Julio Garcia-Aguilar

Colon and Rectum

In the sixth edition, Stage II was subdivided into IIA and IIB on the basis of whether the primary tumor was T3N0 or T4N0, respectively, and Stage III was subdivided into IIIA (T1-2N1M0), IIIB (T3-4N1M0), or IIIC (any TN2M0). In the seventh edition, further substaging of Stage II and III has been accomplished, based on survival and relapse data that was not available for the prior edition

A Pathologic Complete Response to Preoperative Chemoradiation Is Associated With Lower Local Recurrence and Improved Survival in Rectal Cancer Patients Treated by Mesorectal Excision

AbstractPURPOSE: Preoperative chemoradiation reduces tumor size and nodal metastasis in patients with rectal cancer. Tumor downstaging has been associated with an increased probability of a sphincter-saving procedure and with improved local control. However, pathologic complete response to chemoradiation has not been correlated with local control and patient survival. We studied the prognostic value of pathologic complete response to preoperative chemoradiation in rectal cancer patients. METHODS: We have prospectively followed up 168 consecutive patients with ultrasound Stages II (46) and III (122) rectal cancer treated by preoperative chemoradiation followed by radical resection with mesorectal excision; 161 had a curative resection. Recurrence and survival were compared with tumor characteristics and pathologic complete response. Average follow-up was 37 months. RESULTS: Tumor downstaging occurred in 97 (58 percent) patients, including 21 (13 percent) patients who had a pathologic complete response. None of the clinical or pathologic variables was associated with pathologic complete response. The estimated 5-year rate of local recurrence was 5 percent; of distant metastasis, 14 percent. None of the patients with pathologic complete response has developed disease recurrence. We found no difference in survival among patients with pathologic Stages I, II, or III tumors. CONCLUSIONS: A pathologic complete response to preoperative chemoradiation is associated with improved local control and patient survival. For patients without pathologic complete response, the pathology stage does not have prognostic significance.

Optimal timing of surgery after chemoradiation for advanced rectal cancer: preliminary results of a multicenter, nonrandomized phase II prospective trial.

Objective:To determine whether extending the interval between chemoradiation (CRT) and surgery, and administering additional chemotherapy during the waiting period has an impact on tumor response, CRT-related toxicity and surgical complications in patients with advanced rectal cancer. Background:Locally advanced rectal cancer is usually treated with preoperative CRT followed by surgery approximately 6 weeks later. The Timing of Rectal Cancer Response to Chemoradiation Consortium designed a prospective, multicenter, Phase II clinical trial to investigate extending the interval between CRT and surgery, and administering additional chemotherapy during the waiting period. Here, we present preliminary results of this trial, reporting the tumor response, CRT-related toxicity and surgical complications. Methods:Stage II and III rectal cancer patients were treated concurrently with 5-Fluorouracil (FU) and radiation for 5 to 6 weeks. Patients in study group (SG) 1 underwent total mesorectal excision (TME) 6 weeks later. Patients in SG2 with evidence of a clinical response 4 weeks after CRT received 2 cycles of modified FOLFOX-6 (mFOLFOX-6) followed by TME 3 to 5 weeks later. Tumor response, CRT-related toxicity and surgical complications were recorded. Results:One hundred and forty-four patients were accrued. One hundred and thirty-six (66, SG1; 70, SG2) were evaluated for CRT-related toxicity. One hundred and twenty-seven (60, SG1; 67, SG2) were assessed for tumor response and surgical complications. A similar proportion of patients completed CRT per protocol in both SGs, but the cumulative dose of sensitizing 5-FU and radiation was higher in SG2. CRT-related toxicity was comparable between SGs. Average time from CRT-to-surgery was 6 (SG1) and 11 weeks (SG2). Pathologic complete response (pCR) was 18% (SG1) and 25% (SG2). Postoperative complications were similar between SGs. Conclusions:Intense neoadjuvant therapy consisting of CRT followed by additional chemotherapy (mFOLFOX-6), and delaying surgery may result in a modest increase in pCR rate without increasing complications in patients undergoing TME for locally advanced rectal cancer.

Organ preservation for clinical T2N0 distal rectal cancer using neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and local excision (ACOSOG Z6041): results of an open-label, single-arm, multi-institutional, phase 2 trial

Summary Background Local excision is an organ-preserving treatment alternative for patients with stage I rectal cancer. However, local excision alone is associated with a high risk of local recurrence and inferior survival compared to transabdominal rectal resection. Here we investigate the oncologic and functional outcomes of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and local excision for T2N0 rectal cancer. Methods This was a prospective, multi-institutional, single arm phase 2 trial for patients with clinically-staged T2N0 distal rectal cancer, treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy consisting of capecitabine (original dose 825mg/m2, twice daily, on days 1-14 and 22-35) , oxaliplatin (50mg/m2 weeks 1, 2, 4, 5), and radiation (5 days/week at 1.8 Gy/day for 5 weeks to a dose of 45 Gy, then a boost, for a total dose of 54 Gy) followed by local excision. Due to adverse events during chemoradiotherapy, the dose of capecitabine was reduced to 725 mg /m2, twice daily, 5 days/week, for 5 weeks, and the total dose of radiation to 50.4 Gy. Patients were followed at scheduled intervals and evaluated for recurrence and survival. Anorectal function (ARF) and quality of life (QOL) were assessed at baseline and one year after surgery, using validated instruments. The primary endpoint was 3-year disease-free survival for all eligible patients and for patients who completed chemotherapy and radiation, and had ypT0, ypT1, or ypT2 tumors, and negative resection margins. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00114231. Findings Seventy-nine eligible patients were accrued to the trial, and started nCRT. Three patients did not complete nCRT or LE per-protocol. Four additional patients completed protocol treatment, but one had a positive margin and three had ypT3 tumours. Median follow-up was 56 months. Of the 79 patients, five (6%) developed distant recurrence, and three (4%) recurred locally. All but two underwent salvage surgery. Three-year disease-free survival and overall survival for the entire group were 88% (0.88 (95% CI: 0.81, 0.96) and 95% (95% CI: 0.90, 1.00), respectively. Overall 14 (29%) of 79 patients had grade 3-4 gastrointestinal adverse events, 12 (16%) of 79 patients had grade 3-4 pain as an adverse event, 12 (16%) of 79 patients had grade 3-4 hematological adverse events, and 9 (11%) of 79 patients had grade 3 dermatologic adverse events during chemoradiation. Six (8%) of the 77 patients who had surgery had grade 3 pain, 3(4%) of 77 patients had grade 3-4 hemorrhage, 3 (4%) of 77 patients had gastrointestinal adverse events, 2 (3%) of 77 patients had infectious/febrile neutropenia, 2 (3%) of 77 patients had hematological adverse events, and one (1%) had neurological adverse events. The rectum was preserved in 72 of the 79 (91%) patients. ARF and QOL were unchanged one year after surgery compared to baseline. Interpretation Most patients with T2N0 rectal cancer treated with nCRT and LE achieved organ preservation without deterioration of their quality of life. The estimated 3-year DFS rate was within the defined margin of efficacy. Our data suggest that nCRT followed by LE may be considered as an organ-preserving alternative in carefully selected patients with clinically-staged T2N0 tumours who refuse, or are not candidates for, transabdominal resection.

An increase in compliance with the Surgical Care Improvement Project measures does not prevent surgical site infection in colorectal surgery.

PURPOSE: The primary goal of the Surgical Care Improvement Project is to improve quality of care by implementing evidence-based health care practices that prevent surgical complications. This study was designed to test the hypothesis that an increase in compliance with quality process measures decreases the rate of surgical site infections in patients undergoing colorectal surgeries. METHODS: A multidisciplinary task force implemented and monitored compliance with individual quality measures in patients undergoing elective colorectal resections at a tertiary institution. Individual compliance rates and infections were collected prospectively and reviewed monthly. For data analysis, patients were assigned to 2 consecutive 14-month periods: period A (April 1, 2006 to May 31, 2007) and period B (June 1, 2007 to July 31, 2008). Comparisons between periods were performed to determine the association of compliance with process measures and outcomes in infections. RESULTS: A total of 491 consecutive patients were treated during the study periods (period A: n = 238; period B: n = 253). There were no statistically significant differences in patient characteristics, diagnoses, or surgical procedures between periods. Compliance with all process measures significantly increased within periods except for perioperative glucose control. Global compliance (compliance with all measures per patient) significantly improved from period A to B (40%–68%, respectively; P < .001). In total, 99 patients (19%) developed surgical site infections (period A, 18.9%; period B, 19.4%). CONCLUSION: An increase in compliance with the Surgical Care Improvement Project aimed to prevent surgical site infections does not translate into a significant reduction of surgical site infections in patients undergoing colorectal resections.

Reliable Detection of Mismatch Repair Deficiency in Colorectal Cancers Using Mutational Load in Next-Generation Sequencing Panels

PURPOSE Tumor screening for Lynch syndrome is recommended in all or most patients with colorectal cancer (CRC). In metastatic CRC, sequencing of RAS/BRAF is necessary to guide clinical management. We hypothesized that a next-generation sequencing (NGS) panel that identifies RAS/BRAF and other actionable mutations could also reliably identify tumors with DNA mismatch repair protein deficiency (MMR-D) on the basis of increased mutational load. METHODS We identified all CRCs that underwent genomic mutation profiling with a custom NGS assay (MSK-IMPACT) between March 2014 and July 2015. Tumor mutational load, with exclusion of copy number changes, was determined for each case and compared with MMR status as determined by routine immunohistochemistry. RESULTS Tumors from 224 patients with unique CRC analyzed for MMR status also underwent MSK-IMPACT. Thirteen percent (n = 28) exhibited MMR-D by immunohistochemistry. Using the 341-gene assay, 100% of the 193 tumors with < 20 mutations were MMR-proficient. Of 31 tumors with ≥ 20 mutations, 28 (90%) were MMR-D. The three remaining tumors were easily identified as being distinct from the MMR-D tumors with > 150 mutations each. Each of these tumors harbored the P286R hotspot POLE mutation consistent with the ultramutator phenotype. Among MMR-D tumors, the median number of mutations was 50 (range, 20 to 90) compared with six (range, 0 to 17) in MMR-proficient/POLE wild-type tumors (P < .001). With a mutational load cutoff of ≥ 20 and < 150 for MMR-D detection, sensitivity and specificity were both 1.0 (95% CI, 0.93 to 1.0). CONCLUSION A cutoff for mutational load can be identified via multigene NGS tumor profiling, which provides a highly accurate means of screening for MMR-D in the same assay that is used for tumor genotyping.

Exocrine and Endocrine Pancreas

Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (including carcinoid tumors) are now staged by a single pancreatic staging system

Adjuvant chemotherapy in rectal cancer: Defining subgroups who may benefit after neoadjuvant chemoradiation and resection: A pooled analysis of 3,313 patients.

Recent literature suggests that the benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy (aCT) for rectal cancer patients might depend on the response to neoadjuvant chemoradiation (CRT). Aim was to evaluate whether the effect of aCT in rectal cancer is modified by response to CRT and to identify which patients benefit from aCT after CRT, by means of a pooled analysis of individual patient data from 13 datasets. Patients were categorized into three groups: pCR (ypT0N0), ypT1‐2 tumour and ypT3‐4 tumour. Hazard ratios (HR) for the effect of aCT were derived from multivariable Cox regression analyses. Primary outcome measure was recurrence‐free survival (RFS). One thousand seven hundred and twenty three (1723) (52%) of 3,313 included patients received aCT. Eight hundred and ninety eight (898) patients had a pCR, 966 had a ypT1‐2 tumour and 1,302 had a ypT3‐4 tumour. For 122 patients response, category was missing and 25 patients had ypT0N+. Median follow‐up for all patients was 51 (0–219) months. HR for RFS with 95% CI for patients treated with aCT were 1.25(0.68–2.29), 0.58(0.37–0.89) and 0.83(0.66–1.10) for patients with pCR, ypT1‐2 and ypT3‐4 tumours, respectively. The effect of aCT in rectal cancer patients treated with CRT differs between subgroups. Patients with a pCR after CRT may not benefit from aCT, whereas patients with residual tumour had superior outcomes when aCT was administered. The test for interaction did not reach statistical significance, but the results support further investigation of a more individualized approach to administer aCT after CRT and surgery based on pathologic staging.

Extended Intervals after Neoadjuvant Therapy in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: The Key to Improved Tumor Response and Potential Organ Preservation

BACKGROUND Many rectal cancer patients experience tumor downstaging and some are found to achieve a pathologic complete response (pCR) after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT). Previous data suggest that there is an association between the time interval from nCRT completion to surgery and tumor response rates, including pCR. However, these studies have been primarily from single institutions with small sample sizes. The aim of this study was to examine the relationship between a longer interval after nCRT and pCR in a nationally representative cohort of rectal cancer patients. STUDY DESIGN Clinical stage II to III rectal cancer patients undergoing nCRT with a documented surgical resection were selected from the 2006 to 2011 National Cancer Data Base. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to assess the association between the nCRT-surgery interval time (<6 weeks, 6 to 8 weeks, >8 weeks) and the odds of pCR. The relationship between nCRT-surgery interval, surgical morbidity, and tumor downstaging was also examined. RESULTS Overall, 17,255 patients met the inclusion criteria. An nCRT-surgery interval time >8 weeks was associated with higher odds of pCR (odds ratio [OR] 1.12, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.25) and tumor downstaging (OR 1.11, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.25). The longer time delay was also associated with lower odds of 30-day readmission (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.92). CONCLUSIONS An nCRT-surgery interval time >8 weeks results in increased odds of pCR, with no evidence of associated increased surgical complications compared with an interval of 6 to 8 weeks. These data support implementation of a lengthened interval after nCRT to optimize the chances of pCR and perhaps add to the possibility of ultimate organ preservation (nonoperative management).

Lip and Oral Cavity

T4 lesions have been divided into T4a (moderately advanced local disease) and T4b (very advanced local disease), leading to the stratification of Stage IV into Stage IVA (moderately advanced local/regional disease), Stage IVB (very advanced local/regional disease), and Stage IVC (distant metastatic disease)