola institución académica terciaria.CONCLUSIÓN:Uno de cada cinco pacientes con enfermedad de inicio joven albergaba predisposición al cáncer de línea germinal. Esta tasa de detección, junto con un alto nivel de interés y aceptación por parte de los pacientes y la viabilidad de la implementación, respaldan la evaluación universal del riesgo de cáncer de línea germinal en esta población de pacientes. Consulte el Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B925 . (Traducción-Dr. Yesenia Rojas-Khalil ).

Impact of cumulative operative time on postoperative complication risk in simultaneous resections of colorectal liver metastases and primary tumors.

BACKGROUND: Simultaneous resection of colorectal liver metastases (CLM) and primary colorectal cancers (CRC) is nuanced without firm rules for selection. This study aimed to identify factors associated with morbidity after simultaneous resection. METHODS: Using a prospective database, patients undergoing simultaneous CLM-CRC resection from 1/1/2017-7/1/2020 were analyzed. Regression modeling estimated impact of colorectal resection type, Kawaguchi-Gayet (KG) hepatectomy complexity, and perioperative factors on 90-day complications. RESULTS: Overall, 120 patients underwent simultaneous CLM-CRC resection. Grade≥2 complications occurred in 38.3% (n = 46); these patients experienced longer length of stay (median LOS 7.5 vs. 4, p < 0.001) and increased readmission (39% vs. 1.4%, p < 0.001) compared to patients with zero or Grade 1 complications. Median OR time was 298 min. Patients within highest operative time quartile (>506 min) had higher grade≥2 complications (57%vs. 23%, p = 0.04) and greater than 4-fold increased odds of grade≥2 morbidity (OR 4.3, 95% CI (Confidence Interval) 1.41-13.1, p = 0.01). After adjusting for Pringle time, KG complexity and colorectal resection type, increasing operative time was associated with grade≥2 complications, especially for resections in highest quartile of operative time (OR 7.28, 95% CI 1.73-30.6, p = 0.007). CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing simultaneous CLM-CRC resection, prolonged operative time is independently associated with grade≥2 complications. Awareness of cumulative operative time may inform intraoperative decision-making by surgical teams.

Definitive Intensity-Modulated Chemoradiation for Anal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: Outcomes and Toxicity of 428 Patients Treated at a Single Institution.

BACKGROUND: Although intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) is considered the standard of care for the treatment of squamous cell carcinoma of the anus (SCCA), few large series have reported oncologic outcomes and toxicities. In this retrospective report, we aim to describe outcomes and toxicities after IMRT-based chemoradiation (CRT) for the treatment of SCCA, evaluate the impact of dose escalation (>54 Gy), and compare concurrent fluoropyrimidine in combination with either mitomycin or with cisplatin as chemosensitizers. METHODS: Patients treated at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center between January 1, 2003 and December 31, 2018 with IMRT-based CRT were included. Median time to locoregional recurrence, time to colostomy, and overall survival were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: A total of 428 patients were included; median follow-up was 4.4 years. Three hundred and thirty-four patients (78.0%) were treated with concurrent cisplatin and fluoropyrimidine, and 160 (37.4%) with >54 Gy. Two- and 5-year freedom from locoregional failure, freedom from colostomy failure, and overall survival were 86.5% and 81.2%, respectively, 90.0% and 88.3%, respectively, and 93.6% and 85.8%, respectively. Neither dose escalation nor mitomycin-based concurrent chemotherapy resulted in improved outcomes. Mitomycin-based concurrent chemotherapy was associated with in approximately 2.5 times increased grade 3 or greater acute toxicity. Radiation dose >54 Gy was associated with approximately 2.6 times increased Grade 3 or greater chronic toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest IMRT-based CRT with concurrent fluoropyrimidine and cisplatin is a safe and feasible option for patient with SCCA and may cause less acute toxicity. The role for radiation dose escalation is unclear and requires further study.

Rectal Cancer, Version 2.2022, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

This selection from the NCCN Guidelines for Rectal Cancer focuses on management of malignant polyps and resectable nonmetastatic rectal cancer because important updates have been made to these guidelines. These recent updates include redrawing the algorithms for stage II and III disease to reflect new data supporting the increasingly prominent role of total neoadjuvant therapy, expanded recommendations for short-course radiation therapy techniques, and new recommendations for a "watch-and-wait" nonoperative management technique for patients with cancer that shows a complete response to neoadjuvant therapy. The complete version of the NCCN Guidelines for Rectal Cancer, available online at NCCN.org, covers additional topics including risk assessment, pathology and staging, management of metastatic disease, posttreatment surveillance, treatment of recurrent disease, and survivorship.

Colon Cancer, Version 2.2021, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

This selection from the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Colon Cancer focuses on systemic therapy options for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), because important updates have recently been made to this section. These updates include recommendations for first-line use of checkpoint inhibitors for mCRC, that is deficient mismatch repair/microsatellite instability-high, recommendations related to the use of biosimilars, and expanded recommendations for biomarker testing. The systemic therapy recommendations now include targeted therapy options for patients with mCRC that is HER2-amplified, or BRAF V600E mutation-positive. Treatment and management of nonmetastatic or resectable/ablatable metastatic disease are discussed in the complete version of the NCCN Guidelines for Colon Cancer available at NCCN.org. Additional topics covered in the complete version include risk assessment, staging, pathology, posttreatment surveillance, and survivorship.

Fertility discussions in young adult stage III colorectal cancer population: a single-center institution experience.

PURPOSE: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a malignancy that usually occurs in older age individuals. However, CRC cases in young adults are on the rise, and this increase is expected to continue. Young adult CRC requires the healthcare team to familiarize themselves with the unique needs of this population, including concerns about treatment-related infertility. We performed a retrospective review to determine how often our patients, 18-39 years old (yo), had discussions regarding fertility preservation prior to starting stage III CRC treatment. METHODS: Our electronic health record was utilized to identify adult patients < 40 yo with a stage III CRC diagnosis during 1/1/2015-9/1/2019. Fertility preservation discussions were determined by searching the patient's EHR chart. Progress notes from the medical oncology, surgery, and/or radiation oncology teams were reviewed. Additionally, notes from our fertility specialist's team were reviewed when consulted. RESULTS: One hundred and three patients met criteria. Patients were 21-39 yo at diagnosis (median age of 34 yo). Fifty-two percent were male while the remaining 48% were female. Forty-six percent had stage III colon cancer while 54% had stage III rectal cancer. Search terms and progress notes were utilized to determine if discussions were documented. Fertility discussions were documented in 73% of cases while 27% of patients lacked documentation regarding fertility. CONCLUSION: Our results show that most of our young adult stage III CRC population participate in fertility preservation discussions. However, in order to capture all patients, we recognize that a more formal approach is warranted. We additionally recommend these discussions occur with all patients of child-bearing age.

Cancer Surgery Scheduling During and After the COVID-19 First Wave: The MD Anderson Cancer Center Experience.

OBJECTIVE: To summarize the multi-specialty strategy and initial guidelines of a Case Review Committee in triaging oncologic surgery procedures in a large Comprehensive Cancer Center and to outline current steps moving forward after the initial wave. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The impetus for strategic rescheduling of operations is multifactorial and includes our societal responsibility to minimize COVID-19 exposure risk and propagation among patients, the healthcare workforce, and our community at large. Strategic rescheduling is also driven by the need to preserve limited resources. As many states have already or are considering to re-open and relax stay-at-home orders, there remains a continued need for careful surgical scheduling because we must face the reality that we will need to co-exist with COVID-19 for months, if not years. METHODS: The quality officers, chairs, and leadership of the 9 surgical departments in our Division of Surgery provide specialty-specific approaches to appropriately triage patients. RESULTS: We present the strategic approach for surgical rescheduling during and immediately after the COVID-19 first wave for the 9 departments in the Division of Surgery at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, Texas. CONCLUSIONS: Cancer surgeons should continue to use their oncologic knowledge to determine the window of opportunity for each surgical procedure, based on tumor biology, preoperative treatment sequencing, and response to systemic therapy, to safely guide patients through this cautious recovery phase.

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Rectal Cancer, Version 6.2020.

The NCCN Guidelines for Rectal Cancer provide recommendations for the diagnosis, evaluation, treatment, and follow-up of patients with rectal cancer. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the panel discussion behind recent important updates to the guidelines. These updates include clarifying the definition of rectum and differentiating the rectum from the sigmoid colon; the total neoadjuvant therapy approach for localized rectal cancer; and biomarker-targeted therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer, with a focus on new treatment options for patients with BRAF V600E- or HER2 amplification-positive disease.

Facilitation of Surgical Innovation: Is It Possible to Speed the Introduction of New Technology While Simultaneously Improving Patient Safety?

OBJECTIVE: To review efficiency metrics and patient safety data before and after implementation of a structured review process for surgical innovations. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Surgical innovation ranges from minor incremental improvement to radical experimentation. Although innovation paradigms have been described, these are not widely adopted or enforced in the surgical community. METHODS: A Continuous Quality Improvement Team (CQIT) of surgical quality officers and perioperative nurses was organized to perform structured reviews of proposed new surgical devices and procedures at a large quaternary cancer care center. The CQIT process was placed to precede an established Value Analysis Team business evaluation. Pre- and post-CQIT implementation metrics of approval process efficiency and patient safety data were compared. Seven novel procedures were also vetted by the CQIT. RESULTS: Forty-six product requests were evaluated after CQIT implementation. Compared with 34 products evaluated prior to CQIT establishment, the total mean evaluation time decreased from 124 to 51 days (P= 0.007). For new devices requiring intraoperative trial, the time between product proposal and trial decreased from a mean of 260 to 99 days (P= 0.014). The rate of device-related complications in the pre-CQIT group was 10% compared with 0% post-CQIT. Two devices, which administratively bypassed CQIT review, had both minor and major complications, including a mortality. Five novel procedures approved by CQIT with simulation were performed without complications. CONCLUSIONS: Using novel algorithms, the addition of a dedicated team of surgical quality officers to the surgical innovation evaluation process improved both the efficiency and the safety associated with introducing new devices and procedures into practice.

Small Bowel Adenocarcinoma, Version 1.2020, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

Small bowel adenocarcinoma (SBA) is a rare malignancy of the gastrointestinal tract that has increased in incidence across recent years. Often diagnosed at an advanced stage, outcomes for SBA are worse on average than for other related malignancies, including colorectal cancer. Due to the rarity of this disease, few studies have been done to direct optimal treatment, although recent data have shown that SBA responds to treatment differently than colorectal cancer, necessitating a separate approach to treatment. The NCCN Guidelines for Small Bowel Adenocarcinoma were created to establish an evidence-based standard of care for patients with SBA. These guidelines provide recommendations on the workup of suspected SBA, primary treatment options, adjuvant treatment, surveillance, and systemic therapy for metastatic disease. Additionally, principles of imaging and endoscopy, pathologic review, surgery, radiation therapy, and survivorship are described.

Who Should Get Lateral Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection After Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation?

BACKGROUND: Despite the use of neoadjuvant chemoradiation and total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer, lateral pelvic lymph node recurrence is still an important problem. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the indication for lateral pelvic lymph node dissection in post neoadjuvant chemoradiation rectal cancer. DESIGN: This is a retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected institutional database. SETTINGS: This study was conducted at a tertiary care cancer center from January 2006 through December 2017. PATIENTS: Patients who had rectal cancer with suspected lateral pelvic lymph node metastasis, who underwent total mesorectal excision with lateral pelvic lymph node dissection, were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measured was pathologic lateral pelvic lymph node positivity. INTERVENTIONS: The associations between lateral pelvic lymph node size on post-neoadjuvant chemoradiation imaging and pathologic lateral pelvic lymph node positivity and recurrence outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 64 patients were analyzed. The mean lateral pelvic lymph node size before and after neoadjuvant chemoradiation was 12.6 ± 9.5 mm and 8.5 ± 5.4 mm. The minimum size of positive lateral pelvic lymph node was 5 mm on post neoadjuvant chemoradiation imaging. Among 13 (20.3%) patients who had a <5 mm lateral pelvic lymph node after neoadjuvant chemoradiation, none were pathologically positive. Among 51 (79.7%) patients who had a ≥5 mm lateral pelvic lymph node after neoadjuvant chemoradiation, 33 patients (64.7%) were pathologically positive. Five-year overall survival and disease-specific survival were higher in the histologic lateral pelvic lymph node negative group than in the lateral pelvic lymph node positive group (overall survival 79.6% vs 61.8%, p = 0.122; disease-specific survival 84.5% vs 66.2%, p= 0.088). After a median 39 months of follow-up, there were no patients in the <5 mm group who died of cancer. There were no lateral compartment recurrences in the entire cohort. LIMITATIONS: Being a single-center retrospective study may limit generalizability. CONCLUSIONS: Post-neoadjuvant chemoradiation lateral pelvic lymph node size ≥5 mm was strongly associated with pathologic positivity. No patients with size <5 mm had pathologically positive lymph nodes. Following lateral pelvic lymph node dissection, no patients with a positive lateral pelvic lymph node developed lateral compartment recurrence. Therefore, patients who have rectal cancer with clinical evidence of lateral pelvic lymph node metastasis and post-neoadjuvant chemoradiation lateral pelvic lymph node size ≥5 mm should be considered for lateral pelvic lymph node dissection at the time of total mesorectal excision. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B3. ¿QUIéN DEBE RECIBIR LINFADENECTOMíA PéLVICA LATERAL DESPUéS DE LA QUIMIORRADIACIóN NEOADYUVANTE?: A pesar del uso de quimiorradiación neoadyuvante y la escisión total de mesorectao para el cáncer de recto, la recurrencia en los ganglios linfáticos pélvicos laterales sigue siendo un problema importante. OBJETIVO: Determinar la indicación para la disección de los ganglios linfáticos pélvicos laterales en el cáncer rectal post quimiorradiación neoadyuvante. DISEÑO:: Análisis retrospectivo de la base de datos institucional prospectivamente recopilada. ESCENARIO: Centro de cáncer de atención terciaria, de enero de 2006 hasta diciembre de 2017. PACIENTES: Pacientes con cáncer de recto con sospecha de metástasis en los ganglios linfáticos pélvicos laterales, que se sometieron a escisión total mesorectal con disección de los ganglios linfáticos pélvicos laterales. PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADOS: Positividad de ganglios linfáticos pélvicos laterales en histopatología. INTERVENCIONES: Se evaluaron las asociaciones entre el tamaño de los ganglios linfáticos pélvicos laterales en imagenología postquimiorradiación neoadyuvante y la positividad y recurrencia en los ganglios linfáticos pélvicos laterales en histopatología. RESULTADOS: Se analizaron un total de 64 pacientes. La media del tamaño de los ganglios linfáticos pélvicos laterales antes y después de la quimiorradiación neoadyuvante fue de 12.6 ± 9.5 mm y 8.5 ± 5.4 mm, respectivamente. El tamaño mínimo de los ganglios linfáticos pélvicos laterales positivos fue de 5 mm en las imágenes postquimiorradiación neoadyuvante. Entre 13 (20.3%) pacientes que tenían <5 mm de ganglio linfático lateral pélvico después de la quimiorradiación neoadyuvante; ninguno fue positivo en histopatología. Entre 51 (79.7%) pacientes con ganglio linfático pélvico lateral ≥ 5 mm después de la quimiorradiación neoadyuvante; 33 pacientes (64.7%) fueron positivos en histopatología. La supervivencia general a 5 años y la supervivencia específica de la enfermedad fueron mayores en el grupo histológico de ganglio linfático pélvico lateral negativo que en el grupo de ganglio linfático pélvico lateral positivo (Supervivencia general 79.6% vs 61.8%, p = 0.122; Supervivencia específica de la enfermedad 84.5% vs 66.2%, p = 0.088). Después de una mediana de seguimiento de 39 meses, no hubo pacientes en el grupo de <5 mm que hayan fallecido por cáncer. No hubo recurrencias en el compartimento lateral en toda la cohorte. LIMITACIONES: Al ser un estudio retrospectivo en un solo centro puede limitar la generalización. CONCLUSIONES: El tamaño de los ganglios linfáticos pélvicos laterales postquimiorradiación neoadyuvante ≥ 5 mm se asoció fuertemente con la positividad histopatológica. Ningún paciente con tamaño <5 mm tuvo ganglios linfáticos histopatológicamente positivos. Después de la disección de los ganglios linfáticos pélvicos laterales, ningún paciente con ganglios linfáticos pélvicos laterales positivos desarrolló recurrencia del compartimiento lateral. Por lo tanto, los pacientes con cáncer rectal con evidencia clínica de metástasis en los ganglios linfáticos pélvicos laterales y tamaño de ganglios linfáticos pélvicos laterales postquimiorradiación neoadyuvante ≥ 5 mm deben considerarse para disección de los ganglios linfáticos pélvicos laterales en el momento de la escisión total de mesorrecto. Vea el Abstract en video en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B3.

Anal Carcinoma, Version 2.2018, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

The NCCN Guidelines for Anal Carcinoma provide recommendations for the management of patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the anal canal or perianal region. Primary treatment of anal cancer usually includes chemoradiation, although certain lesions can be treated with margin-negative local excision alone. Disease surveillance is recommended for all patients with anal carcinoma because additional curative-intent treatment is possible. A multidisciplinary approach including physicians from gastroenterology, medical oncology, surgical oncology, radiation oncology, and radiology is essential for optimal patient care.

Rectal Cancer, Version 2.2018, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Rectal Cancer address diagnosis, staging, surgical management, perioperative treatment, management of recurrent and metastatic disease, disease surveillance, and survivorship in patients with rectal cancer. This portion of the guidelines focuses on the management of localized disease, which involves careful patient selection for curative-intent treatment options that sequence multimodality therapy usually comprised of chemotherapy, radiation, and surgical resection.

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Colon Cancer, Version 2.2018.

The NCCN Guidelines for Colon Cancer provide recommendations regarding diagnosis, pathologic staging, surgical management, perioperative treatment, surveillance, management of recurrent and metastatic disease, and survivorship. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the NCCN Colon Cancer Panel discussions for the 2018 update of the guidelines regarding risk stratification and adjuvant treatment for patients with stage III colon cancer, and treatment of BRAF V600E mutation-positive metastatic colorectal cancer with regimens containing vemurafenib.

Assessment of Ileostomy Output Using Telemedicine: A Feasibility Trial.

BACKGROUND: Ileostomies are a routine part of the care of patients with rectal cancer, but are associated with significant risk for dehydration, readmission, and acute kidney injury. Telemedicine has proven beneficial in decreasing readmission in chronic medical illnesses, but its utility in patients with an ileostomy is not well studied. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of televideoconferencing in the assessment of ileostomy output. DESIGN: An institutional review board-approved, prospective clinical trial was conducted at a single institution from November 2014 through December 2015. SETTINGS: The study was conducted in a single, large academic medical center. PATIENTS: Patients >18 years of age undergoing surgery with plans for ileostomy were eligible. INTERVENTIONS: Televideoconference assessments of ileostomy output and the need for medical intervention were conducted during the postoperative stay and compared with in-person assessment. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary end point of the trial was the feasibility of using teleconferencing to assess the need for medical intervention, defined as 90% agreement between telemedicine and in-person assessments. Secondary end points included patient/provider satisfaction, and correlative studies examined dehydration events and readmission. RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients underwent 44 teleconferencing assessments of ileostomy output. Compared with in-person treatment decisions, there was a 95% match (95% CI, 85%-99%). The readmission rate for the study participants was 31%, and 18% experienced dehydration events. Both patients and faculty responded favorably to surveys regarding the use of telemedicine in the perioperative period. LIMITATIONS: The study is limited by its in-hospital use of technology and small sample size. CONCLUSIONS: Televideoconference evaluation is a feasible, reliable means of assessing ileostomy output with high patient and physician acceptance. Our pilot study provides rationale for further study in the postdischarge setting for patients with ileostomies. The incorporation of televideoconference assessment within a teledischarge program may enable early intervention to improve patient outcomes. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A455.