Prediction of Isolated Local Recurrence After Resection of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: A Nationwide Study.

BACKGROUND: Distinguishing postoperative fibrosis from isolated local recurrence (ILR) after resection of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is challenging. A prognostic model that helps to identify patients at risk of ILR can assist clinicians when evaluating patients' postoperative imaging. This nationwide study aimed to develop a clinically applicable prognostic model for ILR after PDAC resection. PATIENTS AND METHODS: An observational cohort study was performed, including all patients who underwent PDAC resection in the Netherlands (2014-2019; NCT04605237). On the basis of recurrence location (ILR, systemic, or both), multivariable cause-specific Cox-proportional hazard analysis was conducted to identify predictors for ILR and presented as hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). A predictive model was developed using Akaike's Information Criterion, and bootstrapped discrimination and calibration indices were assessed. RESULTS: Among 1194/1693 patients (71%) with recurrence, 252 patients (21%) developed ILR. Independent predictors for ILR were resectability status (borderline versus resectable, HR 1.42; 95% CI 1.03-1.96; P = 0.03, and locally advanced versus resectable, HR 1.11; 95% CI 0.68-1.82; P = 0.66), tumor location (head versus body/tail, HR 1.50; 95% CI 1.00-2.25; P = 0.05), vascular resection (HR 1.86; 95% CI 1.41-2.45; P < 0.001), perineural invasion (HR 1.47; 95% CI 1.01-2.13; P = 0.02), number of positive lymph nodes (HR 1.04; 95% CI 1.01-1.08; P = 0.02), and resection margin status (R1 < 1 mm versus R0 ≥ 1 mm, HR 1.64; 95% CI 1.25-2.14; P < 0.001). Moderate performance (concordance index 0.66) with adequate calibration (slope 0.99) was achieved. CONCLUSIONS: This nationwide study identified factors predictive of ILR after PDAC resection. Our prognostic model, available through www.pancreascalculator.com , can be utilized to identify patients with a higher a priori risk of developing ILR, providing important information in patient evaluation and prognostication.

New insights in the management of pseudomyxoma peritonei.

While a rare entity, peritoneal pseudomyxoma treatment evolves. Decision-making criteria improve with imaging development and exploratory laparoscopy. Surgery remains at the core of the therapeutic strategy whatever disease progression. Complete cytoreduction plus hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is standard of care. Iterative cytoreduction or debulking is sometimes justified. Intraperitoneal chemotherapy modalities change with early postoperative HIPEC or pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy. Systemic or local treatment such as new chemo/immuno-therapies or BromAc should improve outcomes. Expertise and multicentric cooperation are more than ever needed.

Perioperative Systemic Therapy Versus Cytoreductive Surgery and HIPEC Alone for Resectable Colorectal Peritoneal Metastases: Patient-Reported Outcomes of a Randomized Phase II Trial.

BACKGROUND: As part of a randomized phase II trial in patients with isolated resectable colorectal peritoneal metastases (CPMs), the present study compared patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of patients treated with perioperative systemic therapy versus cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) alone. Also, PROs of patients receiving perioperative systemic therapy were explored. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients were randomized to perioperative systemic therapy (experimental) or CRS-HIPEC alone (control). PROs were assessed using EORTC QLQ-C30, QLQ-CR29, and EQ-5D-5L questionnaires at baseline, after neoadjuvant treatment (experimental), and at 3 and 6 months postoperatively. Linear mixed modeling was used to compare five predefined PROs (visual analog scale, global health status, physical functioning, fatigue, C30 summary score) between arms and to longitudinally analyze PROs in the experimental arm. RESULTS: Of 79 analyzed patients, 37 (47%) received perioperative systemic therapy. All predefined PROs were comparable between arms at all timepoints and returned to baseline at 3 or 6 months postoperatively. The experimental arm had worsening of fatigue [mean difference (MD) + 14, p = 0.001], loss of appetite (MD + 15, p = 0.003), hair loss (MD + 18, p < 0.001), and loss of taste (MD + 27, p < 0.001) after neoadjuvant treatment. Except for loss of appetite, these PROs returned to baseline at 3 or 6 months postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with resectable CPM randomized to perioperative systemic therapy or CRS-HIPEC alone, PROs were comparable between arms and returned to baseline postoperatively. Together with the trial's previously reported feasibility and safety data, these findings show acceptable tolerability of perioperative systemic therapy in this setting.

Perioperative or adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX for resectable pancreatic cancer (PREOPANC-3): study protocol for a multicenter randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Surgical resection followed by adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX (5-fluorouracil with leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin) is currently the standard of care for patients with resectable pancreatic cancer. The main concern regarding adjuvant chemotherapy is that only half of patients actually receive adjuvant treatment. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy, on the other hand, guarantees early systemic treatment and may increase chemotherapy use and thereby improve overall survival. Furthermore, it may prevent futile surgery in patients with rapidly progressive disease. However, some argue that neoadjuvant therapy delays surgery, which could lead to progression towards unresectable disease and thus offset the potential benefits. Comparison of perioperative (i.e., neoadjuvant and adjuvant) with (only) adjuvant administration of mFOLFIRINOX in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) is needed to determine the optimal approach. METHODS: This multicenter, phase 3, RCT will include 378 patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma with a WHO performance status of 0 or 1. Patients are recruited from 20 Dutch centers and three centers in Norway and Sweden. Resectable pancreatic cancer is defined as no arterial contact and ≤ 90 degrees venous contact. Patients in the intervention arm are scheduled for 8 cycles of neoadjuvant mFOLFIRINOX followed by surgery and 4 cycles of adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX (2-week cycle of oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, leucovorin 400 mg/m2, irinotecan 150 mg/m2 at day 1, followed by 46 h continuous infusion of 5-fluorouracil 2400 g/m2). Patients in the comparator arm start with surgery followed by 12 cycles of adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX. The primary outcome is overall survival by intention-to-treat. Secondary outcomes include progression-free survival, resection rate, quality of life, adverse events, and surgical complications. To detect a hazard ratio of 0.70 with 80% power, 252 events are needed. The number of events is expected to be reached after the inclusion of 378 patients in 36 months, with analysis planned 18 months after the last patient has been randomized. DISCUSSION: The multicenter PREOPANC-3 trial compares perioperative mFOLFIRINOX with adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials: NCT04927780. Registered June 16, 2021.

Primary ovarian cancer after colorectal cancer: a Dutch nationwide population-based study.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Women with colorectal cancer (CRC) are at risk not only of developing ovarian metastases, but also of developing a primary ovarian malignancy. Several earlier studies have in fact shown a link between the development of primary ovarian cancer and CRC. The purpose of this study was therefore to determine the risk of developing a primary ovarian cancer in women with prior CRC compared to the general population. METHODS: Data from the Netherlands Cancer Registry were used. All women diagnosed with invasive CRC between 1989 and 2017 were included. Standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) and absolute excess risks (AERs) per 10,000 person-years were calculated. RESULTS: During the study period, 410 (0.3%) CRC patients were diagnosed with primary ovarian cancer. Women with CRC had a 20% increased risk of developing ovarian cancer compared to the general population (SIR = 1.2, 95% CI: 1.1-1.3). The AER of ovarian cancer was 0.9 per 10,000 person-years. The risk was especially increased within the first year of a CRC diagnosis (SIR = 3.3, 95% CI: 2.8-3.8) and in women aged ≤ 55 years (SIR = 2.0, 95% CI: 1.6-2.6). CONCLUSION: This study found a slightly increased risk of primary ovarian cancer in women diagnosed with CRC compared to the general population. However, this may be partly attributable to surveillance or detection bias. Nevertheless, our findings could be helpful for patient counseling, as CRC patients do not currently receive information concerning the increased risk of ovarian cancer.

Ovarian metastases in young women with colorectal cancer: a retrospective multicenter cohort study.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Previous studies indicated that approximately 3.4% of female colorectal cancer (CRC) patients are at increased risk of developing ovarian metastases (OM). It has been suggested that young women more frequently develop this form of metastatic disease. METHODS: This study evaluated, in 6 Dutch hospitals, the proportion of young women with CRC who developed OM. RESULTS: In a cohort of 200 young (age ≤ 55) women with CRC, the proportion of patients diagnosed with synchronous or metachronous OM was calculated. This study revealed that 5% (n = 10) of young female CRC patients developed ovarian metastases resulting in a 5-year overall survival rate of approximately 40%. Furthermore, six patients had concurrent peritoneal metastases, five patients had bilateral ovarian metastases, and five patients had synchronous metastases, while the median time of the occurrence of metachronous metastases (n = 5) was 19 months. CONCLUSION: This retrospective multicenter cohort study indicates that 5% of young women with CRC either present with or develop OM. This result appears to be clinically relevant and demonstrates the need for improved surveillance for young women diagnosed with CRC.

Role Of Ovarian Metastases In Colorectal Cancer (ROMIC): a Dutch study protocol to evaluate the effect of prophylactic salpingo-oophorectomy in postmenopausal women.

BACKGROUND: The mean incidence of ovarian metastases (OM) in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) is 3.4%. The 5-year survival of these patients, even when operated with curative intent, is remarkably low. The lifetime risk of ovarian cancer is approximately 1.3%. Prophylactic salpingo-oophorectomy (PSO, or surgical removal of the ovaries and fallopian tubes) could reduce the number of CRC patients that develop OM after removal of the primary tumor, as well as preventing the occurrence of primary ovarian cancer. Recently, the care pathway for CRC has been changed in several hospitals in line with the updated Dutch guideline. The possibility of PSO is now discussed with postmenopausal CRC patients in these hospitals. The aims of the current study are firstly to estimate the incidence of OM and primary ovarian cancer in postmenopausal patients with CRC, and secondly to evaluate the effect of PSO in these patients. METHODS: An information bulletin and decision guide on this topic was implemented in several Dutch hospitals in 2020. Post-decision outcomes will be collected prospectively. The study population consists of postmenopausal (≥ 60 years of age) patients that are operated with curative intent for CRC. Based on their own preference, patients will be divided into two groups: those who choose to undergo PSO and those who do not. The main study parameters are the reduction in incidence of ovarian malignancies (metastatic or primary) following PSO, and the number needed to treat (NNT) by PSO to prevent one case of ovarian malignancy. DISCUSSION: This will be the first study to evaluate the effect of PSO in postmenopausal CRC patients that is facilitated by an altered CRC care pathway. The results of this study are expected to provide relevant information on whether PSO adds significant value to postmenopausal patients with CRC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, NL7870. Registered on 2019 July 12. URL of trial registry record: https://trialsearch.who.int/Trial2.aspx?TrialID=NL7870 . PROTOCOL VERSION: 1.0, date 2021 June 8.

Treatment Strategies and Prognosis of Patients With Synchronous or Metachronous Colorectal Peritoneal Metastases: A Population-Based Study.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to compare treatment strategies and survival of patients with synchronous colorectal peritoneal metastases (CPM) and patients with metachronous CPM in a nationwide cohort. METHODS: All patients from the Netherlands Cancer Registry with synchronous or metachronous CPM whose primary colorectal cancer (CRC) was diagnosed between 1 January and 30 June 2015 were included in the study. Treatments were categorized as (A) cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy [CRS-HIPEC]; (B) palliative treatment; or (C) best supportive care. Overall survival (OS) for all the patients and disease-free survival (DFS) for those who underwent CRS-HIPEC were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: Of 7233 patients, 743 had a diagnosis of CPM, including 409 patients with synchronous CPM and 334 patients with metachronous CPM. The median OS was 8.1 months for the patients with synchronous CPM versus 12 months for the patients with metachronous CPM (p = 0.003). After multivariable correction, OS no longer differed between the patients with synchronous CPM and those with metachronous CPM (HR 1.03 [0.83-1.27]). The patients with metachronous CPM more often underwent CRS-HIPEC than the patients with synchronous CPM (16 % vs 8 %; p = 0.001). The two groups did not differ statistically in terms of DFS and OS (median DFS, 21.5 vs 14.1 months, respectively; p = 0.094; median OS, 37.8 vs. 35.8 months, respectively; p = 0.553). CONCLUSION: This population-based study showed that survival for the patients with synchronous CPM and patients with metachronous CPM did not significantly differ. This suggests that a similar prognosis may be expected for patients selected for treatment regardless of the onset of CPM.

Effect of centralization and regionalization of pancreatic surgery on resection rates and survival.

BACKGROUND: Centralization of pancreatic surgery in the Netherlands has been ongoing since 2011. The aim of this study was to assess how centralization has affected the likelihood of resection and survival of patients with non-metastatic pancreatic head and periampullary cancer, diagnosed in hospitals with and without pancreatic surgery services. METHODS: An observational cohort study was performed on nationwide data from the Netherlands Cancer Registry (2009-2017), including patients diagnosed with non-metastatic pancreatic head or periampullary cancer. The period of diagnosis was divided into three time intervals: 2009-2011, 2012-2014 and 2015-2017. Hospital of diagnosis was classified as a pancreatic or non-pancreatic surgery centre. Analyses were performed using multivariable logistic and Cox regression models. RESULTS: In total, 10 079 patients were included, of whom 3114 (30.9 per cent) were diagnosed in pancreatic surgery centres. Between 2009-2011 and 2015-2017, the number of patients undergoing resection increased from 1267 of 3169 (40.0 per cent) to 1705 of 3566 (47.8 per cent) (P for trend < 0.001). In multivariable analysis, in 2015-2017, unlike the previous periods, patients diagnosed in pancreatic and non-pancreatic surgery centres had a similar likelihood of resection (odds ratio 1.08, 95 per cent c.i. 0.90 to 1.28; P = 0.422). In this period, however, overall survival was higher in patients diagnosed in pancreatic surgery than in those diagnosed in non-pancreatic surgery centres (hazard ratio 0.92, 95 per cent c.i. 0.85 to 0.99; P = 0.047). CONCLUSION: After centralization of pancreatic surgery, the resection rate for patients with pancreatic head and periampullary cancer diagnosed in non-pancreatic surgery centres increased and became similar to that in pancreatic surgery centres. Overall survival remained higher in patients diagnosed in pancreatic surgery centres.

Completion pancreatectomy or a pancreas-preserving procedure during relaparotomy for pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy: a multicentre cohort study and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Despite the fact that primary percutaneous catheter drainage has become standard practice, some patients with pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy ultimately undergo a relaparotomy. The aim of this study was to compare completion pancreatectomy with a pancreas-preserving procedure in patients undergoing relaparotomy for pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study of nine institutions included patients who underwent relaparotomy for pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy from 2005-2018. Furthermore, a systematic review and meta-analysis were performed according to the PRISMA guidelines. RESULTS: From 4877 patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy, 786 (16 per cent) developed a pancreatic fistula grade B/C and 162 (3 per cent) underwent a relaparotomy for pancreatic fistula. Of these patients, 36 (22 per cent) underwent a completion pancreatectomy and 126 (78 per cent) a pancreas-preserving procedure. Mortality was higher after completion pancreatectomy (20 (56 per cent) versus 40 patients (32 per cent); P = 0.009), which remained after adjusting for sex, age, BMI, ASA score, previous reintervention, and organ failure in the 24 h before relaparotomy (adjusted odds ratio 2.55, 95 per cent c.i. 1.07 to 6.08). The proportion of additional reinterventions was not different between groups (23 (64 per cent) versus 84 patients (67 per cent); P = 0.756). The meta-analysis including 33 studies evaluating 745 patients, confirmed the association between completion pancreatectomy and mortality (Mantel-Haenszel random-effects model: odds ratio 1.99, 95 per cent c.i. 1.03 to 3.84). CONCLUSION: Based on the current data, a pancreas-preserving procedure seems preferable to completion pancreatectomy in patients in whom a relaparotomy is deemed necessary for pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy.

Total neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX versus neoadjuvant gemcitabine-based chemoradiotherapy and adjuvant gemcitabine for resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (PREOPANC-2 trial): study protocol for a nationwide multicenter randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant therapy has several potential advantages over upfront surgery in patients with localized pancreatic cancer; more patients receive systemic treatment, fewer patients undergo futile surgery, and R0 resection rates are higher, thereby possibly improving overall survival (OS). Two recent randomized trials have suggested benefit of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy over upfront surgery, both including single-agent chemotherapy regimens. Potentially, the multi-agent FOLFIRINOX regimen (5-fluorouracil with leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin) may further improve outcomes in the neoadjuvant setting for localized pancreatic cancer, but randomized studies are needed. The PREOPANC-2 trial investigates whether neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX improves OS compared with neoadjuvant gemcitabine-based chemoradiotherapy and adjuvant gemcitabine in resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer patients. METHODS: This nationwide multicenter phase III randomized controlled trial includes patients with pathologically confirmed resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer with a WHO performance score of 0 or 1. Resectable pancreatic cancer is defined as no arterial and ≤ 90 degrees venous involvement; borderline resectable pancreatic cancer is defined as ≤90 degrees arterial and ≤ 270 degrees venous involvement without occlusion. Patients receive 8 cycles of neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX chemotherapy followed by surgery without adjuvant treatment (arm A), or 3 cycles of neoadjuvant gemcitabine with hypofractionated radiotherapy (36 Gy in 15 fractions) during the second cycle, followed by surgery and 4 cycles of adjuvant gemcitabine (arm B). The primary endpoint is OS by intention-to-treat. Secondary endpoints include progression-free survival, quality of life, resection rate, and R0 resection rate. To detect a hazard ratio of 0.70 with 80% power, 252 events are needed. The number of events is expected to be reached after inclusion of 368 eligible patients assuming an accrual period of 3 years and 1.5 years follow-up. DISCUSSION: The PREOPANC-2 trial directly compares two neoadjuvant regimens for patients with resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. Our study will provide evidence on the neoadjuvant treatment of choice for patients with resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Primary registry and trial identifying number: EudraCT: 2017-002036-17 . Date of registration: March 6, 2018. Secondary identifying numbers: The Netherlands National Trial Register - NL7094 , NL61961.078.17, MEC-2018-004.

Dedicated MRI staging versus surgical staging of peritoneal metastases in colorectal cancer patients considered for CRS-HIPEC; the DISCO randomized multicenter trial.

BACKGROUND: Selecting patients with peritoneal metastases from colorectal cancer (CRCPM) who might benefit from cytoreductive surgery followed by hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) is challenging. Computed tomography generally underestimates the peritoneal tumor load. Diagnostic laparoscopy is often used to determine whether patients are amenable for surgery. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has shown to be accurate in predicting completeness of CRS. The aim of this study is to determine whether MRI can effectively reduce the need for surgical staging. METHODS: The study is designed as a multicenter randomized controlled trial (RCT) of colorectal cancer patients who are deemed eligible for CRS-HIPEC after conventional CT staging. Patients are randomly assigned to either MRI based staging (arm A) or to standard surgical staging with or without laparoscopy (arm B). In arm A, MRI assessment will determine whether patients are eligible for CRS-HIPEC. In borderline cases, an additional diagnostic laparoscopy is advised. The primary outcome is the number of unnecessary surgical procedures in both arms defined as: all surgeries in patients with definitely inoperable disease (PCI > 24) or explorative surgeries in patients with limited disease (PCI < 15). Secondary outcomes include correlations between surgical findings and MRI findings, cost-effectiveness, and quality of life (QOL) analysis. CONCLUSION: This randomized trial determines whether MRI can effectively replace surgical staging in patients with CRCPM considered for CRS-HIPEC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered in the clinical trials registry of U.S. National Library of Medicine under NCT04231175 .

The treatment and survival of elderly patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer: A post-hoc analysis of a multicenter registry.

BACKGROUND: The treatment options for patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) have improved in recent years and consequently survival has increased. It is unknown, however, if elderly patients benefit from these improvements in therapy. With the ongoing aging of the patient population and an increasing incidence of pancreatic cancer, this patient group becomes more relevant. This study aims to clarify the association between increasing age, treatment and overall survival in patients with LAPC. METHODS: Post-hoc analysis of a multicenter registry including consecutive patients with LAPC, who were registered in 14 centers of the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Group (April 2015-December 2017). Patients were divided in three groups according to age (<65, 65-74 and ≥75 years). Primary outcome was overall survival stratified by primary treatment strategy. Multivariable regression analyses were performed to adjust for possible confounders. RESULTS: Overall, 422 patients with LAPC were included; 162 patients (38%) aged <65 years, 182 patients (43%) aged 65-74 and 78 patients (19%) aged ≥75 years. Chemotherapy was administered in 86%, 81% and 50% of the patients in the different age groups (p<0.01). Median overall survival was 12, 11 and 7 months for the different age groups (p<0.01).Patients treated with chemotherapy showed comparable median overall survival of 13, 14 and 10 months for the different age groups (p=0.11). When adjusted for confounders, age was not associated with overall survival. CONCLUSION: Elderly patients are less likely to be treated with chemotherapy, but when treated with chemotherapy, their survival is comparable to younger patients.

Age-related differences in morbidity and mortality after surgery for primary clinical T4 and locally recurrent rectal cancer.

AIM: Outcomes in elderly patients (≥75 years) with non-advanced colorectal cancer have improved. It is unclear whether this is also true for elderly patients with clinical T4 rectal cancer (cT4RC) or locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC). We aimed to compare age-related differences in morbidity and mortality after curative treatment for cT4RC and LRRC. METHODS: All cT4RC and LRRC patients without distant metastasis who underwent curative surgery between 2005 and 2017 in the Catharina Hospital (Eindhoven, The Netherlands) were included. Morbidity and mortality were evaluated based on age (<75 and ≥75 years) and date of surgery (2005-2011 and 2012-2017). RESULTS: Overall, 72 of 474 (15.2%) cT4RC and 53 of 293 (18.1%) LRRC patients were ≥75 years. No significant differences in the incidence of Clavien-Dindo I-IV complications were observed between age groups. However, in elderly cT4RC patients, cerebrovascular accidents occurred more frequently (4.2% vs. 0.5%, P = 0.03). Between 2005-2011 and 2012-2017, 30-day mortality improved from 7.5% to 3.1% and from 10.0% to 0.0% in elderly cT4RC and LRRC patients, respectively. The 1-year mortality during 2012-2017 was worse in elderly than in younger patients (28.1% vs. 6.2%, P = 0.001 for cT4RC and 27.3% vs. 13.8%, P = 0.06 for LRRC). In elderly cT4RC and LRRC patients, 44.4% and 46.2% died due to non-cancer-related causes, while only 27.8% and 23.1% died due to disease recurrence, respectively. CONCLUSION: Although the 30-day mortality in elderly cT4RC and LRRC patients improved after curative treatment, the 1-year mortality in elderly patients continued to be high, which requires more awareness for the elderly after hospitalization.

No influence of sarcopenia on survival of ovarian cancer patients in a prospective validation study.

OBJECTIVE: Decrease in skeletal muscle index (SMI) during neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) has been associated with worse outcome in patients with advanced ovarian cancer. To validate these findings, we tested if a decrease in SMI was a prognostic factor for a homogenous cohort of patients who received NACT in the randomized phase 3 OVHIPEC-trial. METHODS: CT-scans were performed at baseline and after two cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in stage III ovarian cancer patients. The SMI (skeletal muscle area in cm2 divided by body surface area in m2) was calculated using SliceOMatic software. The difference in SMI between both CT-scans (ΔSMI) was calculated. Cox-regression analyses were performed to analyze the independent effect of a difference in SMI (ΔSMI) on outcome. Log-rank tests were performed to plot recurrence-free (RFS) and overall survival (OS). The mean number of adverse events per patient were compared between groups using t-tests. RESULTS: Paired CT-scans were available for 212 out of 245 patients (87%). Thirty-four of 74 patients (58%) in the group with a decrease in ΔSMI and 73 of 138 of the patients (53%) in the group with stable/increase in ΔSMI had died. Median RFS and OS did not differ significantly (p = 0.297 and p = 0.764) between groups. Patients with a decrease in SMI experienced more pre-operative adverse events, and more grade 3-4 adverse events. CONCLUSION: Decreased SMI during neoadjuvant chemotherapy was not associated with worse outcome in patients with stage III ovarian cancer included in the OVHIPEC-trial. However, a strong association between decreasing SMI and adverse events was found.

Incidence, risk factors, treatment, and survival of ovarian metastases of colorectal origin: a Dutch population-based study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this nationwide study was to provide insight in the incidence, risk factors, treatment, and survival of patients with ovarian metastases from colorectal cancer (CRC). METHODS: Data from the Netherlands Cancer Registry were used. All newly diagnosed female CRC patients between 2008 and 2016 were included. Treatment was categorized as follows: cytoreductive surgery followed by hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC); resection of the primary tumor; palliative treatment; and no treatment. Overall survival (OS) was investigated using Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox regression analyses. RESULTS: Of 53,883 female CRC patients, 11,343 (21.1%) had metastases at time of diagnosis. Among them, 471 (4.2%) had ovarian metastases. Within latter group, 27.2% received CRS-HIPEC; 38.4% underwent resection of the primary tumor; 25.3% received palliative treatment; and 9.1% received no treatment. Median OS of all patients with ovarian metastases was 17.5 months. In patients receiving CRS-HIPEC, OS was significantly longer than in patients undergoing resection only (median OS 34.1 vs. 17.5 months, adjusted HR 0.44 [0.33-0.66]). Five-year OS was 28.5% for patients having underwent CRS-HIPEC, 11.0% for patients having underwent resection of the primary tumor, 1.2% for patients having underwent palliative treatment, and 0.0% for patients without treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Synchronous ovarian metastases are diagnosed in 4.2% of female colorectal patients presenting with metastatic disease. Risk factors are young age, T4/N+ tumor and histology of signet ring cell carcinoma. Median OS of the entire cohort was 17.5 months, ranging from 3.1 months in patients without treatment to 34.1 months in patients undergoing CRS-HIPEC.

Organoids from colorectal peritoneal metastases as a platform for improving hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Patients with peritoneal metastases from colorectal cancer have a poor prognosis. If the intraperitoneal tumour load is limited, patients may be eligible for cytoreductive surgery followed by hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). This treatment has improved overall survival, but recurrence rates are high. The aim of this study was to create a preclinical platform for the development of more effective intraperitoneal chemotherapy strategies. METHODS: Using organoid technology, five tumour cultures were generated from malignant ascites and resected peritoneal metastases. These were used in an in vitro HIPEC model to assess sensitivity to mitomycin C (MMC) and oxaliplatin, the drugs used most commonly in HIPEC. The model was also used to test a rational combination treatment involving MMC and inhibitors of the checkpoint kinase ATR. RESULTS: MMC was more effective in eliminating peritoneal metastasis-derived organoids than oxaliplatin at clinically relevant concentrations. However, the drug concentrations required to eliminate 50 per cent of the tumour cells (IC50) were higher than the median clinical dose in two of five organoid lines for MMC, and all five lines for oxaliplatin, indicating a general resistance to monotherapy. ATR inhibition increased the sensitivity of all peritoneal metastasis-derived organoids to MMC, as the IC50 decreased 2·6-12·4-fold to well below concentrations commonly attained in clinical practice. Live-cell imaging and flow cytometric analysis showed that ATR inhibition did not release cells from MMC-induced cell cycle arrest, but caused increased replication stress and accelerated cell death. CONCLUSION: Peritoneal metastasis-derived organoids can be used to evaluate existing HIPEC regimens on an individual-patient level and for development of more effective treatment strategies. Surgical relevance Cytoreductive surgery followed by hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) has improved prognosis of patients with peritoneal metastases from colorectal cancer, but disease recurrence is common. More effective and personalized HIPEC is urgently needed. Organoid technology is frequently used for drug screens, as patient-derived organoids can accurately predict clinical therapeutic response in vitro. A panel of organoids was established from peritoneal metastases from colorectal cancer and used to develop a model for testing HIPEC regimens in vitro. Patient-derived organoids differed in sensitivity to commonly used chemotherapeutics, in line with variable clinical outcomes following cytoreductive surgery-HIPEC. Combining MMC with an ATR inhibitor improved the efficacy of MMC. Peritoneal metastasis-derived organoids can be used as a platform to test novel (combination) strategies that increase HIPEC efficacy. In the future, organoids could be used to select patent-tailored HIPEC regimens.

ANTECEDENTES: Los pacientes con metástasis peritoneales (peritoneal metastasis, PM) de cáncer colorrectal tienen un mal pronóstico. Si la carga tumoral intraperitoneal es reducida, los pacientes pueden ser candidatos a cirugía citorreductora seguida de quimioterapia intraperitoneal hipertérmica (hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy, HIPEC). Este tratamiento ha mejorado la supervivencia global, pero las tasas de recidiva son altas. El objetivo de este estudio fue crear una plataforma preclínica para el desarrollo de las estrategias de quimioterapia intraperitoneal más efectivas. MÉTODOS: Mediante la utilización de la tecnología de organoides, se generaron cinco cultivos tumorales a partir de ascitis maligna y PM resecadas. Se utilizó un modelo de HIPEC in vitro para evaluar la sensibilidad a la mitomicina C (mitomycin C, MMC) y al oxaliplatino, los fármacos más utilizados en la HIPEC. El modelo también se usó para probar un tratamiento combinado de MMC e inhibidores de control inmunitario de la quinasa ATR. RESULTADOS: A concentraciones clínicamente relevantes, la MMC fue más efectiva que el oxaliplatino para eliminar los organoides derivados de PM. Sin embargo, las concentraciones de fármaco necesarias para eliminar el 50% de las células tumorales (IC50) fueron más elevadas que la mediana de la dosis clínica en 2/5 (MMC) o 5/5 (oxaliplatino) de las líneas de organoides, lo que indica una resistencia general a la monoterapia. La inhibición de ATR aumentó la sensibilidad a MMC de todos los organoides derivados de PM, ya que la IC50 disminuyó (2,6-12,4 veces) a concentraciones muy por debajo de las que se alcanzan comúnmente en la práctica clínica. Los análisis de viabilidad celular y de citometría de flujo (FACS) mostraron que la inhibición de ATR no liberaba células tras la detención del ciclo celular inducida por la MMC, sino que causaba un aumento en el estrés replicativo y muerte celular acelerada. CONCLUSIÓN: Se pueden usar los organoides derivados de PM para evaluar los regímenes HIPEC existentes a nivel del paciente individual y para desarrollar estrategias terapéuticas más efectivas.

The role of abdominal drainage in pancreatic resection - A multicenter validation study for early drain removal.

BACKGROUND: Abdominal drainage and the timing of drain removal in patients undergoing pancreatic resection are under debate. Early drain removal after pancreatic resection has been reported to be safe with a low risk for clinical relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF) when drain amylase on POD1 is < 5000U/L. The aim of this study was to validate this algorithm in a large national cohort. METHODS: Patients registered in the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit (2014-2016) who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy, distal pancreatectomy or enucleation were analysed. Data on post-operative drain amylase levels, drain removal, postoperative pancreatic fistulae were collected. Univariate and multivariate analysis using a logistic regression model were performed. The primary outcome measure was grade B/C pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF). RESULTS: Among 1402 included patients, 433 patients with a drain fluid amylase level of <5000U/L on POD1, 7% developed a CR-POPF. For patients with an amylase level >5000U/L the CR-POPF rate was 28%. When using a cut-off point of 2000U/L or 1000U/L during POD1-3, the CR-POPF rates were 6% and 5% respectively. For patients with an amylase level of >2000U/L and >1000UL during POD 1-3 the CR-POPF rates were 26% and 22% respectively (n = 223). Drain removal on POD4 or thereafter was associated with more complications (p = 0.004). Drain amylase level was shown to be the most statistically significant predicting factor for CR-POPF (Wald = 49.7; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Our data support early drain removal after pancreatic resection. However, a cut-off of 5000U/L drain amylase on POD1 was associated with a relatively high CR-POPF rate of 7%. A cut-off point of 1000U/L during POD1-3 resulted in 5% CR-POPF and might be a safer alternative.

Nationwide comprehensive gastro-intestinal cancer cohorts: the 3P initiative.

BACKGROUND: The increasing sub-classification of cancer patients due to more detailed molecular classification of tumors, and limitations of current trial designs, require innovative research designs. We present the design, governance and current standing of three comprehensive nationwide cohorts including pancreatic, esophageal/gastric, and colorectal cancer patients (NCT02070146). Multidisciplinary collection of clinical data, tumor tissue, blood samples, and patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures with a nationwide coverage, provides the infrastructure for future and novel trial designs and facilitates research to improve outcomes of gastrointestinal cancer patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: All patients aged ≥18 years with pancreatic, esophageal/gastric or colorectal cancer are eligible. Patients provide informed consent for: (1) reuse of clinical data; (2) biobanking of primary tumor tissue; (3) collection of blood samples; (4) to be informed about relevant newly identified genomic aberrations; (5) collection of longitudinal PROs; and (6) to receive information on new interventional studies and possible participation in cohort multiple randomized controlled trials (cmRCT) in the future. RESULTS: In 2015, clinical data of 21,758 newly diagnosed patients were collected in the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Additional clinical data on the surgical procedures were registered in surgical audits for 13,845 patients. Within the first two years, tumor tissue and blood samples were obtained from 1507 patients; during this period, 1180 patients were included in the PRO registry. Response rate for PROs was 90%. The consent rate to receive information on new interventional studies and possible participation in cmRCTs in the future was >85%. The number of hospitals participating in the cohorts is steadily increasing. CONCLUSION: A comprehensive nationwide multidisciplinary gastrointestinal cancer cohort is feasible and surpasses the limitations of classical study designs. With this initiative, novel and innovative studies can be performed in an efficient, safe, and comprehensive setting.

Nationwide outcomes in patients undergoing surgical exploration without resection for pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: Despite improvements in diagnostic imaging and staging, unresectable pancreatic cancer is still encountered during surgical exploration with curative intent. This nationwide study investigated outcomes in patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer found during surgical exploration. METHODS: All patients diagnosed with primary pancreatic (adeno)carcinoma (2009-2013) in the Netherlands Cancer Registry were included. Predictors of unresectability, 30-day mortality and poor survival were evaluated using logistic and Cox proportional hazards regression analysis. RESULTS: There were 10 595 patients with pancreatic cancer during the study interval. The proportion of patients undergoing surgical exploration increased from 19·9 to 27·0 per cent (P < 0·001). Among 2356 patients who underwent surgical exploration, the proportion of patients with tumour resection increased from 61·6 per cent in 2009 to 71·3 per cent in 2013 (P < 0·001), whereas the contribution of M1 disease (18·5 per cent overall) remained stable. Patients who had exploration only had an increased 30-day mortality rate compared with those who underwent tumour resection (7·8 versus 3·8 per cent; P < 0·001). In the non-resected group, among those with M0 (383 patients) and M1 (435) disease at surgical exploration, the 30-day mortality rate was 4·7 and 10·6 per cent (P = 0·002), median survival was 7·2 and 4·4 months (P < 0·001), and 1-year survival rates were 28·0 and 12·9 per cent, respectively. Among other factors, low hospital volume (0-20 resections per year) was an independent predictor for not undergoing tumour resection, but also for 30-day mortality and poor survival among patients without tumour resection. CONCLUSION: Exploration and resection rates increased, but one-third of patients who had surgical exploration for pancreatic cancer did not undergo resection. Non-resectional surgery doubled the 30-day mortality rate compared with that in patients undergoing tumour resection.