Long-Term Outcomes of Additional Surgery After Endoscopic Resection Versus Primary Surgery for T1 Colorectal Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: There is considerable concern about whether endoscopic resection (ER) before additional surgery (AS) for T1 colorectal cancer (CRC) has oncologically potential adverse effects. Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare the long-term outcomes, including overall survival (OS), of patients treated with AS after ER vs primary surgery (PS) for T1 CRC using a propensity score-matched analysis from a large observational study. METHODS: This study investigated 6,105 patients with T1 CRC treated with either ER or surgical resection between 2009 and 2016 at 27 high-volume Japanese institutions, with those undergoing surgery alone included in the PS group and those undergoing AS after ER included in the AS group. Propensity score matching was used for long-term outcomes of mortality and recurrence analysis. RESULTS: After propensity score matching, 1,219 of 2,438 patients were identified in each group. The 5-year OS rates in the AS and PS groups were 97.1% and 96.0%, respectively (hazard ratio: 0.72, 95% confidence interval: 0.49-1.08), indicating the noninferiority of the AS group. Moreover, 32 patients (2.6%) in the AS group and 24 (2.0%) in the PS group had recurrences, with no significant difference between the 2 groups (odds ratio: 1.34, 95% confidence interval: 0.76-2.40, P = 0.344). DISCUSSION: ER before AS for T1 CRC had no adverse effect on patients' long-term outcomes, including the 5-year OS rate. ER is a viable first-line treatment option for endoscopically resectable T1 CRC.

Treatment Decision for Locally Resected T1 Colorectal Carcinoma-Verification of the Japanese Guideline Criteria for Additional Surgery Based on Long-Term Clinical Outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: To verify the value of the pathological criteria for additional treatment in locally resected pT1 colorectal carcinoma (CRC) which have been used in the Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum (JSCCR) guidelines since 2009. METHODS: We enrolled 4,667 patients with pT1 CRC treated at 27 institutions between July 2009 and December 2016 (1,257 patients with local resection alone [group A], 1,512 patients with additional surgery after local resection [group B], and 1,898 patients with surgery alone [group C]). All 5 factors of the JSCCR guidelines (submucosal resection margin, tumor histologic grade, submucosal invasion depth, lymphovascular invasion, and tumor budding) for lymph node metastasis (LNM) had been diagnosed prospectively. RESULTS: Any of the risk factors were present in 3,751 patients. The LNM incidence was 10.4% (95% confidence interval 9.4-11.5) in group B/C patients with risk factors, whereas it was 1.8% (95% confidence interval 0.4-5.3) in those without risk factors ( P < 0.01). In group A, the incidence of recurrence was 3.6% in patients with risk factors, but it was only 0.4% in patients without risk factors ( P < 0.01). The disease-free survival rate of group A patients classified as risk positive was significantly worse than those of groups B and C patients. However, the 5-year disease-free survival rate in group A patients with no risk was 99.6%. DISCUSSION: Our large-scale real-world multicenter study demonstrated the validity of the JSCCR criteria for pT1 CRC after local resection, especially regarding favorable outcomes in patients with low risk of LNM.

Downregulation of SMOC1 is associated with progression of colorectal traditional serrated adenomas.

BACKGROUND: Aberrant DNA methylation is prevalent in colorectal serrated lesions. We previously reported that the CpG island of SMOC1 is frequently methylated in traditional serrated adenomas (TSAs) and colorectal cancers (CRCs) but is rarely methylated in sessile serrated lesions (SSLs). In the present study, we aimed to further characterize the expression of SMOC1 in early colorectal lesions. METHODS: SMOC1 expression was analyzed immunohistochemically in a series of colorectal tumors (n = 199) and adjacent normal colonic tissues (n = 112). RESULTS: SMOC1 was abundantly expressed in normal colon and SSLs while it was significantly downregulated in TSAs, advanced adenomas and cancers. Mean immunohistochemistry scores were as follows: normal colon, 24.2; hyperplastic polyp (HP), 18.9; SSL, 23.8; SSL with dysplasia (SSLD)/SSL with early invasive cancer (EIC), 15.8; TSA, 5.4; TSA with high grade dysplasia (HGD)/EIC, 4.7; non-advanced adenoma, 21.4; advanced adenoma, 11.9; EIC, 10.9. Higher levels SMOC1 expression correlated positively with proximal colon locations and flat tumoral morphology, reflecting its abundant expression in SSLs. Among TSAs that contained both flat and protruding components, levels of SMOC1 expression were significantly lower in the protruding components. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that reduced expression of SMOC1 is associated with progression of TSAs and conventional adenomas and that SMOC1 expression may be a biomarker for diagnosis of serrated lesions and risk prediction in colorectal tumors.

Clinical performance of fecal calprotectin, lactoferrin, and hemoglobin for evaluating the disease activity of IBD and detecting colorectal tumors.

Background and Aim: Recently, noninvasive fecal markers have been used as indicators of intestinal inflammation in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). We conducted a clinical validation study to measure fecal calprotectin (Cp), lactoferrin (Lf), and hemoglobin (Hb) levels using an all-in-one kit in patients with IBD and colorectal tumors and aimed to clarify the utility of these fecal markers. Methods: In this study, 104 patients were analyzed, including 25 patients with ulcerative colitis (UC), 20 with Crohn's disease (CD), 48 with colorectal tumors, and 13 healthy controls (HC). Of the 48 patients with colorectal tumors, 14 had invasive cancer. We validated the utility of fecal Cp, Lf, and Hb levels by simultaneously measuring fecal markers in patients with IBD and colorectal tumors. Results: Fecal Cp and Lf had almost equivalent abilities in detecting clinical remission in patients with UC; however, fecal Cp was slightly superior to Lf. Regarding colorectal tumors, fecal Cp and Lf levels tended to be higher in patients with adenomas and colorectal cancer than in HCs. Although fecal Hb alone had the best sensitivity and specificity for detecting colorectal cancer, it had relatively low sensitivity for detecting advanced neoplasms and colorectal cancer. Conclusion: Fecal Cp and Lf can be used as almost equivalent biomarkers to assess the clinical activity in patients with UC. Fecal Hb is the most useful marker for screening colorectal cancer; however, adding fecal Cp and Lf may compensate for the low sensitivity of detecting for advanced colorectal tumors based on Hb alone.